Journal A1

JID:YJMAA AID:124746 /FLA Doctopic: Complex Analysis [m3L; v1.297] P.
1 (1-17)
J. Math. Anal. Appl. ••• (••••) ••••••
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications

www.elsevier.com/locate/jmaa
Ideal triangulation and minimal shearing of punctured hyperbolic

surfaces ✩
Manman Jiang
Guangzhou Maritime University, Guangzhou, 510275, China
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: It is known that every punctured hyperbolic surface can be obtained by gluing ideal
Received 27 March 2020 triangles, according to an ideal triangulation pattern and a corresponding shearing
Available online xxxx coordinate. In this paper, we study the minimal shearing of a punctured hyperbolic
Submitted by X. Huang
surface among all ideal triangulations, and show that it is comparable to the length
Keywords: of a systole of the underlying surface.
Punctured hyperbolic surfaces © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Ideal triangulation
Shearing coordinates
1. Introduction
In the research of punctured hyperbolic surfaces, there are two frequently used constructions: pants
decomposition and ideal triangulations. Both of them provide global parametrizations of the Teichmüller
space. The former one gives the Fenchel-Nielsen coordinates, and the latter one gives a shearing coordinates.
In this paper, we will focus on the ideal triangulations and the corresponding shearing coordinates. Among
all types of ideal triangulations, we are interested in “the optimal ideal triangulation” of a punctured
hyperbolic surfaces, and the associate “minimal shearing”.
More precisely, let X be a hyperbolic surface of genus g with n > 0 punctures. Let Tg,n be the Teichmüller
space which consists of equivalence classes of marked hyperbolic surfaces homeomorphic to X. An ideal arc
on X is a complete simple geodesic whose endpoints are punctures. An ideal triangulation of X is a set
Γ = {γ1 , · · · , γ6g−6+3n } of 6g − 6 + 3n idea arcs such that the complement consists of 4g − 4 + 2n ideal
triangles. Each ideal triangulation Γ has an associated shearing coordinates ShΓ (X) = (S1 , · · · , S6g−6+3n ),
which encodes how to construct X from ideal triangles (see §2.1 for definition).
Let SΓ (X) := max{|Si | : i = 1, 2, · · · , 6g − 6 + 3n} be the absolute shearing of X with respect to Γ. It is
proved (Theorem 4.2) that there always exist ideal triangulations realizing inf Γ {SΓ (X)}, where the infimum
✩
This work is supported by NSFC 11771456 and 11901130.
E-mail address: chnjiangmm@foxmail.com.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2020.124746
0022-247X/© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
JID:YJMAA AID:124746 /FLA Doctopic: Complex Analysis [m3L; v1.297] P.2 (1-17)
2 M. Jiang / J. Math. Anal. Appl. ••• (••••) ••••••
ranges over all the ideal triangulations of X. The infimum inf Γ {SΓ (X)} is called the minimal shearing of
X, denoted by S(X).
The main goal of this paper is to characterize the minimal shearing of X in terms of the length of the
shortest simple closed geodesics on X. A systole of a hyperbolic surface X is a non-trivial simple closed
geodesic whose length is shortest among all simple closed geodesics of X. Denote by Syst(X) the length of
a systole of X. We prove that:
Theorem 1.1. Let X be a hyperbolic surface of genus g with n > 0 punctures. Let S(X) and Syst(X) be
respectively the minimal shearing of X and the length of a systole of X. Then
1 √ 1 5
2 ln + ln ln 3 ≤ S(X) ≤ 2K(g, n)(2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n ),
Syst(X) Syst(X) 2
where Bg,n is the Bers constant, and

