Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 51 references

Vietoris-Rips complexes of torus grids

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Torus grid complexes collapse to exact wedges of spheres

desk verdict Real new results for Vietoris-Rips complexes of torus grids, but Theorem 5.12's proof has a concrete false claim about K∩L^1_a and needs repair before the wedge-count family is established. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07134 v2 pith:6N4BRGE7 submitted 2025-02-10 math.AT math.CO

Henry Adams , Adenike Yeside Adetowubo , Hector Barriga-Acosta , Ziqin Feng , John Sterling This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.ATmath.CO MSC 55N3105E4505C69
keywords Vietoris–Ripscomplexestorusgridgraphshomotopytypewedgesumsofspheresl1metriccliquenervelemmafacets
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proves exact homotopy-type formulas for Vietoris–Rips complexes of $n\times n$ grids on the flat $l^1$ torus, for several families of grid size and scale. It shows that at small scales the complex is homotopy equivalent to the torus itself, that at the special sizes $n=3k$ and $n=3k-1$ the complex is a finite wedge sum of spheres, and that at diameter-minus-one scales the complex is a sphere. These are exact topological identities, not homology approximations, and they confirm a pattern visible in computer computations. The result matters because such grids approximate the continuous $l^1$ torus, so the formulas describe how coarse sampling of the torus retains or changes its topology under the standard Vietoris–Rips construction.

What carries the argument

The classification of maximal simplices, or facets, of $\mathrm{VR}(\mathbb{Z}^2;k)$: every facet of the infinite square lattice with the $l^1$ metric is the intersection of $\mathbb{Z}^2$ with a closed $l^1$ ball of radius $k/2$ centered at a point whose coordinates are integers or half-integers. Quotienting by $n\mathbb{Z}\times n\mathbb{Z}$ gives the facets of the torus-grid complex, except that for $n=3k$ and $n=3k-1$ there are extra non-liftable facets: triples equally spaced by $k$ along a row or column for $n=3k$, and quadruples spanned by $\{v_i, v_{i+k}, v_{i+2k-1}, v_{i+2k}\}$ for $n=3k-1$. The proof shows via the nerve lemma that the subcomplex generated by the liftable facets is homotopy equivalent to the torus, and each extra facet attaches a disk along a circle wrapping once around a meridian or longitude, converting the torus into the stated wedge sums of spheres.

What would settle it

Enumerate all maximal cliques of the Vietoris–Rips graph of $T_{9,9}$ at scale 3 with an independent implementation, or compute $H_2(\mathrm{VR}(T_{9,9};3);\mathbb{Z})$. If the number of exceptional triangles is not 54, or if the second Betti number is not 53, Theorem 5.10 fails; the identical check for $\mathrm{VR}(T_{8,8};3)$ should give Betti numbers 15 and 16 in degrees 2 and 3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the $n\times n$ torus grid $T_{n,n}$ with the $l^1$ metric, the paper claims: $\mathrm{VR}(T_{n,n};k)$ is homotopy equivalent to $T^2$ whenever $k\geq 2$ and $n>3k$; for $k\geq 2$, $\mathrm{VR}(T_{3k,3k};k)\simeq \bigvee^{6k^2-1}S^2$; for $k\geq 3$, $\mathrm{VR}(T_{3k-1,3k-1};k)\simeq \left(\bigvee_{6k-3}S^2\right)\vee \left(\bigvee_{6k-2}S^3\right)$; and for $n\geq 2$, $\mathrm{VR}(T_{2n,2n};2n-1)$ is homeomorphic to $S^{2n^2-1}$. In addition, integral homology computations combined with the Hurewicz and Whitehead theorems give $\mathrm{VR}(T_{5,5};3)\simeq \bigvee^{9}S^4$ and $\mathrm{VR}(T_{7,7};4)\simeq S^3$. Together these determine the full homotopy type, not merely Betti numbers, for several entire diagonals of the paper's table of computed complexes.

