Boundary Detection for High-Dimensional Point Clouds
Authors: Abigail Hickok, Valerio Galanti, Osama Al Dalahmah, Andrew J. Blumberg
Organizations: Department of Mathematics Columbia University New York, NY, USA · Department of Computer Science Columbia University New York, NY, USA · Department of Pathology and Cell Biology Columbia University New York, NY, USA · Department of Mathematics, Department of Computer Science, Irving Institute for Cancer Dynamics Columbia University New York, NY, USA
We introduce two new methods for boundary detection in high-dimensional point cloud data, intended to work in situations with non-uniform density, high ambient dimension, and substantial noise. Our first method fits a separating hyperplane on local neighborhoods after doing local dimension reduction---this method works best when one can reliably estimate the intrinsic dimension of the data. Our second method measures the directional uniformity of local neighborhoods, and has the best overall performance on synthetic data. In addition to pointwise numerical boundary scores, our algorithms yield an estimated normal vector at each boundary point. We validate our methodology on synthetic data as well as two real examples: we analyze spatial transcriptomics data, where we show that we can detect the boundary of a tumor, and we also study LLM activation geometry.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Hyperplane optimization on points sampled from half and full balls. Accuracy is the percentage of points that lie on the positive side of the hyperplane orthogonal to w .
Figure 2: The vectors vj for points {xij} (orange) in a local neighborhood of a point xi (red) within a larger point cloud that is sampled from (left) a thin strip in R2 with noise and (right) a half plane.
DU (us)
Hyperplane (us)
LoDD
BEPS
RU
CO
BORDER
BP (Gauss.)
BP (Cauchy)
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.474
0.447
0.474
0.425
0.436
Table 1: Boundary ( ∥x∥>.98 ) vs deep-interior ( ∥x∥<.23 ) AUC for N=10,000 points sampled non-uniformly from a 2D disk. In the interior, there is a “well” ( r<.23 ) where the density is 1/9 that of the density in the outer region ( r>.67 ). The density increases linearly in between.
Figure 3: Boundary scores ( k=100 ) for two synthetic data sets ( N=104 ) with low noise levels.
Figure 4: Boundary scores ( N=10,000 , k=100 ) on the Henneberg minimal surface embedded in R15 with isotropic Gaussian noise ( σ=.02 ), plotted in R3 .
Figure 5: Analysis of boundary scores on disks embedded in RD with Gaussian noise σ=.01 (size N=10,000 points, with k=100 ).
Figure 6: Boundary scores on noisy intersecting line segments.
Figure 7: Boundary scores at high noise, for 2D disks ( N=10,000 ) embedded in RD with Gaussian noise σ . We use neighborhood size k=100 . Boundary and interior points are defined as points with norm >.95 and <.8 , respectively, with norm computed in the xy plane.
Figure 8: For points x near the boundary of a 2D disk or n -ball ( ∥x∥>.95 ), we compare the estimated boundary normal with the ground-truth normal −x/∥x∥ . We plot median error and IQR.
Figure 9: Glioblastoma slice ST1A1.
Figure 10: Boundary detection on the character-counting manifold for Pythia-2.8B.
Appendix figures & tables15 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 11: We calculate the vector w that is the solution to Equation 1 in our hyperplane method, where the accuracy of w is the percentage of points {zi} such that w⋅zi≥0 . (A) 2D half ball with normal (1,0) and k=50 points, with accuracy .98 , (B) 2D full ball with k=50 and accuracy .5 , (C) 3D half ball with normal (0,0,1) and k=100 , with accuracy .99 , and (D) 3D full ball with k=100 and accuracy .6 .
Figure 12: We sample N=10,000 points non-uniformly from a 2D disk. In the interior, there is a “well” ( r<.23 ) where the density is 1/9 that of the density in the outer region ( r>.67 ). The density increases linearly in between. For each method, we calculate the AUC value for boundary points ( ∥x∥>.98 ) vs. interior well points ( ∥x∥<.23 ), using neighborhood size k=100 . In the top row, we show the methods that are able to handle non-uniform density. In the bottom row, we show the methods that confuse boundary points and low-density interior points.
Figure 13: Boundary scores for four synthetic data sets with low noise levels. Each point cloud has N=10,000 points, and we use neighborhood size k=100 .
