Let $M$ be a Riemannian manifold and denote by $\exp_p(v)$ the exponential map at $p \in M$ applied to $v \in T_p M$. Let $q \in M$ be fixed and let $U \subset M$ be a neighborhood of $q$ such that, for each $p \in U$, the map $\exp_p$ is a diffeomorphism in a neighborhood of $exp_p^{-1}(q)$.

Now, the map $V: p \mapsto \exp_p^{-1}(q)$ is a well-defined vector field on $U$ ($q$ is fixed!). Is there a "nice" expression for the covariant derivative $\nabla_X V$ along a given vector field $X$?

What I have tried so far

I understand that $V$ is a vector field such that $V(p)$ points in the (geodesic) direction of $q$ and such that $|V(p)| = d(p,q)$. On flat $\mathbb{R}^n$, we have $V(p) = q-p$ and the covariant derivative is simply $\nabla_X V = -X$.

In the Riemannian case, we have at least $\langle \nabla_X V, V \rangle = \langle -X, V \rangle$ for any vector field $X$. Proof: Consider $c(s,t) = \exp_q(s \exp_q^{-1}(\gamma(t))) = \exp_{\gamma(t)}((1-s) \exp_{\gamma(t)}^{-1}(q))$. Then $\frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(1,t) = -V(\gamma(t))$ and $|\frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(s,t)|$ does not depend on $s$. Therefore, $$ |V(\gamma(t))|^2 = \int_0^1 |\frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(s,t)|^2\,ds $$ and $$ \begin{aligned} \langle \nabla_{\gamma(t)} V, V \rangle &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}|V(\gamma(t))|^2 = \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_0^1 |\frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(s,t)|^2\,ds \\ &= \langle \frac{\partial c}{\partial t}(1,t), \frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(1,t) \rangle = -\langle \dot\gamma(t), V \rangle, \end{aligned} $$ where we used that $\frac{\partial c}{\partial t}(0,t) = 0$, $\nabla_{\partial_s}\frac{\partial c}{\partial s}(s,t) = 0$ and $\nabla_{\partial_s}\frac{\partial c}{\partial t}(s,t) = \nabla_{\partial_t}\frac{\partial s}{\partial t}(s,t)$.

My hypothesis

From explicit calculations on the sphere, I found that $V(p) = -F(p) \nabla F(p)$ where $F(p) = d(p,q)$. Then $$ \nabla_X V = -\langle \nabla F, X\rangle \nabla F - F \nabla_X(\nabla F). $$ From $|\nabla F(p)|^2 = 1$ ($F$ is 1-Lipschitz by triangle inequality), it's clear that $\nabla_X(\nabla F)$ is orthogonal to $\nabla F$ - just as expected. Actually, this formula could probably be more explicit and I don't have a proof for the relation between $F$ and $V$ in the general case.


The vector field $V$ is the gradient of the function $f = -\frac12 r^2$, where $r = d(q,\cdot)$, the distance from $q$. To see this, note that the definition $V_p = \exp_p^{-1}(q)$ implies $\exp_p(V_p) = q$ for each $p\in U$, which is to say that the curve $\gamma(t) = \exp_p(tV_p)$ is a geodesic that goes from $q$ to $p$ in time $1$, and its velocity at $p$ is $V_p$. Thus the reverse geodesic $\sigma(t) = \gamma(1-t)$ is a radial geodesic that goes from $q$ to $p$ in time $1$. Its velocity at time $1$ is $\sigma'(1) = -\gamma'(0) = -V_p$. Every unit-speed radial geodesic starting at $q$ has velocity equal to $\operatorname{grad} r$ by the Gauss lemma. But the geodesic $\sigma$ is not unit-speed; instead, it traverses a distance $r(p)$ in time $1$, so its speed is $r(p)$. The upshot is $$ \newcommand{\grad}{\operatorname{grad}} V_p = - r(p) \grad r|_p = \operatorname{grad} (-\tfrac12 r^2)|_p. $$

The $(1,1)$-tensor field $\nabla V$ is thus the $(1,1)$-Hessian of $-\tfrac12 r^2$; let's denote it by $\mathscr H_f = \nabla (\grad f)$. We can also view it as an endomorphism field $\mathscr H_f\colon \Gamma(TM) \to \Gamma(TM)$, which acts on a vector field $X$ by $$ \mathscr H_f(X) = \nabla _X V = \nabla_X(\grad f). $$ Another way to look at it is that $\mathscr H_f = \nabla(\operatorname{grad} f)$ is the ordinary Hessian $\nabla^2 f$ with one index raised. We can write it as \begin{align*} \mathscr H_f &= \nabla\operatorname{grad}(-\tfrac12 r^2)\\ & = \nabla(-r \operatorname{grad}r) = -\operatorname{grad} r \otimes dr - r \nabla \operatorname{grad} r\\ &= -\operatorname{grad} r \otimes dr - r\mathscr H_r.\tag{$*$} \end{align*} To understand its action on an arbitrary vector field $X$, it is convenient to decompose $X$ as $X = a \operatorname{grad} r + Y$, where $Y$ is orthogonal to $\grad r$ (or equivalently $dr(Y)=0$). Because the integral curves of $\grad r$ are geodesics, $\nabla_{\grad r}(\grad r)\equiv 0$, which implies that $\mathscr H_r$ annihilates $\grad r$. Thus the action of $\mathscr H_f$ on $\grad r$ is just the action of the $-\grad r\otimes dr$ term, which gives $\mathscr H_f(\grad r)=- \grad r$. So to understand the behavior of $\mathscr H_f$, it suffices to consider its action on vectors orthogonal to $\grad r$, and for this we just need to understand the action of $\mathscr H_r$.

There are explicit formulas for $\mathscr H_r$ in constant-curvature manifolds. For a metric with constant sectional curvature $c$ and a vector $Y\perp \grad r$, $$ \mathscr H_r(Y) = t_c(r) Y, $$ where $$ t_c(r) = \begin{cases} \dfrac 1 r, & c = 0,\\ \dfrac 1 R \cot \dfrac r R, & c= \dfrac 1{R^2}>0,\\ \dfrac 1 R \coth \dfrac r R, & c= -\dfrac 1{R^2}<0. \end{cases} $$

Finally, if the sectional curvatures of $M$ are bounded above or below by a constant, then there are comparison theorems that relate $\mathscr H_r$ to its constant-curvature counterpart. If $M$ has sectional curvatures bounded above by a constant $c$, then $\langle\mathscr H_r(Y),Y\rangle \ge t_c(r)|Y|^2$ for $Y\perp\grad r$ in any normal neighborhood of $q$, and if the sectional curvatures are bounded below by $c$, then $\langle\mathscr H_r(Y),Y\rangle\le t_c(r)|Y|^2$ for $Y\perp\grad r$ on the set where $r<\pi R$. This is proved by observing that $\mathscr H_r$ satisfies the following Riccati equation: $$ \nabla_{\grad r} (\mathscr H_r) + \mathscr H_r^2 + R(\cdot,\grad r)\grad r = 0, $$ (where $R$ is the $(1,3)$-Riemann curvature tensor) and applying some ODE comparison theory. Plugging these estimates into formula $(*)$ yields estimates for $\mathscr H_f$.

Proofs of most of these facts can be found in Peter Petersen's Riemannian Geometry.

EDIT: Since I wrote this answer, the latest edition of my Riemannian Manifolds book has been published, so let me add that book as another source for the proofs. See Chapter 11, mainly.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.