EWCG 2005, Eindhoven, March 9–11, 2005 A Pointed Delaunay Pseudo-Triangulation of a Simple Polygon G¨unter Rote∗ Andr´e Schulz†‡ Abstract 2 A reasonable definition of the Delaunay pseudo- triangulations of a simple polygon We present a definition of a pointed Delaunay pseudo- Constrained regularity is a concept which can be ap- triangulation of a simple polygon. We discuss why our plied on triangulations and pseudo-triangulations. A definition is reasonable. Our approach will be mo- triangulation or pseudo-triangulation is said to be reg- tivated from maximal locally convex functions, and ular if it can be represented by a downward projec- extends the work of Aichholzer et al.[1]. Connec- tion of a convex lifting. Since the Delaunay triangu- tions between the polytope of the pointed pseudo- lation is the projection of the lower convex hull of the triangulations and the Delaunay pseudo-triangulation paraboloid lifting the Delaunay triangulation is regu- will be given. lar [3]. Moreover the constrained Delaunay triangula- tion is constrained regular. In [1] constrained regular pseudo-triangulations were introduced. We use this 1 Introduction approach to find a lifting map which is similar to the paraboloid lifting. From now on we are considering a polygon P .The Since the Delaunay triangulation is an important con- n vertices of P are given in a clockwise order and cept in computational geometry it is natural to ask named p1,p2,...,pn. A vertex is called corner if its for an equivalent in the pseudo-triangulation world. internal angle is smaller than π. It is called a reflex More precisely we are interested in a pointed pseudo- vertex otherwise. triangulation which is Delaunay-like. A pseudo- Our goal is to define the Delaunay pseudo- triangulation is pointed if every point is incident to triangulation with help of a certain maximal locally an angle greater than π. Without the restriction to convex function. These functions were studied in [1] pointedness the Delaunay triangulation itself would and we are using the optimality theorem of this pa- be the most Delaunay-like pseudo-triangulation. In per for our definition. A function is locally convex the following we skip the term pointed for the pointed on P , if it is convex on every line segment in P . Delaunay pseudo-triangulation. ∗ Let hi be a given height for every vertex pi. f is As a simple case we consider the pseudo- the maximal locally convex function which satisfies ∗ ∗ triangulations of a simple polygon. For simple poly- f (pi) ≤ hi. The lifting induced by f is piecewise gons the Delaunay triangulation must contain the linear and projects down to a pseudo-triangulation ∗ 2 boundary edges. Thus we are interested in generaliz- PT (h). f and PT (h) are unique. If we set hi = |pi| ing the constrained Delaunay triangulation (CDT)[2] the CDT of P is PT (h). for simple polygons. The pseudo-triangulation PT (h) is not necessaryly Delaunay-like is a quite soft expression. What we pointed. Since we require pointedness we have to ∗ are looking for is a pseudo-triangulation which shares choose the heights in such a way that f will in- many of the properties of the CDT. For a survey for duce a pointed pseudo-triangulation. The corners of properties of the Delaunay triangulation see [4]. As P are pointed because their outer angle is greater than the most important criterion we demand that for a π. The reflex vertices must contain the big angle in- convex polygon Delaunay triangulation and Delaunay side. Thus they must part of a reflex chain of some pseudo-triangulation must coincide. pseudo-triangle (in [1] these vertices are called incom- plete). The optimality theorem says that in this case For the rest of the paper we assume that the points ∗ are given in general position. f (pi) >hi. Their height is defined by the 3 corners of the pseudo-triangle which contains the reflex angle of the reflex vertex. ∗Institut f¨ur Informatik, Freie Universit¨at Berlin,Takustraße To assure that the reflex vertices are part of a reflex 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany, email:[email protected] † chain, we let their hi be very high. With such a lift- Supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft (DFG) ing it is not possible to obtain local convexity when under grant RO 2338/2-1 ∗ ‡Institut f¨ur Informatik, Freie Universit¨at Berlin,Takustraße f (pi)=hi for any reflex vertex. Hence they will be 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany, email:[email protected] pointed. 