log2 n2 , if g = 0,
K(g, n) =
2g + log2 n − 1, if g > 0,
where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.
To prove Theorem 1.1, we associate a graph to each pants decomposition. Let Λ = {λ1 , · · · , λ3g−3+n }
be a pants decomposition of X. Let Σ = {p1 , · · · , pn } be the set of punctures of X. Let P :=
{P1 , P2 , · · · , P2g−2+n } be the set of pairs of pants in X\Λ. For each Pi , let Ei be the set of three geodesic
arcs in Pi each of which connects a pair of boundary geodesics perpendicularly. Let GΛ = (VΛ , EΛ ) be a
2g−2+n
graph whose vertices VΛ = Λ ∪ Σ and edges EΛ = ∪i=1 Ei . It may happens that GΛ contains loops and
parallel edges. We assume that each edge has length one. This induces a metric dGΛ on GΛ . Theorem 1.1 is
a consequence of the following proposition, which might be of independent interest.
Proposition 3.10. For every vertex v ∈ Λ ⊂ VΛ ,
dGΛ (v, Σ) ≤ K(g, n).
This bound is sharp in the sense that for each pair (g, n) with 2 − 2g − n < 0, there is a pants decomposition
Λ0 and a vertex v0 ∈ Λ0 such that the equality holds.
Outline
In §2, we collect some preliminaries of hyperbolic surfaces. In §3, we define the graph GΛ and prove
Proposition 3.10. In §4, we show that the minimal shearing is realized by some ideal triangulation. In §5,
we prove Theorem 1.1.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to the anonymous referee for suggesting a simplified proof of Lemma 2.4, as well as many
helpful comments and suggestions. This work is supported by NSFC 11771456 and 11901130.
2. Preliminaries of hyperbolic geometry
2.1. Shearing coordinates
Let Δ be an ideal triangle on the upper-half plane with sides α1 , α2 , α3 (see Fig. 1(a)). Each corner of Δ
can be foliated by horocycles. Extend these foliations until they fill all but in the center bounded by three
M. Jiang / J. Math. Anal. Appl. ••• (••••) •••••• 3
Fig. 1. Ideal triangle. (For interpretation of the colors in the figure(s), the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
horocycles M1 M2 , M2 M3 , M3 M1 which have the same hyperbolic length. We call Mi the midpoint of αi
with respect to Δ for i = 1, 2, 3.
Let Δ1 be an ideal triangle with vertices Q1 , Q2 , Q3 and Δ2 be an ideal triangle with vertices
Q1 , Q2 , Q4 , such that Δ1 and Δ2 are on different sides of the geodesic γ connecting Q1 and Q2 (see
Fig. 1(b)). Let α1 , α2 , γ and β1 , β2 , γ be the edges of Δ1 and Δ2 respectively. Let M1 , M2 , M3 and
M1 , M2 , M3 be the midpoint of α1 , α2 , γ and β1 , β2 , γ with respect to Δ1 and Δ2 , respectively.
We define the shearing coordinate of Δ1 and Δ2 with respect to γ, denoted by Sγ (Δ1 , Δ2 ), to be the signed
distance from M3 to M3 , where the sign is “+” if M3 sits on the left of M3 observed from Δ1 , otherwise
the sign is defined to be “−”. It’s clear that Sγ (Δ1 , Δ2 ) = Sγ (Δ2 , Δ1 ).
Let X be an oriented hyperbolic surface of genus g with n > 0 marked points Σ = {p1 , · · · , pn }. Let
Γ = {γ1 , γ2 , · · · , γ6g−6+3n } be an ideal triangulation of X. It’s clear that every arc γi ∈ Γ must belong to
two ideal triangles Δi1 and Δi2 in X\Γ which might be equal. The shearing of X along γi with respect to Γ,
denoted by Sγi (X, Γ), is defined to be the shearing Sγi (Δi1 , Δi2 ). The shearing coordinate of X with respect
to Γ is defined to be the (6g − 6 + 3n)-tuple (Sγ1 (X, Γ), · · · , Sγ6g−6+3n (X, Γ)). (For more details on shearing
coordinates we refer to [5,4,11].)
Definition 2.1 (Minimal shearing). Let X be a hyperbolic surface and Γ be an ideal triangulation of X. Define
SΓ (X) := maxγ∈Γ |Sγ (X, Γ)| to be the maximal shearing of X with respect to Γ. Define S(X) := inf Γ SΓ (X)
to be the minimal shearing of X, where the infimum ranges over all the ideal triangulations of X.
2.2. Pant decomposition
A pair of pants is a hyperbolic surface of genus zero with three geodesic boundary components. A
pants decomposition is a collection of nontrivial disjoint simple closed geodesics on a surface so that each
component of the complementary is a pair of pants. The theorem below is due to Bers ([2,3]) (see [1,6–8]
for further results).
Theorem 2.2 ([2,3]). Let X be hyperbolic surface of genus g with n punctures. There exists a pants decom-
position AB = {α1 , · · · , αk } of X such that lX (αi ) ≤ Bg,n for all 1 ≤ i ≤ k := 6g − 6 + 3n, where Bg,n is
called the Bers constant.
Remark 1. It follows from the Collar lemma that if Syst(X) < for small , then the pants decomposition
obtained from Theorem 2.2 contains the systoles of X.
Let P be a pair of pants with boundary components α1 , α2 , α3 . Let δi be the geodesic connecting αi and
αi+1 perpendicularly for i = 1, 2, 3 and α4 = α1 .
Lemma 2.3. Let P be a pair of pants. If lP (αi ) ≤ Bg,n , then
1
lP (δi ) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n , (1)
Syst(P )
where Syst(P ) = min{lP (αi ) : i = 1, 2, 3}.
Proof. It follows from Theorem 2.4.1 of [7] that
cosh(lP (αi )/2) cosh(lP (αi+1 )/2) + cosh(lP (αi−1 )/2)

cosh(lP (δi )) =
sinh(lP (αi )/2) sinh(lP (αi+1 )/2)
cosh2 (Bg,n /2) + cosh(Bg,n /2)
≤
(Syst(P )/2)2
8eBg,n
≤ ,
Syst2 (P )
where we use the fact that sinh(x) ≥ x. Therefore,
1
lP (δi ) ≤ ln(2 cosh(lP (δi ))) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n .
Syst(P )
A pair of pants P is called degenerate if some boundary component degenerates to a puncture. If P

is degenerate, let P ⊂ P be the subsurface obtained from P via removing a cusp neighborhood U1 with
boundary horocycle of length 2 for each puncture of P . Let δi := δi ∩ P̂ .
Lemma 2.4. Let P be a degenerated pair of pants with one or two punctures. If lP (αi ) ≤ Bg,n for all
i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, then
1 3Bg,n
lP (δi ) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + , (2)
Syst(P ) 2
where Syst(P ) = min{lP (αi ) > 0 : i = 1, 2, 3}.
Proof. (I) P has one puncture, say α1 . Cutting P along δ1 , δ2 , δ3 , we get a geodesic pentagon with consecutive
sides δ1 , α2 /2, δ2 , α3 /2, δ3 . The angle bounded by δ3 and δ1 is zero, while the remaining four angles are right
angles. Then by the formulas of cosine and sine laws (see for example the 7th figure in the Appendix A of
[10]), we have
B
1 + cosh( lP (α 2)
) cosh( lP (α 3)
) cosh2 g,n
2 +1 8eBg,n
cosh(lP (δ1 )) = 2 2
≤ ≤ .
sinh( lP (α
2
2)
) sinh( lP (α
2
3)
) (Syst(P )/2) 2
Syst2 (P )
Thus,
lP (δ1 ) ≤ ln(2 cosh(lP (δ2 )))