Load-bearing premise

The proof counts facets exhaustively: for $n=3k$ or $n=3k-1$, every maximal simplex in the grid complex is either the image of a maximal simplex in the infinite square lattice or one of the explicitly listed special simplices, and if a single exceptional facet is missed, the wedge-sum formulas would acquire an extra sphere summand and fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the scale $k$ satisfies $n>3k$, the Vietoris–Rips complex of the grid has the same homotopy type as the continuous torus, so no spurious topology arises in that regime.
  • At $n=3k$, all topology is two-dimensional: the complex is a wedge of $6k^2-1$ copies of $S^2$, so all higher Betti numbers vanish.
  • At $n=3k-1$, homology is nonzero only in degrees 2 and 3, with ranks $6k-3$ and $6k-2$, respectively.
  • For even grid sizes, at scale one below the diameter the complex is the boundary of an $n^2/2$-dimensional cross-polytope, hence a single sphere of dimension $n^2/2-1$.
  • The paper verifies one member of the conjectured 3-sphere family: $\mathrm{VR}(T_{7,7};4)\simeq S^3$.
  • If the paper's facet counts are correct, the complexes $\mathrm{VR}(T_{9,9};3)$ and $\mathrm{VR}(T_{8,8};3)$ provide concrete benchmarks: the former should have second Betti number $53$, and the latter should have second and third Betti numbers $15$ and $16$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper's claims, the facet-lifting technique looks applicable to other quotient lattices, such as grids on $m$-dimensional tori or on other flat orbifolds, and would yield exact homotopy types rather than homology-only information.
  • If the conjectured countable family of $(n,k)$ pairs with $S^3$ homotopy type is correct, the paper's Heegaard-decomposition picture predicts a middle-scale regime where a single three-dimensional hole appears and then fills in as $k$ grows; this is testable by persistent homology in degree 3.
  • The exact wedge-sum formulas provide a natural sanity check for computational topology software: any implementation that computes persistence with integral coefficients should reproduce the stated Betti numbers, and any discrepancy would pinpoint a bug or a missed facet.
  • The paper's division into liftable facets and exceptional facets suggests a broader pattern: topology changes at scales where lattice points snap into periodic alignment, so the same dichotomy may organize the intermediate-scale topology of other periodic metric spaces.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies Vietoris–Rips complexes of n×n torus grids with the l1 metric. It proves: for n > 3k, VR(T_{n,n};k) is homotopy equivalent to the torus; for k ≥ 2, VR(T_{3k,3k};k) is homotopy equivalent to a wedge of 6k^2−1 copies of S^2; for k ≥ 3, VR(T_{3k−1,3k−1};k) is homotopy equivalent to a wedge of 6k−3 copies of S^2 and 6k−2 copies of S^3; and for even n, VR(T_{n,n};n−1) is homeomorphic to a sphere. The paper also uses integral homology computations and Hurewicz–Whitehead arguments to prove VR(T_{5,5};3) ≃ ⋁_9 S^4 and VR(T_{7,7};4) ≃ S^3, and it classifies the facets of VR(Z^2;k). Several conjectures based on homology computations are stated, including a countable family of (n,k) for which VR(T_{n,n};k) is conjectured to be a 3-sphere.

