Exponential convexifying of polynomials

Abstract: Let $X\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ be a convex closed and semialgebraic set and let $f$ be a polynomial positive on $X$. We prove that there exists an exponent $N\geq 1$, such that for any $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^n$ the function $\varphi_N(x)=e^{N|x-\xi|^2}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$. When $X$ is unbounded we have to assume also that the leading form of $f$ is positive in $\mathbb{R}^n\setminus\{0\}$. We obtain strong convexity of $\varPhi_N(x)=e^{e^{N|x|^2}}f(x)$ on possibly unbounded $X$, provided $N$ is sufficiently large, assuming only that $f$ is positive on $X$. We apply these results for searching critical points of polynomials on convex closed semialgebraic sets.

\section{Introduction}

In \cite{KS} we considered several questions  concerning convexification of a polynomial $f$

  which is positive on a closed convex set $X\subset \mathbb R^n$.
  One of the main results in  \cite{KS},  is the following [Theorem 5.1]: \emph{if $X$ is a compact set than there exists a positive integer $N$  such that the function
\begin{equation}\label{conv1}
\phi_N(x)=(1+|x|^2)^Nf(x)
\end{equation}
is strongly convex on $X$}. Moreover,  explicit estimates for the exponent $N$ were given in  \cite{KS}. They depend on the diameter of $X$, the size of coefficients of the polynomial $f$ and on the minimum of $f$ on $X$.
In fact a  stronger version of  \eqref{conv1} was  given  in  \cite{KS}; \emph{there exists  an integer  $N$, which can be explicitly estimated, such  that the polynomials
\begin{equation*
\phi_{N,\xi}=(1+|x-\xi|^2)^Nf(x),\quad \xi\in X,
\end{equation*}
are strongly convex on $X$}. The fact that $N$ can be chosen  independent  of  $\xi$  was  crucial for  a construction
of an algorithm which for a given polynomial $f$, positive in the convex compact semialgebraic set $X$, produces a sequence $a_\nu\in X$ starting from an arbitrary point $a_0\in X$, defined by induction: $a_\nu=\operatorname{argmin}_{X}\phi_{N,a_{\nu-1}}$, i.e., $a_{\nu}\in X$ is the unique point of $X$ at which $\phi_{N,a_{\nu-1}}$ has a global minimum on $X$. The sequence $a_\nu$ converges to a lower critical point of $f$ on  $X$ (see \cite[Theorem 7.5]{KS}).

In the case of non-compact closed convex set $X$ the  results mentioned   above require an  additional assumption, that the \emph{leading form} $f_d$ of  $f$,
satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eqpositivityfd}
f_d(x)>0\quad\hbox{for }x\in\mathbb R^n\setminus\{0\}.
\end{equation}
Under this assumption we have that: \emph{if a  polynomial $f$ is positive on $X$ then for any $R>0$ there exists $N_0$ such that for each $\xi\in X$, $|\xi|\leq R$,
$N>N_0$ the polynomial $\phi_{N,\xi}$ is strongly convex on $X$}.

The assumption \eqref{eqpositivityfd} is necessary for local convexity of $\phi_{N,\xi}$ in a neighborhood of infinity, see \cite[Proposition 6.3]{KS}. However, this assumption is not sufficient to obtain  convexity of the polynomial $\phi_{N,\xi}$ for some fixed  $N>0$ independent of  $\xi\in X$.
For instance
the polynomial $f(x)=1+x^2$, has this property, cf. \cite[Example 4.5]{KS}.

The  main goal  of this paper is to study convexification of polynomials functions  by exponential factors of the form
$e^{N|x-\xi|^2}$ or by double exponential of the form $e^{e^{N|x-\xi|^{2}}}$.
 Surprisingly they  play distinct roles.
We set
 $$
\varphi _{N,\xi}(x):=e^{N|x-\xi|^2}f(x).
$$
and  prove the following  (see Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym} and Corollary \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartymcor2}):
\emph{if  a polynomial $f$ is positive on a compact and convex set $X\subset \mathbb R^n$,
than there exists effectively computed number $N_0$ such that for any $N> N_0$ and $\xi\in \mathbb R^n$ the function $\varphi _{N,\xi}(x)$
 is strongly convex on $X$.}

If  $X$ is not  compact, we obtain the above assertions under the assumption
 \eqref{eqpositivityfd}, see Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar}.
  In general the assumption \eqref{eqpositivityfd}

  can not be ommited as we show in Example \ref{exacounter}.

Surprisingly convexification in the noncompact case  without assumption \eqref{eqpositivityfd}  is possible using double exponential factors. Namely  in Theorems \ref{tedoubleexp} and \ref{convexonconvexsetnewxdoublevarsemi} we prove that:
\emph{if $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ is a convex and closed semialgebraic set and $f$ is a polynomial positive on $X$, then for any $R>0$ there exists effectively computed number $N_0$ such that for any $N> N_0$ and any $\xi\in \mathbb R^n$, $|\xi|\leq R$, the function
$$
\varPhi_{N,\xi}(x):=e^{e^{N|x-\xi|^{2}}}f(x)
$$
is strongly convex on $X$.}

In the case when $X$ is a convex and closed set, but non necessary semialgebraic, the result  still holds  (Theorems \ref{tedoubleexp2} and \ref{convexonconvexsetnewxdouble}) under an additional assumption
\begin{equation}\label{eqestmonX}
\inf\{f(x): x\in X\}\ge  m>0.
\end{equation}

In the above    theorems  one can  replace $\varPhi_{N,\xi}$ by  the function
$$
\Phi_{N,\xi}(x):=e^{Ne^{|x-\xi|^{2}}}f(x).
$$

 It turns out that convexification of polynomials using exponential function  is somehow more natural and powerful than the convexification   by the  factors of the form
 $(1+|x-\xi|^2)^N$ done in \cite{KS}. In particular it applies also to the noncompact case  and the explicit formulae for the exponent $N$ are nicer.

  We  believe that the results mentioned above could be of    interest, also to  study   o-minimal structures expanded by the exponent function. It fits particularly to the structure
 $\mathbb R_{\exp}$  semialgebraic sets expanded by the  exponent function. The remarkable fact that $\mathbb R_{\exp}$ is indeed an o-minimal structure
 was established by A. Wilkie \cite{W}.
 It would be interesting  to explain
  a different power of exponential and double exponential  for convexification.

The main difficulty when determining explicitely the number $N$ such that the function $\varphi_N$ is strongly convex on a convex  compact set $X$, comes from an effective estimation of the number $m$ in \eqref{eqestmonX}
and the number $R=\max\{|x|:x\in X\}$. Using results of G.~Jeronimo, D. Perrucci, E.~Tsigaridas \cite{JPT}  we show in  Theorem \ref{uwypuklaniecalkowitychna zwartym}) and Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym} how it is feasible when $X$ is a compact semialgebraic set described by polynomial inequalities with integer coefficients and $f$ is also a polynomial with integer coefficients (see Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym calk}).

As an application to optimization  we propose an algorithm which produces, starting from an arbitrary point $a_0\in X$,
  a sequence $a_\nu \in X$ which tends to a lower critical point of a polynomial $f$ restricted to
  $X$ or to infinity. We assume that
 $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ is a closed convex  semialgebraic set and $f$ a polynomial  which is bounded from below on $X$.  Then by adding to $f$ an appropriate constant we may assume that  $f\ge m> 0$ on $X$. If $X$ is unbounded we assume also condition \eqref{eqpositivityfd}.
Hence by the above mentioned theorems we  obtain strong convexity of $\varphi_\xi(x)=e^{|x-\xi|^2}f(x)$ for $\xi\in X$.
Let us choose any  $a_0\in X$ and set by induction:
$a_\nu=\operatorname{argmin}_{X}\varphi_{N,a_{\nu-1}}$.  Then we prove that  the sequence  $a_\nu $   tends to a lower critical point of a polynomial $f$ restricted to
  $X$ or to infinity.  Note that computing $a_\nu$, that is minimizing $\varphi_{N,a_{\nu-1}}$  on $X$,  is usually easier since the function is convex.
   This type of algorithm, based on convexification,  is called  sometimes {\it proximal}, see for instance \cite{Bolte}.
  Observe  that computing the critical point of $\varphi_{N,a_{\nu-1}}$ involves only algebraic equations.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{one variable} we prove that the function $\varphi _N$ in one variable  is strongly convex on a closed interval $I\subset \mathbb R$, provided $f(x)>m$ for $x\in I$ and some $m>0$ and $N\in\mathbb{R}$ is sufficiently large. We also estimate from above the number $N$.  In Section \ref{Sect3} we consider this problem in  the several variables case on a compact convex set $X$ (see Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym}). In  Sections \ref{Sect44} and \ref{secdoubleexp} we consider the case when the set $X$ is not compact.

\section{Convexifying polynomials}\label{one variable}
\subsection{Convexifying $C^2$-functions in one variable}
In this section we prove that if $f$ is a function of class $C^2$ positive on a closed interval $I\subset \mathbb R$ (not necessary compact), then for $N$ large enough the function $t\mapsto e^{Nt^2}f(t)$ is strongly convex on   $I$.

Let $f: \mathbb R\rightarrow \mathbb R$ be $C^2$ function. For any $N\in \mathbb R $ and $p,q\in\mathbb R$ we define the following function:
$$
\varphi _{N,p,q}(t):=e^{N(t^2+pt+q)}f(t), \ \ t\in \mathbb R.
$$

For positive numbers $m,D$ we put
$$
\mathcal{N}(m,D):=\frac{D}{2m}+\frac{D^2}{2m^2}.
$$

\begin{lemat}\label{lemat dla funkcji2}
Let $f$ be a function of class $C^2$, which is positive on a closed interval $I\subset \mathbb R$. Let
$m,D\in\mathbb{R}$ be such that
\begin{equation}\label{minimum f}
	0<m\leq \inf\{f(t): t \in I\},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{ograniczenie pochodnych}
|f'(t)|\leq D, \quad |f''(t)|\leq D \quad for \quad t \in I.
\end{equation}
Assume that
 $p^2\leq 4q$ and
\begin{equation}\label{nierownosc dla N2}
N>\mathcal{N}(m,D)
\end{equation}
then
$$\varphi _{N,p,q}'' (t)\geq -\frac{D^2}{m}-D+2Nm>0$$ for $t \in I$, thus $\varphi _{N,p,q}$ is strongly convex on $I$.
\end{lemat}

\begin{proof}
By definition of $\varphi_{N,p,q}$ we have
\begin{equation*}\label{eqwaznewprzykladzie}
\varphi_{N,p,q}''(t)=e^{N(t^2+pt+q)}[N^2(2t+p)^2f(t)+2N(2t+p)f'(t)+2Nf(t)+f''(t)].
\end{equation*}
Hence, from the assumptions we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{oszacowanie}
\varphi_{N,p,q}''(t)\geq e^{N(t^2+pt+q)}[N^2(2t+p)^2m-2N|2t+p|D+2Nm-D]
\end{equation}
for $t\in I$.Note that  the function
$$
\mathbb{R} \ni \lambda \mapsto N^2m\lambda^2-2N D\lambda+2Nm-D$$
attains its minimum, equal $-\frac{D^2}{m}-D+2Nm$, at the point $\lambda =\frac{D}{Nm}$. Thus for
$
N>\mathcal{N}(m,D)
$
we have $$N^2m\lambda^2-2ND|\lambda|+2Nm-D>0$$ for any $\lambda\in \mathbb R$.
Therefore
$$
\varphi_{N,p,q}''(t)\geq -\frac{D^2}{m}-D+2Nm>0\quad \hbox{for }t\in I,
$$
which implies that $\varphi_{N,p,q}$ is strongly convex on $I$.
\end{proof}

From Lemma \ref{lemat dla funkcji2} we immediately obtain

\begin{cor}\label{cor lemat dla funkcji2}
Let $f$ be a function of class $C^2$ on a closed interval $I\subset \mathbb R$. Let
 $m,D\in\mathbb{R}$ be such that
\begin{equation}
	m< \inf\{f(t): t \in I\},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{ograniczenie pochodnychdwa}
|f'(t)|\leq  D, \quad |f''(t)|\leq  D, \quad \hbox{for} \quad t \in I.
\end{equation}
Than for any $\xi\in\mathbb R$ and any $N\geq 1$ the   function
$$
\psi_{N,\xi}(t)=e^{N(t-\xi)^2}[f(t)-m+D],\quad t\in I
$$
is strongly convex on $I$. In particular the function
$$
\varphi(t)=e^{(t-\xi)^2}[f(t)-m+D],\quad t\in I,
$$
is strongly convex on $I$.
\end{cor}

\subsection{Convexifying polynomials in several variables}\label{Sect3}

We will show that the function $\varphi _N$ in $n$ variables is strongly convex on a compact convex set $X\subset\mathbb{R}^n$, provided $f$ is a polynomial positive on $X$ and $N$ is suficiently large.

Let
$f\in \mathbb R [x]$ be a real polynomial in $x=(x_1, \ldots , x_n)$ of the form
\begin{equation}\label{funkcja f}
f=\sum_{j=0}^d\sum_{|\nu |=j}a_{\nu }x^\nu ,
\end{equation}
where $a_\nu  \in \mathbb R,$ $x^\nu =x^{\nu_{1}}_1\cdots x^{\nu_{n}}_n$ and $|\nu |=\nu _1 + \cdots + \nu _n$ for $\nu =(\nu _1, \cdots , \nu _n)\in \mathbb N^n$ (we assume that $0\in \mathbb N$).
For $R>0$ we denote
$$
D_n (f,R):=\max \bigg\{1,\sum_{j=1}^d\sum_{|\nu |=j}j|a_ \nu |R^{j-1};\sum_{j=1}^d\sum_{|\nu |=j}j(j-1)|a_ \nu |R^{j-2}\bigg\}.
$$

\begin{tw}\label{uwypuklanie na zwartym}
Let $f\in \mathbb R [x]$ be a polynomial which is positive on a compact and convex set $X\subset \mathbb R^n$. Let $R=\max\{|x|: x \in X\}$ and
$$0<m\leq \min\{f(x): x\in X\}.$$
Than for any $\xi\in \mathbb R^n$, any $D \geq D_n (f,R)$ and any real $N> \mathcal{N}(m,D)$ the function $\varphi _{N,\xi}(x):=e^{N|x-\xi|^{2}}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{tw}

\begin{proof}
 Let
\begin{equation}\label{eqdefA}
A:=\{(\alpha,\beta) \in \mathbb R^n \times \mathbb R^n: \langle \alpha, \beta \rangle=0,\; |\beta|=1\},
\end{equation}
where $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle$ denotes the standard scalar product on $\mathbb R^n.$ Set
$$\gamma _{\alpha, \beta}(t):=\beta t + \alpha, \ \ t\in \mathbb R.$$
Clearly, the family of all curves $\gamma _{\alpha, \beta}$, where $(\alpha,\beta)\in A$ describes all affine lines in $\mathbb R^n.$
Denote by   $B\subset A$ the set of all $(\alpha,\beta)\in A$ such that the line parametrized by $\gamma _{\alpha, \beta}$ intersects the set X. Then $B$ is a compact set and $$B\subset \{(\alpha ,\beta )\in A: |\alpha |\leq R\}.$$
We will prove that for any $(\alpha ,\beta )\in B$ and $N > \mathcal{N}(m,D)$ the function $\varphi_{N,\xi} \circ \gamma _{ \alpha , \beta }$ is strongly convex on
$$I_{\alpha ,\beta }:=\{t\in \mathbb R: \gamma_{\alpha ,\beta }(t) \in X\}.$$
Because $X$ is a compact and convex set, so $I_{\alpha ,\beta }$ is a closed interval or only one point.

