Disk patterns, quasi-duality and the uniform bounded diameter conjecture

Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a connected simple plane graph with vertex and edge sets $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{E}$. Let $\omega:\mathcal{E}\longrightarrow\{\frac{\pi}{n}\colon n\in\mathbb{N}_{\geq 2}\}\cup\{0\}$ be some weight function on its edge set. We call such an edge-weighted graph $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ a Coxeter graph. A disk pattern with combinatorics $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ is essentially a collection of disks $\mathcal{P}=\{D_{v},v\in\mathcal{V}\}$ whose intersection pattern and angles are described by the graph $\mathcal{G}$ and the weight function $\omega$ respectively (see Definitions 2.1 and 2.2 for the subtleties involving a parabolic face).

The Koebe-Andreev-Thurston theorem (see Theorem 2.3, c.f. [RHD07, Theorem 1.4]) gives a characterization on the realization problem for disk patterns, and its deformation space is identified with the product space of the Teichmüller space (see Theorem 2.7, c.f. [HL13, Theorem 1.3] and [HL17, Theorem 0.5]). Given a disk pattern $\mathcal{P}$ realizing the Coxeter graph $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$, we consider the reflection group $G=G_{\mathcal{P}}$ generated by reflections along all disks in $\mathcal{P}$. This gives a correspondence between reflection groups and disk patterns.

In §2, we will give a characterization of acylindrical reflection group in terms of its Coxeter graph $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ (see Theorem 2.9). In particular, we will show that if $G$ is acylindrical, then $\mathcal{G}$ is $3$-connected. Equivalently, this means that $\mathcal{G}$ is a polyhedral graph, i.e., it is the 1-skeleton of a convex polyhedron. We have an identification

where $F$ is a hyperbolic face of $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ (see §2) and $\Pi_{F}$ is the corresponding hyperbolic polygon whose angles are determined by the weight function $\omega$.

Hence in our setting, the skinning map can be explicitly defined as follows. Given a disk pattern $\mathcal{P}$ associated to the reflection group, the input of the skinning map is represented by a collection of polygons $\{\Pi_{F,\mathcal{P}}\}_{F}$. For each hyperbolic face $F$, the corresponding component of the skinning image is revealed by removing the disks for vertices in the complement of $F$, and represented by another polygon $\Pi_{F,\mathcal{P}}^{-}$. See Figure 1.1 for an example illustrating the correspondence between reflection groups and circle patterns, as well as this explicit presentation of the skinning map.

A key tool in this paper is extremal length, particularly in the context of disk patterns. Let $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ be a Coxeter graph, and $F$ be a hyperbolic face of $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$. Let $a,b$ be a pair of non-adjacent vertices on $\partial F$. Let $\Gamma_{a,b}$ be the family of paths $\gamma$ in $\mathcal{G}$ with $\operatorname{Int}\gamma\subseteq\mathcal{G}-\partial F$ connecting $a,b$. Similarly, let $\Gamma_{a,b}^{*}$ be the family of paths $\gamma$ in $\mathcal{G}$ with $\operatorname{Int}\gamma\subseteq\mathcal{G}-\partial F$ and $\partial\gamma\subseteq\partial F$ separating $a,b$. We consider the vertex extremal length, denoted by $\operatorname{EL}_{\mathcal{G}}(\Gamma_{a,b},\partial F)$ and $\operatorname{EL}_{\mathcal{G}}(\Gamma_{a,b}^{*},\partial F)$ for these families of paths in $\mathcal{G}$ (see §3 for more details). We denote the vertex extremal width (or vertex modulus), i.e. the reciprocal of extremal length, by $\operatorname{EW}_{\mathcal{G}}(\Gamma_{a,b},\partial F)$ and $\operatorname{EW}_{\mathcal{G}}(\Gamma_{a,b}^{*},\partial F)$

This discrete version of extremal length was first introduced by Cannon [Can94] and in various other forms by Duffin [Duf62] and Schramm [Sch95]. If $\mathcal{G}$ induces a triangulation of the complement of the face $F$ in $S^{2}$, then it follows from a classical result of Schramm (see [Sch93]) that we have duality of extremal lengths / widths, i.e.,

Duality fails in general (see Example 3.3). Instead, we prove a uniform quasi-duality in terms of the topological complexity (see Theorem 3.2)

We remark that the uniform lower bound in Equation (1.1) is the key in our argument to obtain a uniform upper bound on the skinning diameter. It is a discrete analogue of the reciprocal condition in [Raj17, NR22] (see §1.4.3 for more discussions).