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, these are among the few exact homotopy-type results for Vietoris–Rips complexes of finite metric spaces at all scales, and they provide a clean picture of the transition from torus at small scales to wedges of spheres at intermediate scales. The facet classification of VR(Z^2;k) and the nerve-lemma torus argument are elegant and likely reusable. The paper is transparent about its computational evidence and poses well-motivated open questions. However, the proof of the family VR(T_{3k−1,3k−1};k) currently contains a false claim about the intersection K ∩ L^1_a and an omitted proof of a load-bearing lemma, so the significance is conditional on repair.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.2, Lemma 5.11] Lemma 5.11 is load-bearing for Theorem 5.12 but its proof is omitted with only the note that it is analogous to Lemma 5.9. The analogy is not automatic: in Lemma 5.9 the added cells are 2-simplices attached along circles, whereas in Lemma 5.11 the added cells are 3-simplices, and one must verify which faces of τ1 and τ2 already lie in the subcomplex generated by M_{3k−1,k}. For k=3, the 2-face {([0],[0]),([0],[3]),([0],[5])} of τ1 is not a face of any M_{8,3} facet, whereas {([0],[0]),([0],[5]),([0],[6])} is; hence the union is not obtained by attaching a 3-ball along its full boundary, and the homotopy type does not follow from the proof of Lemma 5.9. This gap must be filled for Theorem 5.12 to be established.
  2. [§5.2, Theorem 5.12] The proof's description of K ∩ L^1_a for a ≠ 0 is false. For k=3 (n=8), the 3-simplex {([1],[0]),([1],[1]),([1],[2]),([1],[3])} is a face of the lift facet π_8(B_{R^2}[(1,1.5),1.5] ∩ Z^2) ∈ M_{8,3}, so it lies in K ∩ L^1_1. In general, every arc {([a],[b]),([a],[b+1]),...,([a],[b+k])} is a face of some M_{3k−1,k} facet, and these arcs are maximal simplices of the intersection; the simplices listed in the proof are proper faces of these arcs. Thus the asserted homotopy equivalence K ∩ L^1_a ≃ S^1 is not established by the given facet list, and the induction producing ⋁_{6k−3} S^2 ∨ ⋁_{6k−2} S^3 is unsupported as written. The theorem may be true and Table 1 is consistent with it, but the proof needs a correct analysis of the intersection, for example a nerve-lemma argument showing that the subcomplex generated by the arcs is homotopy equivalent to S^1.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4, Corollary 4.3] In the first direction of the proof, the sentence 'by Proposition 4.2 and the claim above we have σ = B[c,k/2] ∩ Z^2' is incorrect: Proposition 4.2 classifies facets, and a non-maximal simplex is only contained in such a ball, not equal to it. The corollary is true, but the proof should argue by extending σ to a facet.
  2. [§5.1, Lemma 5.5] In the proof of the second statement, 'isomorphic to the clique complex VR(C_{3k};k)' should read VR(C_{3k−1};k).
  3. [§5.1, Lemma 5.6] Lemma 5.6 is stated without proof. It follows from the discussion after Lemma 5.4 when n > 3k, but the implication should be made explicit.
  4. [§5.2, Theorem 5.12, T_{5,5} case] The treatment of VR(T_{5,5};2) relies on unproved assertions labeled 'similar as Lemma 5.5' and 'similar approach as Lemma 5.9'. Given the false intersection description in the same theorem, this case should be reworked with a complete proof.
  5. [§7, Theorem 7.1] The proofs of VR(T_{5,5};3) ≃ ⋁_9 S^4 and VR(T_{7,7};4) ≃ S^3 depend on Polymake homology computations. The authors should provide the code, input data, or a verification script so that the computational step is reproducible.
  6. [Various] There are several typos: 'toplogically' in Proposition 6.2, 'Papaer No.' in reference [30], 'dimesnional' in Proposition 6.2, and the use of 'W' for wedge sums in the abstract and theorems is inconsistent with the standard '∨' notation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: central theorems proved from facet classifications, nerve lemma, external cycle result, and standard Hurewicz–Whitehead argument; self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

No significant circularity found. The central homotopy equivalences (Theorems 5.8, 5.10, 5.12, Corollary 6.3, and Theorem 7.1) are derived from the paper's own facet classifications in Section 5.1, the nerve theorem, the gluing/induction Lemma 5.7, Adamaszek's external characterization of VR(C_n;k), and standard Hurewicz–Whitehead arguments. The homology computations in Section 7 are independent evidence, not fitted inputs: they determine the homology groups of the complexes in question, and Hurewicz–Whitehead then upgrades that information to a homotopy type. Self-citations (e.g., [3] for hypercube complexes, [18] for initial computations, [5] for hypercube lower bounds) appear only as background or comparison. The T_{4,4} ≅ Q_4 observation is an explicit graph isomorphism, so importing hypercube homotopy types from [3] is a legitimate external reduction, not a circular one. There is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no ansatz smuggled in via citation, and no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors. The proof of Theorem 5.12 contains a potentially unsupported facet description of K ∩ L^1_a, as the skeptic notes, but that is a correctness risk in a specific argument, not circularity: the theorem does not assume its conclusion. Similarly, Lemma 5.11 is stated without proof, but it is an omitted detail, not a self-referential step. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted. The proofs rely on standard topological theorems and on one computational input, the Polymake homology computations, which is not independently packaged.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Nerve theorem for open covers (Theorem 3.1).
    Used in Theorems 5.8 and 4.4 to identify complexes as nerves of convex ball covers.
  • standard math Adamaszek's homotopy classification of VR(C_n;k).
    Used in Theorem 5.12 to identify full subcomplexes L_a^1 and L_b^2 with S^3.
  • standard math Barmak's connectivity criterion for clique complexes.
    Used in Section 7 to prove simple connectivity of VR(T_{5,5};3) and VR(T_{7,7};4).
  • standard math Hurewicz and Whitehead theorems.
    Used in Section 7 to lift homology data to homotopy equivalences with wedges of spheres.
  • domain assumption Polymake integral homology computations for VR(T_{5,5};3) and VR(T_{7,7};4) are correct.
    Theorem 7.1 depends on these computations; no input or output files are provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Vietoris-Rips complexes of torus grids." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6N4BRGE7

