# Singularities of equidistants and global centre symmetry sets of Lagrangian submanifolds

- 481 Downloads
- 4 Citations

## Abstract

We study the global centre symmetry set (*GCS*) of a smooth closed submanifold \(M^m\subset \mathbb{R }^n, n \le 2m\). The *GCS* includes both the centre symmetry set defined by Janeczko (Geometria Dedicata 60:9–16, 1996) and the Wigner caustic defined by Berry (Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 287:237–271, 1977). The definition of *GCS* \((M)\) uses the concept of an affine \(\lambda \)-equidistant of \(M, E_{\lambda }(M), \lambda \in \mathbb{R }\). When \(M=L\) is a Lagrangian submanifold in the affine symplectic space \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega =\sum _{i=1}^m dp^i\wedge dq^i)\), we present generating families for singularities of \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) and prove that the caustic of any simple stable Lagrangian singularity in a \(4m\)-dimensional Lagrangian fibre bundle is realizable as the germ of an affine equidistant of some \(L\subset \mathbb{R }^{2m}\). We characterize the criminant part of *GCS* \((L)\) in terms of bitangent hyperplanes to \(L\). Then, after presenting the appropriate equivalence relation to be used in this Lagrangian case, we classify the affine-Lagrangian stable singularities of *GCS* \((L)\). In particular we show that, already for a smooth closed convex curve \(L\subset \mathbb{R }^2\), many singularities of *GCS* \((L)\) which are affine stable are not affine-Lagrangian stable.

## Keywords

Centre symmetry set Symplectic geometry Lagrangian singularities## Mathematics Subject Classification (1991)

57R45 58K40 53D12 58K25 58K50## 1 Introduction

The centre of symmetry of an ellipse in \(\mathbb{R }^2\) can be defined as the set (in this case consisting of a single element) of midpoints of intervals connecting pairs of points on the curve with parallel tangent vectors. For a generic smooth convex closed curve, this set is not a single point, but forms a curve with an odd number of cusps, in the interior of the smooth original curve, which has been known as the *Wigner caustic* of the smooth curve since the work of Berry in the \(70\)’s. Thus, the Wigner caustic is an affine-invariant generalization of the centre of symmetry of an ellipse and this definition of centre of symmetry extends to higher dimensional smooth closed submanifolds of \(\mathbb{R }^n\).

On the other hand, the centre of symmetry of an ellipse in \(\mathbb{R }^2\) can also be described as the envelope of all straight lines connecting pairs of points on the curve with parallel tangent vectors. For a generic smooth convex closed curve, this set is not a single point, but forms a curve with an odd number of cusps, in the interior of the smooth original curve, which has been known as the *centre symmetry set* of the smooth curve since the work of Janeczko in the \(90\)’s. Again, this is an affine-invariant generalization of the centre of a circle, which extends to higher dimensional smooth closed hypersurfaces of \(\mathbb{R }^n\) [16].

The Wigner caustic and the centre symmetry set of a generic smooth convex closed curve are not the same singular curve. Instead, the Wigner caustic is interior to the centre symmetry set and the cusp points of the inner curve touches the outer one in its smooth part. A larger centre symmetry set, containing the two previous ones, can be defined in an affine-invariant way, for an arbitrary smooth closed \(m\)-dimensional submanifold \(M\) of \(\mathbb{R }^n\), for \(n/2\le m < n\). We call this new set the *global centre symmetry* set of \(M\) and denote it by *GCS* \((M)\).

Our definition is a slight modification of a definition introduced by Giblin and Zakalyukin [10, 11, 12] to study singularities of centre symmetry sets of hypersurfaces. A key notion in this definition is that of an affine \(\lambda \)-equidistant of the smooth submanifold \(M\), denoted \(E_{\lambda }(M)\), of which the Wigner caustic is the case \(\lambda =1/2\). The singularities of \(E_{\lambda }(M)\) are then fundamental to characterize *GCS* \((M)\) and its own singularities.

In this paper, we study singularities of \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) and *GCS* \((L)\), when \(L\) is a smooth closed *Lagrangian* submanifold of \((\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \omega )\), where \(\omega \) is the canonical symplectic form. The paper is organized as follows.

In Sect. 2 we present the definitions of an affine \(\lambda \)-equidistant of \(M\) and of the global centre symmetry set of \(M\), for a general smooth submanifold \(M^m\subset \mathbb{R }^n, n \le 2m\). In Sect. 3, for \(M=L\) Lagrangian in \(\mathbb{R }^{2m}\), we obtain the generating families for the affine equidistants \(E_{\lambda }(L)\), cf. Theorem 3.8, relating their general classification to the well known classification by Lagrangian equivalence (chapters 18, 19, 21 in [2]). This is used in Sect. 4 to study singularities of affine equidistants. Theorem 4.1 states that the caustic of any simple stable Lagrangian singularity in a \(4m\)-dimensional Lagrangian fibre bundle is realizable as the germ of an affine equidistant \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) of some \(L\subset \mathbb{R }^{2m}\).

In Sect. 5 we obtain a geometric characterization for the criminant of *GCS* \((L)\) in terms of bitangent hyperplanes to the Lagrangian submanifold \(L^m\subset \mathbb{R }^{2m}\), cf Theorem 5.5. This result is similar to results presented for a hypersurface \(M^m\subset \mathbb{R }^{m+1}\) in [10, 11, 12].

In Sect. 6 we introduce the equivalence relation (also as an equivalence of generating families) that is used to classify the singularities of *GCS* \((L)\), cf. Definitions 6.1, 6.3 and 6.7. Then, we show that the only affine-Lagrangian stable singularities of *GCS* \((L)\) are singularities of the criminant, the smooth part of the Wigner caustic, or tangent union of both, cf. Theorems 6.12 through 6.16 and Lemma 6.13.

Section 7 is devoted to the *GCS* of curves in the affine symplectic plane. First, in Theorem 7.1 we collect results on the *GCS* of convex curves in non-symplectic plane, [3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16], and we obtain in Theorem 7.2 a new inequality on the number of cusps of the centre symmetry set and the Wigner caustic. Pictures illustrate these results.

Then, we obtain in Theorem 7.7 and Corollary 7.8 all the affine-Lagrangian stable singularities of the *GCS* of curves in symplectic plane. Comparison of Theorem 7.1 and Corollary 7.8 shows that most of the singularities of the *GCS* which are affine-stable when no symplectic structure is considered, are not affine-Lagrangian stable.

In other words, although any smooth curve on \(\mathbb{R }^2\) is Lagrangian, the singularities of their *GCS* are sensitive to the presence of a symplectic form to be accounted for, that is, there is a breakdown of their stability. Thus, we end the paper with some discussion of this result, which is similar to some results in [4, 5, 6, 7] showing a breakdown of the simplicity of some singularities due to a symplectic form.

