LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV

COMPARISON

Last time we proved various local comparison theorems that holds away from
cut locus. Today we turn to global comparison that holds on M .

1. The Hessian comparison theorem: global form

¶ Hessian of distance for Mκm .
Let Mκm be a space form, i.e. a complete connected Riemannian manifold with
constant sectional curvature κ. Let γ : [0, l] → Mκm be a normal geodesic in Mκm
from p to q ̸∈ Cut(p) ∪ {p}, then for any Xq ∈ (γ̇(l))⊥ , the Jacobi field V along γ
with V (0) = 0 and V (l) = Xq is
snk (t)
V (t) = Xq (t),
snk (l)
where Xq (t) is the parallel vector field along γ with Xq (l) = Xq , and we used
 sin(√kt)  √

 √
k
, k > 0 cos( kt),
 k > 0,
′
snk (t) = t, k = 0 and cnk (t) = snk (t) = 1, k = 0,
 sinh(
 √
−kt)
 √
√ , k<0
 cosh( −kt), k < 0.
−k
As a result, for any Yq ∈ Tq M ,
cnk (l)
(∇2 dp )q (Xq , Yq ) = ⟨∇γ̇(l) V, Yq ⟩ = ⟨Xq , Yq ⟩.
snk (l)
So the Hessian of dp at the point q, with respect to an orthonormal basis e1 (l) =
γ̇(l), e2 (l), · · · , em (l), is
0 0 ··· 0
 
0 cnκ (l) · · · 0 
2  snκ (l)
(∇ dp )q =  .. ..  .

.. ..
. . . . 
cnκ (l)
0 0 · · · snκ (l)
The Hessian matrix is almost a constant matrix, with the only exception that
there is a zero for the top-left entry. We will carefully choose a function f so that
∇2 (f ◦dp ) is a constant matrix. For this purpose we calculate, for any Xq , Yq ∈ Tq M ,
∇2 (f ◦dp )(Xq ,Yq ) = ⟨∇Xq∇(f ◦dp ), Yq ⟩ = ⟨∇Xq (f ′ (dp )∇dp ), Yq ⟩
= f ′ (dp )⟨∇Xq∇dp , Yq ⟩+f ′′ (dp )⟨∇dp ,Xq ⟩⟨∇dp ,Yq ⟩
= f ′ (dp )∇2 dp (Xq ,Yq )+f ′′ (dp )⟨γ̇(l),Xq ⟩⟨γ̇(l),Yq ⟩,
1
2 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON

where γ is the minimizing geodesic from p to q. As a result, for ∇2 (f ◦ dp ) to be a

constant matrix under the given basis, we should choose f so that
cnκ (t)
f ′ (t) = f ′′ (t).
snκ (t)
So the simplest solution is to take f to satisfy f ′ (t) = snk (t), i.e. take f to be
 √
1−cos( κr)
Z r 
 κ
, if κ > 0,
r2
mdκ (r) = snκ (t)dt = 2
, √ if κ = 0,
0  1−cosh( −κr) , if k < 0.

κ
It follows
∇2 (mdκ ◦ dp )q = cnk (l)Id.
¶ The cosine law in Mκm .
It is easy to check cnκ (r) = 1 − κ mdκ (r). So if we let φ(t) = mdκ ◦ dp ◦ γ(t),
where γ is a geodesic in Mκm away from Cut(p) ∪ {p}, then
φ′′ (t) = cnκ ◦ dp ◦ γ(t) = 1 − κ mdκ (dp ◦ γ(t)) = 1 − κφ(t).
As an application, we may derive the cosine law in Mκm . Consider a geodesic
triangle △ABC in Mκm √ with side lengths a, b, c and angles A, B, C, where for κ > 0
we assume a, b, c < π/ κ. Let γ1 : [0, a] → Mκm be the normal geodesic with
γ1 (0) = B, γ1 (a) = C and let γ2 : [0, b] → Mκm be the normal geodesic with γ2 (0) =
C, γ2 (b) = A.
Now take p = B and γ = γ2 , i.e. consider φ(t) = mdκ ◦ dB ◦ γ2 (t). Then
φ(0) = mdκ (a), φ(b) = mdκ (c)
and
φ′ (0) = snκ (a)⟨γ̇1 (a), γ̇2 (0)⟩ = −snκ (a) cos C.
So if κ = 0, we get
a2 1
φ(t) = − a cos Ct + t2
2 2
and thus φ(b) = mdκ (c) becomes c2 = a2 + b2 − 2ab cos C.
For κ ̸= 0, we get
1
φ(t) = + c1 snκ (t) + c2 cnκ (t).
κ
The initial conditions φ(0) = mdκ (a) and φ′ (0) = −snκ (a) cos C implies c1 =
−snκ (a) cos C, c2 = − κ1 cnκ (a). So the equation φ(b) = mdκ (c) becomes the fol-
lowing cosine law in Mκm ,
cnκ (c) = cnκ (a)cnκ (b) + κsnκ (a)snκ (b) cos C.
As a direct corollary, we get
Proposition 1.1. In Mκm , take an angle α with side lengths l1 and l2 fixed. Let
f (α) be the distance between the end points. Then f (α) is increasing in α.
 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON 3