@misc{pith2026250207134,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Vietoris-Rips complexes of torus grids},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6N4BRGE7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07134}
}
abstract

We study the topology of Vietoris--Rips complexes of finite grids on the torus. Let $T_{n,n}$ be the grid of $n\times n$ points on the flat torus $S^1\times S^1$, equipped with the $l^1$ metric. Let $\mathrm{VR}(T_{n,n};k)$ be the Vietoris--Rips simplicial complex of this torus grid at scale $k\ge 0$. For $n\ge 7$ and small scales $2\le k\le \frac{n-1}{3}$, the complex $\mathrm{VR}(T_{n,n};k)$ is homotopy equivalent to the torus. For large scales $k\ge 2\lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor$, the complex $\mathrm{VR}(T_{n,n};k)$ is a simplex and hence contractible. Interesting topology arises over intermediate scales $\frac{n-1}{3}<k<2\lfloor\frac{n}{2}\rfloor$. For example, we prove that $\mathrm{VR}(T_{2n,2n};2n-1)\cong S^{2n^2-1}$ for $n\ge 2$, that $\mathrm{VR}(T_{3n,3n};n)\simeq\vee^{6n^2-1}S^2$ for $n\ge 2$, and that $\mathrm{VR}(T_{3n-1,3n-1};n)\simeq \bigvee_{6n-3} S^2\vee \bigvee_{6n-2}S^3$ for $n\geq 3$. Based on homology computations, we conjecture that $\mathrm{VR}(T_{n,n};k)$ is homotopy equivalent to a $3$-sphere for a countable family of $(n,k)$ pairs, and we prove this for $(n,k)=(7,4)$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07134 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example simplices in N8,3 and N9,3 Lemma 5.5. For any k ≥ 2, the collection of facets in VR(T3k,3k; k) is M3k,k ∪ N3k,k. Also, for any k ≥ 3, the collection of facets in VR(T3k−1,3k−1; k) is M3k−1,k ∪ N3k−1,k. Proof. We have M3k,k ⊆ M(VR(T3k,3k; k)) by Lemma 5.2 (with 3k = n > 2k + 1 since k ≥ 2). Also, we have the containment N3k,k ⊆ M(VR(T3k,3k; k)). Similarly, we have M3k−1,k ⊆ M(VR(T3k−1,3k−1; k)) by Lemma 5.2 (… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visualization of n = 10 case where v6 is the vertex in σ closest to vj−k = v8−3 = v5. The left diagram highlights B[v8, 3] in red, while the right diagram displays the arc of v6 in blue. Suppose vt = vj . For the sake of contradiction, assume that σ contains a vertex vs not in the arc of vt . Then vs ∈ B[vj , k] and vs ̸∈ {vj−k, vj−k+1, . . . , vj−1} as vt is the closest point in σ to vj−k. Hence, vs ̸∈ B[vj , k] as… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Continuation of the above case, illustrating the minimal dis￾tances in both the clockwise and counterclockwise directions from v6 to vertices in B[v8, 3] that are not in the arc of v6. These vertices are high￾lighted with green outlines for clarity. When n = 3k, there are two types of facets. Denote σ ′ i = {vi , vi+k, vi+2k}, with all indices taken modulo n. We claim M(VR(Cn; k)) = {σi : i = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1} ∪ … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of n = 9 case where v7 corresponds to vj and v4 corresponds to vj−k. The left diagram highlights B[v7, 3] in red, along with all potential vs ∈ {vj+1, . . . , vj+k}, which are highlighted in green. The right diagram illustrates that v1, which is vj+k in t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Clique complexes and graph powers.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 196(1):295– 319, 2013