## 2 Definition of the global centre symmetry set

Let \(M\) be a smooth closed \(m\)-dimensional submanifold of the affine space \(\mathbb{R }^{n}\), with \(n\le 2m\). Let \(a, b\) be points of \(M\). Let \(\tau _{a-b}\) be the translation by the vector \((a-b)\), i.e., \(\tau _{a-b}:\mathbb{R }^n \ni x\mapsto x+(a-b) \in \mathbb{R }^n.\)

### **Definition 2.1**

*weakly parallel*pair if

*parallel*if

*strongly parallel*, or just

*parallel*. We also refer to \(k\) as the

*degree of parallelism*of the pair \((a,b)\).

### **Definition 2.2**

*chord*passing through a pair \(a,b\), is the line

### **Definition 2.3**

For a given \(\lambda \), an *affine* \(\lambda \)-*equidistant* of \(M, E_{\lambda }(M)\), is the set of all \(x\in \mathbb{R }^n\) such that \(x=\lambda a + (1-\lambda ) b\), for all weakly parallel pairs \(a,b \in M\). \(E_{\lambda }(M)\) is also called a (affine) *momentary equidistant* of \(M\). Whenever \(M\) is understood, we write \(E_{\lambda }\) for \(E_{\lambda }(M)\).

Note that, for any \(\lambda , E_{\lambda }(M)=E_{1-\lambda }(M)\) and in particular \(E_0(M)=E_1(M)=M\). Thus, the case \(\lambda =1/2\) is special:

The *extended affine space* is the space \(\mathbb{R }^{n+1}_e=\mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{n}\) with coordinate \(\lambda \in \mathbb{R }\) (called *affine time*) on the first factor and projection on the second factor denoted by \(\pi :\mathbb{R }^{n+1}_e\ni (\lambda ,x)\mapsto x \in \mathbb{R }^{n}\).

### **Definition 2.5**

The *affine extended wave front* of \(M, \mathbb{E }(M)\), is the union of all affine equidistants each embedded into its own slice of the extended affine space: \(\mathbb{E }(M)=\bigcup _{\lambda \in \mathbb{R }} \ \{\lambda \}\times E_{\lambda }(M) \ \subset \mathbb{R }_e^{n+1}.\)

Note that, when \(M\) is a circle in the plane, \(\mathbb{E }(M)\) is the (double) cone, which is a smooth manifold with nonsingular projection \(\pi \) everywhere, but at its singular point, which projects to the centre of the circle. From this, we generalize the notion of centre of symmetry. Thus, let \(\pi _r\) be the restriction of \(\pi \) to the affine extended wave front of \(M\): \(\pi _r=\pi |_{\mathbb{E }(M)}\). A point \(x\in \mathbb{E }(M)\) is a *critical* point of \(\pi _r\) if the germ of \(\pi _r\) at \(x\) fails to be the germ of a regular projection of a smooth submanifold. We now introduce the main definition of this paper:

### **Definition 2.6**

The *global centre symmetry* set of \(M,\) *GCS* \((M)\), is the image under \(\pi \) of the locus of critical points of \(\pi _r\).

### *Remark 2.7*

The set *GCS* \((M)\) is the bifurcation set of the family of affine equidistants (the family of chords of weakly parallel pairs) of \(M\).

In general, *GCS* \((M)\) consists of two components: the *caustic* \(\Sigma (M)\) being the projection of the singular locus of \(\mathbb{E }(M)\) and the *criminant* \(\Delta (M)\) being the (closure of) the image under \(\pi _r\) of the set of regular points of \(\mathbb{E }(M)\) which are critical points of the projection \(\pi \) restricted to the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(M)\). Thus \(\Delta (M)\) is the envelope of the family of regular parts of momentary equidistants, while \(\Sigma (M)\) contains all the singular points of momentary equidistants.

The above definition (with its following remarks) is a slight modification of the definition that has already been introduced by Giblin and Zakalyukin [10]. However, in our present definition the whole manifold \(M\) is considered, as opposed to pairs of germs, as in [10], and weak parallelism is also taken into account. Considering the whole manifold in the definition leads to the following simple but important result:

### **Theorem 2.8**

The set *GCS* \((M)\) contains the Wigner caustic of \(M\).

### *Proof*

If \(M\subset \mathbb{R }^{2}\) is a smooth curve, then \(E_{1/2}(M)\) is the bifurcation set for the number of chords connecting two points in \(M\) and having a given midpoint \(x\), for any \(x\in E_{1/2}(M)\) [3]. Similarly, if \(\mathcal{R }_x:\mathbb{R }^{2}\rightarrow \mathbb{R }^{2}\) denotes reflection through \(x\in \mathbb{R }^{2}\), then \(x\in E_{1/2}(M)\) when \(M\) and \(\mathcal{R }_x(M)\) are not transversal [14, 17]. Finally, let \(A(x,\kappa )\) be the area of the planar region bounded by \(M\) and a chord, considered as a function of a point \(x\) on the chord and a variable \(\kappa \) locating one of the endpoints of the chord on the curve. Then, \(A(x,\kappa )\) is a generating family for \(E_{1/2}(M)\) [3, 13]. Below we generalize this notion to every \(\lambda \)-equidistant of any Lagrangian submanifold.

## 3 Generating families

Consider the product affine space \(\mathbb{R }^{n}\times \mathbb{R }^{n}\) with coordinates \((x_+,x_-)\), the tangent bundle to \(\mathbb{R }^{n}, T\mathbb{R }^{n}=\mathbb{R }^{n}\times \mathbb{R }^{n}\) with coordinate system \((x,\dot{x})\), and standard projection \(pr: T\mathbb{R }^{n} \rightarrow \mathbb{R }^{n}, \ (x,\dot{x})\mapsto x\).

### **Definition 3.1**

*chord transformation*

*linear*diffeomorphism defined by the \(\lambda \)-

*point equation*:

*chord equation*:

### **Theorem 3.2**

The set of critical values of the standard projection \(pr: T\mathbb{R }^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb{R }^{n}\) restricted to \(\mathcal{M }_{\lambda }\) is \(E_{\lambda }(M)\).

### *Proof*

Now, assume \(a\in E_{\lambda }\). Then \(a=\lambda a^++(1-\lambda )a^-\) for a weakly \(k\)-parallel pair \(a^+, a^-\) for \(k>2m-n\). Thus there exist linearly independent vectors \(v^+_j=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\alpha _{ji} \frac{\partial }{\partial x^+_i}|_{a^+}\in T_{a^+}M\cap \tau _{(a^+-a^-)}T_{a^-}M\) for \(j=1,\ldots ,k\). Consider linearly independent vectors \(v_j=(\Phi _{\lambda })_{*}((1-\lambda )v^+_j- \lambda \tau _{(a^--a^+)}v^+_j)\) for \(j=1,\ldots ,k\). Then, \(v_j\) belongs to \(T_{(a,\dot{a})}\mathcal{M }_{\lambda }\) and \(pr_{*}(v_j)=0\) for \(j=1,\ldots , k\). Thus \(a\) is a critical value of \(pr|_{\mathcal{M }_{\lambda }}\). \(\square \)

*Lagrangian fiber bundle*with respect to \(\dot{\omega }\), that is, a fiber bundle whose fibers are Lagrangian in the total symplectic space.