¶ Compare in the barrier sense.

It turns out that the Hessian and Laplacian comparison theorems holds globally
on the whole of M in several weak sense: in the barrier sense, in the viscosity sense
and in the distribution sense1. Here we only discuss the first one, since the condition
is often easier to check. The notion of barrier sense was first introduced by Calabi
in 1958:
Definition 1.2. Let f be a continuous function defined on (M, g).
(1) If g ∈ C 2 (U ) is defined in a neighborhood U of p, and
f (p) = g(p), and f (q) ≤ g(q), ∀q ∈ U,
then we call g an upper barrier function of f at p.
(2) If for any ε > 0, there is an upper barrier function gε of f at p, such that
∆gε (p) ≤ c + ε, then we say
∆f (p) ≤ c in the barrier sense.
(3) If for any normal geodesic σ with σ(0) = q, one has (f ◦ σ)′′ (0) ≤ c in the
barrier sense, then we say
(∇2 f )(q) ≤ c · Id in the barrier sense.
Example. Note that by taking M = (a, b), we get a definition of “f ′′ (t0 ) ≤ c in
the barrier sense” for continuous function f : (a, b) → R. For example, consider
f (x) = −|x|. Then g = 0 is a upper barrier function of f at x = 0. As a result,
f ′′ (0) ≤ 0 in the barrier sense.
As observed by Calabi, one can easily construct upper barrier functions for the
distance function:
Example. If γ is a minimizing geodesic from p to q, then for 0 < η < d(p, q), the
function rη (x) = η + d(x, γ(η)) is an upper barrier function for dp at q.
The proof of the following lemma will be left as an exercise.
Lemma 1.3. Let f : (a, b) → R be continuous.
(1) If f is C 2 , then f ′′ (t0 ) ≤ c in the barrier sense if and only if f ′′ (t0 ) ≤ c in
the usual sense.
(2) If f takes its minimum at t0 , and f ′′ (t0 ) ≤ c in the barrier sense, then c ≥ 0.
(3) If f ′′ ≤ 0 in the barrier sense, then f is concave.
We also mention the following Hopf strong maximal principle without proof.
Theorem 1.4 (Hopf-Calabi strong maximum principle). Let Ω ⊂ M be a con-
nected open set. Suppose ∆f ≤ 0 in M in the barrier sense, and f has an interior
minimum, then f is constant on Ω.
1It can be proven that if ∆f ≤ g holds in the barrier sense, then it also holds in the viscosity
sense and in the distribution sense.
4 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON

¶ The global Hessian comparison theorem.

Now we are ready to state and prove

Theorem 1.5 (The global Hessian comparison theorem). Let (M, g) be a Riemann-
ian manifold with sectional curvature K ≥ κ. Then for any p ∈ M ,

∇2 (mdκ ◦ dp ) ≤ cnk ◦ dp · Id in the barrier sense.

Proof. According to the (local) Hessian comparison theorem that we proved last
time, the theorem holds at smooth points q of dp . We first prove the conclusion at
the point p: For any normal geodesic σ with σ(0) = p, we have

mdk ◦ dp ◦ σ(t) = mdk (|t|) = mdk (t).