It is obvious that for $(\alpha;\beta) \in B$ the set $\{t\in \mathbb R: |\gamma _{\alpha ,\beta }(t)|\leq R\}$ is an interval, which contains the point 0 or it is equal to $\{0\}$. Denote  this interval by $[-R_{\alpha ,\beta },R_{\alpha ,\beta }]$ (under convention $[0,0]=\{0\}$). Then
$$I_{\alpha ,\beta }\subset [-R_{\alpha ,\beta },R_{\alpha ,\beta }]\subset [-R;R].$$

Let $f$ be of the form (\ref{funkcja f}). Than for $t\in I_{\alpha, \beta}$ we have
$|\gamma _{\alpha ,\beta } (t)| \leq R $.
Let us fix $(\alpha, \beta) \in B$.
Then
$$
|(f\circ \gamma _{\alpha ,\beta })'(t)|\leq \sum_{j=1}^d\sum_{|\nu |=j}j|a_ \nu |R^{j-1}
$$
and
$$
|(f\circ \gamma _{\alpha ,\beta })''(t)|\leq \sum_{j=1}^d\sum_{|\nu |\leq j}j(j-1)|a_ \nu |R^{j-2}.
$$
Consequently,
$$
|(f\circ \gamma _{\alpha ,\beta })'(t)|\leq D, \ \ \ |(f\circ \gamma _{\alpha ,\beta })''(t)|\leq D \ \ \ \hbox{for} \ \ \ t\in I_{\alpha, \beta}.$$

Take any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$, then
\begin{multline*
|\gamma _{\alpha ,\beta }(t)-\xi|^2=\langle \beta t+\alpha-\xi ,\beta t+\alpha-\xi \rangle \\
= t^2-2\langle \beta,\xi\rangle t+|\alpha| ^2-2\langle \alpha,\xi\rangle+|\xi|^2
\end{multline*
then for $p=-2\langle \beta,\xi\rangle$ and $q=|\alpha| ^2-2\langle \alpha,\xi\rangle+|\xi|^2$, we have $p^2\leq 4q$ and
$$
\varphi _N \circ \gamma _{\alpha, \beta}(t)=e^{N(t^2+pt+q)}f(\gamma _{\alpha, \beta}(t)).
$$
So, by Lemma {\ref{lemat dla funkcji2}} we get that $\left(\varphi _N \circ \gamma _{\alpha, \beta}\right)''(t)\geq  -\frac{D^2}{m}-D+2Nm>0$ for $t\in I_{\alpha,\beta}$ and $\varphi_{N,\xi}$ is strongly convex on $X$,
 provided $N>\mathcal{N}(m,D)$.
\end{proof}
From Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym}  we obtain the following corollary.

\begin{cor}\label{uwypuklanie na zwartymcor2}
Let $f\in \mathbb R [x]$  and let  $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a compact and convex set. Let $R=\max\{|x|: x \in X\}$ and let $m\in \mathbb{R}$ be a constant such that
$$
m\leq \min\{f(x): x\in X\}.
$$
Than for any $D> D_n (f,R)$ and any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$, the function
$$
\varphi_\xi(x):=e^{|x-\xi|^2}[f(x)-m+D], \quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{cor}

By a similar argument as in the proof of Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym}, we obtain the following fact.

\begin{rem}\label{uwypuklanie na zwartymrem}
Let $f:\mathbb{R}^n\to \mathbb{R}$ be a function of class $C^2$ and let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a compact and convex set. Assume that $m,D\in \mathbb{R}$ are numbers satisfying
$$
m < \min\{f(x): x\in X\}
$$
and the first and second directional derivatives of $f$ in directions of vectors of length $1$, are bounded by $D$ on $X$. Then the function
$$
\varphi_\xi(x)=e^{|x-\xi|^2}[f(x)-m+D], \quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n, \quad \xi\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{rem}

\subsection{Convexifying polynomials with integer coefficients}\label{SectINTEGER}

For actual applications  of  Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym} it is important to compute  the number $\mathcal{N}(m,D)$
for a given  convex semialgebraic set $X $
and a polynomial $f$ which is positive on $X$. Hence
the main  difficulty is to compute (or rather estimate)  $m=\min\{f(x):x\in X\}$ and $R=\max\{|x|:x\in X\}$. This actually possible if we suppose that
$f$ has integer coefficients and $X$ is described by  equations and inequalities  with integer coefficients.

 More precisely, let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$, $n\ge 2$, be a compact semialgebraic set of the form
\begin{multline}\label{formXc}
X=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:g_1(x)=0,\ldots,g_l(x)=0,g_{l+1}(x)\geq 0,
\ldots,\\
g_k(x)\geq 0\},
\end{multline}
where $g_1,\ldots,g_k\in \mathbb{Z}[x]$.
Under the above notations
G. Jeronimo, D.~Perrucci, E.~Tsigaridas in \cite{JPT} proved that

\begin{tw}\label{uwypuklaniecalkowitychna zwartym}
Let $f, g_1,\ldots,g_k\in \mathbb{Z}[x]$ be polynomials with degrees bound by an even integer $d$ and coefficients of absolute values at most $H$, and let $\tilde H=\max\{H,2n+2k\}$. If $f(x)>0$ for $x\in X$ and $X$ of the form \eqref{formXc} is compact, then
$$
\min\{f(x):x\in X\}\geq \left(2^{4-\frac{n}{2}}\tilde H d^n\right)^{-n2^nd^n}.
$$
\end{tw}

For a positive real number $H$ and positive integers $d,n,k$ we put
$$
\frak{b}(n,d,H,k)=\left(2^{4-\frac{n}{2}}\max\{H,2n+2k\}d^n\right)^{-n2^nd^n}
$$

From Theorems \ref{uwypuklaniecalkowitychna zwartym} and \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym} we immediately obtain

\begin{tw}\label{uwypuklanie na zwartym calk}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a compact and convex semialgebraic set of the form \eqref{formXc} and let $f, g_1,\ldots,g_k\in \mathbb{Z}[x]$ be polynomials with degrees bound by an even integer $d $ and coefficients of absolute values at most $H$.
 Set
$$
R=\sqrt{\big[\frak{b}(n+1,\max\{d,4\},H,k+2)\big]^{-1}-1},\quad m=\frak{b}(n.d,H,k).
$$
Then
\begin{equation}\label{boundR}
\max\{|x|:x\in X\}\leq R.
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $f(x)>0$ for $x\in X$, then for any $D \geq D_n \left(f,R\right)$,  $N> \mathcal{N}\left(m,D\right)$  and for any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$
the function $$\varphi _{N,\xi}(x):=e^{N|x-\xi|^{2}}f(x)$$ is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{tw}

\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{uwypuklaniecalkowitychna zwartym} we have $0<m\leq \min\{f(x):x\in X\}$.
Let
$$
Y=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb R^n\times\mathbb R:x\in X,\,(1+|x|^2)y^2-1=0,\,y\ge 0\},
$$
and let $h(x,y)=y^2$. Then $Y\subset \mathbb R^{n+1}$ is a compact semialgebraic set defined by $k+2$ polynomial equations and inequalities of degrees bounded by $\max\{d,4\}$. Moreover, the absolute values of coefficients of those polynomials and $h$ are bounded by $H$. Then, by Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym calk},
$$
\min\{h(x,y):(x,y)\in Y\}\geq \frak{b}(n+1,\max\{d,4\},H,k+2)
$$
and consequently we obtain \eqref{boundR}. Summing up, Theorem \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartym} gives the assertion.
\end{proof}

\section{Convexifying polynomials on non-compact sets}\label{Sect44}

In this section we will show that the function $\varphi _N(x)=e^{N|x|^2}f(x)$ in $n$ variables is strongly convex on a closed and convex set $X\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ (not necessary compact), provided the polynomial $f$ takes values larger than a certain number $m>0$, the leading form of a polynomial $f$ has only positive values and $N$ is suficiently large.

\subsection
 Convexifying polynomials in one variable}

For a polynomial $f\in\mathbb R[t]$ of the form $f(t)=a_0t^d+a_1t^{d-1}+\cdots+a_d$, $a_0,\ldots,a_d\in\mathbb R$, $a_0\ne 0$, we put
$$
K(f):=2\max_{1\leq i\leq d}\left|\frac{a_i}{a_0}\right|^{1/i}.
$$

\begin{lemat}\label{K(g)<K(f)var}
Let $f\in \mathbb{R}[t]$ be a polynomial of degree $d>0$ which is positive on a closed interval $I\subset \mathbb R$ (not necessary compact). Let $m\in\mathbb R$ be a positive number such that
$$
\inf\{f(t):t\in I\}\geq m.
$$
Let $g_N\in\mathbb R[t]$ be a polynomial of the form
$$
g_N=2Nf^2-(f')^2+ff'',
$$
and let $\Theta_N\in\mathbb{R}[t,\xi]$ be a polynomial of the form
\begin{equation}\label{thetaNformvar}
\Theta _N(t,\xi):=4N^2(t-\xi)^2f(t)+4N(t-\xi)f'(t)+2Nf(t)+f''(t)
\end{equation}
for $N\in \mathbb{R}$ and $N \geq 1$. Then
for $N\geq \mathcal{N}(m,D)$, where $D\geq D_1(f,R)$ and $R\geq \max\{K(f),K(g_1)\}$, we  have
$$
\Theta_N(t,\xi)>0\quad\hbox{for }(t,\xi)\in I\times \mathbb R.
$$
\end{lemat}

\begin{proof}
Consider the following quadratic function in $x$
$$
4N^2x^2f(t)+4Nxf'(t)+2Nf(t)+f''(t).
$$
Then its discrirminant is of the form $\Delta(t)=-16N^2g_N(t)$.
Take $R\geq \max\{K(f),K(g_1)\}$, $D\geq D_1(f,R)$ and $N>\mathcal{N}(m,D)$. Then we have
$$
g_N(t)\geq 2Nf^2(t)-D^2-f(t)D\geq f^2(t)\left(2N-\tfrac{D^2}{m^2}-\tfrac{D}{m}\right)>0
$$
for $t\in I$, $|t|\leq R$. On the other hand $g_N(t)\geq g_1(t)>0$ for $t\in I$, $|t|\geq R$. So $\Delta(t)<0$ for $t\in I$ and we deduce the assertion.
\end{proof}

\begin{tw}\label{thm3unboundedvar}
Let $f \in \mathbb R[t] $ be a polynomial of degree $d>0$ and let $I\subset \mathbb{R}$ be a closed interval (not necessary compact). Assume that there exists $m\in \mathbb R$ such that
$$
0<m\leq \inf\{f(t): t\in I\}.
$$
Let $R>\max\{K(f),K(2f^2-(f')^2+ff'')$ and $D\geq D_1(f,R)$.
Then for any $N\in \mathbb{R}$, $N\geq \mathcal{N}(m,D)$, and any $\xi\in\mathbb R$ the function
$$
\varphi_{N,\xi}(t)=e^{N(t-\xi)^2}f(t)
$$
is strongly convex on $I$.
\end{tw}

\begin{proof}
It suffices to observe that $\varphi''_{N,\xi}(t)=e^{N|t-\xi|^2}\Theta_N(t,\xi)$ and apply Lemma \ref{K(g)<K(f)var}.
\end{proof}

\subsection
Convexifying polynomials in several variables}

\begin{tw}\label{convexonconvexsetnewvar}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a convex closed set. Assume that
$f$ is a polynomial of degree $d>0$ which is positive on~$X$,
\begin{equation}\label{assumptioncompactvar}
f_d^{-1}(0) = \{0\}
\end{equation}
and there exists $m>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{estfcompact1var}
\inf \{f(x):x\in X\} \ge m.
\end{equation}
Then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb N$ such that for any integer $N\geq N_0$ and any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$
 the function $\varphi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{N|x-\xi|^2}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{tw}

\begin{proof}
Take any line of the form $\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)=\beta t +\alpha$, where $\alpha,\beta\in\mathbb R^n$, $|\beta|=1$ and $\langle \alpha,\beta\rangle=0$. Then
$$
(\varphi_{N,\xi}\circ \gamma_{\alpha,\beta})(t)=e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2-2\langle \beta,\xi\rangle t-2\langle\alpha,\xi\rangle)}f(\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)).
$$
Then
\begin{equation*}\label{eqbis}
\begin{split}
(\varphi_{N,\xi}\circ \gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)=&e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2-2\langle \beta,\xi\rangle t-2\langle\alpha,\xi\rangle)}[4N^2(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})(t)y^2\\
&+4N(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})'(t)y+ 2N(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})(t)\\
&+(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)],
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $y=t+\langle\beta,\xi\rangle$. Consider the function in the square bracket as a quadratic function in $y$. Then its discriminant is of the form
$$
\Delta=-16N^2[2N(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})^2(t)+(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})(t)(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)-((f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})'(t))^2].
$$
Note that $(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})'(t)$ and $(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)$ are the first and the second directional derivatives of $f$ at $\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)$ in the direction $\beta$ and $|\beta|=1$.

Observe that there exists $N_0$ such that for any $N\geq N_0$ we have $\Delta<0$. Indead, it suffices to prove that for any $x\in X$ and any $\beta \in\mathbb R^n$, $|\beta|=1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqvar1}
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2>0.
\end{equation}
If $f_d(x)<0$ for $x\in\mathbb R^n\setminus \{0\}$ then the set $X$ is compact and the inequality follows from the assumption that $f(x)\geq m$ for $x\in X$. Indead, let $D\geq \max \{|\partial _\beta f(x)|,|\partial^2_\beta f(x)|\}$ for $x\in X$, $|\beta|=1$. Since $X$ is compact, then
$$
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2\ge 2Nm^2-mD-D^2>0
$$
for $N>\mathcal{N}(m,D)$. This gives \eqref{eqvar1}.