1
≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n .
Syst(P )
For {i, j} = {2, 3}, applying the formulas of cosine and sine laws in the 7th figure in Appendix A of [10],
we have
lP (αj ) Bg,n B
elP (δi ) cosh( lP (α i)
) + cosh( ) 2 cosh 2 cosh g,n
= 2 2
≤ 2
≤ 2
2 l (α )
2 sinh( P 2 j ) 2 sinh Syst(P ) 4−1 Syst(P )2 e−Syst(P )
2
where we use the fact that
x x2
sinh ≥ x , ∀x ≥ 0. (3)
2 8e
Thus,
1 Bg,n 1 3Bg,n
lP (δi ) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + + Syst(P ) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + .
Syst(P ) 2 Syst(P ) 2
(II) P has two punctures, say α1 and α2 . The proof is similar to the proof of case (I), except that we use
the formulas of cosine and sine laws in the 9th figure in Appendix A of [10]. For i ∈ {1, 2},
B
elP (δi ) 1 + cosh lP (α 3)
2 cosh g,n
= 2
≤ 2
.
2 2 sinh lP (α
2
3)
2 sinh Syst(P )
2
It then follows from the discussion above that for i ∈ {1, 2},
1 3Bg,n
lP (δi ) ≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + .
Syst(P ) 2
For i = 3,
Bg,n
elP (δ3 ) 1 + cosh lP (α 3)
2 cosh
= 2
≤ 2
.
2 4 4
Notice that
1
x + ln 16 + 2 ln ≥0
x
holds for all x ≥ 0. Therefore,
Bg,n
lP (δ3 ) ≤
2

1 Bg,n
≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n +
Bg,n 2
1 3Bg,n
≤ 2 ln + ln 16 + .
Syst(P ) 2
Remark 2. The proof of Lemma 2.4 is suggested by the referee, which simplifies the original version.
3. Graphs associated to a pants decomposition
In this section, we first recall some basic definitions of graphs which can be found in [9], then we associate
a graph and a forest to every pants decomposition.
3.1. Definitions
Definition 3.1 (Graph). A graph G is a pair (V , E) consisting of a set V of vertices and a set E of edges,
together with an incidence function ψG which associate to each edge of G an undered pair of (not necessary
distinct) vertices of G. If e is an edge and u and v are vertices such that ψG (e) = {u, v}, then e is said to
join u and v, and the vertices u and v are called the ends of e. The ends of an edge are said to be incident
with the edge, and vice versa.
For an edge e ∈ E, we say that the graph G = (V , E\{e}) is obtained from G = (V , E) by removing
the edge e. For a vertex v ∈ V , we say that the graph G = (V \{v}, E\E(v)) is obtained from G = (V , E)
by removing the vertex v, where E(v) ⊂ E is the set of edges incident with v. In both cases, the incident
function is the restriction of ψG .
Definition 3.2 (Degree). The degree of a vertex v in G is the number of edges incident with v, where each
loop is counted twice.
Definition 3.3 (Loop, link and parallel edges). An edge with identical ends is called a loop, and an edge with
distinct ends a link. Two or more links with the same pair of ends are said to be parallel edges.
Definition 3.4 (Simple graph). A graph is called simple if it has no loops or parallel edges.
Definition 3.5 (Path and cycle). A path is a simple graph whose vertices can be arranged in a linear sequence
in such a way that two vertices are adjacent if and only if they are consecutive in the sequence. A cycle
on three or more vertices is a simple graph whose vertices can be arranged in a cyclic sequence in such a
way that two vertices are adjacent if and only if they are consecutive in the sequence; a cycle on one vertex
consists of a single vertex with a loop, and a cycle on two vertices consists of two vertices joined by a pair
of parallel edges. The length of a path or a cycle is the number of its edges.
Remark 3. By definition, a path contains no cycles.
Definition 3.6 (Distance). For two vertices v1 , v2 of G, the distance dG (v1 , v2 ) is defined to be the shortest
length of paths in G between v1 and v2 .
Definition 3.7 (Forest and tree). A graph with no cycles is called a forest. A connected forest is called a tree.
3.2. Graph GΛ
Let Λ = {λ1 , · · · , λ3g−3+n } be a pants decomposition of X. Recall that Σ = {p1 , · · · , pn } is the set of
punctures of X.
Let P := {P1 , P2 , · · · , P2g−2+n } be the set of pairs of pants in X\Λ. For each Pi , let Ei be the set of three
geodesic arcs in Pi each of which connects a pair of boundary geodesics perpendicularly. Let GΛ = (VΛ , EΛ )
2g−2+n
be a graph where VΛ = Λ ∪ Σ and EΛ = ∪i=1 Ei . It may happens that GΛ contains loops and parallel
edges (see Fig. 2). By construction, every vertex is of degree two or four. Moreover, a vertex is of degree
two if and only if it is a puncture. (See Fig. 2.)
Lemma 3.8. Every edge e of GΛ is contained in a unique cycle c(e) of length at most three whose edges are
contained in one pair of pants in P .
Proof. If e is a loop, or if there is an edge parallel to e, then the lemma follows. Otherwise, let {v, v } be
the two different ends of e. By the definition of EΛ , there is a geodesic arc on X corresponding to e, which
Fig. 2. Panel (a) is a hyperbolic surface X of genus 3 with 9 punctures, where the pants decomposition Λ consists of 8 red geodesics
and 7 blue geodesics. Panel (b) is the graph GΛ corresponding to the pants decomposition Λ, which contains one loop and three
pairs of parallel edges. The red path in panel (b) realizes K(3, 9) defined in Proposition 3.10.
is contained in some pair of pants P ∈ P . Let v be the boundary component of P other than v, v . Let e
(resp. e ) be the edge joining v and v (resp. v and v). Then vev e v e v is a cycle of length three. The
uniqueness also follows.
Lemma 3.9. Let Y be an orientable surface of genus zero with one geodesic boundary component α and
m ≥ 2 punctures p1 , p2 , · · · , pm . Let Λ α be a pants decomposition of Y . Let GΛ be the graph defined as
above. Let d := min{dGΛ (α, pi ) : 1 ≤ i ≤ m}. Then m ≥ 2d .
Proof. Since Y is a surface of genus zero, every simple closed curve η on Y is separating in the sense that
Y \η is disconnected. This implies that every cycle of GΛ has length three. In particular, GΛ has no loops
and parallel edges. For each integer s ≥ 1, let VΛ (α, s) := {v ∈ VΛ : dGΛ (α, v) = s}. Let v be a vertex in
some VΛ (α, s). The following dichotomy holds.
(i) If v ∈
/ {p1 , · · · , pm }, then it is adjacent to one vertex in VΛ (α, s − 1), one vertex in VΛ (α, s), and two
vertices in VΛ (α, s + 1).
(ii) If v ∈ {p1 , · · · , pm }, then it is adjacent to one vertex in VΛ (α, s − 1) and one vertex in VΛ (α, s).
Therefore, VΛ (α, s) has exactly 2s elements for each 1 ≤ s ≤ d. Moreover, for each v ∈ {p1 , · · · , pm }, there
is a unique path of length dGΛ (α, v) between α and v, which passes exactly one vertex in VΛ (α, d). On the
other hand, for each vertex in VΛ (α, d), there is at least one such path passing through it. As a consequence,
we get m ≥ 2d .
Let