*caustic*. Theorem 3.2 implies

### **Proposition 3.3**

The caustic of the Lagrangian map \(pr|_{\mathcal{L }_{\lambda }}\) is \(E_{\lambda }(L)\).

### **Definition 3.4**

\(E_{\lambda }(L)\) and \(E_{\lambda }(\widetilde{L})\) are *Lagrangian equivalent* if the Lagrangian maps \(pr|_{\mathcal{L }_{\lambda }}\) and \(pr|_{\widetilde{\mathcal{L }}_{\lambda }}\) are Lagrangian equivalent (see chapter 18 in [2]).

It follows from above definitions:

### **Proposition 3.5**

The classification of affine equidistants \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) by Lagrangian equivalence is affine symplectic invariant, i.e., invariant under the standard action of the affine symplectic group on \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\).

From the above, we also use the term *affine-Lagrangian equivalence* for Lagrangian equivalence (see chapter 18 in [2]) of \(E_{\lambda }(L)\).

### *Remark 3.6*

The definition of the \(\lambda \)-weighted symplectic form \(\delta _{\lambda }\omega \) given by (3.3) is not arbitrary. When \(\lambda =1/2\), a Lagrangian submanifold \(\Lambda \subset (\mathbb{R }^{2m}\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}, \delta _{1/2}\omega )\) defines a *canonical relation* in \((\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \omega )\) which can be locally described by a generating function of the midpoints \(x_{1/2}=(x^++x^-)/2\), for \((x^+,x^-)\in \Lambda \), when \(\mathcal L _{1/2}=\Phi _{1/2}(\Lambda )\) locally projects regularly to the zero section of \((T\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \dot{\omega })\), cf. [8, 18]. Thus, a Lagrangian submanifold \(\Lambda \subset (\mathbb{R }^{2m}\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}, \delta _{\lambda }\omega )\) defines a \(\lambda \)-*weighted canonical relation* in \((\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \omega )\) which can be locally described by a generating function of the \(\lambda \)-points \(x_{\lambda }=\lambda x^++(1-\lambda )x^-\), when \(\mathcal L _{\lambda }=\Phi _{\lambda }(\Lambda )\) locally projects regularly to the zero section of \((T\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \dot{\omega })\). Such generating functions give rise to the generating families, as described below, used to study singularities of the Lagrangian map \(pr|_{{\mathcal{L }}_{\lambda }}\).

Let \(L^+\) and \(L^-\) denote germs of \(L\) at points \(a^+\) and \(a^-\).

### **Proposition 3.7**

### *Proof*

We can find a linear symplectic change of coordinates such that \(T_{a^+}L^+=\{p=p^{+}_a\}\), where \(a^+=(p_a^+,q_a^+)\), and \(T_{a^-}L^-=\{p_1=p^{-}_{a,1},\ldots ,p_k=p^-_{a,k},q_{k+1}=q^-_{a,k+1},\ldots ,q_m=q^-_{a,m}\}\), where \(a^-=(p_a^-,q_a^-)\). Since \(L\) is a smooth Lagrangian submanifold, it follows from standard considerations that it can be described locally by differentials of generating functions of the forms stated above in neighborhoods of \(a^+\) and \(a^-\), in which case we have that \(d^2S^+|a^+=d^2S^-|a^-=0\). \(\square \)

Let \(q=(q_1,\ldots ,q_m), p=(p_{1},\ldots ,p_m), \dot{q}=(\dot{q}_1,\ldots ,\dot{q}_m), \dot{p}=(\dot{p}_{1},\ldots ,\dot{p}_m)\).

Also, let \(\beta =(\beta _1,\ldots ,\beta _m)\) and, for any \(k<m\), let \([k]=\{1,\ldots ,k\}\), so that \(\beta _{[k]}=(\beta _1,\ldots ,\beta _k)\), and \(\alpha _{[m]\setminus [k]}=(\alpha _{k+1},\ldots ,\alpha _m)\).

Let \(L^+\times L^-\) denote the germ of \(L\times L\) at the point \((a^+,a^-)\in L\times L\) so that \(\mathcal{L }_{\lambda }=\Phi _{\lambda }(L^+\times L^-)\) is the germ at \((a,\dot{a})\), where \(a=\lambda a^++(1-\lambda )a^-, \dot{a}=\lambda a^+-(1-\lambda )a^-\), of a smooth Lagrangian submanifold of \((T\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \dot{\omega })\).

### **Theorem 3.8**

*generating family*

### *Proof*

The proof is a straightforward calculation. \(\square \)

### *Remark 3.9*

It follows from (3.7) that *the degree of parallelism is the corank of the singularity*, i.e. the corank of the Hessian of \(F_{\lambda }(p_a,q_a,\alpha _{[m]\setminus {[k]}},\beta )\) as a function in \((\alpha _{[m]\setminus {[k]}},\beta )\in \mathbb{R }^{2m-k}\).

### **Theorem 3.10**

([2]) Germs of Lagrangian maps are Lagrangian equivalent iff the germs of their generating families are stably \(\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent.

### **Corollary 3.11**

Germs \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) and \(E_{\lambda }(\tilde{L})\) are Lagrangian equivalent iff germs of generating families for \({\mathcal{L }}_{\lambda }\) and \(\tilde{\mathcal{L }}_{\lambda }\) are stably \(\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent.

## 4 Singularities of equidistants of Lagrangian submanifolds

We have the following results on singularities of affine equidistants of closed Lagrangian submanifolds, up to Lagrangian equivalence:

### **Theorem 4.1**

The caustic of any simple stable Lagrangian singularity (A-D-E singularities) in the \(4m\)-dimensional symplectic tangent bundle \((T\mathbb{R }^{2m}, \dot{\omega })\) is realizable as \(E_{\lambda }(L)\), for some smooth closed Lagrangian submanifold \(L\) in \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\).

The generic Lagrangian maps for manifolds of dimension smaller than \(6\) have only simple stable Lagrangian singularities (chapter 21 in [2]). Therefore we obtain the following corollary.

### **Corollary 4.2**

Any germ of generic caustics on \(2m\)-dimensional manifold for \(m=1,2\) is realizable as \(E_{\lambda }(L)\), for some smooth Lagrangian submanifold \(L\) in \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\).