Consider the case when $f_d(x)>0$ for $x\in\mathbb R^n\setminus\{0\}$, and let
$$
f_{d*}=\inf \{f_d(x):x\in S_n\},
$$
where $S_n$ is the unit sphere in $\mathbb{R}^n$, i.e., $S_n=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:|x|=1\}$.

Let $f$ be a polynomial of the form \eqref{funkcja f}. We set
$$
\|f\|:
\sum_{|\nu|\leq d}|a_\nu|
$$
Then $\|f\|\geq \|f_d\|\geq f_{d*}$. If $f_{d*}>0$ then  we set
$$
\mathbb{K}(f):= \frac{2\|f\|}{f_{d*}}
$$
and
$$
m(f):=f_{d*}-\sum_{j=0}^{d-1}\mathbb{K}(f)^{j-d}\sum_{|\nu|=j}|a_\nu|.
$$

In the further part of the proof we will need the following lemma.

\begin{lemat}\label{lemmamestvar}
If $d=\deg f>0$ and $f_{d*}>0$, then $m(f)>0$ and $f(x)\geq m(f)|x|^d$ for any $x\in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $|x|\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$.
\end{lemat}

\begin{proof}
Put
$$
h(t):=f_{d*}t^d-\sum_{j=0}^{d-1}\left(\sum_{|\nu|=j}|a_\nu|\right)t^{j}.
$$
Since $\frac{\|f\|}{f_{d*}}\geq 1$, then
$$
K(h)=2\max_{1\leq i\leq d}\left|\frac{\sum_{|\nu|=d-i}|a_\nu|}{f_{d*}}\right|^{{1}/{i}}<  2\max_{1\leq i\leq d}\left|\frac{\|f\|}{f_{d*}}\right|^{{1}/{i}}=\mathbb{K}(f),
$$
and since $h'(t)>0$ for $t >K(h)$, then $h(|x|)\geq h(\mathbb{K}(f))>0$ for $|x|\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$. Moreover, $m(f)\mathbb{K}(f)^d=h(\mathbb{K}(f))$, so $m(f)>0$. On the other hand
$$
m(f)|x|^d\leq \left(f_{d*}-\sum_{j=0}^{d-1}|x|^{j-d}\sum_{|\nu|=j}|a_\nu|\right)|x|^d=h(|x|)\leq f(x)
$$
for $|x|\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$. This gives the assertion of Lemma \ref{lemmamestvar}.
\end{proof}

Take $R\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$, and $D\geq D_n(f,R)$ then for $N\geq \mathcal{N}(m,D)$ we have
$$
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2\geq 2Nm^2-mD-D^2>0
$$
for $|x|\leq R$.

For $|x|\geq R$, we have
\begin{multline*}
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2\\
\geq 2Nm^2(f)|x|^{2d}-m(f)|x|^dD_n(f,|x|)-D_n^2(f,|x|).
\end{multline*}
Since for $|x|\geq 1$,
$$
D_n(f,|x|)\leq D_n(f,1)|x|^{d-1},
$$
then for $|x|\geq R$ and $|\beta|=1$ we have
\begin{multline*}
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2\\
\geq 2Nm^2(f)|x|^{2d}-m(f)D_n(f,1)|x|^{2d-1}-D_n^2(f,1)|x|^{2d-2}\\
\geq |x|^{2d}[2Nm^2(f)-m(f)D_n(f,1)-D_n^2(f,1)]>0.
\end{multline*}
for $N>\mathcal{N}(m(f),D_n(f,1))$. This gives \eqref{eqvar1}. Moreover, there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that
$$
2Nf(x)^2+f(x)\partial^2_\beta f(x)-(\partial_\beta f(x))^2>\epsilon.
$$
for any $x\in X$ and $|\beta|=1$.

From \eqref{eqvar1} and the above there follows that $\Delta<-16N^2\epsilon$ for any $\alpha,\beta$ and $t$ such that $\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)\in X$. Since $f(x)\geq m$ for $x\in X$, then $(\varphi_{N,\xi}\circ \gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)\geq \tfrac{\epsilon}{m}$ if $\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)\in X$. This gives the assertion.
\end{proof}

By analogous argument as for Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar} and under notations of the proof  we obtain the following corollary.

\begin{cor}\label{uwypuklanie na wypuklymcor2}
Let $f\in \mathbb R [x]$ be a polynomial of degree $d$  and let  $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a convex and closed set.
Under assumptions of Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar} and notations of the proof,
for any $R\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$, $D\geq D_n(f,R)$ and
$N>\max\{\mathcal{N}(m,D),\mathcal{N}(m(f),D_n(f,1))\}$,  and any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$
 the function $\varphi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{N|x-\xi|^2}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$. In particular
 the function
$$
\varphi_\xi(x):=e^{|x-\xi|^2}[f(x)-m+D
$$
is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{cor}

The assumption \eqref{assumptioncompactvar}
  that $f_d(x)\ne 0$ for $x\ne 0$, in Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar},
  can not be omited as the following example shows.

\begin{exa}\label{exacounter}
Let $f\in \mathbb R[x,y,z]$ be a polynomial of the form
$$
f(x,y,z)=(y^2+z^2+1)\left[(x-1)^2(x+1)^2 +(yz+1)^2+y^2\right].
$$
Since $(y^2+z^2+1)\left[(yz+1)^2+y^2\right]\ge \frac{1}{2}$ for $(y,z)\in\mathbb R^2$ then we easily see that
$$
f(x,y,z)\ge \tfrac{1}{2}\quad \hbox{for }(x,y,z)\in\mathbb R^3.
$$
Note that $\deg f=6$, and the leading form $f_6(x,y,z)=(y^2+z^2)(x^4+y^2z^2)$ has nontrivial zeroes.

Now take any $N\in \mathbb R$ and $\varphi_N(x,y,z)=e^{N(x^2+y^2+z^2)}f(x,y,z)$.
Then for $\xi\ne 0$ we have
$$
\varphi_N(0,\xi^{-1},-\xi)=e^{N(\xi^{-2}+\xi^2)}(\xi^{-2}+\xi^2+1)(1+\xi^{-2})
$$
and
$$
\varphi_N(-1,\xi^{-1},-\xi)=\varphi_N(1,\xi^{-1},-\xi)=e^{N(\xi^{-2}+\xi^2)}(\xi^{-2}+\xi^2+1)e^N\xi^{-2}.
$$
Hence for sufficiently large $\xi$,
$$
\varphi_N(-1,\xi^{-1},-\xi)=\varphi_N(1,\xi^{-1},-\xi)<\varphi_N(0,\xi^{-1},-\xi),
$$
therefore $\varphi_N$ can  not be a convex function.
\end{exa}

The assumption \eqref{assumptioncompactvar} in Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar}, cannot be  replaced by a condition $\lim_{|x|\to\infty} f(x)=\infty$.
Indead, consider a modification of the previous example of the form
$$
f_k(x,y,z)=(y^2+z^2+1)^k\left[(x-1)^2(x+1)^2 +(yz+1)^2+y^2\right],
$$
where $k\geq 2$. Then $\lim_{|(x,y,z)|\to\infty} f(x,y,z)=\infty$ and the function $\varphi_N(x,y,z)=e^{N(x^2+y^2+z^2)}f_k(x,y,z)$ is not convex for any $N\in\mathbb R$ by the previous argument.

It turns out that the use of a double exponential function leads to a convexity of an appropriate function on $X$.
We show it in the next section.

\section{Double exponential convexifying polynomials}\label{secdoubleexp}

In this section, without the assumption that the leading form of a polynomial $f\in\mathbb R[x]$ in $n$ variables has only positive values, we will show that the function $\varPhi _N(x)=e^{e^{N|x|^2}}f(x)$  is strongly convex on a closed and convex semialgebraic set $X\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ (not necessary compact), provided the polynomial $f$ takes positive values on $X$ and $N$ is suficiently large.

\begin{tw}\label{tedoubleexp}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a closed and convex semialgebraic set, and let $f\in\mathbb R[x]$ be a polynomial which has only positive values on $X$. Then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb R$ such that for any $N\geq N_0$ the function $\varPhi _N(x)=e^{e^{N|x|^2}}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{tw}

\begin{proof}
Let $f$ be of the form \eqref{funkcja f}, $d=\deg f$. Then $f(x)$,
, the first and second directional derivatives of $f$ in directions of vectors of length $1$ at $x\in X$, are bounded by
 $\tilde D(1+|x|^d)$, where
$$
\tilde D:=|a_0|+\sum_{|\nu|=1}|a_\nu|+\sum_{j=2}^d\sum_{|\nu |=j}j(j-1)|a_ \nu |.
$$

Take an affine line in $\mathbb R^n$ of the for
$$
\gamma _{\alpha, \beta}(t):=\beta t + \alpha, \ \ t\in \mathbb{R},
$$
where $(\alpha,\beta)\in A$ and the set $A$ is defined in \eqref{eqdefA}. Then $|\beta|=1$, $\langle \alpha,\beta\rangle=0$, and $|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^2=t^2+|\alpha|^2$.
Let write the second derivative of $\varPhi_N\circ \gamma_{\alpha,\beta}$ in the form
$$
(\varPhi_N\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)=e^{e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}}(a(t) t^2 +b(t)t +c(t)),
$$
where
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
  a(t) & = 4N^2(e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}+e^{2N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)})f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t),
  \\
b(t) & =  4Ne^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})'(t),
\\
c(t) & = 2Ne^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)
+(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The discriminant of the polynomial
$
P_t(\lambda) = a(t)\lambda^2 + b(t)\lambda+c(t)
$
is of the form
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Delta=16N^2e^{2N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}
&\left[\left((f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})'(t)\right)^2\right.
\\
&-f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)\left(1- e^{-N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}\right)\\
&\left.-2N(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})^2(t)\left(1+ e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}\right)\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
So, by the choice of the
number $\tilde D$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Delta\leq 32N^2e^{2N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}&\left[ \tilde D^2\left(1+|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^d\right)^2\right.\\
&\;\; \left.-N(f\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})^2(t)\left(1+ e^{N|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^2}\right)
\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation*}

Since the set $X$ is semialgebraic and $f^{-1}(0)\cap X=\emptyset$, then by H\"ormander-{\L}ojasiewicz inequality, see eg. \cite[Corollary 2.4]{KS0}, there exist $C,K,\mathcal{L}>0$, where $K,\mathcal{L}\in \mathbb{Z}$, $K\geq d$, depend on $d$ and the {\it complexity}  of $X$, (i.e., degrees and the number of polynomials describing $X$)   such that
$$
f(x)\geq C\left({1+|x|^K}\right)^{-\mathcal{L}}\quad \hbox{for }x\in X.
$$
Moreover, the numbers $K,\mathcal{L}$ are effectively computable.
By the above,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Delta\leq 32N^2e^{2N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}\left({1+|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^K}\right)^{-\mathcal{L}}&\left[ \tilde D^2\left(2+|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^K\right)^{\mathcal{L}+2}\right.
\\
&\left.\;\; -NC^
\left(1+ e^{N|\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}(t)|^2}\right)\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
If $N$ is large enough, then for   any $x\in\mathbb R^n$ we have $$\tilde D^2(2+|x|^K)^{\mathcal{L}+2}<NC^2(1+e^{N|x|^2}).$$
Therefore  $\Delta<0$, so
$P_t(\lambda) >0$ for any $\lambda \in \mathbb R$.
Consequently
$$
(\varPhi_N\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)=e^{e^{N(t^2+|\alpha|^2)}}P_t(t) >0,
$$
 for $t\in \mathbb R$. Note that  $\lim_{|t|\to \infty}(\varPhi_N\circ \gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)=+\infty$, hence  there exists $\mu>0$ such that $(\varPhi_N\circ\gamma_{\alpha,\beta})''(t)\geq \mu $ for $t\in\mathbb R$. Moreover, the number $\mu$  can  be chosen independet of $\gamma_{\alpha,\beta}$. This gives the assertion.
\end{proof}

\begin{rem}\label{remeffectcomputed}
The number $N_0$ in Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp} can be effectively computed, provided we can estimate the constant $C$. More precisely, under notations in the proof, if $k > (\mathcal{L}+2)K$, then for $|x|\geq 1$ we have
$$
NC^2\left(1+e^{N|x|^2}\right)\geq NC^2+\sum_{j=0}^k\frac{C^2N^{j+1}}{j!}|x|^{2j}>\tilde D^2\left(2+|x|^K\right)^{\mathcal{L}+2}
$$
for
$$
N>k!\max_{i=0,\ldots,\mathcal{L}+2}\left({\tilde D^2C^{-2}2^{\mathcal{L}+2-i}\binom{\mathcal{L}+2}{i}}\right)
$$
If additionally $N\geq \tilde D^2 C^{-2}3^{\mathcal{L}+2}$, then the above inequality holds for any
 $x\in\mathbb R^n$.
\end{rem}

\begin{rem}\label{remdoubleexp}
We cannot omit the assumption in Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp} that the set $X$ is semialgebraic. For instance if $f(x,y)=-y^2+y$ and $X=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb R^2:e^{-e^x}\leq y\leq \tfrac{1}{2},\; x\geq 0\}$, then $f(x,y)>0$ on $X$, but the function $\varPhi_N(x,y)$ is not convex on $X$ for any $N\in \mathbb R$.
\end{rem}

Assuming that $f(x)\geq m$ on $X$, for some $m>0$, we can omit the assumption in Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp} on semialgebraicity of $X$. More precisely, by a similar argument as in the proof of Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp} we obtain

\begin{tw}\label{tedoubleexp2}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a closed and convex set, and let $f\in\mathbb R[x]$ be a polynomial such that $f(x)\geq m$ for $x\in X$ and some $m>0$. Then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb R$ such that for any $N\geq N_0$ the function $\varPhi _N(x)=e^{e^{N|x|^2}}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{tw}

\begin{rem}\label{tedoubleexp2bis}
By a similar argument as for the proof of Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp2} we obtain that the assertion of this Theorem occurs not only for the function $\varPhi_{N}$ but also for the function $\Phi_{N}(x)=e^{Ne^{|x|^2}}f(x)$. More precisely, we have:

Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a closed and convex set, and let $f\in\mathbb R[x]$ be a polynomial such that $f(x)\geq m$ for $x\in X$ and some $m>0$. Then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb R$ such that for any $N\geq N_0$ the function $\Phi _{N}$
 is strongly convex on $X$.
\end{rem}

A similar argument as for Theorem \ref{tedoubleexp} gives the following theorems

\begin{tw}\label{convexonconvexsetnewxdoublevarsemi}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a convex closed semialgebraic set and let $r>0$. If $f$ is a polynomial such that
\begin{equation}\label{estfcompact1xdoublevarsemi}
f(x)>0\quad\hbox{for }x\in X,
\end{equation}
then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb N$ such that for any integer $N\geq N_0$ and any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$, $|\xi|\leq r$,
 the function $\varPhi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{e^{N|x-\xi|^2}}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.