log2 n2 , if g = 0,
K(g, n) =
2g + log2 n − 1, if g > 0,
where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.
Proposition 3.10. Let X be a complete (orientable) hyperbolic surface of genus g ≥ 0 with n > 0 punctures.
Let Λ be a pants decomposition of X. Let GΛ , K(g, n) be defined as above. Then for any v ∈ Λ ⊂ VΛ ,
dGΛ (v, Σ) ≤ K(g, n).

This bound is sharp in the sense that for each pair (g, n) with 2 − 2g − n < 0, there is a pants decomposition
Λ0 and a vertex v0 ∈ Λ0 such that the equality holds.

Proof. If g = 0, it follows from Lemma 3.9 that dGΛ (v, Σ) ≤ log2 n2 .
In the following, we will consider the case that g > 0.
Let L = v1 e1 v2 e2 · · · vk ek vk+1 be a path of GΛ such that
• {v1 = v, · · · , vk+1 } ⊂ VΛ and {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ Σ = {vk+1 },

• {e1 , · · · , ek } ⊂ EΛ ,
• every edge ei is incident with vi and vi+1 ,
• k = dGΛ (v, Σ).
Let Λ(L) = {v1 , · · · , vk }.

By Lemma 3.8, every edge ei is contained in a unique cycle c(ei ) which corresponds some pair of pants
in P , which we denote by Pi . Let vi be the vertex of c(ei ) other than vi and vi+1 . Let V
Λ (L) = {v1 , · · · , vk }
and P (L) = {P1 , · · · , Pk }.
The assumption k = dGΛ (v, Σ) implies:
(a) Pi = Pj if i = j,
(b) vi =
vj if |i − j| > 1, and
(c) vi can not be a puncture if i < k.
Therefore, the multiplicity of each vj in V

Λ (L) is at most two.
Again by the assumption k = dGΛ (v, Σ), we see that
{v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = ∅ or {v1 }. (4)
Otherwise, suppose that there exists vi0 = v1 such that
vi0 ∈ {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {

v1 , · · · , vk }.
Then there are only two vertices adjacent to vi0 in GΛ , one of which is vi0 itself. As a consequence, we see
that vi0 can not be vk+1 which is a puncture. Therefore, vi0 −1 = vi0 +1 . Contradiction!

In order to estimate the upper bound of the length of L, we need to make Λ\Λ(L) = V
Λ (L)\Λ(L)

Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ VΛ (L))
as small as possible.

First, we are going to estimate Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V
Λ (L)) . Let

X(L) = X\( Pi )
1≤i≤k
be the subsurface obtained by removing P1 , · · · Pk , which is possibly disconnected. Let BΛ (L) be the set of
geodesic boundary components of X(L). It is clear that BΛ (L) is a subset of V Λ (L) ∪ {v1 } and that any two

elements of BΛ (L) correspond to different elements of VΛ (L)∪{v1 }. Let X1 (L), · · · , Xm (L) be the connected
components of X(L). For each 1 ≤ i ≤ m, the subset Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V Λ (L)) induces a pants decomposition Λi (L)
of Xi (L), where Λi (L) does not include the boundary components of Xi (L). For each Xi (L), let Bi (L) and
Σi (L) be the set of geodesic boundary components and the set of punctures, respectively. Let ni = |Σi (L)|,
bi = |Bi (L)|, and gi be the genus, respectively. Then BΛ (L) is the disjoint union of B1 (L), · · · , Bm (L).
Moreover, we have
|Λi (L)| = (3gi − 3) + (bi + ni ), (5)
and
gi ≥ 0, bi ≥ 1, ni ≥ 0. (6)
Therefore,
m
m

Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V Λ (L)) = |Λ i (L)| = (3gi − 3 + bi + ni ). (7)
i=1 i=1
Recall that |Λ(L) ∩ V

Λ (L)| ≤ 1, |Λ(L) ∩ BΛ (L)| ≤ 1, and that the multiplicity of each vj in VΛ (L) is at
most two. It follows that

m
m
bi − 1 ≤ |BΛ (L)\Λ(L)| ≤ bi (8)
i=1 i=1
and
m

k − 1 − ( i=1 bi + 1)
Λ
V (L)\ Λ(L) ∪ B Λ (L) ≥ , (9)
2
where x represents the smallest integer not less than x.

