arXiv++ Combinatorics

Cut and project sets are obtained by projecting an irrational slice through a lattice to a lower dimensional subspace. Under standard conditions, the resulting pattern has no translational periods even though it retains some regularity of the lattice. Cut and project sets are one of the archetypical examples of patterns featuring aperiodic order, the other construction methods being by substitution and matching rules. Many early examples of aperiodic tilings, including the famous Penrose and Ammann--Beenker tilings, have a description from all of these methods. In this article we answer the following question, in the case of a Euclidean total space: what property of the cut and project data characterises when the resulting cut and project sets may also be defined by a substitution rule?

We calculate the growth rate of the complexity function for polytopal cut and project sets. This generalises work of Julien where the almost canonical condition is assumed. The analysis of polytopal cut and project sets has often relied on being able to replace acceptance domains of patterns by so-called cut regions. Our results correct mistakes in the literature where these two notions are incorrectly identified. One may only relate acceptance domains and cut regions when additional conditions on the cut and project set hold. We find a natural condition, called the quasicanonical condition, guaranteeing this property and demonstrate via counterexample that the almost canonical condition is not sufficient for this. We also discuss the relevance of this condition for the current techniques used to study the algebraic topology of polytopal cut and project sets.