### *Proof of Theorem 4.1*

## 5 The GCS of a Lagrangian submanifold: the criminant

We now begin the study of singularities of the global centre symmetry set of a smooth closed Lagrangian submanifold \(L\subset (\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\). Recall that in general the set *GCS* \((L)\) consists of the caustic and the criminant (see Remark 2.7). As part of the *GCS* \((L)\) caustic, the Wigner caustic of \(L\) has been almost entirely classified in Sect. 4. In a subsequent paper [5], we study \(E_{1/2}(L)\) in a neighborhood of \(L\), considering pairs of points of the type \((a,a)\in L\times L\) as strongly parallel pairs. In terms of the generating families of Sect. 4, these are odd functions of the variables, so we consider classification *in the category of odd functions*. This implies a hidden \(\mathbb{Z }_2\)-symmetry for these singularities [5].

This section is devoted to the criminant \(\Delta (L)\). In order to study the global centre symmetry set, the whole \(\lambda \)-family must be considered together. Due to the Lagrangian condition, we resort to a classification via generating families. We know that \(E_{\lambda }(L)\) is the caustic of \(\mathcal{L }_{\lambda }=\Phi _{\lambda }(L\times L)\). The generating family for \(\mathcal{L }_{\lambda }\) is given by \(F_{\lambda }(p,q,\alpha ,\beta )\) of the form (3.7). Since \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is the union of \(\{\lambda \}\times E_{\lambda }\), the germ of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is described in the following way (for \(\kappa =(\alpha ,\beta )\)):

### **Proposition 5.1**

\(\mathbb{E }(L)=\left\{ (\lambda ,p,q):\exists \kappa \ \frac{\partial F_{\lambda }}{\partial \kappa }=0, \ \det \left[ \frac{\partial ^2 F_{\lambda }}{\partial \kappa _i \partial \kappa _j}\right] =0\right\} \).

### **Proposition 5.2**

We find the condition for the tangency of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) to the fibers of the projection \(\pi :(\lambda ,p,q)\mapsto (p,q)\).

### **Proposition 5.3**

If \((\lambda ,a)\) is a regular point of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\), then there exists a \(1\)-parallel pair \(a^+, a^-\) such that \(a=\lambda a^+ +(1-\lambda ) a^-\).

### *Proof*

### **Proposition 5.4**

### *Proof*

### **Theorem 5.5**

The point \(a=\lambda a^+ +(1-\lambda ) a^-\) belongs to the criminant \(\Delta (L)\) of *GCS* \((L)\) iff there is a bitangent hyperplane to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and \(a^-\).

### *Proof*

### **Corollary 5.6**

If, for some \(\lambda , \lambda a^+ +(1-\lambda ) a^- = a\in \Delta (L)\subset \) *GCS* \((L)\), then the whole chord \(l(a^+,a^-)\subset \) *GCS* \((L)\). Equivalently, if there is a bitangent hyperplane to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and \(a^-\), then \(l(a^+,a^-)\subset \) *GCS* \((L)\).

Thus, we generalize the notion of convexity of a curve on the plane.

### **Definition 5.7**

A smooth closed Lagrangian submanifold \(L\) of \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\) is *weakly convex* if there is no bitangent hyperplane to \(L\).

### **Corollary 5.8**

If \(L\) is a weakly convex closed Lagrangian submanifold of \((\mathbb{R }^{2m},\omega )\) then the criminant \(\Delta (L)\) of *GCS* \((L)\) is empty.

## 6 Affine-Lagrangian stable singularities of the GCS

We now define an equivalence relation to classify the singularities of *GCS* \((L)\). Due to the Lagrangian condition, we look for an equivalence of generating families. For the classification of \(\mathbb{E }(\lambda )\) and *GCS* \((L)\), because \(\lambda \) is no longer fixed it has become an extra parameter that unfolds the generating families \(F\). The naive approach is to consider the extended parameter space \(\mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}\ni (\lambda ,x)\) for unfolding the generating families \(f(\lambda ,\kappa )=f_{\lambda }(\kappa )\) and classify their stable unfoldings in the usual way. However, such a classification of *GCS* \((L)\) would not take into account the projection \(\pi : \mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}\rightarrow \mathbb{R }^{2m}\) in a proper way, because it does not distinguish the affine time \(\lambda \in \mathbb{R }\) from \(x\in \mathbb{R }^{2m}\).

### **Definition 6.1**

*(1,2m)-Lagrangian equivalent*if there exists a symplectomorphism-germ \(\Upsilon \) of \(T^{*}\mathbb{R } \times T\mathbb{R }^{2m}\) such that \(\Upsilon (\mathcal{L })=\widetilde{\mathcal{L }}\) and the following diagram commutes:

*(1,2m)-Lagrangian equivalent for*\(\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\) if, in addition, for every \(x\in \mathbb{R }^{2m}\)

### *Remark 6.2*

Condition (6.4) is introduced for the classification of the Wigner caustic \(E_{{1}/{2}}(L)\) as a part of *GCS* \((L)\).

### **Definition 6.3**

*GCS* \((L)\) and *GCS* \((\widetilde{L})\) are *(1,2m)-Lagrangian equivalent* if \(\mathcal{L }\) and \(\widetilde{\mathcal{L }}\) are (1,2m)-Lagrangian equivalent.

### *Remark 6.4*

From (6.3), it is clear that classification of *GCS* \((L)\) by \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalence of \(\mathcal{L }\) is *affine symplectic invariant*.

### *Remark 6.5*

### **Definition 6.6**

\(\mathcal{L }\) is *(1,2m)-Lagrangian stable* if the diagram of maps \(D(\mathcal{L })\) is stable, i.e. every \(\widetilde{\mathcal{L }}\) with nearby diagram \(D(\widetilde{\mathcal{L }})\) is \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalent to \(\mathcal{L }\). *GCS* \((L)\) is *(1,2m)-Lagrangian stable* if \(\mathcal{L }\) is (1,2m)-Lagrangian stable.

In view of Remark 6.4, we also use the term *affine-Lagrangian stability* for \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian stability.

### **Definition 6.7**

*(1,2m)*-\(\mathcal{R }^+\)-

*equivalent*if there exists a diffeomorphism-germ

*stably (1,2m)*-\(\mathcal{R }^+\)-

*equivalent*if there are nondegenerate quadratic forms \(Q\) in new arguments \(\xi \) and \(\widetilde{Q}\) in new arguments \(\tilde{\xi }\) such that \(F+Q\) and \(\widetilde{F} + \widetilde{Q}\) are \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent. The germ \(F\) at \((\frac{1}{2},a,\kappa _a)\) and the germ \(\widetilde{F}\) at \((\frac{1}{2},a,\tilde{\kappa }_a)\) are (stably) (1,2m)-\(\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent for \(\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\) if, in addition, for every \(x\in \mathbb{R }^m\) condition (6.4) is satisfied.