    Micha l Adamaszek. Clique complexes and graph powers.Israel Journal of Mathematics, 196(1):295– 319, 2013

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    The Vietoris–Rips complexes of a circle.Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 290:1–40, 2017

    Micha l Adamaszek and Henry Adams. The Vietoris–Rips complexes of a circle.Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 290:1–40, 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    On Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, 6(2):177–192, 2022

    Micha l Adamaszek and Henry Adams. On Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, 6(2):177–192, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [5]

    Lower bounds on the homology of Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society, 47(3):72, 2024

    Henry Adams and ˇZiga Virk. Lower bounds on the homology of Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society, 47(3):72, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [6]

    Ripser: efficient computation of Vietoris–Rips persistence barcodes.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, pages 391–423, 2021

    Ulrich Bauer. Ripser: efficient computation of Vietoris–Rips persistence barcodes.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, pages 391–423, 2021

    work page 2021

  6. [4]

    The connectivity of Vietoris–Rips complexes of spheres.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15818, 2024

    Henry Adams, Johnathan Bush, and ˇZiga Virk. The connectivity of Vietoris–Rips complexes of spheres.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15818, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Topological methods.Handbook of Combinatorics, 2:1819–1872, 1995

    Anders Bj¨ orner. Topological methods.Handbook of Combinatorics, 2:1819–1872, 1995

    1995

  8. [8]

    On the imbedding of systems of compacta in simplicial complexes.Fundamenta Math- ematicae, 35(1):217–234, 1948

    Karol Borsuk. On the imbedding of systems of compacta in simplicial complexes.Fundamenta Math- ematicae, 35(1):217–234, 1948

    work page 1948

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    On the independence complex of square grids.J

    Mireille Bousquet-M´ elou, Svante Linusson, and Eran Nevo. On the independence complex of square grids.J. Algebraic Combin., 27(4):423–450, 2008

    2008

  2. [10]

    http://www.groupoids.org.uk/, Deganwy, United Kingdom, 2006

    Ronald Brown.Topology and Groupoids. http://www.groupoids.org.uk/, Deganwy, United Kingdom, 2006

    2006

  3. [11]

    Homological algebra for persistence modules.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 21:1233–1278, 2021

    Peter Bubenik and Nikola Mili´ cevi´ c. Homological algebra for persistence modules.Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 21:1233–1278, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    Roots of real-valued zero mean maps: Compositions of linear functionals and equivariant maps.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19729, 2025

    Francesca Cantor, Julia D’Amico, Florian Frick, and Eric Myzelev. Roots of real-valued zero mean maps: Compositions of linear functionals and equivariant maps.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19729, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Topology and data.Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 46(2):255–308, 2009

    Gunnar Carlsson. Topology and data.Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 46(2):255–308, 2009. 20

    2009

  6. [14]

    Persistent homology of the sum metric.Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 224(5):106244, 2020

    Gunnar Carlsson and Benjamin Filippenko. Persistent homology of the sum metric.Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 224(5):106244, 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    Homotopy type through homology groups

    Andr´ es Carnero Bravo and Omar Antol ´ ın Camarena. Homotopy type through homology groups. Bolet ´ ın de la Sociedad Matem´ atica Mexicana, 30(2):28, 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Persistence stability for geometric complexes.Ge- ometriae Dedicata, 174:193–214, 2014

    Fr´ ed´ eric Chazal, Vin de Silva, and Steve Oudot. Persistence stability for geometric complexes.Ge- ometriae Dedicata, 174:193–214, 2014

    2014

  9. [17]