As a consequence,

VΛ (L)\Λ(L) Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V Λ (L))

= V Λ (L)\ Λ(L) ∪ BΛ (L) + |BΛ (L)\Λ(L)| + Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ VΛ (L)
m m m
k − 1 − ( i=1 bi + 1)
≥ +( bi − 1) + (3gi − 3 + bi + ni )
2 i=1 i=1
k−5
m m
3
≥ + (3gi − 3 + bi ) + ni
2 i=1
2 i=1
m m
Notice that n − 2 ≤ i=1 ni ≤ n − 1. Moreover, i=1 ni = n − 2 if and only if the pair of pants Pk
contains two punctures. Let m be chosen such that gi = 0 if and only if 0 ≤ i ≤ m . Then

m
3 m
3
m
3
(3gi − 3 + bi ) = (3gi − 3 + bi ) + (3gi − 3 + bi ).
i=1
2 i=1
2
2
i=m +1

This implies that, to make VΛ (L)\Λ(L) Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V
Λ (L)) as small as possible, it is necessary that
m is as big as possible. Combined with Lemma 3.9, it’s necessary that
(C1) m = m, i.e. gi = 0 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ m;

(C2) bi = 1, ∀1 ≤ i ≤ m;
(C3) Σmi=1 ni = n − 2.
The condition (C3) implies that vk is a puncture.

Let m0 be the biggest m under the conditions (C1), (C2) and (C3). We claim that m0 = log2 n − 1.
Recall that for each subsurface Xi (L), Bi (L) ⊂ V ji ∈ V
Λ (L). Let v Λ (L) be the geodesic boundary component

of Xi (L). On the other hand, Xi (L) induces a subgraph Gi (L) of GΛ , which is the induced subgraph with
vertices {
vji } ∪ Vi (L) ∪ Σi (L), where Σi (L) is the set of punctures of X i (L). The assumption that L realizes
dG (v1 , Σ) implies that
v ji , Σi (L)) ≥ k − ji .
dGΛi (L) (
Combined with Lemma 3.9, this implies that

|Vi (L) ≥ 2k−ji .
Therefore,
2k−j1 + · · · 2k−jm ≤ n − 2,
which implies that
m ≤ log2 n − 1, (10)
where equality holds if
{j1 , j2 , · · · , jm } = {k − 1, k − 2, · · · , k − (log2 n − 1)}. (11)
Combining Equations (7), (8) and (9), we see that
3g − 3 + n

= |Λ(L)| + VΛ (L)\ (Λ(L) ∪ BΛ (L) ∪ {vk })

+ |BΛ (L)\Λ(L)| + Λ\(Λ(L) ∪ V Λ (L))

(k − 1) − (m0 + 1)
≥k+ + (m0 − 1) + (n − 2 − 2m0 ) (12)
2
which implies that k ≤ 2g + log2 n − 13 . Since k is an integer,
k ≤ 2g + log2 n − 1,
where the equality holds if the following hold:
• {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = {v1 }, and

• m0 = log2 n − 1.
Remark 4. For a pants decomposition Λ of X, let D(Λ) = maxv∈Λ dGΛ (v,Σ) . A pants decomposition Λ
is called maximal if D(Λ) is maximal among all pants decompositions of X. In general, maximal pants
decompositions are not unique.
Fig. 3. Panel (a) is a pants decomposition of a hyperbolic surface X of genus 3 with 3 punctures. Panel (b) is the graph GΛ
corresponding to the pants decomposition. Panel (c) is the forest 3.10.
R
3.3. Forest GΛ
Let R := max{dGΛ (v, Σ) : v ∈ Λ}. For each 1 ≤ i ≤ R + 1, let
Vi = {v1i , · · · , vlii } := {v ∈ Λ : dGΛ (v, Σ) = R − i + 1}.
In particular, VR+1 = Σ. For each vji ∈ Vi , let us choose an edge e1i which connects it to some vertex in
Vi+1 . Let ER := {eij : 1 ≤ i ≤ R, 1 ≤ j ≤ li }. In this way, we construct a graph (V , ER ), denoted by G R
(see Fig. 3).
4. Realization of minimal shearing
For any X ∈ Tg,n , let X̂ be the surface obtained from X via removing a cusp neighborhood Ui of boundary
length 1 for each puncture pi . For each cusp, we define an orientation of βi := ∂Ui in a way such that if we
travel along βi the punctured point pi is on the left. Let us denote γ ∩ X̂ by γ̂.
Lemma 4.1. Let X be an oriented hyperbolic surface of genus g with n > 0 marked points Σ = {p1 , · · · , pn }.
Let Γ = {γ1 , γ2 , . . . , γ6g−6+3n } be an ideal triangulation of X, then there are constants C1 , C2 depending
on g and n, such that
SΓ (X) ≤ max{lX (γ̂)} ≤ C1 + C2 SΓ (X). (13)

γ∈Γ
Proof. The first inequality follows from the definition. For the second one, recall that each arc γ ∈ Γ has
two midpoints M, M which correspond to the two ideal triangles. Let A, B be the endpoints of γ̂ := γ ∩ X̂
and AM be the subarc of γ with endpoints A, M . Then lX (γ̂) = lX (AM ) +lX (M B) = lX (AM ) +lX (M B).
To prove the second inequality, it suffices to prove:
lX (AM ) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X), lX (M B) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X)

lX (AM ) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X), lX (M B) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X),
Fig. 4. Cusp and shearing.
for some constants c1 , c2 which depend on g and n.