Moreover, there exists $\alpha\in\mathbb R$ such that the function
$$
\varPhi_\xi(x)=e^{e^{|x-\xi|^2}}[f(x)+\alpha], \quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is strongly convex on $X$, provided $ \xi\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $|\xi|\leq r$.
\end{tw}

\begin{tw}\label{convexonconvexsetnewxdouble}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a convex closed set and let $r>0$. Assume that
$f$ is a polynomial of degre $d>0$ such that
 there exists $m\in\mathbb R$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{estfcompact1xdouble}
0<m < \inf \{f(x):x\in X\}.
\end{equation}
Then there exists $N_0\in\mathbb N$ such that for any integer $N\geq N_0$ and any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$, $|\xi|\leq r$
 the function $\varPhi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{e^{N|x-\xi|^2}}f(x)$ is strongly convex on $X$.

Moreover, there exists $\alpha\in\mathbb R$ such that the function
$$
\varPhi_\xi(x)=e^{e^{|x-\xi|^2}}[f(x)+\alpha], \quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is strongly convex on $X$, provided $ \xi\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $|\xi|\leq r$.
\end{tw}

It is impossible to obtain $N$ in the above theorem, such that the function $\varPhi_{N,\xi}$ is convex for any $\xi\in X$ as the following example shows.

\begin{exa}\label{exacounter2}
Let $f\in \mathbb R[x,y,z]$ be a polynomial of the form
$$
f(x,y,z)=\left[(yz+1)^2+y^2\right]\left[\left(xz^2-1\right)^2\left(xz^2+1\right)^2 +y^2+z^2+1\right].
$$
Analogously as in Example \ref{exacounter}
 we see that
$$
f(x,y,z)\ge \tfrac{1}{2}\quad \hbox{for }(x,y,z)\in\mathbb R^3,
$$
and the leading form $f_{16}(x,y,z)=y^2z^{10}x^4$ has nontrivial zeroes.

Now take any $N\in \mathbb R$ and $\varPhi_N(x,y,z)=e^{e^{N(x^2+y^2+z^2)}}f(x,y,z)$.
Then for $\xi=(0,t^{-1},-t)$, $t>0$ we have
$$
\frac{\partial^2 \varPhi_{N,\xi}}{\partial x^2}(\xi)=e\left(2Nf(\xi)+\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2}(\xi)\right).
$$
Since
$$
f(\xi)=2t^{-2}+t^{-4}+1
$$
and
$$
\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial x^2}(\xi)=-4t^2,
$$
then
we easily see that $\frac{\partial^2 \varPhi_{N,\xi}}{\partial x^2}(\xi)<0$ for sufficiently large $t$. So, $\varPhi_{N,\xi}$ can not be a convex function.
\end{exa}

\begin{rem}\label{remtripleexpmotnotimproves}
It is worth noting that the use of triple exponential convexifying $\phi_N(x)=e^{e^{e^{N|x|^2}}}f(x)$ of a polynomial $f$ does not improve convexity of the function
  $\phi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{e^{e^{N|x-\xi|^2}}}f(x)$ regardless of $\xi\in X$.
\end{rem}

\section{Algorithm for searching lower critical points}\label{Algorithm0}

\subsection{Searching lower critical points in a compact set}

In this part we give an algorithm which produces, starting from an arbitrary point, a sequence of points converging to a lower critical point of a polynomial on a convex compact semialgebraic set. A similar algorithm was proposed in \cite{KS}.

Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a closed set and let $f$ be a function of class $C^1$ in a neighborhood $U\subset \mathbb R^n$ of  $X$.
We denote the set of lower critical points of the function $f$ on the set $X$ by $\Sigma _X f.$ It is obvious that the set of ordinary critical points $\Sigma f$ of the function $f$ is contained in the set $\Sigma _X f.$

Our algorithm for approximation of lower critical points  of $f$ is based on the iteration of computation of the smallest value of the strongly convex function $\varphi _{\xi }$ on the convex and compact set $X$. More precisely, let
$$
R\ge
\max\{|x|:x\in X\}
$$
 Take any polynomial $f\in\mathbb{R}[x]$ of the form \eqref{funkcja f}. Let
$$
m=-\sum_{j=0}^dR^j\sum_{|\nu |=j}|a_{\nu }|,
$$
and let
$$
D>D_n (f,2R).
$$
Then we have
$$
f(x)-m+D\geq D \quad\hbox{for }x\in X,
$$
and from Corollary \ref{uwypuklanie na zwartymcor2}, we have that for any $\xi\in X$, the function
$$
\varphi_\xi(x)=e^{|x-\xi|^2}[f(x)-m+D],\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is $\mu$-strongly convex on $X$ for some $\mu>0$. Since we are looking for lower critical points of $ f $, so without loss of generality, we may assume that $-m+D=0$, therefore
$$
\varphi_\xi(x)=e^{|x-\xi|^2}f(x),\quad x\in \mathbb{R}^n
$$
is $\mu$-strongly convex function in $X$ for any $\xi\in X$.

Any strictly convex function $\varphi$ defined on a compact and convex set $X$ has the unique point, denoted by $\operatorname{argmin}_X \varphi$, in which the function $\varphi$ has the minimal value on the set $X$. Therefore, chosing an arbitrary point $a_0 \in X$, we can determine by induction a sequence $a_\nu \in X$, $\nu\in\mathbb{N}$, in the following way
\begin{equation}\label{eqanu}
a_\nu :=\operatorname{argmin}_X \varphi_{a_{\nu -1}}\quad \hbox{for }\nu \geq 1.
\end{equation}

\begin{tw}\label{approxi}
Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a compact convex semialgebraic set and $f:\mathbb R ^n \rightarrow \mathbb R$ a positive polynomial on $X$. Let $a_\nu $ be a sequence defined as $a_ \nu :=\operatorname{argmin}_X \varphi_{a_{\nu -1}}$ with $a_0 \in X.$ Then the limit $$
a_*=\lim_{\nu \rightarrow \infty } a_ \nu
$$
exist and $a_* \in \Sigma _X f.$
\end{tw}

The proof of Theorem \ref{approxi} follows word by word
 the proof of Theorem 6.5 in \cite{KS}, where we should use the following  three lemmas instead of the corresponding  lemmas in \cite{KS}.

\begin{lemat}
For any $\nu \in \mathbb N$, we have
$$|a_{\nu +1}-a_{\nu }|=\operatorname{dist}(a_\nu , f^{-1}(f(a_{\nu +1})) \cap X).$$
\end{lemat}

\begin{lemat}\label{lemma44x}
For any $\nu \in \mathbb N$ we have
$$f(a_{\nu +1})\leq \frac{f(a_\nu )-\frac{\mu }{2}|a_{\nu +1}-a_\nu |^2}{e^{|a_{\nu +1}-a_\nu |^2}}.$$
In particular the sequence $f(a_\nu )$ is decreasing.
\end{lemat}
\begin{proof}
Since $\varphi _\xi $ is strongly convex, the definition of $a_{\nu +1}$ implies that the function
$$
[0,1] \ni t\mapsto \varphi _{a_\nu }(a_\nu +t(a_{\nu +1}-a_\nu ))
$$
decrease, so $\langle a_{\nu +1}-a_{\nu }, \nabla \varphi _{a_{\nu }}(a_{\nu +1 })\rangle \leq 0$.
Again by the fact  that  $\varphi _{a_\nu }$ is $\mu$-strictly convex, we get
$$
f({a_\nu })\geq f(a_{\nu +1})e^{|a_{\nu }-a_{\nu +1}|^2}+\frac{\mu}{2}|a_{\nu }-a_{\nu +1} |.$$
This gives the assertion.
\end{proof}

We can also addapt the following lemma (\cite[Lemma 6.3]{KS}).
\begin{lemat}
Let $f:[0,\eta ]\rightarrow \mathbb R$ be a $C^1$ function such that $0<f\leq C$ and $f'\leq -\eta $ on $[0,\eta ]$ for some $C\geq \frac{1}{2}$ and $\eta >0.$
Assume that $\varphi (x)=e^{x^2}f(x)$ is strictly convex on $[0,\eta ].$ Then $b_1:=\operatorname{argmin}_{[0,\eta ]}\varphi \geq \frac{\eta }{2C}.$ Hence $f(0)-f(b_1)\geq \frac{\eta ^2}{2C}.$
\end{lemat}

\begin{rem}\label{effectivemin}
The function $\varphi_{a_{\nu-1}}$ is defined by using the function $\exp$.
However, to determine the minimum value of this function on a compact convex semialgebraic set $X$ it is enough to solve only polynomial equations and inequalities. More precisely, the set $X$ is the union of a finite collection of basic semialgebraic sets, so we may assume that
$$
a_\nu\in X=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:g_1(x)\geq 0,\ldots,g_k(x)\geq 0\},
$$
where $g_1,\ldots,g_k\in\mathbb{R}[x]$. Then
$$
 X=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:g_1(x)e^{|x-a_{\nu-1}|^2}\geq 0,\ldots,g_k(x)e^{|x-a_{\nu-1}|^2}\geq 0\}.
$$
Therefore, when applying Lagrange Multipliers or Karush-Kuhn-Tucker Theorem to compute the point $a_\nu$ it is enought to solve a system of polynomial equations and inequalities.
\end{rem}

\subsection{Searching lower critical points in an unbounded set}

Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be a convex and closed semialgebraic set. Let $f\in \mathbb R[x]$ be a polynomial of degree $d>0$ of the form \eqref{funkcja f} and let $f_d$ be the leading form of $f$. Assume that $f_{d*} >0$.

Then by Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewvar}, we may effectively compute a real number $N\geq 1$ such that the function $\varphi_{N,\xi}(x)=e^{N|x-\xi|^2}f(x)$ for $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$ is strongly convex on $X$. Moreover, $\varphi_{N,\xi}(x)\geq f(x)\geq m(f)|x|^d$ for $x\in X$, $|x|\geq \mathbb{K}(f)$, so we have
\begin{equation*}\label{factlim}
\lim_{x\in X,\,|x|\to\infty} \varphi_{N,\xi}(x)=+\infty.
\end{equation*}
Then we may uniquely determine the sequence
\begin{equation}\label{eqanu2}
a_\nu :=\operatorname{argmin}_{X} \varphi_{a_{\nu -1}}\quad \hbox{for }\nu \geq 1.
\end{equation}
Analogous argument  as for Theorem \ref{approxi} gives the following theorem.

\begin{tw}\label{approxi2}
Let $a_\nu $ be a sequence defined by \eqref{eqanu2},
Then the limit $$
a_*=\lim_{\nu \rightarrow \infty } a_ \nu
$$
exist and $a_* \in \Sigma _X f.$
\end{tw}

\begin{rem}\label{generalcase}
If $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ is a closed and convex semialgebraic set and a polynomial $f\in\mathbb R[x]$ is positive on $X$ and it is proper on $X$ (i.e., $\lim_{x\in X,\,|x|\to \infty}f(x)=+\infty$), then by Theorem \ref{convexonconvexsetnewxdoublevarsemi} one can repeat the argument from Theorem \ref{approxi} and obtain a sequence $a_\nu\in X$ such that $\lim_{\nu\to\infty}a_\nu=a_*\in\Sigma_Xf$.

If we assume only that $f(x)>0$ on $X$,
 then the sequence $a_\nu$ can tend to infinity. Moreover, in the construction of $a_\nu$ we have to change $N$ step by step
\end{rem}

Algebraic Geometry (math.AG); Classical Analysis and ODEs (math.CA)

Exponential convexifying of polynomials


Three problems on exponential bases

Abstract: We consider three special and significant cases of the following problem. Let D be a (possibly unbounded) set of finite Lebesgue measure in R^d. Find conditions on D for which the standard exponential basis on the unit cube of R^d is a frame, a Riesz sequence, or a Riesz basis on L^2(D).

\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}

We are interested in   the following  problem.
Let $D\subset\mathbb R^d$ be a   set of Lebesgue measure  $|D|<\infty$.
Let $E( \Z^d)=\{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}\}_{n\in\Z^d}$    be the standard exponential basis for the unit   cube $  \cal Q_d =[-\frac 12, \frac 12]^d$.
Can  $E(\Z^d)$ be frame, or a Riesz sequence, or a   Riesz basis for $L^2(D)$?

We have recalled definitions  and general facts about  frames, Riesz sequences and    Riesz bases   in  Section 2.

Our investigation was motivated  by the following  problems:

\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf P1.}] {\it  (The broken interval)}. Let    $ J= [0,\alpha)\cup [\alpha+r, L+r)$, with $0<\alpha<\, L$ and $r>0$.  For which values of the parameters   is the set $E(\Z)$ a Riesz basis,  a Riesz sequence or a frame  in $L^2(J)?$
\end{itemize}

 It is easy to verify that  $E(\Z)$ is a frame  on $J$ when $L+r\leq 1$  and it is a Riesz sequence when either $\alpha\ge 1$ of $L-\alpha\ge 1$ (see also Lemma \ref{L-dil-basis}). It is proved in \cite{Laba}  that $E(\Z)$ is an orthonormal  basis for $J$  if and only if     the measure of $J$  is $L=1$ and  the "gap" $  r$ is a non-negative  integer.

\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf P2.}] {\it  (The rotated square)}. Let   $Q_h= [-\frac h2, \frac h2]\times [-\frac h2, \frac h2]$ be a  square with side $h>0$. For $\theta\in [0, 2\pi)$, we let $\rho_\theta:\mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R^2$  be the rotation  $\rho_\theta(x,y)= (x\cos\theta-y\sin\theta, \ x\sin\theta+y\cos\theta)$.
For which values of $\theta $ is   $E(\Z^2)$   a Riesz basis,  a Riesz sequence or a frame on  $ \rho_\theta( Q_h)$?
\end{itemize}
 %

Also the solution to this problem is  trivial only for certain values of the parameters (for example, when $\theta$ is an integer multiple of $\frac \pi 2$).