The vertex extremal length / width serves as a discrete analogue and gives good approximation of the classical conformal extremal length / width in the following sense.

Let $(S_{F})_{F}\in\sigma_{M}(\operatorname{Teich}(\partial M/r))$. Let $\operatorname{EW}(\Gamma_{a,b,S_{F}})$ (or $\operatorname{EW}(\Gamma_{a,b,S_{F}}^{*})$) be the conformal extremal width of families of paths $\Gamma_{a,b,S_{F}}$ connecting (or families of paths $\Gamma_{a,b,S_{F}}^{*}$ separating) the edges associated to $a,b$ of the hyperbolic polygon $S_{F}$ (see §4.2 for more details). In Theorem 4.5, we prove that if $G$ is acylindrical, and if the extremal width $\operatorname{EW}(\Gamma_{a,b,S_{F}})$ is bigger than some threshold depending only on $\mathscr{C}_{top}(G)$, then

Let $(S_{F})_{F},(S^{\prime}_{F})_{F}\in\sigma_{M}(\operatorname{Teich}(\partial M/r))$. Let $a,b$ be a pair of non-adjacent vertices on $\partial F$. By Equation (1.2), if the extremal widths for the polygons $(S_{F})_{F},(S^{\prime}_{F})_{F}$ between $a,b$ are big, then

Thus, by Equation (1.1), there exists some constant $K$ depending only on $\mathscr{C}_{top}(G)$ so that

This essentially implies that the Teichmüller distance between the two hyperbolic polygons $(S_{F})_{F},(S^{\prime}_{F})_{F}\in\sigma_{M}(\operatorname{Teich}(\partial M/r))$ is bounded above by some constant depending only on the topological complexity $\mathscr{C}_{top}(G)$, giving the desired uniform upper bound on the diameter of the skinning map $\sigma_{M}(\operatorname{Teich}(\partial M/r))$ (see Theorem 5.1 and §5 for more details).

We remark that as one varies reflection groups with the same topological complexity, the hyperbolic polygons in the skinning image can become degenerate. Our Theorem 1.2, in particular Equation (1.3), states that different hyperbolic polygons in the skinning image must degenerate in the same way.

The authors thank Y. Minksy for asking the question and suggesting the connection between uniform diameter bound and circle packings.

In this subsection, we introduce a combinatorial object (Coxeter graphs) to encode both disk patterns with angles in $\{\pi/n:n\in\mathbb{N}_{\geq 2}\}\cup\{0\}$ and reflection groups, and study their relationships. In particular, we show that their deformation spaces are naturally identified (Theorem 2.7). Our main ingredient is a version of Koebe-Andreev-Thurston’s theorem on realizable disk patterns (Theorem 2.3).

Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a connected simple plane graph, and let $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{E}$ be the set of vertices and edges of $\mathcal{G}$ respectively. Let $\omega:\mathcal{E}\longrightarrow[0,\pi/2]$ be a weight function on the set of edges. We call such an edge-weighted graph a Coxeter graph.

Given a Coxeter graph $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$, a face of $F$ of $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ is said to be

• •

  elliptic if it is triangular and the sum of weights $\omega(e_{1})+\omega(e_{2})+\omega(e_{3})>\pi$ for the three edges $e_{1},e_{2},e_{3}$ bounding $F$;

• •

  parabolic if the sum of weights $\omega(e_{1})+\cdots+\omega(e_{n})=(n-2)\pi$ for the edges $e_{1},\ldots,e_{n}$ bounding $F$;

• •

  hyperbolic otherwise.

It is easy to see that if $F$ is parabolic, then it is either a triangle or a quadrilateral. It is also easy to see that if $F$ is hyperbolic with $n$ sides, then the weights on the edges add up to $<(n-2)\pi$.

For a more uniform presentation, we always assume that in the Coxeter graph $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$, there does not exist a pair of adjacent triangular parabolic faces sharing an edge with weight $0$. If there does exist such a pair, it is easy to see that the four edges other than the one shared by the two triangles all have weight $\pi/2$. We can remove the common edge, and combine the two parabolic faces into a single quadrilateral parabolic face. This in fact does not affect the combinatorics of the disk patterns encoded by the graph, see Definitions 2.1 and 2.2, as well as the discussion between them.

