arXiv++ Combinatorics

Universal bounds for the potential energy of weighted spherical codes are obtained by linear programming. The universality is in the sense of Cohn-Kumar -- every attaining code is optimal with respect to a large class of potential functions (absolutely monotone), in the sense of Levenshtein -- there is a bound for every weighted code, and in the sense of parameters (nodes and weights) -- they are independent of the potential function. We derive a necessary condition for optimality (in the linear programming framework) of our lower bounds which is also shown to be sufficient when the potential is strictly absolutely monotone. Bounds are also obtained for the weighted energy of weighted spherical designs. We explore our bounds for several previously studied weighted spherical codes.

We prove that the kissing number in 48 dimensions among antipodal spherical codes with certain forbidden inner products is 52\,416\,000. Constructions of attaining codes as kissing configurations of minimum vectors in even unimodular extremal lattices are well known since the 1970's. We also prove that corresponding spherical 11-designs with the same cardinality are minimal. We use appropriate modifications of the linear programming bounds for spherical codes and designs introduced by Delsarte, Goethals and Seidel in 1977.

This article is devoted to the study of discrete potentials on the sphere in $\mathbb{R}^n$ for sharp codes. We show that the potentials of most of the known sharp codes attain the universal lower bounds for polarization for spherical $τ$-designs previously derived by the authors, where ``universal'' is meant in the sense of applying to a large class of potentials that includes absolutely monotone functions of inner products. We also extend our universal bounds to $T$-designs and the associated polynomial subspaces determined by the vanishing moments of spherical configurations and thus obtain the minima for the icosahedron, dodecahedron, and sharp codes coming from $E_8$ and the Leech lattice. For this purpose, we investigate quadrature formulas for certain subspaces of Gegenbauer polynomials $P^{(n)}_j$ which we call PULB subspaces, particularly those having basis $\{P_j^{(n)}\}_{j=0}^{2k+2}\setminus \{P_{2k}^{(n)}\}.$ Furthermore, for potentials with $h^{(τ+1)}<0$ we prove that the strong sharp codes and the antipodal sharp codes attain the universal bounds and their minima occur at points of the codes. The same phenomenon is established for the $600$-cell when the potential $h$ satisfies $h^{(i)}\geq 0$, $i=1,\dots,15$, and $h^{(16)}\leq 0.$

In this article we investigate the $N$-point min-max and the max-min polarization problems on the sphere for a large class of potentials in $\mathbb{R}^n$. We derive universal lower and upper bounds on the polarization of spherical designs of fixed dimension, strength, and cardinality. The bounds are universal in the sense that they are a convex combination of potential function evaluations with nodes and weights independent of the class of potentials. As a consequence of our lower bounds, we obtain the Fazekas-Levenshtein bounds on the covering radius of spherical designs. Utilizing the existence of spherical designs, our polarization bounds are extended to general configurations. As examples we completely solve the min-max polarization problem for $120$ points on $\mathbb{S}^3$ and show that the $600$-cell is universally optimal for that problem. We also provide alternative methods for solving the max-min polarization problem when the number of points $N$ does not exceed the dimension $n$ and when $N=n+1$. We further show that the cross-polytope has the best max-min polarization constant among all spherical $2$-designs of $N=2n$ points for $n=2,3,4$; for $n\geq 5$, this statement is conditional on a well-known conjecture that the cross-polytope has the best covering radius. This max-min optimality is also established for all so-called centered codes.

We prove that the inner products of spherical $s$-distance $t$-designs with $t \geq 2s-2$ (Delsarte codes) and $s \geq 3$ are rational with the only exception being the icosahedron. In other formulations, we prove that all sharp configurations have rational inner products and all spherical codes which attain the Levenshtein bound, have rational inner products, except for the icosahedron.

We investigate spherical 4-distance 7-designs by studying their distance distributions. We compute these distance distributions and use their product (an integer) to derive certain divisibility conditions relating the dimension $n$ and the cardinality $M$ of our designs. It follows that $n$ divides $12M$ and $n+1$ divides $4M^2$. This result provides a good base for computer experiments to support the folklore conjecture that the only spherical 4-distance 7-designs are the tight spherical 7-designs. We then proceed with a computer assisted proof of this conjecture in all dimensions $n \leq 1000$.

We derive upper and lower bounds on the sum of distances of a spherical code of size $N$ in $n$ dimensions when $N\sim n^α, 0<α\le 2.$ The bounds are derived by specializing recent general, universal bounds on energy of spherical sets. We discuss asymptotic behavior of our bounds along with several examples of codes whose sum of distances closely follows the upper bound.

We apply polynomial techniques (linear programming) to obtain lower and upper bounds on the covering radius of spherical designs as function of their dimension, strength, and cardinality. In terms of inner products we improve the lower bounds due to Fazekas and Levenshtein and propose new upper bounds. Our approach to the lower bounds involves certain signed measures whose corresponding series of orthogonal polynomials are positive definite up to a certain (appropriate) degree. Upper bounds are based on a geometric observation and more or less standard linear programming techniques.

Inspired by a recently formulated conjecture by Bannai et al. we investigate spherical codes which admit exactly three different distances and are spherical 5-designs. Computing and analyzing distance distributions we provide new proof of the fact (due to Levenshtein) that such codes are maximal and rule out certain cases towards a proof of the conjecture.

We introduce and investigate binary $(k,k)$-designs -- combinatorial structures which are related to binary orthogonal arrays. We derive general linear programming bound and propose as a consequence a universal bound on the minimum possible cardinality of $(k,k)$-designs for fixed $k$ and length $n$. Designs which attain our bound are investigated.

We derive general linear programming bounds for spherical $(k,k)$-designs. This includes lower bounds for the minimum cardinality and lower and upper bounds for minimum and maximum energy, respectively. As applications we obtain a universal bound in sense of Levenshtein for the minimum possible cardinality of a $(k,k)$ design for fixed dimension and $k$ and corresponding optimality result. We also discuss examples and possibilities for attaining the universal bound.

We employ signed measures that are positive definite up to certain degrees to establish Levenshtein-type upper bounds on the cardinality of codes with given minimum and maximum distances, and universal lower bounds on the potential energy (for absolutely monotone interactions) for codes with given maximum distance and cardinality. The distance distributions of codes that attain the bounds are found in terms of the parameters of Levenshtein-type quadrature formulas. Necessary and sufficient conditions for the optimality of our bounds are derived. Further, we obtain upper bounds on the energy of codes of fixed minimum and maximum distances and cardinality.

We derive upper bounds for the potential energy of spherical designs of cardinality close to the Delsarte-Goethals-Seidel bound. These bounds are obtained by linear programming with the use of the Hermite interpolating polynomial of the potential function in suitable nodes. Numerical computations show that the results are quite close to certain lower energy bounds confirming that spherical designs are, in a sense, energy efficient. \end{abstract}