English

Untangling two systems of noncrossing curves

Combinatorics 2014-03-10 v5 Geometric Topology

Abstract

We consider two systems of curves (α1,...,αm)(\alpha_1,...,\alpha_m) and (β1,...,βn)(\beta_1,...,\beta_n) drawn on a compact two-dimensional surface MM with boundary. Each αi\alpha_i and each βj\beta_j is either an arc meeting the boundary of MM at its two endpoints, or a closed curve. The αi\alpha_i are pairwise disjoint except for possibly sharing endpoints, and similarly for the βj\beta_j. We want to "untangle" the βj\beta_j from the αi\alpha_i by a self-homeomorphism of MM; more precisely, we seek a homeomorphism ϕ:MM\phi:M\rightarrow M fixing the boundary of MM pointwise such that the total number of crossings of the αi\alpha_i with the ϕ(βj)\phi(\beta_j) is as small as possible. This problem is motivated by an application in the algorithmic theory of embeddings and 3-manifolds. We prove that if MM is planar, i.e., a sphere with h0h\geq 0 boundary components ("holes"), then O(mn)O(mn) crossings can be achieved (independently of hh), which is asymptotically tight, as an easy lower bound shows. In general, for an arbitrary (orientable or nonorientable) surface MM with hh holes and of (orientable or nonorientable) genus gg, we obtain an O((m+n)4)O((m+n)^4) upper bound, again independent of hh and gg. The proofs rely, among others, on a result concerning simultaneous planar drawings of graphs by Erten and Kobourov.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1302.6475,
  title  = {Untangling two systems of noncrossing curves},
  author = {Jiří Matoušek and Eric Sedgwick and Martin Tancer and Uli Wagner},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1302.6475},
  year   = {2014}
}

Comments

30 pages, 20 figures; the proof of the existence of a suitable orientation-enabling cycle was simplified by several pages (the homology based argument was replaced with a local orientation argument following a suggestion of an anonymous referee)

R2 v1 2026-06-21T23:32:54.558Z