77 21st European Workshop on Computational Geometry, 2005 Now we discuss how an appropriate lifting will look like. We define f1(pi)ifpi is corner in P hd := f2(pi) otherwise | |2 For f1 we choose f1(pi)= pi . This guarantees that (a) (b) for convex polygons the Delaunay triangulation and the Delaunay pseudo-triangulation coincide. f2 can Figure 2: A Delaunay pseudo-triangulation of a poly- be any strictly concave function with minP (f2(pi)) > gon (a) and the CDT of the same polygon (b) maxP (f1(pi)). Lemma 1 The maximal locally convex function in the domain of P defined by hd projects down to a pointed pseudo-triangulation. 70 60 Proof. Let p be a reflex vertex of P and let l be a 50 c z 40 8 line in P that crosses the neighborhood of pc. The line 30 6 l ends at the boundary of P . We name its endpoints 20 4 2 6 0 5 4 e1 and e2. The point e1 lies on the boundary segment 3 −2 2 1 0 −4 −1 −2 x (b1,b2)ofP ; the point e2 on the segment (b3,b4). −3 −6 y Figure 1 illustartes the situation. ∗ We know that for i ∈{1, 2, 3, 4}f (bi) ≤ f2(bi)by ∗ ∗ the definition of f . Since f2 is concave and f convex Figure 3: The lifted polygon from Figure 2 ∗ ∗ we know that f (e1) ≤ f2(e1)andf (e2) ≤ f2(e2). ∗ ∗ Thus we have f (e1) <f2(pc)andf (e2) <f2(pc)(f2 The PT (hd) can be constructed by flipping to op- is strictly concave). But since f ∗ must be convex on timality [1]: We start with any triangulation of P ∗ ∗ l we deduce that f (pc) <f2(pc). Thus f (pc) <hc and then flip away all reflex edges by convexifying 2 for all reflex vertices and as discussed above PT (hd)is and edge removing flips. After at most O(n )flipswe pointed. will reach the optimum. For every flip a linear sys- tem of equations must be solved. This can be done in b1 O(n + i3) time, where i is the number of incomplete e 1 vertices. By flipping to optimality the PT (h )canbe b2 d computed in O(n5). pc 3 Relations to the PPT Polytope l This section presents some evidence why our choice b4 of definition is reasonable. The Delaunay triangula- e2 tion can be expressed as an optimal vertex of a high- b3 dimensional polytope. We will show a similar inter- pretation for the Delaunay pseudo-triangulation. The secondary polytope of a point set S repre- Figure 1: Illustration of the proof of Lemma 1 sents every regular triangulation of S as a vertex in |S| Since we have defined a unique pointed pseudo- R . Moreover flips corresponds to edges in this poly- triangulation by a maximal locally convex func- tope. The scalar product of a vertex of the secondary tion, we are able to define the Delaunay pseudo- polytope and a height vector gives the volume under the lifted triangulation. If the height vector lifts the triangulation with help of hd. It turns out that the height of the reflex vertices are not relevant. points to the paraboloid the minimization of the vol- ume will give us the Delaunay triangulation. Recently a polytope for regular pseudo-triangulations of sim- Definition 1 Let P be a simple polygon and hd the ple polygons was introduced [1, Lemma 9.2]. Again lifting defined above. We name PT (hd) the Delaunay pseudo-triangulation of P . we can represent the volume under the lifted surface as a scalar product with some height vector. Thus Figure 2.a shows an easy example. We have a poly- PT (hd) can be defined as an optimal vertex in this gon with 10 vertices, 3 of them are reflex. The locally polytope. For practical computation this approach is convex surface induced by the paraboloid lifting of the not useful, because the polytope is not given by a set complete vertices is shown in Figure 3. of inequalities. 78 EWCG 2005, Eindhoven, March 9–11, 2005 Even more interesting is the connection be- tween PT (hd) and the polytope of pointed pseudo- triangulations (PPT Polytope) defined in [6]. For a class of simple polygons we present a formulation of PT (hd) as an objective function of the PPT polytope. This gives us a completely independent way to define PT (hd) as a generalization of a Delaunay triangula- tion for this class. Our starting point is the objective function for the (a) (b) Delaunay triangulation in the PPT polytope. Of Figure 4: Examples of neighborly and not neighborly course this can only be done for points in convex posi- visible polygons tion. Fortunately, for points in convex position, there is a connections between the secondary polytope and the PPT polytope (in this case the two polytopes are combinatorially equivalent)[6]. Theorem 2 Let P be a neighborly visible polygon. We abbreviate the the signed area of the triangle Furthermore let all corners of P lie on its convex hull.