\medskip
The next problem  was kindly suggested  by Chun Kit Lai.

\begin{itemize}
\item[{\bf P3.}] {\it  (The translated parallelepiped)}. Let  $P \subset \mathbb R^d$ be a parallelepiped with sides parallel to  the vectors $  v_1$, ...,\, $  v_d\in\mathbb R^d$.  Find conditions on  these vectors for which  that the set $E(\Z^d)$  is a  Riesz basis,   a  Riesz sequence, or a   frame in $L^2(P)$                                                                                .
\end{itemize}

We recall that a {\it lattice}   is the image of $\Z^d$ by a linear invertible transformation   \newline $B:\mathbb R^d\to\mathbb R^d$
 and we observe that
Problem 3 is equivalent to the following: {\it for which  lattices $\Lambda=B\Z^d$  is the set  $E(B\Z^d)=\{e^{2\pi i Bn\cdot x}\}_{n\in\Z^d}$  a  Riesz basis, or a  Riesz sequence, or a   frame in  $L^2(\cal Q_d)$?   }

Problem 3 is related to certain optimization problems on lattices that have deep applications in computer sciences and in cryptography. See Section  7.1 for details and references.

\medskip
We first prove necessary and sufficient  conditions for which $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence   or a frame on a given domain $D\subset \mathbb R^d$ and then we completely solve   Problems 1, 2 and 3.

 We      let \begin{equation}\label{e-Phi} \Phi(x)=\sum_{m\in\Z^d}   \chi_D(x+m), \end{equation} where      $\chi_D$  denotes   the characteristic function of   $D$. Note that $\Phi(x)$ only takes  non-negative integer values.  Our first result is  the following

\begin{theorem}
 \label{T-Riesz }
$E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(D)$
if and only if  there exist  constants $0<A\leq B <\infty$ for which $A\leq  \Phi(x) \leq B$ for a.e.   $x\in \cal Q_d $.

 \end{theorem}
That is, we prove that $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(D)$ if and only if   the  integer translates of $D$  (i.e., the sets
    $D+n=\{x+n,\, x\in D\}$, with $n\in\Z^d$) cover  $\mathbb R^d $  with the possible exception of  a set of measure zero.

     \medskip
It is interesting to compare  Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }  with results in \cite{AAC, K, GL}.
In these papers the authors consider  domains  that {\it multi-tile } $\mathbb R^d$, i.e.  bounded measurable sets  $S \subset\mathbb R^d$   for which   there exist a set  of translations $\Lambda $  and an  integer $h>0$    such that  $\sum_{\lambda\in\Lambda} \chi_{S+\lambda}(x)\equiv h$   a.e.; if $h=1$,  we  say that $S$  {\it  tiles} $\mathbb R^d$.
It is proved in   \cite[Theorem 1]{GL} and in  \cite[Theorem 1]{K} that bounded domains  that   multi-tile  $\mathbb R^d$ with a lattice of translation  have an exponential basis; in the recent \cite[Theorem 4.4] {AAC} the converse of \cite[Theorem 1]{K} is proved.

If $\Phi$ is   as in \eqref{e-Phi}  and     $\Phi(x)\equiv k$ a.e., then   $D$    multi-tiles $\mathbb R^d$ with lattice of translations $\Z^d$. By Theorem \ref{T-Riesz },   $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence on $L^2(D)$; when $D$ is bounded,   it is shown in  \cite[Theorem 1]{K}   that   $E(\Z^d)$ can be completed to an exponential  basis for $L^2(D)$, but when $D$ is not bounded an example in  \cite{AAC} shows that that may not be possible.

 \medskip

Next,  we investigate conditions for which  $E(\Z^d)$ is  a frame on   $D $.
The following   result is  proved in  \cite[Lemma 2.10]{GLi}. See also    the recent \cite[Theorem 2]{BHM}.
   \begin{theorem} \label{T-frame}
    $E(\Z^d)$ is a frame on $L^2( D)$ if and only if   for every   $ m,   s\in\Z^d$, with  $  m\ne   s$,
       we have that  \begin{equation}\label{e-ass-fr}
       |(D+  m)\cap (D+ s)|=0.
       \end{equation}
\end{theorem}
In other words,
  $E(\Z^d)$ is a frame in $L^2(D)$ if and only if the  integer translates of $D$ only overlap  on sets of measure zero. Equivalently, $E(\Z^d)$ is a frame on $L^2( D)$ if and only if $ \Phi(x) \leq 1$ for a.e. $x\in\mathbb R^d$.

\medskip
We finally prove the following

\begin{theorem}\label{T-basis} Assume that $|D|=1$. The following are equivalent
in $L^2(D)$:
\begin{itemize}\item [a)]
$E(\Z^d)$ is a frame
\item [b)] $E(\Z^d)$ is a complete
\item [c)] The integer translates of  $D$  tile   $\mathbb R^d$.
\item[d)] $E(\Z^d)$ is an orthonormal Riesz basis
\item[e)] $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence

\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}

We recall that a set   $\{w_i\}_{i\in I}$ is {\it complete} in a Hilbert space $ (H ,\  \l \ , \ \r_H)$ if and only if  $\l u, w_i\r_H=0$ for every $i\in I$  implies $u=0$.  A frame is complete but   the converse is not necessarily true.

B. Fuglede proved in \cite{F} that  if $\Lambda=A\Z^d$ is a lattice in $\mathbb R^d$,  the set $E(A\Z^d)$  is  an orthogonal exponential basis in $L^2(D)$  if and only if   $\{D +\mu\}_{\mu\in( A^t)^{-1} \Z^d }$ tiles $\mathbb R^d$.  Here, $(A^t)^{-1}$  denotes the inverse of the transpose of  $A$.
Thus,  the equivalence of  c) and d) in   Theorem \ref{T-basis} is  a special case of Fuglede's  theorem.
The connections between tiling  and   exponential bases are deep and interesting and  have been intensely investigated. We refer the reader to  the introduction and to the references cited in    \cite{BHM}. See also \cite{K2}.

\medskip
 This paper is organized as follows:
 in Section 2 we present  preliminary definitions and known results. We prove Theorems    \ref{T-Riesz }, \ref{T-frame} and \ref{T-basis} in Sections 3 and 4. We solve Problems 1, 2 and 3 in Sections  5, 6 and 7.

 \medskip \noindent
 {\it Acknowledgments.} The first author wishes to thank C.K. Lai for  bringing Problem 3 to our attention and E. Hernandez for  stimulating discussions that helped us improve the quality of this paper. We also  wish thank the anonymous referees for their thorough reading of our manuscript and for their valuable  suggestions.

\section{ Preliminary and notation}

  We denote with $x\cdot y= x_1y_1+\,...\,+ x_dy_d$  the   inner product of    $x=(x_1, ...,\, x_d)$, $y=(y_1, ...,y_d)\in\mathbb R^d$.

  We let  $\|f\|_2=\left(\int_{\mathbb R^d} |f(x)|^2 dx\right)^{\frac 12}$   be the  standard norm in  $L^2(\mathbb R^d)$; we let ${\bf c}=\{c_j\}_{j\in\Z^d}$ and we denote with   $\|{\bf c}\|_{\ell^2}=(\sum_{j\in\Z^d } |c_j|^2)^{\frac 12}$  the  standard norm in $\ell^2(\Z^d)$.   We denote with $\l f ,\, g \r_{2}=\int_{\mathbb R^d} f(x)\bar g(x)dx$   the  inner product   in $L^2(\mathbb R^d)$. When there is no ambiguity we will use the same notation also for the inner product in $\ell^2(\Z^d)$.

The Fourier transform of  a function $f\in L^2(\mathbb R^d)\cap L^1(\mathbb R^d)$ is $\hat f(x)=\int_{\mathbb R^d} f(t) e^{-2\pi i x\cdot t} dt. $

 We will  often say that a family of sets $\{D_\lambda\}_{\lambda\in\Lambda}$ {  covers}   $\mathbb R^d$  with the understanding that  $\mathbb R^d-\cup_{\lambda\in\Lambda} D_\lambda $ may be a  nonempty set of measure zero.

We use the notation   $\tau_w$ to denote the translation operator $g \to  g  (\cdot+w)$.

\subsection{Frames and Riesz bases}

 We have used the excellent textbooks \cite{Heil} and \cite{Cr} for most of the definitions  and preliminary results presented in this section.

 Let $H$ be a  separable Hilbert space  with inner product $\langle\ ,\ \rangle $  and norm $||\ ||=\sqrt{\l \ , \    \r} $.
 %
A sequence of vectors ${\mathcal V}= \{v_j\}_{j\in\Z} \subset H $   is a
 {\it frame} if
there exist  constants $0< A, \ B<\infty$    such that the following inequality holds  for every $w\in H$.
\begin{equation}\label{e2-frame}
 A||w||^2\leq  \sum_{j\in\Z} |\l  w, v_j\r |^2\leq B ||w||^2.
\end{equation}
 %

  We say that  ${\cal V}$  is a   {\it  tight frame } if $A=B$   and   is a {\it Parseval frame} if $A=B=1$.

The left inequality in \eqref{e2-frame} implies that  ${\cal V}$ is     complete    in $H$  but it may not be linearly independent. A {\it Riesz basis} is a linearly independent frame.

An equivalent definition of  Riesz basis is the following: the set
${\mathcal V}$ is a  {\it Riesz sequence}  if   there exists constants $0<A\leq B <\infty$ such that, for every finite set of coefficients $ \{a_j\}_{j\in J}\subset\mathbb C $,
we have that
\begin{equation}\label{e2- Riesz-sequence}
 A  \sum_{j\in J}   |a_j|^2   \leq  \left\Vert \sum_{j\in J}  a_j  v_j \right\Vert^2  \leq B \sum_{j\in J} |a_j|^2,
\end{equation}
and it is  {\it Riesz basis} if it also satisfies  \eqref{e2-frame}.
If ${\mathcal V}$ is a Riesz basis, the  constants $A$ and $B$ in \eqref{e2-frame} and \eqref{e2- Riesz-sequence}  are the same (see \cite[Proposition  3.5.5]{Cr}).

 An orthonormal  basis   is a Riesz basis; we can write   $w=\sum_{j\in\Z} \l v_j,  \, w\r v_j$ for every $v\in H$ and   this  representation formula  yields  the following important identities: for every $    w,\ z\in  H$,
\begin{equation}\label{e-Planch}
||w||^2= \sum_{n\in\Z } |\l v_n,\, w\r|^2, \quad \l w, z\r=   \sum_{n\in\Z }  \l v_n,\, w\r\overline{\l v_n, z\r}.
\end{equation}
The following useful  proposition can be found in  \cite[Prop. 3.2.8]{Cr}.
 \begin{proposition}\label{prop-C}  A sequence of unit vectors in $H$  is a Parseval frame if
and only if it is an orthonormal Riesz basis.
\end{proposition}

\medskip
Let $D\subset \mathbb R^d$ be a measurable set, with $|D|<\infty$.
An {\it exponential basis} of $L^2(D)$ is a Riesz basis made of  functions in the form of $  e^{2\pi i   x\cdot \lambda  }$, where    $ \lambda \in\mathbb R^d$.
Exponential bases are important in the applications because they allow one to represent   functions in $L^2(D)$ in a stable manner, with coefficients that are easy to calculate.

The following lemma is easy to prove   (see e.g   \cite[Prop. 2.1]{DK}).
\begin{lemma}\label{L-dil-basis} Let $D_1\subset D\subset D_2$ be measurable sets of $\mathbb R^d$ , with $|D_2|<\infty$.
 %
Let  ${\cal V}=\{ e^{2\pi i   x\cdot \lambda_n  }\}_{n\in\Z}$  be  Riesz basis of $L^2(D)$  with frame constants $0<A\leq B<\infty$; then, ${\cal V}$ is a Riesz sequence on $L^2(D_2)$ and a frame on  $L^2(D_1)$
 with the same frame constants.
\end{lemma}

 \subsection{The Beurling density}
In \cite{B, B1} A. Beurling   characterized sampling sets by means of their density.

For $h > 0$ and $x  \in\mathbb R^d$,  we let $Q _h(x)$ denote the  closed cube centered at $x$ with
side length $h$.
Let $\Lambda=\{\lambda_j\}_{j\in\Z}\subset  \mathbb R^d$ be    {\it uniformly discrete}, i.e., we assume that
$|\lambda_j-\lambda_k|\ge \delta>0$
  whenever $\lambda_j\ne\lambda_k$.  Following \cite{CDH} we denote with
\begin{align*} {\mathcal D}^+(\Lambda) &= \limsup_{h\to \infty} \frac{\sup_{x\in\mathbb R^d} |\Lambda\cap Q_h(x)|}{h^d}\\
{\mathcal D}^-(\Lambda) &= \liminf_{h\to \infty} \frac{\inf_{x\in\mathbb R^d} |\Lambda\cap Q_h(x)|}{h^d}
\end{align*}
 the upper and lower  density of $\Lambda$.
  If ${\mathcal D}^-(\Lambda)={\mathcal D}^+(\Lambda)$  we say that $\Lambda$ has {\it uniform Beurling density} ${\mathcal D}(\Lambda)$.

Theorem \ref{T-density-exp} below is a generalization of  theorems of Landau  and Beurling \cite{B, Landau} in dimension $d\ge 1$. See also \cite{NO} and  \cite[Sect. 2]{S}.

\begin{theorem}\label{T-density-exp}

If $E(\Lambda)=\{e^{2\pi i \lambda_j\cdot x}\}_{j\in\Z}$ is a frame in $L^2(D)$, then  ${\mathcal D}^-(\Lambda)\ge |D|$.
If  $E(\Lambda)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(D)$, then ${\mathcal D}^+(\Lambda)\leq |D|$.
\end{theorem}

Thus, a necessary condition for   $E(\Lambda)$ to be  a Riesz basis in $L^2(D)$  is  that ${\mathcal D} (\Lambda)= |D|$.  In the special case  of $\Lambda=\Z^d$ we have the following
\begin{corollary}\label{C-density}
If $E(\Z^d)$ is a frame in $L^2(D)$ then $|D|\leq 1$; if  $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence   in $L^2(D)$ then $|D|\ge 1$.
\end{corollary}

\subsection{Shift invariant spaces}
We let
$$
V^2(\varphi):=\overline{\Span \{\tau_k\varphi \}_{k\in\Z^d  } }
$$
where  $\varphi\in L^{2}(\mathbb R^d)$   and ``bar'' denotes the closure in $L^2(\mathbb R^d)$.
The space $  V^2(\varphi)$ is {\it shift-invariant}, i.e.  if $f\in V^2(\varphi)$  then also $\tau_m f\in V^2(\varphi)$ for every $m\in\Z^d$.
Shift-invariant spaces of functions appear naturally in signal theory and in other branches of applied sciences.
Following \cite{Aldroubi}, \cite{Christiansen}, \cite{CCS}
 we say that  the translates $\{ \tau_k\varphi \}_{k\in\Z^d}$ form a Riesz basis in $V^2 ( \varphi ) $ if there exist constants $0<A,\ B<\infty$ such that, for every   finite set of coefficients ${\bf d}= \{d_j\}  \subset\mathbb C $, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{E-p-basis-2}
A \|{\bf d}\|_{\ell^2} \leq \| \sum_j d_j  \tau_j\varphi  \|_{2} \leq B\|{\bf d}\|_{\ell^2}.
\end{equation}
If \eqref{E-p-basis-2}  holds,  then  $
V^2(\varphi )= \left\{ f= \sum_{k\in\Z^d}d_k  \tau_k\varphi, \ {\bf d} \in \ell^2\  \right\},
$
and the sequence $\{d_k  \}_{k\in\Z^d}$ is uniquely determined by $f$.