In the following, we shall prove lX (AM ) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X). The proofs of the other three inequalities are
similar. Recall that {A} = γ ∩ β for some horocycle β. Let p ∈ Σ be the puncture corresponding to β, i.e.
B is not contained in the interior of Ap. Notice that the horocycle β = ∂U is divided by Γ into at most
k arcs, where k = 2(6g − 6 + 3n). Therefore, there exists one arc of length at least k1 . Let δ be such an
arc, and assume that A1 and A2 are the endpoints of δ which belong to γi1 ∈ Γ and γi2 ∈ Γ respectively
(see Fig. 4). Let us denote by Δ1 the triangle determined by γi1 and γi2 , and by O1 the center of Δ1 . Let
M1 , M2 be the midpoint of γi1 , γi2 with respect to Δ1 . Then in the pentagon A2 M2 O1 M1 A1 , we have
lX (δ) = e−h , where h is the length of A1 M1 . Since
1
≤ lX (δ) ≤ 1,
k
we have
0 ≤ h ≤ log k.
Notice that in the pentagon A2 M2 O1 M1 A1 , the length of A1 M1 is equal to the length of A2 M2 . Let Δ2
be the other triangle which contains γi2 as an edge. Let M̃2 be the midpoint of γi2 with respect to Δ2 . Then
the length of A2 M̃2 is either h + Sγi2 (X, Γ) or h − Sγi2 (X, Γ).
Recall that A = γ∩β. Let A1 A be the subarc of β according to the orientation of β. Let γi1 , γi2 , · · · , γij = γ
be the arcs of Γ which intersect A1 A. Set Al = γil ∩ A1 A. Denote by Δl the triangle determined by γil and
γil+1 , by Ml the midpoint of γil with respect to Δl . Then
lX (AM ) = lX (Aj Mj ) ≤ h + 2kSΓ (X) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X),
where c1 = log k, c2 = 2k.
Theorem 4.2. Given X ∈ Tg,n , then there exists an ideal triangulation Γ of X ∈ Tg,n such that S(X) =
SΓ (X).
Proof. Let Γ be an ideal triangulation of X ∈ Tg,n , if SΓ (X) > S(X), then there must be another ideal
triangulation Γ of X ∈ Tg, n such that SΓ (X) < SΓ (X). From the lemma above we have
max {lγ̂ (X)} ≤ C1 + C2 SΓ (X).

γ∈Γ
Fig. 5. Closed geodesics and triangles.
Since there are only finitely many arcs on X that satisfy the condition above, so there are only finitely many
ideal triangulation such that SΓ (X) < SΓ (X). Hence there must be one that satisfy S(X) = SΓ (X).
Corollary 4.3. The minimal shearing function S : Tg,n → R, which associate to each hyperbolic surface the
minimal shearing, is continuous.
Proof. Let X ∈ Tg,n . Suppose that {Γ1 , · · · , Γk } is the set of ideal triangulations realizing the minimal
shearing. Then there is a neighborhood U of X in Tg,n such that for any Y ∈ U , S(Y ) = min1≤i≤k {SΓi (Y )}.
This completes the proof.
5. Minimal shearing and systole function
In this section, we shall prove Theorem 1.1.
5.1. Lower bound

√
Lemma 5.1. For any X ∈ Tg,n , S(X) ≥ 2 ln Syst(X)
1
+ 2 ln ln 3.
√
Proof. Notice that for any ideal triangle of X\Γ, there is an embedded disc of radius ln 3 centered at the
center. For any non-trivial simple closed geodesic β, there exists a collar neighborhood C(β) of β:
lX (β)
C(β) := {x ∈ X : sinh(dist(x, β))sinh( ) ≤ 1}.
2
√
Suppose first that Syst(X) < ln 3. Let α be a systole. Let Γ = {γ1 , γ2 , . . . , γ6g−6+3n } be an arbitrary ideal
triangulation of X ∈ Tg,n . Notice that α is cut into several segments by Γ. Let α\Γ = α1 ∪ · · · ∪ αk such
that for each i, αi is a segment. Notice that every segment αi is contained in a unique ideal triangle Δi
from X\Γ and exactly one of the components of Δi \α consists is a spike, which we denote by Pi .
Let us choose an orientation for α. We claim that there exists 1 ≤ i0 ≤ 6g − 7 + 3n, such that Pi0 and
Pi0 +1 are on the different sides of α (see Fig. 5). Otherwise, ∪1≤i≤k Pi is a neighborhood of some punctured
point, which implies that α is homotopic to a punctured point. Contradiction.
Let γi0 ∈ Γ be the arc which passes through the common endpoint of αi0 and αi0 +1 . (If αi0 ∩ αi0 +1 has
two points, we choose γi0 ∈ Γ to pass through one of them.) It is clear that γi0 is a common edge of Δi0 and
Δi0 +1 Let Mi0 and Mi0 +1 be the midpoints of γi0 with respect to Δi0 and Δi0 +1 , respectively. Let Oi0 and
√
Oi0 +1 be respectively the centers of Δi0 and Δi0 +1 . Since lX (α) = Syst(X) < ln 3, Oi0 and the spike Pi0
(resp. Oi0 +1 and the spike Pi0 +1 ) belong to different sides of α. Then Oi0 and Oi0 +1 sit on different sides
of α. Therefore, the subarc Mi0 Mi0 +1 of γi0 must cross the collar neighborhood C(α).
For each x ∈ X, let rx (X) be the injective radius of x. It follows from hyperbolic trigonometry that
sinh rx (X) = sinh lX2(α) cosh t, where t = dist(x, α) (see for example the proof of [7, Theorem 4.1.6]).
Therefore,
√
−1 sinh(ln 3)
dist(Oi0 , α) ≥ cosh
sinh(lX (α)/2)
√
sinh(ln 3)
> ln
sinh(lX (α)/2)
√
sinh(ln 3)
> ln √
cosh(ln 3)(lX (α)/2)
1 1
= ln = ln ,
lX (α) Syst(X)
where we use the fact that
sinh(lX (α)/2) = cosh θ(lX (α)/2)
for some 0 ≤ θ ≤ (lX (α)/2). Similarly
1
dist(Oi0 +1 , α) ≥ ln
Syst(X)
Then
S(X) ≥ lX (Mi0 Mi0 +1 )