    Systems of disjoint representatives

    Maria Chudnovsky. Systems of disjoint representatives. Master’s thesis, 2000

    2000

  10. [18]

    The Vietoris–Rips complex for embedded lattice points in the torus

    Samuel Coyle. The Vietoris–Rips complex for embedded lattice points in the torus. University of Minnesota Digital Conservatory,https://hdl.handle.net/11299/271245, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Cambridge University Press, 2022

    Tamal Krishna Dey and Yusu Wang.Computational topology for data analysis. Cambridge University Press, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Persistent homology: Theory and practice

    Herbert Edelsbrunner. Persistent homology: Theory and practice. 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    American Math- ematical Society, Providence, 2010

    Herbert Edelsbrunner and John L Harer.Computational Topology: An Introduction. American Math- ematical Society, Providence, 2010

    2010

  14. [22]

    Large simplicial complexes: universality, randomness, and ampleness.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, 8:1551–1574, 2023

    Michael Farber. Large simplicial complexes: universality, randomness, and ampleness.Journal of Applied and Computational Topology, 8:1551–1574, 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Hard squares with negative activity

    Paul Fendley, Kareljan Schoutens, and Hendrik van Eerten. Hard squares with negative activity. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 38(2):315, 2004

    2004

  16. [24]

    Homotopy types of Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Journal of Topology and Analysis,https: // doi

    Ziqin Feng. Homotopy types of Vietoris–Rips complexes of hypercube graphs.Journal of Topology and Analysis,https: // doi. org/ 10. 1142/ S1793525325500062, 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    On Vietoris–Rips complexes of finite metric spaces with scale 2.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.14664, 2023

    Ziqin Feng and Naga Chandra Padmini Nukala. On Vietoris–Rips complexes of finite metric spaces with scale 2.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.14664, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Exploring homological properties of independent complexes of Kneser graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10566, 2024

    Ziqin Feng and Guanghui Wang. Exploring homological properties of independent complexes of Kneser graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10566, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    K¨ unneth formulae in persistent homology.arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.05656, 2019

    Hitesh Gakhar and Jose A Perea. K¨ unneth formulae in persistent homology.arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.05656, 2019

    1910 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Open problems in computational topology

    William Gasarch, Brittany Terese Fasy, and Bei Wang. Open problems in computational topology. ACM SIGACT News, 48(3):32–36, 2017

    2017

  21. [29]

    In Polytopes—combinatorics and computation (Oberwolfach, 1997), volume 29 ofDMV Sem., pages 43–73

    Ewgenij Gawrilow and Michael Joswig.Polymake: A framework for analyzing convex polytopes. In Polytopes—combinatorics and computation (Oberwolfach, 1997), volume 29 ofDMV Sem., pages 43–73. Birkh¨ auser, Basel, 2000

    1997

  22. [30]

    Goyal, S

    S. Goyal, S. Shukla, and A. Singh. Topology of clique complexes of line graphs.Art Discrete Appl. Math., 5(2):Papaer No. 2.06, 12, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Hyperbolic groups

    Mikhael Gromov. Hyperbolic groups. In Stephen M Gersten, editor,Essays in Group Theory. Springer, 1987

    1987

  24. [32]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002

    Allen Hatcher.Algebraic Topology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002

    2002

  25. [33]

    On the Vietoris–Rips complexes and a cohomology theory for metric spaces

    Jean-Claude Hausmann. On the Vietoris–Rips complexes and a cohomology theory for metric spaces. Annals of Mathematics Studies, 138:175–188, 1995

    1995

  26. [34]

    Hard squares with negative activity and rhombus tilings of the plane.the electronic journal of combinatorics, pages R67–R67, 2006

    Jakob Jonsson. Hard squares with negative activity and rhombus tilings of the plane.the electronic journal of combinatorics, pages R67–R67, 2006

    2006

  27. [35]

    Topology of random clique complexes.Discrete Mathematics, 309(6):1658–1671, 2009

    Matthew Kahle. Topology of random clique complexes.Discrete Mathematics, 309(6):1658–1671, 2009

    2009

  28. [36]

