# Smallest simplex

(Difference between revisions)
 Revision as of 04:16, 17 February 2010 (edit)← Previous diff Current revision (22:17, 4 December 2011) (edit) (undo) (→question) (One intermediate revision not shown.) Line 11: Line 11: ==question== ==question== - ''Doesn't a simplex in n-space always have (n+1) vertices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplex)? Or would you want to allow for sub-dimensional simplices? But then, measuring the volume is quite pointless for all but the full-dimensional ones. I'm probably misunderstanding something, perhaps you can clarify this?'' + ''Doesn't a simplex in n-space always have (n+1) vertices? Or would you want to allow for sub-dimensional simplices? But then, measuring the volume is quite pointless for all but the full-dimensional ones. I'm probably misunderstanding something, perhaps you can clarify this?'' ==Reply== ==Reply==

## Current revision

I am a PhD. candidate student in Tsinghua University, China. I think this is an open problem in my field. That is:

How to find the smallest simplex which can enclose a bunch of given points in a high dimensional space (under the following two assumptions:)?

• (1) The number of the vertexes of the simplex is known, say n;
• (2) The number of the vertexes of the simplex is unknown.

To measure how small the simplex is, we can use the volume of the simplex.

The question is: can this problem be cast into a convex optimization?

## question

Doesn't a simplex in n-space always have (n+1) vertices? Or would you want to allow for sub-dimensional simplices? But then, measuring the volume is quite pointless for all but the full-dimensional ones. I'm probably misunderstanding something, perhaps you can clarify this?