\medskip
The following  theorem is well known: see e.g \cite{JM} or \cite[Prop. 1.1]{AS}.
\begin{theorem} \label{T-basis2}
The set $\{ \tau_m\varphi \} _{m\in\Z^d}$ is a  Riesz basis in $V^2(\varphi)$ with frame constants $0<A,\ B<\infty$   if and only if,
\begin{equation}\label{e1}
A= \inf_{y\in \cal Q_d}\sum_{m \in\Z^d} |\hat \varphi(y+m)|^2 \leq \sup_{y\in \cal Q_d}\sum_{m \in\Z^d} |\hat \varphi(y+m)|^2 = B.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\section{ Proof of Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }}

 Let $\ell^2_0(\Z^d)\subset  \ell^2(\Z^d)$   be the  set of    sequences ${\bf a}=(a_n)_{n\in\Z^d}$ such that $a_n=0  $ whenever $|n|\ge N$, with $N=N({\bf a})\ge 0$.
 Let
$ S({\bf a})  =    \sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}$.
Recall that $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(D)$  if and only if  there exists  constants $0<A,\ B<\infty$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{ineq-S}
A\|{\bf a}\|_2^2\leq \|S({\bf a}) \|_{L^2(D)} ^2\leq B\|{\bf a}\|_2 ^2
\end{equation}
for every  ${\bf a}\in \ell^2_0(\Z^d).$
We gather:
\begin{align}\nonumber
\|S({\bf a}) \|_{L^2(D)} ^2= &  \int_D \left|\sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}\right|^2 dx= \int_D\left(\sum_{n, m\in\Z^d} a_n \overline{a_m}\, e^{2\pi i (n-m)\cdot x}\right)dx
\\\label{Sa}
=&  \sum_{n, m\in\Z^d} a_n \overline{a_m}\, \int_D e^{2\pi i (n-m)\cdot x} dx
=  \sum_{n, m\in\Z^d} a_n \overline{a_m} \widehat{\chi_D}(n-m).
\end{align}
 Let $T_D$ be the operator,  initially defined in $\ell^2_0(\Z^d)$, as:
\begin{equation}\label{e-TD} T_D({\bf a})_m= \sum_{n \in\Z^d} a_n   \widehat{\chi_D}(n-m), \ m\in\Z^d.
\end{equation}
The calculation above shows that
$
\|S({\bf a}) \|_{L^2(D)} ^2=\l T_D({\bf a}), \ {\bf a}\r_2,
$
where  $\l\, , \,\r_2 $  denotes the inner product  in $\ell^2(\Z^d)$. We can easily verify that    $T_D({\bf a})$ is self-adjoint    and, in  view of \eqref{Sa},    that
  $ \l T_D({\bf a}),\ {\bf a}\r_2\ge 0$   for every ${\bf a}\in\ell^2_0(\Z^d)$; thus, \eqref{ineq-S} holds if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{e-1}
A\|{\bf a}\|_2\leq \l T_D({\bf a}), \ {\bf a}\r_2 \leq B\|{\bf a}\|_2,\quad {\bf a}\in \ell^2_0(\Z^d).
\end{equation}
 %
To prove \eqref{e-1} we need the following
\begin{lemma}\label{L-Haase}
Assume that $\dsize ||T_D||_{\ell^2\to\ell^2}= \sup_{||{\bf a}||_2=1}|| T_D ({\bf a})||_2 <\infty$.
The   inequality below holds for every ${\bf a}\in \ell^2_0(\Z^d)$ such that  $||{\bf a} ||_2=1$.
\begin{equation}\label{e2}
  \displaystyle \frac{ ||T_D({\bf a})||_2^2}{  ||T_D||_{\ell^2\to\ell^2}}\leq \l T_D({\bf a}),\, {\bf a}\r_2 \leq  ||T_D||_{\ell^2\to\ell^2}
.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }]
Let $\Phi(x) $ be as in \eqref{e-Phi}. We show that  if there exist constants   $0<A' \leq   B'  <\infty$ such that  $A' \leq \Phi(x)\leq B' $ a.e. in $\cal Q_d$, then $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(D)$.
Since $\Phi(x)=\sum_{m \in\Z^d}   \chi_D(x+m) =\sum_{m \in\Z^d}   |\chi_D(x+m)|^2 $,
by Theorem \ref{T-basis2}    the set  $\{ \tau_m\hat \chi_D \} _{m\in\Z^d}$ is a  Riesz basis of $V^2(\hat \chi_D )$ with frame constants $0<A' ,\ B' <\infty$.
In  view of \eqref{E-p-basis-2} and \eqref{e-TD}, the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{e-prime}
A' \|{\bf a}\|_2\leq \|T_D{\bf a}\|_2^2\leq B' \|{\bf a}\|_2
\end{equation}
holds  for every ${\bf a}\in \ell^2_0(\Z^d)$. By Lemma \ref{L-Haase}, we have \eqref{e-1}, as required.

 If $E(Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence on $D$, we argue as in the proof of  \cite[Theorem 3.1]{selvan}.   Using Plancherel's identity and the Poisson summation formula, from \eqref{Sa} we obtain
\begin{align}\nonumber
||S({\bf a}) ||_{L^2(D)} ^2 &= \sum_m {\Big \vert} \sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n\widehat{\chi_D}(n-m) {\Big \vert} ^2    =   \int_{\cal Q_d}   {\Big\vert} \sum_{m\in\Z^d}   \sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n\widehat{\chi_D}(n-m) e^{2\pi i x\cdot m} {\Big\vert}^2dx
\\ \nonumber & =\int_{\cal Q_d}  {\Big\vert} {\Big( } \sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n e^{2\pi i x\cdot n} {\Big )}\sum_{m\in\Z^d}      \widehat{\chi_D}(n-m) e^{2\pi i x\cdot (m-n)} {\Big\vert}^2dx
 %
\\ \label{new e}& =
\int_{\cal Q_d}  \, {\Big\vert}\sum_{n\in\Z^d} a_n e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}{\Big\vert}^2\, |\Phi(x)|^2  dx.
 %
\end{align}
By assumption,  the integral in \eqref{new e}  is finite and so   so  $\Phi(x) <\infty$ a.e..
To show that  $\Phi(x) >0$ a.e. we argue by
 contradiction: suppose that there exists   $\Omega\subset D$, with $|\Omega|>0$,  where $\Phi(x)\equiv 0$. We can assume that $\Omega\subset \cal Q_d$.    Since $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz basis in $L^2(\cal Q_d)$, we can write    $\chi_{\cal Q_d-\Omega}(x)=\sum_{n\in\Z^d} b_ne^{2\pi i n\cdot x}$, with $\vec b\in \ell^2(\Z^d)$.  Thus, $\int_{\cal Q_d} |\Phi(x)|^2 \, \left|\sum_{n\in\Z^d} b_n e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}\right|^2dx =0$  which, together with \eqref{new e}, contradicts \eqref{ineq-S}.
 \end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{L-Haase}]
The right   inequality in  \eqref{e2}  is \cite[Theorem 13.8]{Haase} so we only need to  prove the left inequality. Let  $\alpha= \sup_{||{\bf a}||_2=1}|\l T_D({\bf a}),\, {\bf a}\r|$ and   $U= \alpha I-T_D$, where $I$ is the identity operator in $\ell^2(\Z^d)$. It is easy to verify that $U$ is positive and that
  \begin{equation}\label{e-id3}
   T_D\,U\,T_D+\,U\,T_D\,U\,=\alpha^2T_D-\alpha T_D^2.
  \end{equation}
  The operators  $T_D\,U\,T_D$ and $\,U\,T_D\,U\,$ are   positive too; indeed, for every ${\bf a}\in \ell^2$,  we have that  $\l T_D\,U\,T_D {\bf a}, \, {\bf a}\r_2= \l \,U\,(T_D{\bf a}), \ T_D{\bf a}\r_2\ge 0$  and $\l \,U\,T_D\,U\,{\bf a} , \, {\bf a}\r_2= \l T_D(\,U\,{\bf a}), \ \,U\, {\bf a}\r_2 \ge 0$ because $T_D$ and $\,U\,$ are both positive. By \eqref{e-id3}, also the operator $\alpha T_D-  T_D^2$ is positive. For every  ${\bf a}\in \ell^2$ with $||{\bf a}||_2=1$, we have that
  $$
  \l (\alpha T_D-  T_D^2) {\bf a}, \  {\bf a}\r_2= \alpha  \l T_D{\bf a}, \ {\bf a}\r_2- \l T_D^2{\bf a}, \ {\bf a}\r_2
  = \alpha  \l T_D{\bf a}, \ {\bf a}\r_2-||T_D{\bf a}||_2^2\ge 0
  $$
and the left inequality in \eqref{e2} is proved.
  \end{proof}

  \medskip
 \noindent
 {\it Remark.}  From the  identity \eqref{new e}  it follows  that the constants  $A$ and $B$ in \eqref{ineq-S} are the minimum and maximum of   $\Phi(x)$  on the unit square $\cal Q_d$.

 Thus,

 $A $ and $B $ are   integers.

When  $|D|=1$,    Theorem \ref{T-basis} shows that  $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence if and only  the integer translates of $D$ tile $\mathbb R^d$,   and so $A =B =1$. In general, if   $k \leq |D|< k+1$ for some positive integer $k$, we can easily verify that  the integer translates of  $D $   cover   $\mathbb R^d$ $k$ times but not $k+1$ times.
Thus,   $A  \leq |D|$ and $B  \ge |D|$.

 \section{Proof of Theorem \ref{T-frame}  }

\medskip
Let $D\subset \mathbb R^d$ be measurable, with $|D|\leq 1$.  By Lemma \ref{L-dil-basis},
 the theorem is trivial when $D\subset \cal Q_d $, so  we assume that $ D- \cal Q_d    $  has positive measure. Let  $D_1$, ...,\, $D_N ,\,...$ be a (possibly infinite) family of disjoint sets of positive measure such that      $D-\cal Q_d= \cup_{j} D_j$.  We can choose the $D_j$ in such way that, for certain vectors  $v_1$, ... $v_N,\, ... \in \Z^d$, we have that $D_j+v_j\subset  \cal Q_d.  $  Let   $D_0= D\cap \cal Q_d $ and $v_0=0$.
 %
 We prove the following
\begin{lemma} \label{L-frame2}

    $E(\Z^d)$ is   frame for $L^2( D)$ if and only, for every  $  v  \in\Z^d$ and every $k\ne j$,
       \begin{equation}\label{e-assumptions-frame}|(  v +D_j)\cap  D_k |= 0.  \end{equation}

\end{lemma}

 It is easy to verify that   \eqref{e-assumptions-frame} is equivalent to  \eqref{e-ass-fr},  and so Theorem \ref{T-frame} is equivalent to  Lemma \ref{L-frame2}.

\begin{proof}

Assume  that  $|(D_1 + v) \cap D_0|>0 $ for some $v\in\Z^d$  (the proof is similar in the other cases). We can assume without loss of generality that   $D_1 + v \subset \cal Q_d $  (see Figure 1); otherwise we let  $D_1= D_1' \cup D_1''$, with    $D'_1+v\subset \cal Q_d$ and we replace $D_1$ with $D_1'$.  We show that $E(\Z^d)$ is not a frame on  $L^2(D)$.

\begin{figure}[h!]
  \begin{center}
     \begin{tikzpicture}
      %

 \fill[gray!20] (-1.5,0)--  (-1.5, 3)-- ( -.5,3)--(0, 4)--(.5,3)--(1.5,3)--(1.5, 0)--( .7, 0)-- (.7, .7)--(-.7, .7)-- (-.7, 0)--(-1.5,0);
 \fill[gray!20]  ( -.5,3)--(0, 4)--(.5,3)-- (-.5,3);
 \draw[black]( -.5,0)--(0, 1)--(.5,0)-- (-.5,0);
 \fill[gray!60]  ( -.5,0)--(0, 1)--(.5,0)-- (-.5,0);
\draw[  black] (-1.5,0)--  (-1.5, 3)-- ( -.5,3)--(0, 4)--(.5,3)--(1.5,3)--(1.5, 0)--( .7, 0)-- (.7, .7)--(-.7, .7)-- (-.7, 0)--(-1.5,0);;
 \draw[thick, black,  dashed] (-1.5,0)--(-1.5,3)--(1.5, 3)--(1.5,0)--(-1.5, 0);

 \draw [-> ]  (0,3)-- (0,1.5);
 \draw (.2 ,2.2) node [black ] {$   v$};
 \draw (-.5 ,1.5) node [black ]   {$D_0$};
  \draw (0 ,3.3) node [black ]   { \small{$D_1$}};
   \draw (0 , .2) node [black ]   { \tiny{$  D_1\!+\!v$}};
 \draw (2 , 1.5) node [black ]   {$\cal Q_d $};

  \end{tikzpicture}
 \caption{ }
   \end{center}
 \end{figure}

  Every $f\in L^2(D)$ can be written as $f = f_0 + f_1$ where $f_0 = f \chi_{D-D_1}$ and $f_1 = f \chi_{D_1}$.
  %
Recall that     $\tau_w g(x)= g  (x+w)$.
    It follows  that
     \begin{align}\nonumber
        |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f}_{L^2(D)}|^2
        &= |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f_0}_{L^2(D-D_1)} + \inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f_1}_{L^2(D_1)}|^2 \\\label{1}
        &= |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x }}{f_0}_{L^2(D-D_1)} + \inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot (x-v)}}{\tau_{-  v}f_1 }_{L^2( D_1+v))}|^2 \\\nonumber
        &= |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f_0}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )} + \inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{\tau_{-v}{f_1}}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}|^2 \\\nonumber
        &= |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f_0}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}|^2 + |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{\tau_{-v}{f_1}}_{\cal Q_d )}|^2 \\\nonumber & \quad + 2\Real{\left(\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f_0}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )} \conjugate{\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{\tau_{-v}{f_1}}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}}\right)}.
    \end{align}
We have used the change of variables $x\to x-v$ in the second inner product in \eqref{1} and  the fact that  $e^{2\pi i n\cdot v}=1$. Since $E(\Z^d)$ is an orthonormal basis in $\cal Q_d $,  the identities  \eqref{e-Planch} in Section 2  and the calculation above  yield
    %
    \begin{equation}\label{e-id1}
    %
    \begin{split}
        \sum_{n  \in \Z^d} |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f}_{L^2(D)}|^2
         %
        &=  \norm{f_0}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2 + \norm{ \tau_{-v} f_1 }_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2 \\ & + 2\Real{ \inner{f_0}{\tau_{-v}{f_1}}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )} }.
    \end{split}
    \end{equation}
    If we let $B= (D-D_1)\cap (D_1 +v)$
  we can choose $ f=f_1+f_0$, with $ f_1(x)= \chi_{B}(x+v)$   and $f_0(x) =- \chi_B(x) $; from \eqref{e-id1} it readily follows that
    %
    $\sum_{n  \in \Z^d} |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f}_{L^2(D)}|^2  =0$, which contradicts
  \eqref{e2-frame}.