    Vietoris–Rips complexes of metric spaces near a closed Riemannian manifold.Archiv der Mathematik, 77(6):522–528, 2001

    Janko Latschev. Vietoris–Rips complexes of metric spaces near a closed Riemannian manifold.Archiv der Mathematik, 77(6):522–528, 2001

    2001

  29. [37]

    Contractible Rips complex from non-hyperbolic group

    Uzu Lim. Contractible Rips complex from non-hyperbolic group. MathOverflow.https:// mathoverflow.net/q/373007

  30. [38]

    The clique complex and hypergraph matching.Combinatorica, 21(1):89–94, 2001

    Roy Meshulam. The clique complex and hypergraph matching.Combinatorica, 21(1):89–94, 2001

    2001

  31. [39]

    Domination numbers and homology.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 102(2):321–330, 2003

    Roy Meshulam. Domination numbers and homology.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 102(2):321–330, 2003

    2003

  32. [40]

    Persistence modules with operators in Morse and Floer theory.Moscow Mathematical Journal, 17:757–786, 2017

    Leonid Polterovich, Egor Shelukhin, and Vukaˇ sin Stojisavljevi´ c. Persistence modules with operators in Morse and Floer theory.Moscow Mathematical Journal, 17:757–786, 2017

    2017

  33. [41]

    Vietoris–Rips complexes of platonic solids.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.14388, 2023

    Nada Saleh, Thomas Titz Mite, and Stefan Witzel. Vietoris–Rips complexes of platonic solids.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.14388, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    On Vietoris–Rips complexes (with scale 3) of hypercube graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.02756, 2022

    Samir Shukla. On Vietoris–Rips complexes (with scale 3) of hypercube graphs.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.02756, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    On the theory of graphs

    Paul Tur´ an. On the theory of graphs. InColloquium Mathematicum, volume 1, pages 19–30, 1954

    1954

  36. [44]

    PhD thesis, Colorado State University, 2023

    Daniel Vargas-Rosario.Persistent Homology of Products and Gromov–Hausdorff Distances Between Hypercubes and Spheres. PhD thesis, Colorado State University, 2023. 21

    2023

  37. [45]

    ¨Uber den h¨ oheren Zusammenhang kompakter R¨ aume und eine Klasse von zusam- menhangstreuen Abbildungen.Mathematische Annalen, 97(1):454–472, 1927

    Leopold Vietoris. ¨Uber den h¨ oheren Zusammenhang kompakter R¨ aume und eine Klasse von zusam- menhangstreuen Abbildungen.Mathematische Annalen, 97(1):454–472, 1927

    1927

  38. [46]

    Contractibility of the Rips complexes of integer lattices via local domination.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 2024

    ˇZiga Virk. Contractibility of the Rips complexes of integer lattices via local domination.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    Contractibility of Vietoris–Rips complexes of dense subsets in (R n, ℓ1) via hyper- convex embeddings, 2024

    Qingsong Wang. Contractibility of Vietoris–Rips complexes of dense subsets in (R n, ℓ1) via hyper- convex embeddings, 2024

    2024

  40. [48]

    Contractible Vietoris–Rips complexes ofZ n.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.11993, 2024

    Matthew CB Zaremsky. Contractible Vietoris–Rips complexes ofZ n.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.11993, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Computational topology.Algorithms and theory of computation handbook, 2(3), 2009

    Afra Zomorodian. Computational topology.Algorithms and theory of computation handbook, 2(3), 2009

    2009

  42. [50]

    Fast construction of the Vietoris–Rips complex.Computers & Graphics, 34(3):263– 271, 2010

    Afra Zomorodian. Fast construction of the Vietoris–Rips complex.Computers & Graphics, 34(3):263– 271, 2010

    2010

  43. [51]

    Computing persistent homology.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 33(2):249–274, 2005

    Afra Zomorodian and Gunnar Carlsson. Computing persistent homology.Discrete & Computational Geometry, 33(2):249–274, 2005. AppendixA. The following result about maximal simplices is referenced in Section 5.1. Lemma A.1.We have M(VR(C n;k)) =    {σi :i= 0, . . . , n−1}forn...

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.