### *Remark 6.8*

\((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalence is a special case of Wassermann’s \((1,2m)\)-equivalence [19]. For relations between the \((r,s)\)-classification of families of functions [19], the classification of bifurcations of caustics [1, 20] and the classification of bifurcations of Lagrangian maps, see chapter 22 in [2].

We have the following result, whose proof is a minor modification for \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalence of the proof of Theorem 3.10 in [2].

### **Proposition 6.9**

Germs of Lagrangian submanifolds \(\mathcal{L }, \ \widetilde{\mathcal{L }}\) of \((T^{*}\mathbb{R } \times T\mathbb{R }^{2m}, d\lambda ^*\wedge d\lambda + \dot{\omega })\) are \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalent iff the germs of generating families \(F\) and \(\widetilde{F}\) are stably \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent.

### **Definition 6.10**

A function-germ \(F\) at \(z\) is *(1,2m)*-\(\mathcal{R }^+\)-*stable* if for any neighborhood \(U\ni z\) in \(\mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{2m} \times \mathbb{R }^k\) and representative function \(F^{\prime }\) of the germ \(F\) on \(U\), there is a neighborhood \(V\) of \(F^{\prime }\) in \(C^{\infty }(U,\mathbb{R })\) (with weak \(C^{\infty }\)-topology) s.t. for any function \(G^{\prime }\in V\) there is a point \(z^{\prime }\in U\) such that the germ of \(G^{\prime }\) at \(z^{\prime }\) is \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent to \(F\).

### *Remark 6.11*

\(\mathcal{L }\) and *GCS* \((L)\) are \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian stable if and only if the germ of generating family \(F\) (of \(\mathcal{L }\)) is \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-stable.

The following theorems show that the only affine-Lagrangian stable singularities of GCS are singularities of the criminant, the smooth part of the Wigner caustic and their “tangent” union.

### **Definition 6.12**

### *Proof*

If \(f\) has \(A_1\) singularity then it is obvious that \(F\) is stably \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent to the trivial unfolding. Now we assume that \(f\) has \(A_2\) singularity. Since \(F\) is stable, then \(F\) is stably \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent to \(F(\lambda ,x,t)=t^3+t g(\lambda ,x)\), where \(g\) is a smooth function-germ vanishing at \(0\). If \(g\) is a versal unfolding of the function-germ \(\lambda \mapsto g(\lambda ,0)\) with \(A_k\) singularity we can reduce \(F\) to the form (6.5) by a diffeomorphism-germ of the form \((\lambda ,x,t)\mapsto (\Lambda (\lambda ,x),X(x),t)\). \(\square \)

The following lemma shows that these are the only \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-stable unfoldings.

### **Lemma 6.13**

Unfoldings of \(A_3^{\pm }\) singularity are not \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-stable.

### *Proof*

For \(E_{1/2}(L)\subset \) *GCS* \((L)\), we consider the germ of \(F\) at \((1/2,a,\kappa _a)\).

### **Theorem 6.14**

### *Proof*

If \(f\) has \(A_1\) singularity then \(F\) is stably \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent to the trivial unfolding. If \(f\) has \(A_2\) singularity, then (since \(F\) is stable) \(F\) is stably \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-equivalent to \(F(\lambda ,x,t)=t^3+t g(\lambda ,x)\), where \(g\) is a smooth function-germ vanishing at \((1/2,0)\). If \(g\) is a versal unfolding of the function-germ \(\lambda \mapsto g(\lambda ,0)\) with \(B_k^{\pm }\) singularity on a manifold (\(\lambda \)-space) with the boundary (\(\lambda =\frac{1}{2}\)) (see [1]) then we can reduce \(F\) to the form (6.7) by a diffeomorphism-germ of the form \((\lambda ,x,t)\mapsto (1/2+(\lambda -1/2)\Lambda (\lambda ,x),X(x),t)\). \(\square \)

### **Theorem 6.15**

If \(F\) (generating \(\mathcal{L }\)) has \(A_2^{A_k^\pm }\) singularity, for \(k=0,1,\ldots , 2m\), then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is a germ of a smooth hypersurface in \(\mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}\).

If \(F\) has \(A_2^{A_0}\) singularity at \((\lambda _a,a,\kappa _a)\) then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is transversal at \((\lambda _a,a)\) to the fibers of projection \(\pi \).

If \(F\) has \(A_2^{A_k^{\pm }}\) singularity for \(k\ge 1\) at \((\lambda _a,a,\kappa _a)\) then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is \(k\)-tangent at \((\lambda _a,a)\) to the fibers of \(\pi , a\) belongs to the criminant \(\Delta (L)\) of *GSC*(L) and the germ of \(\Delta (L)\) at \(a\) is the caustic of \(A_k^{\pm }\) singularity.

### *Proof*

### **Theorem 6.16**

If the germ at \((\frac{1}{2},a,\kappa _a)\) of \(F\) has \(A_2^{B_k^\pm }\) singularity (\(k=1,\ldots , 2m\)), then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is a germ of smooth hypersurface in \(\mathbb{R }\times \mathbb{R }^{2m}\).

If \(F\) has \(A_2^{B_1}\) singularity at \((\frac{1}{2},a,\kappa _a)\), then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is transversal at \((\frac{1}{2},a)\) to the fibers of projection \(\pi \). The germ of *GCS* \((L)\) at \(a\) is the germ of a smooth hypersurface of \(\mathbb{R }^{2m}\)—the Wigner caustic \(E_{{1}/{2}}(L)\).

If \(F\) has \(A_2^{B_k^{\pm }}\) singularity for \(k\ge 2\) at \((\frac{1}{2},a,\kappa _a)\), then \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is \(k\)-tangent at \((1/2,a,t)\) to the fibers of \(\pi \). The germ of *GCS* \((L)\) at \(a\) consists of two tangent components: the germ of a smooth hypersurface—\(E_{{1}/{2}}(L)\)—and the germ of the caustic of \(B_k^{\pm }\) singularity—\(\Delta (L)\).

### *Proof*

### *Remark 6.17*

Not all \((1,2m)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-stable singularities can be realizable as singularities of generating families \(F\) for \(\mathcal{L }\) which are of the special form given in Theorem 3.8. In the next section, in Theorem 7.7, we prove that the \(A_2^{A_2}\) singularity is not realizable for Lagrangian curves.

## 7 Classifications of the GCS of Lagrangian curves

We now classify the singularities of the global centre symmetry set of a Lagrangian curve \(L\subset (\mathbb{R }^2,\omega )\). To set the stage, we first state the results for the *GCS* of a curve on the affine plane \(\mathbb{R }^2\), when no symplectic structure is considered.