  \medskip

We now assume that  $|(w+D_j)\cap D_k|=0$ for every $k\ne j$ and every $w\in\Z^d$; we prove that  $E(\Z^d)$ is a tight frame in $L^2(D)$.
We  assume for simplicity that    $ D_1+v  \subset \cal Q_d $ for some   $v \in\Z^d$. Let $f=f_0+f_1$ be as in the first part of the proof. By assumption,  $|(D_1+v)  \cap (D-D_1)|  =0$,   and so \eqref{e-id1} yields
  \begin{align*}\sum_{n  \in \Z^d} |\inner{e^{2\pi i n\cdot x}}{f }_{L^2(D)}|^2& = \norm{f_0}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2 + \norm{ \tau_{-v} f_1 }_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2
   \\ &=\norm{f  \chi_{D-D_1}}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2 + \norm{   f \chi_{D_1 +v}}_{L^2(\cal Q_d )}^2
    = ||f||_{L^2(D)}.
   \end{align*}
 Thus, $E(\Z^d)$ is a tight frame in $L^2(D)$ as required.
\end{proof}

 \medskip
   The  proof of Theorem \ref{T-frame} shows that if  \eqref{e-assumptions-frame} is not  satisfied,      we can produce a function $f\in L^2(D)$ for which $\l f,\, e^{2\pi i x\cdot n}\r_{L^2(D)}=0$ for every $n\in\Z^d$, and so $E(\Z^d)$ is not complete.   This observation proves  the following:

 \begin{corollary}\label{C-complete}
 $E(\Z^d)$ is complete in $L^2(D)$ if and only if  the integer translates of $D$ intersect on sets of measure $0$.
 \end{corollary}

  \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{T-basis}]
  We have proved that  a) $\iff$ b);  we show that $b)\iff c)$.
  By Corollary \ref{C-complete},
  $E(\Z^d)$ is  complete in $L^2(D)$ if and only if  the integer translates of $D$ overlap only on sets of measure zero.  Thus, c) $\Rightarrow$ b). Let us prove that  b) $\Rightarrow$ c);  let   $D_0,\, D_1$, ...,\, $D_N ,\,...$  and $v_0, \,v_1, \, ...,\, \, v_N,\, ...$ be   as  in the proof of Lemma \ref{L-frame2}.
  Since  $|(D_j+v_j)\cap (D_k+v_k)|=0 $ when $k\ne j$, and
  \begin{equation}\label{e-Q-D}
  1= |\cal Q_d|=|D|= |D_0| +  \sum_j |D_j+v_j|  \end{equation}
   necessarily  $ \cup_j  (D_j+v_j) =\cal Q_d$   and   the integer translates of $D$ tiles $\mathbb R^d$.

   By Fuglede's theorem, c) $\iff$ d). Clearly d) $\Rightarrow$  e);  to finish the proof of the theorem we  show that e) $\Rightarrow$ c).  By Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }, the integer translates of $D$ cover $\mathbb R^d$; thus, $ \cup_j  (D_j+v_j) =\cal Q_d$ and from \eqref{e-Q-D} follows that    the $D_j+v_j$'s can only intersect   on set of measure zero.  Thus, the integer translated of $D$ can only intersect on sets of measure zero and   c)   is proved.

  \end{proof}
  \section{The broken interval}

In this section we solve  the first problem stated in the introduction. We  let $J= [0,\alpha)\cup [\alpha+r, L+r)\subset \mathbb R$, with   $0<\alpha<L$ and   $r>0$.

  By Lemma \ref{L-frame2} and Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }, $E(\Z)$ is a frame on $L^2(J)$ if and only if  the integer translates of $J$ do not overlap in $[0,1]$ and it is a Riesz sequence if and only if the integer translates of $J$ cover $\mathbb R$.

\medskip

Let $[r]$ be the integer part of $r$, i.e., the largest integer $n \leq r$; let   $\{r\}=   r - [r]$   be the fractional part of $r$.
We prove the following
\begin{theorem}\label{T-riesz-interval}

a)   $E(\Z)$ is a frame on $J$ if and only if    $L + \{r\} \leq 1$.
 \\
b) $E(\Z)$ is a Riesz sequence on   $J $ if and only if one of the following is true: \begin{itemize}
\item[i)]
	$\alpha \geq 1$ or $L - \alpha \geq 1$
\item[ ii)]
	$\{r\} = 0$ and $L \geq 1$
\item[ iii)] $1 \leq L < 2$ and $L + \{r\} \geq 2$;
\end{itemize}
\medskip

\end{theorem}

 %
 To prove  b) we will need the following
 \begin{lemma}\label{L-frac-part}
The  integer translates of $J$ cover  $\mathbb R$ if and only if the integer translates of $J' = [0,\alpha) \cup [\alpha + \{r\}, L + \{r\})$ cover  $\mathbb R$.
 \end{lemma}

 \begin{proof}
 If the integer translates of $J$ cover   $\mathbb R$ then for   $ x\in\mathbb R$, there is an integer $m$ such that either $x \in (m, \alpha +m)$ or $x \in (\alpha + r + m,\ L + r + m)$. If $x \in (m, \alpha + m)$ then clearly $x\in J'+m$ as well. If $x \in (\alpha + r + m,\ L + r + m)$, then $x \in (\alpha + \{r\} + [r] + m,\ L + \{r\} + [r] + m)$, i.e. $x$ is in the translation of $J'$ by $[r]+m$. The converse is similar.
  \end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{T-riesz-interval}]

By Theorem \ref{T-frame} and Lemma \ref{L-frac-part},  $E(\Z)$ is a frame on $J$ if and only if    the integer translates of $[0,\alpha)\cup[\alpha + \{r\}, L + \{r\})$ do not intersect in $[0,1]$, or if  and only if  $(0,\alpha) \cap (\alpha + \{r\} - 1, L + \{r\} - 1) = \varnothing$. This is equivalent to having either $\alpha \leq \alpha + \{r\} -1$, which is impossible, or $L + \{r\} \leq 1.$ That proves part  a).

\medskip

	Let us prove part  b). By Lemma \ref{L-frac-part} we can assume that $r = \{r\}$, i.e.  that $0 \leq r < 1$.

	By  Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }, $E(\Z)$ is a Riesz sequence on J if and only if the integer translates of J cover $\mathbb R$.
	If one of the connected components $[0,\alpha)$ or  $[\alpha + r, L + r)$ covers $\mathbb R$ by integer translations, we have that either  $\alpha \geq 1$ or $L - \alpha \geq 1$, and   i) is proved.

	If neither component covers $\mathbb R$ by integer translations, i.e. if both $\alpha < 1$ and $L - \alpha < 1$, we can consider   2 sub-cases:

\begin{itemize}\item If $r = 0$, we have that  $J=[0, L)$, and  the integer translates of $J$ cover $\mathbb R$ if and only if $L \geq 1$; that proves  ii).

	\item Suppose next that $r > 0$.
    The integer translates of $J$ cover $\mathbb R$ if and only if the "gap" $(\alpha, \alpha + r)$ is covered by integer translates of $J$. This is possible  if and only if
    $ (1, \alpha +1) \cup (\alpha + r - 1, L + r -1)\supset (\alpha, \alpha + r) $ (see Figure2).

    \begin{figure}[h!]
  \begin{center}
     \begin{tikzpicture}
      %

\draw[  black, ->] (-.5 ,0 )--  ( 5 , 0 ) ;

    \draw[  black, thick] (0,0)--  ( 1.5, 0);
   \draw[  black, thick] (  2.5,0)--  (   3.5, 0 );

    \draw[  black, thick] (1,1)--  ( 2.5, 1);
   \draw[  black, thick] (  3.5,1)--  (   4.5, 1);

  \draw (  0,-.2 ) node [black ]   {{\tiny $  0 $}};

  \draw (  .2, .2 ) node [black ]   {{\tiny $  J $}};

\draw (  1.5, -.2) node [black ]   {{\tiny $   \alpha  $}};
\draw (2.5, -.2  )  node [black ]   {{\tiny $ r+\alpha  $}};
\draw (3.5,-.2  )  node [black ]   {{\tiny $ r+L  $}};
\draw (5,1 )  node [black ]   {{\tiny{\bf $J+1 $}}};

 \draw [black,fill]  (1,1 ) circle [radius=0.06];
 \draw [black,fill]  (2.5,1 ) circle [radius=0.06];
 \draw [black,fill]  (3.5,1 ) circle [radius=0.06];
 \draw [black,fill]  (4.5,1 ) circle [radius=0.06];

 \draw[black, dashed] (1,1)--(1,0);
 \draw [black,fill]  (0, 0) circle [radius=0.06];
\draw [black,fill]  (1.5, 0) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (2.5, 0) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (3.5, 0) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (1, 0) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw (1,-.2  )  node [black ]   {{\tiny $ 1 $}};
    \end{tikzpicture}
 \caption{ }
   \end{center}
 \end{figure}
    We have $(1, \alpha + 1) \cap (\alpha, \alpha + r) = (1, \alpha + r)$, because $\alpha , r < 1$. Thus, J covers $\mathbb R$ if and only if
    $(\alpha + r -1, L + r - 1) \cap (\alpha, \alpha + r) \supset (\alpha, 1)$. This is equivalent to the conditions
    %
   \begin{center}
$   \begin{cases}  r - 1 \leq 0 \\ L + r -1 \geq 1 \\ \alpha + r \geq 1 \end{cases} \Longleftrightarrow  \begin{cases} r  \leq 1 \\ L + r  \geq 2 \\ \alpha + r \geq 1 \end{cases}.$
   \end{center}
    %
 Since $\alpha < 1$ and $L - \alpha < 1$  by assumption, and recalling that    $r < 1$,  we can see at once that  the condition $L + r \geq 2$ implies $\alpha + r \geq 1$. Indeed, if $\alpha + r < 1$, then $$L + r = L - \alpha + \alpha + r < L - \alpha + 1 < 2.$$  Thus, the integer translates of $J$ covers $\mathbb R$ if and only if $L + r  \geq 2$, and we have iii). The theorem is proved.
    \end{itemize}
   %
\end{proof}

\section{The rotated square}

Let $ Q_h= Q_h (0)=[-\frac{h}{2}, \frac{h}{2}] \times [-\frac{h}{2}, \frac{h}{2}]$ be the  square in $\mathbb R^2$ centered at the origin with sides of length $h$. Let $A_\theta=\begin{bmatrix}
        \cos{(\theta)} & \sin{(\theta)} \\
        -\sin{(\theta)} & \cos{(\theta)}
        \end{bmatrix}$ be the matrix of a   rotation by an angle $\theta$, and let
$
    Q_{h,\theta}   =A_{\theta}Q_h(0)
     $
be the square obtained from the rotation of  $Q_h(0)$.  The following theorem offers a complete solution to Problem 2:

\begin{theorem}
   a)  $E(\Z^2)$ is a Riesz sequence  on  $L^2(Q_{h,\theta})$ if and only if
   $ h\ge 1-\sin(2\theta) $.

   b)  $E(\Z^2)$ is  a frame  on $L^2(Q_{h,\theta})$ if  and only if $h\leq \frac{1}{\sin\theta+\cos\theta}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
   We first prove  Part a).
 Let $P_1= (\frac 12, \frac 12), \ P_2= (-\frac 12, \frac 12)\ P_3= (-\frac 12, -\frac 12)\ P_4= (\frac 12, -\frac 12)$  be the vertices of $\cal Q_2$. We first find conditions on $h$ and $\theta$  for which the points $P_1$, ...,  $P_4$ lie on the sides of $Q_{h,\theta}$.
  \begin{figure}[h!]
  \begin{center}
     \begin{tikzpicture}
      %

\draw[  black, dashed] (-1.5 ,-1.5 )--  ( 1.5 , -1.5 )-- (1.5 , 1.5 )--(-1.5 , 1.5 )--(-1.5 , -1.5 );

   \fill[gray!10](-2.4,0)--  ( 0, -2.4)--  ( 2.4,0)-- (0,  2.4 )--(-2.4,0);
   \draw[  black] (-2.4,0)--  ( 0, -2.4)--  ( 2.4,0)-- (0,  2.4 )--(-2.4,0);
 \draw[  black, dashed] (-1.5 ,-1.5 )--  ( 1.5 , -1.5 )-- (1.5 , 1.5 )--(-1.5 , 1.5 )--(-1.5 , -1.5 );

\draw[  black] (-3 ,0)--  ( 0, -3 )--  ( 3 ,0)-- (0,  3  )--(-3 ,0);
\draw (0 ,0) node [black ]   { $ Q_{h,\theta}$};
   %

\draw (1.8, -1.8 ) node [black ]   {{\small $  P_4  $}};
\draw (1.8, 1.8 )  node [black ]   {{\small $  P_1  $}};
\draw (-1.8, 1.8 )  node [black ]  {{\small $  P_2  $}};
\draw (-1.8, -1.8 ) node [black ]  {{\small $  P_3 $}};

\draw (-3.3,0 ) node [black ]   {{\small $  Q_3  $}};
\draw (3.3,0 )  node [black ]   {{\small $  Q_1  $}};
\draw (0, -3.3 )  node [black ]  {{\small $  Q_4  $}};
\draw (0,3.3) node [black ]  {{\small $  Q_2 $}};
\draw (2.5,2 ) node [black ]  {{  $Q_{l(\theta), \theta}$}};

\fill[gray!60] ( 1.5 , 1.5 )--  ( 1.1 ,  1.5 )-- (1.1 , 1.3 )--( 1.5 , 1.3)--( 1.5 ,  1.5 );
\draw[  black, thick] ( 1.5 , 1.5 )--  ( 1.1 ,  1.5 )-- (1.1 , 1.3 )--( 1.5 , 1.3)--( 1.5 ,  1.5 );

\fill[gray!60] ( -1.5 , -1.5 )--  (- 1.1 ,  -1.5 )-- (-1.1 , -1.3 )--(- 1.5 , -1.3)--( -1.5 , -1.5 );
\draw[  black, thick] (- 1.5 ,- 1.5 )--  ( -1.1 , - 1.5 )-- (-1.1 , -1.3 )--( -1.5 , -1.3)--( -1.5 ,  -1.5 );