≥ dist(Oi0 , Oi0 +1 ) − lX (Mi0 Oi0 ) − lX (Mi0 +1 Oi0 +1 )
≥ dist(Oi0 , α) + dist(Oi0 +1 , α) − lX (Mi0 Oi0 ) − lX (Mi0 +1 Oi0 +1 )
1 √
≥ 2 ln − 2 ln 3.
Syst(X)
√
If Syst(X) ≥ ln 3, then S(X) ≥ 0 ≥ 2 ln Syst(X)
1
− 2 ln ln 1√3 .
Hence, for any X ∈ Tg ,
1 1
S(X) ≥ 2 ln − 2 ln √ .
Syst(X) ln 3
5.2. Upper bound
In this subsection, we will construct an ideal triangulation consisting of “good” geodesic arcs. The con-
struction is as following.
Let Λ = {λ1 , · · · , λ3g−3+n } be a pants decomposition of X such that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ 3g − 3 + n,
lX (λi ) ≤ Bg,n , where Bg,n is the Bers constant. Let P := {P1 , P2 , · · · , P2g−2+n } be the set of pairs of pants
R
in X\Λ. Let GΛ = (VΛ , EΛ ) and GΛ = (VΛ , ER
Λ ) be constructed in Section 3.2 and Section 3.3 respectively,
where R := max{dGΛ (λi , Σ) : λi ∈ Λ}. Recall that GΛ R
= (VΛ , ER Λ ) has exactly n connected components,
each corresponding to a puncture of X. Let
{λi1 , · · · , λim } := {λi ∈ Λ : λi has degree one in GΛ

R
}.
Fig. 6. Constructing “good” geodesic arcs.
For each λik , 1 ≤ k ≤ m, there is a unique vertex pjk ∈ Σ, such that λik and pjk ∈ Σ are joined by a
R
path in GΛ , denoted by ζik . By construction, every vertex in Λ is contained in at least one of the paths
{ζi1 , · · · , ζim }.
Step 1. For each ζik , let ζik be the geodesic arc on X connecting λik and pjk , such that
• for each λ ∈ Λ, if it is contained in ζik , then ζik and λ intersect once, otherwise they are disjoint;
• ζik and λik are perpendicular.
Let {ζi1 , · · · , ζim } be the geodesic arcs obtained as above (see Fig. 6). By construction, we see that every
simple closed curve in Λ intersects at least one of {ζi1 , · · · , ζim }, and that arcs in {ζi1 , · · · , ζim } are mutually
disjoint.

Step 2. For each λl ∈ Λ, let {D1l , · · · , Dm l

l
} := λl ∩ ζi1 ∪· · ·∪ζim ). For each Dsl , let ωsl be the subarc connecting
Dsl and the puncture point pi along the corresponding arc in {ζi1 , · · · , ζim }. The curve λl is divided by
{D1l , · · · , Dm
l
l
} into ml intervals I1l , · · · , Im
l
l
. We assume that ∂Isl = {Dsl , Ds+1 l
} with Dm l
l +1
= D1l . Recall
λl is not homotopic to a puncture. There exists one interval, say Ii , such that the concatenation ωil ∗Iil ∗ωi+1
l l
is a homotopically nontrivial arc. Let ξl be the geodesic arc homotopic to ωil ∗ Iil ∗ ωi+1 (see Fig. 6).
Step 3. By construction, every connected component of X\{ξ1 , · · · , ξ3g−3+n } is either an ideal triangle,
torus, or a pair of pants. (see the Fig. 7)
We now extend {ξ1 , · · · , ξ3g−3+n } to an ideal triangulation
Γ = {ξ1 , · · · , ξ3g−3+n , · · · , ξ6g−6+3n }
of X by adding at most three geodesics for each component.
Proposition 5.2. Let X be hyperbolic surface of genus g with n punctures. Let Γ = {ξ1 , · · · , ξ2 , · · · , ξ6g−6+3n }
be the ideal triangulation constructed as above. Then
1 5
SΓ (X) ≤ 2K(g, n)(2 ln + ln 16 + Bg,n ),
Syst(X) 2
where K(g, n) is the constant defined in Proposition 3.10.
Proof. Let X be the surface obtained from X via removing a cusp neighborhood Ui of boundary length 2
for each puncture pi .
For each 1 ≤ i ≤ 3g − 3 + n, if ξi intersects some simple closed curve λ ∈ Γ, it intersects λ exactly twice.
Moreover, it follows from Proposition 3.10 that ξi intersects at most K(g, n) elements of Γ. Together with
Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4, this implies that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ 3g − 3 + n,
Fig. 7. Panels (a), (b), and (c) are respectively ideal triangle, torus and pair of pants.
≤ 2K(g, n)(2 ln 1 5
lX (ξi ∩ X) + ln 16 + Bg,n ).
Syst(X) 2
For each 3g − 2 + n < i ≤ 6g − 6 + 3n, if ξi intersects some simple closed curve λ ∈ Γ, it intersects λ
exactly once. Moreover, it follows from Proposition 3.10 that ξi intersects at most 2K(g, n) elements of Γ.
Therefore, for each 3g − 2 + n ≤ i ≤ 6g − 6 + 3n,
≤ 2K(g, n)(2 ln 1 5
lX (ξi ∩ X) + ln 16 + Bg,n ).
Syst(X) 2
Now the proposition follows from Lemma 4.1.
Corollary 5.3. The minimal shearing function S : Mg,n → R, which associate to each hyperbolic surface the
minimal shearing, is proper.
Proof of Theorem 1.1. It follows from Lemma 5.1 and Proposition 5.2.
References
[1] F. Balacheff, H. Parlier, S. Sabourau, Short loop decompositions of surfaces and the geometry of Jacobians, Geom. Funct.
Anal. 22 (2012) 37–73.
[2] L. Bers, Spaces of degenerating Riemann surfaces, in: Discontinuous Groups and Riemann Surfaces, in: Ann. of Math.
Studies, vol. 79, 1974, pp. 43–55.
[3] L. Bers, An inequality for Riemann surfaces, in: Differential Geometry and Complex Analysis, Springer, Berlin, 1985,
pp. 87–93.
[4] F. Bonahon, Shearing hyperbolic surfaces, bending pleated surfaces and Thurston’s symplectic form, Ann. Fac. Sci.
Toulouse Math. (6) 5 (2) (1996) 233–297.
[5] M. Bestvina, K. Bromberg, K. Fujiwara, J. Souto, Shearing coordinates and convexity of length functions on Teichmüller
space, Am. J. Math. 135 (6) (December 2013) 1449–1476.
[6] P. Buser, Riemannsche Flächen und Längenspektrum vom trigonometrischen Standpunkt, Habilitation Thesis, University
of Bonn, 1981.
[7] P. Buser, Geometry and Spectra of Compact Riemann Surfaces, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 106, Birkhäuser, 1992.
[8] P. Buser, M. Seppälä, Symmetric pants decompositions of Riemann surfaces, Duke Math. J. 67 (1) (1992) 39–55.
[9] J.A. Bondy, U.S.R. Murty, Graph Theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 244, Springer, New York, ISBN 978-1-
84628-969-9, 2008, xii+651 pp.
[10] R. Guo, F. Luo, Rigidity of polyhedral surfaces. II, Geom. Topol. 13 (3) (2009) 1265–1312.
[11] W. Thurston, Minimal stretch maps between hyperbolic surfaces, preprint, http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9801039.