### *Theorem 7.1*

([3, 10, 11, 16]) Affine stable GCS of a smooth convex closed curve \(M\subset \mathbb{R }^2\) (no symplectic structure) consists of:

i) The CSS, a smooth curve with (possible) self intersections and cusp singularities, ii) the Wigner caustic, a smooth curve with (possible) self intersections and cusp singularities lying on the smooth part of the CSS, and iii) the medial axis, which are smooth half-lines starting at the cusp points of the CSS.

The results stated in Theorem 7.1, originally obtained by various methods, can also be proved using the affine-invariant method of chord equivalence, the analogous of \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalence when no symplectic structure is considered, cf Definition 7.10, below.

### **Theorem 7.2**

Let \(M\) be a generic smooth convex closed curve in \(\mathbb{R }^2\). The number of cusps of the Wigner caustic of \(M\) is odd and not smaller than 3. The number of cusps of the CSS of \(M\) is odd and not smaller than 3. The number of cusps of the Wigner caustic of \(M\) is not greater than the number of cusps of the CSS of \(M\).

The statement on the number of cusps of Wigner caustics was first proved by Berry [3], and the statement on the number of cusps of CSS by Giblin and Holtom [9]. The last inequality of the theorem is new. It follows immediately from the characterization in [9] of cusps of \(E_{1/2}(M)\) by the curvature ratio being \(1\) and cusps of CSS of \(M\) by the derivative of the curvature ratio being \(0\), using Rolle’s theorem.

*GCS*(M) where the number of cusps of the CSS and of the Wigner caustic are equal to three and neither curve is self intersecting can be found in [9]. We picture a case when the number of cusps of the Wigner caustic is three and the CSS is self intersecting and the number of its cusps is five, and another case when both the Wigner caustic and the CSS are self intersecting and both have five cusps (Figs. 1, 2).

### 7.1 Affine-Lagrangian classification of the *GCS* of Lagrangian curves

*GCS*\((L)\). In what follows, \(a^+=(p_a^+,q_a^+), a^-=(p_a^-,q_a^-)\) denote a parallel pair on \(L\) and \(a_{\lambda }=\lambda a^++(1-\lambda )a^-, \dot{q}_\lambda =\lambda q_a^+-(1-\lambda )q_a^-\). Let \(S^{\pm }\) be germs of generating functions of \(L\) at \(a^\pm \) satisfying the conditions in Proposition 3.7. The germ of generating family of \(\mathcal{L }\) and the big wave front set are given by

### **Proposition 7.3**

- (i)
\((\lambda ,a_{\lambda })\) belongs to the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\),

- (ii)
\(\exists t \ \frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial t^3}(\lambda ,a_{\lambda },t)\ne 0, \frac{\partial F}{\partial t}(\lambda ,a_{\lambda },t)=\frac{\partial ^2 F}{\partial t^2}(\lambda ,a_{\lambda },t)=0\),

- (iii)
\(\frac{1}{\lambda }\frac{\partial ^3 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^3}(q_a^+)+\frac{1}{1-\lambda }\frac{\partial ^3 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^3}(q_a^-)\ne 0\),

- (iv)
\(\frac{1}{\lambda }\kappa (a^+)+\frac{1}{1-\lambda }\kappa (a^-)\ne 0\), where \(\kappa (x)\) is the curvature of \(L\) at \(x\).

### *Proof*

Equivalence of (i) and (ii) follows from the definition of the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\). Equivalence of (ii) and (iii) is obtained by direct calculations. (iv) is obvious since \(\kappa (a^{\pm })=\frac{\partial ^3 S^\pm }{\partial (q^\pm )^3}(q_a^\pm )\). \(\square \)

### **Proposition 7.4**

- (v)
the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is tangent to the fiber of \(\pi \) at \((\lambda ,a_\lambda )\),

- (vi)
\(\exists t\):

*(ii)*is satisfied and \( \frac{\partial ^2 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t}(\lambda ,a_{\lambda },t)=0\). - (vii)
*(iii)*is satisfied and \(p_a^+=\frac{\partial S^+}{\partial q^+}(q_a^+)=\frac{\partial S^-}{\partial q^-}(q_a^-)=p_a^-\). - (viii)
*(iv)*is satisfied and \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is bitangent to \(a^+,a^-\) to \(L\).

### *Proof*

All statements follow from Proposition 5.4 and Theorem 5.5. \(\square \)

### **Proposition 7.5**

- (ix)
the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is \(1\)-tangent to the fiber of \(\pi \) at \((\lambda ,a_\lambda )\),

- (x)\(\exists t:\)
*(vi)*is satisfied and$$\begin{aligned} \left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^2}(\lambda ,a_\lambda ,t)\right) ^2-\frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}(\lambda ,a_\lambda ,t)\frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda ^2 \partial t}(\lambda ,a_\lambda ,t)\ne 0. \end{aligned}$$(7.1) - (xi)
*(vii)*is satisfied and \( \frac{\partial ^3 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^3}(q_a^+)\frac{\partial ^3 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^3}(q_a^-)\ne 0\). - (xii)
*(iv)*is satisfied and \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and \(a^-\)

### *Proof*

### **Proposition 7.6**

- (xiii)
the regular part of \(\mathbb{E }(L)\) is \(2\)-tangent to the fiber of \(\pi \) at \((\lambda ,a_\lambda )\),

- (xiv)\(\exists t\):
*(vi)*is satisfied, (7.1) is not satisfied and$$\begin{aligned}&\left\{ \frac{\partial ^4 F}{{{{\partial \lambda }^3} {\partial t}}}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\right) ^3-3\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial \lambda ^2 \partial t^2}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\right) ^2\frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial \lambda \partial t^2}\right. \\&\quad \left. +3\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^3}\frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial \lambda \partial t^2}\right) ^2-\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial t^4}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^2}\right) ^3 \right\} (\lambda ,a_\lambda ,t)\ne 0 \end{aligned}$$ - (xv)
*(vii)*is satisfied and \(\left( \frac{\partial ^3 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^3}(q_a^+)= 0 \ \wedge \ \frac{\partial ^4 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^4}(q_a^+)\ne 0\right) \) or \(\left( \frac{\partial ^3 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^3}(q_a^-)= 0 \ \wedge \ \frac{\partial ^4 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^4}(q_a^-)\ne 0\right) \) - (xvi)
*(iv)*is satisfied and \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at one of points \(a^+, a^-\) and \(2\)-tangent to \(L\) at the other.