Note that if $\mathcal{F}_{pq}$ is nonempty, then the completion is no longer a plane graph. This definition is motivated by the observation that there are extraneous tangencies for quadrilateral parabolic faces; see [Thu22, Ch. 13]. For easier references, we still refer to the quadrilateral $v_{1}v_{2}v_{3}v_{4}$ as a parabolic face of $\overline{\mathcal{G}}$. The four triangles $v_{1}v_{2}v_{3}$, $v_{2}v_{3}v_{4}$, $v_{3}v_{4}v_{1}$, $v_{4}v_{1}v_{2}$ formed by adding the diagonals are called extraneous parabolic faces of $\overline{\mathcal{G}}$.

We remark that if $\omega\equiv 0$ on $\mathcal{E}$, then the disk pattern $\mathcal{P}$ realizing $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ is a circle packing. We endow $\operatorname{Teich}(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ with the Hausdorff topology, i.e. $\mathcal{P}_{i}\to\mathcal{P}$ if (up to Möbius transformations) the corresponding disks $D_{v,i}\to D_{v}$ on $\hat{\mathbb{C}}$.

The following statement is a slight generalization of the classical Koebe-Andreev-Thurston theorem (see e.g. Chapter 13 of [Thu22]).

We remark that if $\omega\equiv 0$, then the two conditions are automatically satisfied, and the result above reduces to the classical one on circle packings.

We will briefly sketch a proof of realizability, and discuss more about (non)uniqueness in later sections. Many versions of this theorem found in current literature treat slightly different cases. We refer to [RHD07] for some of the nuances.

For applications on reflection groups, from now on, we restrict the weight function $\omega:\mathcal{E}\longrightarrow\{\frac{\pi}{n}\colon n\in\mathbb{N}_{\geq 2}\}\cup\{0\}$, and assume that $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ is realizable. We remark that without this restriction, many estimates in later sections still hold, but some constants will depend on $\omega$.

We also assume that $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ has at least one hyperoblic face. Let $\operatorname{Aut}^{\pm}(\hat{\mathbb{C}})\cong\operatorname{Isom}(\mathbb{H}^{3})$ be the group of Möbius and anti-Möbius transformations.

Given $\mathcal{P}\in\operatorname{Teich}(\mathcal{G},\omega)$, consider the group $G=G_{\mathcal{P}}$ generated by reflections $r_{v}$ in the boundary circles $C_{v}$ of $D_{v}$. Note that for any $v,w\in\mathcal{V}$, $r_{v}\circ r_{w}$ is

• •

  an elliptic element of order $n$ if there is an edge $e$ connecting them with $\omega(e)=\pi/n$ for some integer $n\geq 2$;

• •

  a parabolic element if there is an edge $e$ connecting them in the completion $\overline{\mathcal{G}}$ with $\overline{\omega}(e)=0$;

• •

  a hyperbolic element if no edge connects them in the completion.

We can construct a fundamental domain for the action of $G$ on $\mathbb{H}^{3}$ explicitly. For each vertex $v$, let $P_{v}$ be the corresponding geodesic plane in $\mathbb{H}^{3}$ with $C_{v}$ as its boundary at infinity, oriented with normal vectors pointing towards $D_{v}$. Let $\mathcal{H}_{v}$ be the half space bounded by $P_{v}$ so that the normals on $P_{v}$ points away from $\mathcal{H}_{v}$. Set

Note that the planes $P_{v}$ and $P_{w}$ intersect in a dihedral angle $\pi/n$ if $\omega(vw)=\pi/n$. Consider also the set

Since $(\mathcal{G},\omega)$ contains at least one hyperbolic face, $\Pi$ is nonempty. In fact, each connected component of $\Pi$ is the interior of a polygon bounded by circular arcs, corresponding to a face $F$ of $\mathcal{G}$. We denote this connected component by $\Pi_{F}$, and calls it the interstice of the pattern for the face $F$.

Note that the infinite ends of $\mathcal{H}_{P}$ extend to the sphere at infinity $\hat{\mathbb{C}}$ as interstices. In particular, we conclude that $\mathcal{H}_{P}$ is nonempty and in fact has nonempty interior. By Poincaré’s polyhedron theorem, $G$ is a discrete subgroup of $\operatorname{Aut}^{\pm}(\hat{\mathbb{C}})$, and $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{P}}$ is a fundamental domain for the action of $G$ on $\mathbb{H}^{3}$. The group $G$ contains an index-2 subgroup of orientation-preserving elements, which we denote by $\widetilde{G}$. It follows from the construction of a fundamental domain above that $\widetilde{G}$ is geometrically finite, i.e. the action of $\widetilde{G}$ on $\mathbb{H}^{3}$ has a finite-sided fundamental polyhedron.