Thus (mdk ◦ dp ◦ σ)′′ (0) = md′′k (0) = cnk (0).

It remains to prove the conclusion for a non-smooth point q ̸= p of dp . So we let
γ : [0, l] → M be a minimizing normal geodesic from p to q, and let σ be a normal
geodesic with σ(0) = q. Note that by Bonnet-Myers theorem, l ≤ √πκ if κ > 0.
For 0 < η < d(p, q) small, the function

rη (x) = η + d(x, γ(η))

is an upper barrier function of dp at q. Apply Hessian comparison to rη we get

(mdκ ◦rη ◦σ)′′ (0) = mkκ′ (l)(rη ◦ σ)′′ (0) + md′′κ (l)⟨γ̇(l), σ̇(0)⟩2
= snκ (l)(∇2 dγ(η) )q (σ̇(0), σ̇(0)) + cnκ (l)⟨γ̇(l), σ̇(0)⟩2
cnκ (l − η) ⊥
≤ snκ (l) |σ̇ (0)|2 + cnκ (l)⟨γ̇(l), σ̇(0)⟩2
snκ (l − η)
snκ (l)cnκ (l−η)−cnκ (l)snκ (l−η) ⊥
= |σ̇ (0)|2 +cnκ (l)(|σ̇ ⊥ (0)|2 +⟨γ̇(l), σ̇(0)⟩2 )
snκ (l−η)
snκ (η)
= |σ̇ ⊥ (0)|2 + cnκ (l).
snκ (l − η)
So if κ ≤ 0 or if l < √π when κ > 0, given any ε > 0, for η is small enough, we have
κ

(mdκ ◦ rη ◦ σ)′′ (0) ≤ cnκ (l) + ε,

which implies

∇2 (mdκ ◦ dp ) ≤ cnk ◦ dp in the barrier sense.

For κ > 0 and l = √πκ , we will prove (M, g) is isomorphic to Sκm , in which case we
may take σ such that σ̇(0) = γ̇(l), and the desired conclusion follows. □
 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON 5

2. The Toponogov Comparison Theorem

The purpose of this section is to prove a very useful global comparison theorem,
due to Toponogov in 1959. It quantifies the assertion (c.f. PSet 4) that a pair of
geodesics emanating from a point p spread apart more slowly in a region of high
curvature than they would in a region of low curvature.

¶ Geodesic triangles and hinges.

Definition 2.1. Let (M, g) be complete.
(1) A geodesic triangle △ABC consists of three points A, B, C in M (which are
called the vertices) and three minimizing normal geodesics (which are called
the sides) γAB , γBC , γCA joining each two of them.
If only two sides, say γAB and γAC , are minimizing, while the third is a normal
geodesic [which need not be minimizing] that satisfies the triangle inequality
L(γBC ) ≤ L(γAB ) + L(γAC ),
then we will call △ABC a generalized geodesic triangle.
(2) A geodesic hinge ∠BAC consists of a point A in M (which is again called
the vertex ) and two minimizing normal geodesics γAB , γAC (called the sides)
emanating from A, with end points B and C in M .
If one side is minimizing, while the other side is a normal geodesic[which need
not be minimizing], we call ∠BAC a generalized geodesic hinge.

In what follows when we say hinge or triangle, we always mean generalized

geodesic hinge or generalized geodesic triangle.
Remark. In the definition of generalized geodesic hinge, we required that at least
one curve is minimizing. Otherwise the Toponogov comparison theorem below may
fail: If one take two geodesics of length √πκ in Mκ+ε , then the other endpoints of the
comparing hinge in Mκ will meet.
Lemma 2.2. Let (M, g) be a complete Riemannian manifold of dimension m whose
sectional curvature K ≥ k. Then
(1) Let ∠BAC be a generalized geodesic hinge in M . If κ > 0 we further assume
that all the sides of ∠ABC have lengths no more than √πκ . Then there is
a generalized geodesic hinge ∠BeA e in M m with same angle and the same
eC
k
corresponding side lengths. [We will call it a comparing hinge.]
(2) Let △ABC be a generalized geodesic triangle in M . If κ > 0 we further
assume that all the sides of △ABC have lengths no more than √πκ . Then
there is a triangle △AeB
eCe in M m whose corresponding sides have the same
k
length as △ABC. [We will call it a comparing triangle.]
6 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON

¶ Toponogov Comparison Theorem.