### *Proof*

(xiii) means that (7.2) is satisfied, (7.3) is not satisfied and \(\frac{\partial ^3}{\partial \lambda ^3}\left( \frac{\partial F}{\partial t}(\lambda ,p,q,\right. \) \(\left. T(\lambda ,p,q ))\right) \left| _{(\lambda ,a_{\lambda })}\right. \ne 0\). Using (7.4), we see that these conditions are equivalent to (xiv). By direct calculation we see that (xiv) \(\iff \) (xv). Finally, (xvi) is the geometric description of (xv). \(\square \)

### **Theorem 7.7**

- (1)
If \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is not bitangent to \(L\) at \(a^+,a^-\), then the germ of \(F\) at \((1/2,a_{1/2},\dot{q}_{1/2})\) has \(A_2^{B_1}\) singularity, and the germ of

*GCS*at \(a_{1/2}\) is a smooth curve (the smooth part of the Wigner caustic). - (2)
If \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and at \(a^-\), then the germ of \(F\) at \((1/2,a_{1/2},\dot{q}_{1/2})\) has \(A_2^{B_2}\) singularity, and the germ of

*GCS*at \(a_{1/2}\) is a union of two \(1\)-tangent smooth curves (the smooth part of the Wigner caustic and the smooth part of the criminant). - (3)
If \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and at \(a^-\), then the germ of \(F\) at \((\lambda ,a_\lambda ,\dot{q}_\lambda )\) for \(\lambda \ne 1/2\) has \(A_2^{A_1}\) singularity and the germ of

*GCS*at \(a_{\lambda }\) is a smooth curve (the smooth part of the criminant). - (4)
If \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at one of the points \(a^+, a^-\) and \(2\)-tangent at the other, then the germ of \(F\) at \((\lambda ,a_\lambda ,\dot{q}_\lambda )\) for \(\lambda \ne 1/2\) is not \((1,2)\text{- }\mathcal{R }^+\)-stable. In particular, \(A_2^{A_2}\) is not realizable as stable singularity of the

*GCS*of a Lagrangian curve.

### *Proof*

By Proposition 7.3, if \(\frac{1}{\lambda }\frac{\partial ^3 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^3}(q_a^+)+\frac{1}{1-\lambda }\frac{\partial ^3 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^3}(q_a^-)\ne 0\) then the germ of \(F\) is a unfolding of \(A_2\) singularity. Therefore we can reduce \(F\) to the form \(F^{\prime }(\lambda ,p,q,t)=t^3+g(\lambda ,p,q)t\), where \(g\) is a smooth function-germ vanishing at \((\lambda _a,0)\) (for \(\lambda _a=0\) or \(\lambda _a=1/2\)). By Proposition 7.4, if \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is not bitangent to \(L\) at \(a^+, a^-\) then \(\frac{\partial F^{\prime }}{\partial t \partial \lambda }(1/2,0,0) \ne 0\) and this implies \(\frac{\partial g}{\partial \lambda }(1/2,0)\ne 0\). By Theorems 6.14 and 6.16 we obtain (1). If the chord \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+, a^-\) then by Proposition 7.4 we get that \(p^+_a=p^-_a\) and \(\frac{\partial F^{\prime }}{\partial t \partial \lambda }(\lambda _a,0,0) = 0\) and this implies \(\frac{\partial g}{\partial \lambda }(\lambda _a,0)=0\). But \(dg|_{(\lambda _a,0)}\ne 0\) since \(\frac{\partial F}{\partial t \partial p}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a) \ne 0\). By Proposition 7.5 if \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+, a^-\) then \(\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F^{\prime }}{\partial \lambda \partial t^2}(\lambda _a,0,0)\right) ^2-\frac{\partial ^3 F^{\prime }}{ \partial t^3}(\lambda _a,0,0)\frac{\partial ^3 F^{\prime }}{\partial \lambda ^2 \partial t}(\lambda _a,0,0)\ne 0\). But this implies \(\frac{\partial ^2 g}{\partial \lambda ^2}(\lambda _a,0,)\ne 0\). Thus if \(\lambda _a=1/2\) by Theorems 6.14 and 6.16 we obtain (2) and otherwise by Theorems 6.12 and 6.15 we obtain (2). Finally, assume that \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(1\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^+\) and \(2\)-tangent at \(a^-\). By Proposition 7.6 we get \(\frac{\partial ^2 g}{\partial \lambda ^2}(\lambda _a,0,)=0\) and \(\Big \{\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial \lambda ^3 \partial t}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\right) ^3-3\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial \lambda ^2 \partial t^2}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\right) ^2\frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial \lambda \partial t^2}+3\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^3}\frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial t^3}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{ \partial \lambda \partial t^2}\right) ^2-\frac{\partial ^4 F}{\partial t^4}\left( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^2}\right) ^3\Big \}(\lambda _a,0,0)\ne 0\). Thus, \(\frac{\partial ^3 g}{\partial \lambda ^3}(\lambda _a,0,)\ne 0\). We know that \(\frac{\partial g}{ \partial p}(\lambda _a,0,)\ne 0\) since \(\frac{\partial ^2 F}{\partial t \partial p}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a) \ne 0\). It is easy to see that \(\frac{\partial ^2 F}{\partial t \partial q}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)=0\). Thus \(F\) has \(A_2^{A_2}\) singularity at \((\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)\) iff \( \frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda \partial q \partial t}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)\frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial t^3}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)-\frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial \lambda \partial t^2}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)\frac{\partial ^3 F}{\partial q \partial t^2}(\lambda _a,a,\dot{q}_a)\ne 0 \). By direct calculation, this is equivalent to \( \frac{(q_a^+-q_a^-)}{\lambda _a(1-\lambda _a)}\frac{\partial ^3 S^+}{\partial (q^+)^3}(q_a^+)\frac{\partial ^3 S^-}{\partial (q^-)^3}(q_a^-)\ne 0 \), which is not satisfied, since \(l(a^+,a^-)\) is \(2\)-tangent to \(L\) at \(a^-\). \(\square \)

### **Corollary 7.8**

Let \(L\) be a smooth closed convex curve in \((\mathbb{R }^{2},\omega )\). The smooth part of \(E_{1/2}(L)\) is \((1,2)\)-Lagrangian stable, but the cusps of \(E_{1/2}(L)\), seen as part of *GCS* \((L)\), are not \((1,2)\)-Lagrangian stable; the medial axis and the whole CSS are not \((1,2)\)-Lagrangian stable.

### *Remark 7.9*

For a convex curve \(L\subset \mathbb{R }^2\), most singularities which are affine stable are not affine-Lagrangian stable (compare Theorem 7.1 and Corollary 7.8). Also, although the cusps of \(E_{1/2}(L)\) are affine-Lagrangian stable when \(E_{1/2}(L)\) is considered by itself, they are not affine-Lagrangian stable considering \(E_{1/2}(L)\subset \) *GCS* \((L)\), that is, the meeting of \(E_{1/2}(L)\) and CSS is not affine-Lagrangian stable.