\fill[gray!60] (  1.5 , -1.5 )--  (  1.1 ,  -1.5 )-- ( 1.1 , -1.3 )--(  1.5 , -1.3)--(  1.5 , -1.5 );
\draw[  black, thick] ( 1.5 ,- 1.5 )--  (  1.1 , - 1.5 )-- ( 1.1 , -1.3 )--(  1.5 , -1.3)--(  1.5 ,  -1.5 );

\fill[gray!60] ( -1.5 ,  1.5 )--  (- 1.1 ,   1.5 )-- (-1.1 ,  1.3 )--(- 1.5 ,  1.3)--( -1.5 ,  1.5 );
\draw[  black, thick] (- 1.5 ,  1.5 )--  ( -1.1 ,   1.5 )-- (-1.1 ,  1.3 )--( -1.5 ,  1.3)--( -1.5 ,   1.5 );

\draw [black,fill]  (1.5, 1.5) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (1.5, -1.5) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (-1.5, 1.5) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (-1.5,- 1.5) circle [radius=0.06];
  \end{tikzpicture}
 \caption{ }
   \end{center}
 \end{figure}

 Let $\ell_{1}:  y-\frac 12=\tan(\theta)(x-\frac 12)$,
 $ \ell_{2}:  y-\frac 12=-\frac 1{\tan(\theta) } (x+\frac 12)$ and $\ell_{3}:  y+\frac 12=\tan(\theta)(x+\frac 12)
 $
 be   the equations of the sides of $Q_{h,\theta}$ that contain  the points $P_1$, $P_2$ and $P_3$, resp.
  It is easy to verify that $\ell_2$ intersects $\ell_1$ and $\ell_3$ at the points
 $
 Q_2= \left( -\frac 12\cos(2\theta), \ \frac 12(1-\sin(2\theta))\right)$ and $
 Q_3= \left( -\frac 12(1-\sin(2\theta)) , \ -\frac 12\cos(2\theta)\right)
 $,
 and that  the length of the segment that join $Q_2$ and $Q_3$ equals to $  l(\theta) =1-\sin(2\theta)$.
 Thus, when $h\ge   l(\theta)$, the set $E(\Z^2)$ is a Riesz sequence on $L^2(Q_{h, \theta})$.

 We show that when $h < l(\theta)$ the integer translates of $Q_{h, \theta}$ do not cover  the plane  anymore. Indeed, if $h < l(\theta)$, the four vertices of $\cal Q_2$ are outside the square  $Q_{l(\theta), \theta}$ and have positive distance from the boundary of $Q_{h,\theta}$.  We can find a small rectangle $R$   with sides parallel to the sides of $\cal Q_2$ for which $  R+P_j  \subset \cal Q_2-Q_{h, \theta}$ for every $j$ (see Figure 3).  The integer translates of $Q_{h,\theta}$ cannot cover   the rectangles $R+P_j$ and so the  condition of Theorem \ref{T-Riesz } is not verified.

 \medskip

  \begin{figure}[h!]
  \begin{center}
     \begin{tikzpicture}
      %

  \draw[  black, dashed] (-2, 1)--(3,1)--(3,6)--(-2, 6)--(-2, 1);

\draw (3.5,5.2)  node [black ]  {{\small $  \cal Q_2  $}};
  \draw[black] (1,7)--(4,3)--(0,0)--(-3,4)--(1,7);

  \fill[gray!60](.5,6)--(.5, 6.3)--(.2, 6.3)--(.2, 6)--(.5, 6);
  \draw[black ] (.5,6)--(.5, 6.3)--(.2, 6.3)--(.2, 6)--(.5, 6);
  %
  \draw (.1,6.5)  node [black ]  {{\small ${  R } $}};
  \fill[gray!30](1,6)--(-2,4)--(0,1)--( 3,3)--(1,6);

  \draw[black] (1,6)--(-2,4)--(0,1)--( 3,3)--(1,6);

  \draw (1, 6.4) node [black ]   {{\small $  Q_1  $}};
\draw (-2.4, 4)  node [black ]   {{\small $  Q_2 $}};
\draw (0, .6 ) node [black ]  {{\small $  Q_3 $}};
\draw (3.4, 3) node [black ]  {{\small $  Q_4 $}};
  \draw (0,3) node [black ]  {{  $Q_{s(\theta), \theta}$}};
  \draw [black,fill]  (1,6) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill]  (-2,4) circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill] (0,1)circle [radius=0.06];
  \draw [black,fill] (3,3)circle [radius=0.06];

  \end{tikzpicture}
 \caption{ }
   \end{center}
 \end{figure}

 Let us prove   Part b):
 the vertices $Q_1$, ..,\, $Q_4$ of $Q_{h,\theta}$ lie  on the sides of $\cal Q_2$ if  and only if there exists $0<t\leq 1$ for which $Q_1=(t-\frac 12,\, \frac 12)$, $Q_2= (-\frac 12,\, t-\frac 12)$, $Q_3= ( \frac 12  -t,\, -\frac 12)$ and $Q_4= ( \frac 12,  \,  \frac 12 -t)$.
 If we let $\tan(\theta)$ be  the slope of the line that joins $Q_3$ and $Q_4$, we can see at once  that
 $  \tan(\theta)= \frac {1-t}{t}$; thus,  $ t=\frac{1}{1+\tan(\theta)}= \frac{\cos(\theta)}{\sin(\theta)+\cos(\theta)}.$
 The length of  the segment $[Q_3Q_4]$ is then:
 $$
s(\theta)= \sqrt{ t^2+(1-t )^2}= \frac{1}{\sin(\theta)+\cos(\theta)} $$
and   $E(\Z^2)$ is a frame on $ Q_{h,\theta}$  whenever $h\leq s(\theta)$.

Let us show that $E(\Z^2)$ is not a frame on $Q_{h,\theta}$ whenever    $h>s(\theta)$. Indeed, if  $h>s(\theta)$,  the set  $Q_{h,\theta}-\cal Q_2$ has positive measure; we can find a small rectangle $R$  with sides parallel to the sides of $\cal Q_2$  and vectors $n_1$, ..., $n_4\in\Z^2$ such that $R+n_j\subset    Q_{h,\theta}-\cal Q_2$ (see Figure 3).  Thus, the integers translates of $Q_{h,\theta}$ overlap on the rectangles $R+n_j$ and  by Theorem \ref{T-frame}, $E(\Z^2)$ is not a frame on $L^2(Q_{h,\theta})$.

    \end{proof}

 \section{The translated parallelepiped} In this section we solve  Problem 3.

 Let  $P\subset \mathbb R^d$ be a parallelepiped with sides parallel to  vectors $  v_1$, ...,\, $  v_d$.
 We let $A=\{a_{i,j}\}_{1\leq i,j\leq d}$ be the matrix whose columns are $ v_1$, ...,\, $ v_d$; we let  $A^{-1}=\{b_{i,j}\}_{1\leq i,j\leq d}$.
 We prove the following
 \begin{theorem}\label{T-frame-parall}
a) The set  $E(\Z^d)$  is a frame  on  $L^2(P)$ if and only if  $\det(A) \leq 1$ and  $\max_{{1\leq i,k, j\leq d}\atop{j\ne k}}|a_{i,j}|+  |a_{i,k}|\leq 1$

 b) The set $E(\Z^d)$  is a Riesz sequence   on  $L^2(P)$  if and only if $\det(A ) \ge1$ and   $\max_{1\leq i, j\leq d} |b_{i,j}| \leq 1$.
 \end{theorem}

    \begin{figure}[h!]
  \begin{center}
     \begin{tikzpicture}
      %

  \draw[  black, ->] (-1, 0)--(7,0);
  \draw[  black, ->] (0,-1)--(0, 5);

  \draw[black] (0,0)--(2,2)--(3.5,2)--(1.5,0)--(0,0);
  \draw[black] (1.8 ,1.5)--(3.8 ,3.5)--(5.3 ,3.5)--(3.3 ,1.5)--(1.8 ,1.5);

 \draw(1, -.3) node[black] {$v_1$};
 \draw(1.8, -.3 ) node[black] {$1$};
 \draw (1.1  ,.5) node [black ]   {{\small $ P $}};
  \draw (6 ,2.8) node [black ]   {{\small $ P +(1,1) $}};
  \draw[black, dashed] (1.8, 1.5)-- (1.8,0);
  \draw[black, dashed] (1.8, 1.5)-- (0,1.5);

  \draw(-.2, 1.5 ) node[black] {$1$};
  \draw(1.7, 2 ) node[black] {$v_2$};

  \end{tikzpicture}
 \caption{ }
   \end{center}
 \end{figure}

 \begin{proof}
  Observe that  if $|P|= \det(A) > 1$, the set $E(\Z^d)$ cannot be a frame on $L^2(P)$ so in part a)  we assume $\det(A) \leq 1$. Similarly, for  part b) we assume that $\det(A) \ge 1$.

\medskip
We prove part a)   by induction on the dimension $d$.

By Theorem \ref{T-frame}, the set $E(\Z^d)$ is a frame on $L^2(P)$  if and only if  the integer translates  of $P$  overlap only on  sets of zero measure.
In dimension $d=2$,   we let     $ v_1=(a_{1,1}, a_{2,1})$ and $ v_ 2=(a_{1,2}, a_{2,2})$ be the vectors that are parallel to the sides of $P$. When the components of $v_1$ and $v_2$ are non-negative, we can easily verify that  $P$ overlaps with $P+(1,1)$ if and only  if the sum   of the   projections of $v_1$ and $v_2$  on the $x_1$  and $x_2$ axes has measure  $\ge 1$ (see Figure 4).   Thus,    $P$  overlaps with $P+(1,1)$  if and only if   $  a_{1,1} + a_{1,2} \ge 1$ and  $a_{2,1} + a_{2,2} \ge 1$.   These conditions imply that  no pair of integer translates of $P$ intersect.
For general   $v_1$ and $v_2$ we can similarly verify that the integer translates of $P$ do not intersect  if and only if $ | a_{1,1} |+ |a_{1,2}| \ge 1$ and  $|a_{2,1}| + |a_{2,2} |\ge 1$.

 We now assume that part a) of the theorem is valid  in dimension $d\ge 2$. We prove that is is valid also in dimension $d+1$.

 Let $P$ be a parallelepiped in $\mathbb R^{d+1}$.
  The integer translates of $P$ overlap on sets of positive measure in $\mathbb R^{d+1}$ if and only if the integer translates of the faces of $P$   overlap   on sets of positive measure in $\mathbb R^{d}$.
Let  $P_h$ be the face of $P$ spanned by the vectors  $ v_1$, ..., $ v_{h-1}, \  v_{h+1}$, ...,\, $ v_{d+1}$.

  Let $ e_1=(1, 0, ...,\,0)$, ..., $ e_{d+1} =(0,  ...0,\,1)$ be the standard orthonormal basis in $\mathbb R^{d+1}$ and let $H_j$ be the orthogonal complement of  $e_j$. Clearly, the  integer translates of $P_h$ overlap  if and only if  the integer translates of the  orthogonal projections  of $P_h$  on  the  $H_j$'s overlap.

 The projection of  $P_h$ on $H_k$ is a parallelepiped in $\mathbb R^d$ spanned by the vectors
 $ w_1$, ..., $ w_{h-1}, \  w_{h+1}$, ...,\, $ w_{d+1}$ where $ w_j$ is the projection of $v_j$ on $H_k$,  i.e., it is  the vector  $ v_j$ with the $k$-th  component removed.
  By assumptions,   $\max_{{1 \leq i,k, j\leq d+1\atop{i\ne k}}\atop{k\ne j\ne h}}\{|a_{i,j }| + |a_{i,k }|  \}\leq 1$.
This  inequality  is valid for every face of $P$ and for every projection, and so we have that $\max_{{1 \leq i,j, k\leq d+1 }\atop{k\ne j}}\{|a_{i,k}|+ |a_{i,j}|\}\leq 1$ as required.

 \medskip
 We now  prove   part b).  By Theorem \ref{T-Riesz }, the   integer translates of $P$ must cover $\mathbb R^d$.
Since  $P$ is   the image of the unit cube $[0,1]^d$ via the linear transformation $A(x)= A  x$, we can write  $P=A([0,1]^d)$.  Thus, $E(\Z^d)$ is a Riesz sequence in $L^2(P)$ if and only if
 $  \bigcup_{n\in\Z^d} (A([0,1]^d) +  n) =\mathbb R^d $, or:
 $$
 A^{-1}\left(\bigcup_{n\in\Z^d} (A([0,1]^d) +  n)\right)= \bigcup_{n\in\Z^d} ( [0,1]^d  + A^{-1} n)=\mathbb R^d.$$
 The translates of the unit cube $[0,1]^d$ cover $\mathbb R^d$ if and only if the components of the vectors $A^{-1}e_k$  are  all  $\leq 1$, i.e.,  if and only if $\max_{1\leq i,j\leq d}|b_{i,j}|\leq 1$.

 \end{proof}

    \subsection{The shortest vector problem}

    Let $A:\mathbb R^d\to\mathbb R^d$  be linear and invertible;  consider the parallelepiped $P=A(Q)$, where $Q  = [0,1]^d.$  The  sides of $P$ are parallel to the  columns of  the matrix that represents $A$.

    By Corollary \ref{C-complete}, the  set $E(\Z^d)$ is complete in $L^2(A(Q))$ if and only if   the integer translates of $A(Q)$ do not intersect.
 %
	The integer translates of $A(Q)$ intersect if and only if there are $x,\ y \in Q $ such that $Ax = Ay + n$, for some nonzero $n \in \Z^d$. We can also say that the translates of $A(Q_d)$ intersect if and only if there exist $x, y \in Q$ and $n \in \Z^d$ such that $A^{-1}n = x-y$, i.e., if and only if there exists $n \in \Z^d$ such that $A^{-1}n \in D = \{w \mid \| w\|_{\infty} < 1 \}$.

	\medskip
	These considerations show that    Problem 3 is related to the so-called {\it shortest vector problems} (SVP): Given a lattice $\mathcal{L}$ and a norm $||\ ||$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$, find the minimum length $\lambda = \min_{0 \neq v \in \mathcal{L}}\| v\|$ of a nonzero lattice point.  The SVP is known to be NP-hard (see \cite{Aj}).

The conjectured intractability of the SVP and of other optimization problems on lattices  is central in the  construction of secure lattice-based cryptosystems.
  For more information on this problem see e.g. \cite{AD}, \cite{Kn} and the references cited in these papers.
	\medskip

Three problems on exponential bases