Now we state and prove Toponogov Comparison Theorem, in which we can
actually compare the distance functions instead of only comparing their Hessian.
Theorem 2.3 (Toponogov Comparison Theorem). Let (M, g) be a complete Rie-
mannian manifold with sectional curvature K ≥ k. Then
(1) (Hinge Version) Let ∠BAC be a generalized geodesic hinge in M and
∠BeA e a comparing hinge in M m 2. If κ > 0 we further assume that the sides
eC
k
of ∠BAC have lengths no more than √πκ . Then dist(B, C) ≤ dist(B, e C).
e
(2) (Triangle Version) Let △ABC be a generalized geodesic triangle in M and
△A eBeCe a comparing triangle in M m . If κ > 0 we further assume that all the
k
sides of △ABC have lengths no more than √πκ . Then the angles in △ABC
opposites to the minimizing geodesics are greater than the corresponding an-
gles in △A eB
e C.
e

Proof. We first observe that according to the cosine law in Mκ2 , for any hinge with
sides γ1 , γ2 and angle α, the function
f (α) = d(γ0 (l0 ), γ1 (l1 ))
is increasing for α ∈ (0, π). So the Hinge version implies the triangle version.
To prove the Hinge version, we need
Lemma 2.4. Let f : [0, l] → R be a continuous function that is
differentiable at t = 0, with f (0) = 0 and f ′ (0) ≤ 0, where l ≤ √πκ if
κ > 0. Moreover, assume
f ′′ (t) + κf (t) ≤ 0 in the barrier sense,
then f (t) ≤ 0 for all t ∈ [0, l].
We first assume this lemma and proceed.
For simplicity we denote γ0 = γAB , γ1 = γAC and denote l0 = L(γ0 ), l1 = L(γ1 ),
α = ∠BAC. Assume γ0 is minimizing. For ε > 0 small, let
ρε (t) = d(γ0 (l0 − ε), γ1 (t)), t ∈ [0, l1 ].
Then ρε is smooth for t > 0 small enough, ρε (0) = l0 − ε and
ρ′ε (0) = ⟨−γ̇0 (0), γ̇1 (0)⟩ = − cos α.
By the global Hessian comparison theorem,
(mdκ ◦ ρε )′′ (t) ≤ cnk ◦ ρ(t) = 1 − κ mdκ ◦ ρ(t), in the barrier sense.
We may perform the same computation in Mκ2 to conclude that for ρ̃ε (t) = dγ̃0 (l0 −ε) (γ̃1 (t)),
one has ρ̃ε (0) = l0 − ε, ρ̃′ε (0) = − cos α and
(mdκ ◦ ρ̃ε )′′ (t) = 1 − κ mdκ ◦ ρ̃(t).
2Obviously can replace Mkm by Mk2 .
 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON 7

So if we let f (t) = mdκ ◦ ρε − mdκ ◦ ρ̃ε , then

f ′′ (t) + κf (t) ≤ 0 in the barrier sense,

and f (0) = 0, f ′ (0) = snκ (ρε (0))ρ′ε (0) − snκ (ρ̃′ε (0))ρ̃′ε (0) = 0. By Lemma 2.4, we
have f (t) ≤ 0 for all t ∈ [0, l1 ]. It follows that ρε (t) ≤ ρ̃ε (t) for all t ∈ [0, l1 ]. Letting
ε → 0 we get the desired conclusion. □

¶ Proof of Lemma 2.4.