### 7.2 Discussion

Because of the large loss of stability for singularities of the GCS, when going from the affine to the affine-Lagrangian case, one wonders if it is possible to consider a coarsen classification of singularities of the GCS of Lagrangian submanifolds, which produces more stable singularities. In fact, the usual Lagrangian equivalence will do.

*GCS*\((L)\) which are Lagrangian stable are not \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian stable. In fact, for convex Lagrangian curves, it is easy to see that most of the singularities of Theorem 7.1 are Lagrangian stable in the above sense.

However, the fact that the last projection \(\pi : \mathbb{R }^{1+2m} \rightarrow \mathbb{R }^{2m}\) is not taken into account is an obvious indication that usual Lagrangian equivalence is not the correct equivalence relation for classification of the singularities of *GCS* \((L)\), because this latter is the image under \(\pi \) of the locus of critical points of \(\pi \) restricted to \(\mathbb{E }(L)\).

*extended chord transformation*

### **Definition 7.10**

*GCS*\((M)\) and

*GCS*\((\widetilde{M})\) are

*chord equivalent*if there is a diffeomorphism-germ \(\Theta \) of \(\mathbb{R }\times T\mathbb{R }^n\) s.t. \(\widetilde{\mathbb{M }}=\Theta (\mathbb{M })\) and the following diagram commutes:

*vertical*arrows indicate diffeomorphism-germs, as follows:

### **Definition 7.11**

A singularity of *GCS* \((M)\) is *affine stable* if it is a stable singularity under its classification by the chord equivalence.

Using classification by the chord equivalence, one proves Theorem 7.1 for the *GCS* of convex curves by somewhat lengthy but straightforward computations. The classification of the singularities of *GCS* \((M)\) in the other known cases, for instance hyperplanes, can be similarly accomplished by chord equivalence, which gives the correct affine-invariant classification of the singularities of *GCS* \((M)\) for general \(m\)-dimensional submanifolds \(M\subset \mathbb{R }^n, n\le 2m\).

Comparison of the classifying diagram in Definition 7.10 for chord equivalence with the classifying diagram in Definition 6.3 for \((1,2m)\)-Lagrangian equivalence shows their obvious analogy.

*wrong*equivalence relation to classify singularities of

*GCS*\((M)\) for general submanifolds \(M^m\subset \mathbb{R }^n, n\le 2m\), produces many more stable singularities than when applying the

*correct*classifying diagram of Definition 7.10.

Thus, choosing the correct classifying diagram in both the non-symplectic and the symplectic cases shows that most singularities of the *GCS* which are stable when no symplectic form has to be accounted for, cease to be stable when there is a symplectic form to be accounted for. In other words, there is breakdown of stability due to a symplectic form. Other similar cases, of breakdown of simplicity due to a symplectic form, can be found in [4, 6] and especially in [7].

## Notes

### Acknowledgments

We specially thank M. A. S. Ruas for many stimulating discussions and invaluable remarks. We also thank P. Giblin and S. Janeczko for discussions and V. Goryunov for remarks. We are also very grateful to the referee for many invaluable suggestions. W. Domitrz was supported by FAPESP, during his stay in São Carlos, and by Polish MNiSW grant no. N N201 397237. P. de M. Rios acknowledges partial support by FAPESP grant no. 2010/15179-8.

## References

- 1.Arnol’d, V.I.: Critical points of functions on a manifold with boundary, the simple Lie groups \(B_4, C_k\), and \(F_4\) and singularities of evolutes. Russ. Math. Surv.
**33**, 99–116 (1978)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 2.Arnol’d, V.I., Gusein-Zade, S.M., Varchenko, A.N.: Singularities of Differentiable Maps, vol. 1. Birhauser, Boston (1985)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 3.Berry, M.V.: Semi-classical mechanics in phase space: a study of Wigner’s function. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A
**287**, 237–271 (1977)Google Scholar - 4.Domitrz, W.: Local symplectic algebra of quasi-homogeneous curves. Fundamentae Mathematicae
**204**, 57–86 (2009)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 5.Domitrz, W., Manoel, M., Rios, P. de M.: The Wigner Caustic On-Shell and Singularities of Odd Functions. arXiv 1207.1068 to appear in J. Geom. Phys.Google Scholar
- 6.Domitrz, W., Janeczko, S., Zhitomirskii, M.: Symplectic singularities of varietes: the method of algebraic restrictions. J. reine und angewandte Math.
**618**, 197–235 (2008)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 7.Domitrz, W., Rieger, J.H.: Volume preserving subgroups of \({\cal A}\) and \({\cal K}\) and singularities in unimodular geometry. Mathematische Annalen
**345**, 783–817 (2009)Google Scholar - 8.Rios, P. de M., Ozorio de Almeida, A.: A variational principle for actions on symmetric symplectic spaces. J. Geom. Phys.
**51**(4), 404–441 (2004)Google Scholar - 9.Giblin, P.J., Holtom P.A.: The Centre Symmetry Set, Geometry and Topology of Caustics, vol. 50, pp. 91–105. Banach Center Publications, Warsaw (1999)Google Scholar
- 10.Giblin, P.J., Zakalyukin, V.M.: Singularities of systems of chords. Funct. Anal. Appl.
**36**, 220–224 (2002)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 11.Giblin, P.J., Zakalyukin, V.M.: Singularities of centre symmetry sets. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc.
**90**(3), 132–166 (2005)Google Scholar - 12.Giblin, P.J., Zakalyukin, V.M.: Recognition of centre symmetry set singularities. Geom. Dedicata
**130**, 43–58 (2007)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 13.Giblin, P.: Affinely Invariant Symmetry Sets, Geometry and Topology of Caustics—Caustics ’06, vol. 82, pp. 71–84. Banach Center Publications (2008)Google Scholar
- 14.Giblin, P., Janeczko, S.: Geometry of curves and surfaces through the contact map. Topol. Appl.
**159**(2), 466475 (2012)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 15.Goryunov, V.V.: Singularities of projections of full intersections. J. Sov. Math.
**27**, 2785–2811 (1984)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 16.Janeczko, S.: Bifurcations of the center of symmetry. Geometria Dedicata
**60**, 9–16 (1996)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 17.Ozorio de Almeida, A.M., Hannay, J.: Geometry of two dimensional Tori in phase space: projections. Sect. Wigner Funct. Ann. Phys.
**138**, 115–154 (1982)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 18.Poincaré, H.: Les Méthodes Nouvelles de la Méchanique Céleste, vol. 3. Gauthier-Villars, Paris (1892)Google Scholar
- 19.Wassermann, G.: Stability of unfoldings in space and time. Acta Math.
**135**, 57–128 (1975)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar - 20.Zakalyukin, V.M.: Reconstructions of fronts and caustics depending on a parameter and versality of mappings. J. Sov. Math.
**27**, 2713–2735 (1984)Google Scholar

## Copyright information

**Open Access**This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.