Journal A1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal A1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JID:YJMAA AID:124746 /FLA Doctopic: Complex Analysis [m3L; v1.297] P.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications

Ideal triangulation and minimal shearing of punctured hyperbolic

where Bg,n is the Bers constant, and

where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.

Proposition 3.10. For every vertex v ∈ Λ ⊂ VΛ ,

dGΛ (v, Σ) ≤ K(g, n).

2. Preliminaries of hyperbolic geometry

2.1. Shearing coordinates

2.2. Pant decomposition

Lemma 2.3. Let P be a pair of pants. If lP (αi ) ≤ Bg,n , then

where Syst(P ) = min{lP (αi ) : i = 1, 2, 3}.

Proof. It follows from Theorem 2.4.1 of [7] that

cosh(lP (αi )/2) cosh(lP (αi+1 )/2) + cosh(lP (αi−1 )/2)

where we use the fact that sinh(x) ≥ x. Therefore,

A pair of pants P is called degenerate if some boundary component degenerates to a puncture. If P

where Syst(P ) = min{lP (αi ) > 0 : i = 1, 2, 3}.

lP (δ1 ) ≤ ln(2 cosh(lP (δ2 )))

where we use the fact that

holds for all x ≥ 0. Therefore,

3. Graphs associated to a pants decomposition

Remark 3. By deﬁnition, a path contains no cycles.

where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.

dGΛ (v, Σ) ≤ K(g, n).

• {v1 = v, · · · , vk+1 } ⊂ VΛ and {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ Σ = {vk+1 },

Let Λ(L) = {v1 , · · · , vk }.

Therefore, the multiplicity of each vj in V

{v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = ∅ or {v1 }. (4)

Otherwise, suppose that there exists vi0 = v1 such that

vi0 ∈ {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {

|Λi (L)| = (3gi − 3) + (bi + ni ), (5)

Recall that |Λ(L) ∩ V

where x represents the smallest integer not less than x.

(C1) m = m, i.e. gi = 0 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ m;

The condition (C3) implies that vk is a puncture.

Combined with Lemma 3.9, this implies that

which implies that

where equality holds if

{j1 , j2 , · · · , jm } = {k − 1, k − 2, · · · , k − (log2 n − 1)}. (11)

Combining Equations (7), (8) and (9), we see that

which implies that k ≤ 2g + log2 n − 13 . Since k is an integer,

where the equality holds if the following hold:

• {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = {v1 }, and

Let R := max{dGΛ (v, Σ) : v ∈ Λ}. For each 1 ≤ i ≤ R + 1, let

Vi = {v1i , · · · , vlii } := {v ∈ Λ : dGΛ (v, Σ) = R − i + 1}.

4. Realization of minimal shearing

SΓ (X) ≤ max{lX (γ̂)} ≤ C1 + C2 SΓ (X). (13)

lX (AM ) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X), lX (M B) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X)

Fig. 4. Cusp and shearing.

for some constants c1 , c2 which depend on g and n.

lX (AM ) = lX (Aj Mj ) ≤ h + 2kSΓ (X) ≤ c1 + c2 SΓ (X),

where c1 = log k, c2 = 2k.

max {lγ̂ (X)} ≤ C1 + C2 SΓ (X).

Fig. 5. Closed geodesics and triangles.

5. Minimal shearing and systole function

In this section, we shall prove Theorem 1.1.

5.1. Lower bound

where we use the fact that

sinh(lX (α)/2) = cosh θ(lX (α)/2)

for some 0 ≤ θ ≤ (lX (α)/2). Similarly

S(X) ≥ lX (Mi0 Mi0 +1 )

5.2. Upper bound

where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.

lP (δ1 ) ≤ ln(2 cosh(lP (δ2 )))

where x represents the largest integer not exceeding x.

Therefore, the multiplicity of each vj in V

{v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = ∅ or {v1 }. (4)

vi0 ∈ {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {

where x represents the smallest integer not less than x.

The condition (C3) implies that vk is a puncture.

{j1 , j2 , · · · , jm } = {k − 1, k − 2, · · · , k − (log2 n − 1)}. (11)

which implies that k ≤ 2g + log2 n − 13 . Since k is an integer,

• {v1 , · · · , vk+1 } ∩ {v1 , · · · , vk } = {v1 }, and