Let fε (t) = f (t) − εsnκ (t), then fε (0) = 0 and fε′ (0) ≤ −ε < 0. So fε (t) < 0
for t > 0 small enough. In what follows we prove fε (t) ≤ 0 for all t ∈ [0, l]. Letting
ε → 0 we get the desired conclusion.
By contradiction we let t0 be the smallest positive root of fε .
Case 1: κ ≤ 0 . Suppose fε |[0,t0 ] takes its minimum at t1 . Then we get,

fε′′ (t1 ) + κfε (t1 ) = f ′′ (t1 ) + κf (t1 ) − ε(sn′′κ (t1 ) + κsnκ (t1 )) ≤ 0

in the barrier sense. By Lemma 1.3(2), we get −κfε (t1 ) ≥ 0, i.e. fε (t1 ) ≥ 0, a
contradiction.
Case 2: κ > 0 . We may assume t0 < l, otherwise we √ are done. Take δ > 0
π
small so that [−δ, √κ+δ − δ] ⊃ [0, t0 ]. Let ϕ(t) = − sin( κ + δ(t + δ)), so that
ϕ′′ (t) + (K + δ)ϕ = 0. Suppose fϕε |[0,t0 ] takes its maximum at t1 . Let gε,ε′ be an
upper barrier function of fε at t1 , i.e.

gε,ε′ (t1 ) = fε (t1 ), gε,ε′ (t) ≥ fε (t) near t1 ,

and such that

′′ ′
gε,ε ′ (t1 ) ≤ (−κ)fε (t1 ) + ε .

gε,ε′
Then t1 is a maximum for ϕ
since ϕ < 0. It follows
′ ′ ′
gε,ε ′ (t)ϕ(t) − gε,ε′ (t)ϕ (t)

gε,ε′
(t) =
ϕ ϕ2 (t)
equals 0 at t1 , and thus
′′ ′′ ′′
gε,ε ′ (t1 )ϕ(t1 ) − gε,ε′ (t1 )ϕ (t1 )

gε,ε′
0≥ (t1 ) =
ϕ ϕ2 (t1 )
′′
gε,ε ′ (t1 ) + (K + δ)gε,ε′ (t1 ) ε′ + δgε,ε′ (t1 )
= ≥ .
ϕ(t1 ) ϕ(t1 )

Letting ε′ → 0 we get fε (t1 ) = gε,ε′ (t1 ) ≥ 0, a contradiction.

8 LECTURE 24: THE GLOBAL HESSIAN AND TOPONOGOV COMPARISON

¶ Application to fundamental group.

As an application, we prove
Theorem 2.5 (Gromov). Let (M, g) be a complete Riemannian manifold with sec-
tional curvature K ≥ 0. Then π1 (M ) is generated by no more than
Vol(S m−1 )
C(m) =
Vol(S m−1 (π/6))
generators, where S m−1 (π/6) is a geodesic ball of radius π/6 in S m−1 .
Proof. We will consider π1 (M ) as the group of Deck transformations on the universal
f. Fix p̃ ∈ M
covering M f and choose inductively a generating set of π1 (M ) as follows:
• We first choose e ̸= g1 ∈ π1 (M ) so that
d(p̃, g1 · p̃) ≤ d(p̃, g · p̃), ∀g ∈ π1 (M ) \ {e}.
• Suppose g1 , · · · , gk−1 are chosen. We then choose gk ̸∈ ⟨g1 , · · · , gk−1 ⟩ so that
d(p̃, gk · p̃) ≤ d(p̃, g · p̃), ∀g ∈ π1 (M ) \ ⟨g1 , · · · , gk−1 ⟩.
f, g̃) from p̃ to gk · p̃. We claim that the
Let γ̃k be a minimizing geodesic in (M
angle between any two such geodesics is at least π3 . Then the conclusion follows.
We prove the claim by contradiction. Suppose the angle between γ̃k and γ̃k+l
is less than π3 . For simplicity we denote ˜lk = d(p̃, gk · p̃). Then according to the
Toponogov comparison theorem,
d(gk+l · p̃, gk · p̃)2 < lk2 + lk+l
2 2
− lk lk+l ≤ lk+l .
This implies
−1
d(p̃, gk+l gk · p̃) = d(gk+l · p̃, gk · p̃) < lk+l = d(p̃, gk+l · p̃),
which contradicts with the choice of gk+l . □
Remark. By the same way one can prove the following theorem of Gromov:
Theorem 2.6 (Gromov). For k negative, there is a constant C =
C(m, k, D) so that for any complete Riemannian manifold (M, g) with
K ≥ k and diam(M, g) ≤ D, the fundamental group π1 (M ) is gener-
ated by no more than C(m, k, D) generators.
Note that a bound on diameter is needed. To see this, one can look at the example
of surface of genus g.