Figure 14: Boundary scores for three synthetic data sets embedded in R15 with noise. Scores here are plotted in R3 .
Figure 15: Boundary scores on disks embedded in R15 with Gaussian noise σ=.01 , with N=10,000 points. We use neighborhood size k=100 . We plot only the first two coordinates.
Figure 16: Boundary scores for 2D disks embedded in R3 with isotropic Gaussian noise σ=.05 , projected here to R2 .
Figure 17: Boundary scores on a point cloud with N=10,000 points sampled from a 10 -dimensional ball in R10 , with isotropic Gaussian noise ( σ=.01 ). The ground-truth boundary is difficult to display in 2 D because it is 9 -dimensional, so instead we take a thin 2D slice (a slightly thickened disk) the ball, plotting the 1500 points closest to the xy plane. Because of the curvature of the boundary (a sphere), the boundary appears thicker than the 2D balls in earlier figures, but this is an artifact of the way we are taking a slice and projecting to R2 .
Figure 18: HP and DU boundary scores on the ST1A1 glioblastoma slice at neighborhood sizes k=75,100,150 .
Figure 19: Boundary detection on the character-counting manifold for Llama-3.1-8B. In (c), we calculate normal vectors only for the top 10% scoring boundary points.
Figure 20: Point clouds are sampled from 2D disks embedded in RD for D=3,5,8,10,12,15 with Gaussian noise level σ=.01 . Each point cloud has N=10,000 points, and we use neighborhood size k=100 . Interior points are defined to be points with norm less than .8 , and boundary points are defined to be points with norm larger than τB , which increases from τB=.91 to τB=.98 across the panels. In each panel, we plot the AUC values as a function of ambient dimension D for each of the three methods.
Figure 21: At each noise level σ , we sample a point cloud from a 2D disk in R3 with isotropic Gaussian noise. Each point cloud has N=10,000 points, and we use neighborhood size k=100 . Interior points are defined to be points with norm less than .8 , and boundary points are defined to be points with norm larger than τB , which increases from τB=.91 to τB=.98 across the panels. In each panel, we plot the AUC values as a function of noise level σ for each of the three methods.
Figure 22: At each ambient dimension D , we sample a point cloud from a 2D disk in RD with isotropic Gaussian noise σ=.05 . Each point cloud has N=10,000 points, and we use neighborhood size k=100 . Interior points are defined to be points with norm less than .8 , and boundary points are defined to be points with norm larger than τB , which increases from τB=.91 to τB=.98 across the panels. In each panel, we plot the AUC values as a function of ambient dimension D for each of the four methods.
Pythia-2.8B
Llama-3.1-8B
Total tokens
271,100
269,651
Non-newline tokens
250,437
250,641
Appendix
Table 2: Number of tokens extracted for each model.
Variant
Vector
Score
CO ( Wang et al., 2018 )
vi
k2∑j=1kmi−1mj−1vi⋅vj
Directional uniformity
vi
∑j=1kvi⋅vj
CO magnitude
vi
∥vi∥
Cosine
vi
cos(vi,∑jvj)
Sum displacement
ui
∑jui⋅uj
Mean direction
ui
∑jcos(ui,uj)
Appendix
Table 3: Other boundary-detection methods that we tested.
Figure 23: We compare the variants from Table 3 . (A) Scores on the non-uniformly sampled disk from Figure 12 with N=10,000 points and neighborhood size k=100 . AUROC scores are for boundary points (norm >.98 ) vs deep interior points (norm <.23 ), like in Figure 12 . AUROC scores for boundary vs. interior points on 2D disks and n -balls, where interior and boundary points are defined as having norms <.8 and >.95 , respectively.
Accurate boundary detection in high-dimensional data remains a central challenge in unsupervised learning, particularly in the presence of non-linear structures and heterogeneous densities. In this work, we introduce Mean Curvature Boundary Points (MCBP), a novel geometric framework grounded in Geometric Machine Learning that departs from traditional density-based approaches by explicitly modeling the intrinsic curvature of the data manifold. The method relies on a discrete approximation of the shape operator, estimated from local k-nearest neighbor patches, to compute pointwise mean curvature without requiring explicit manifold parametrization. The key insight of MCBP is to use mean curvature as a principled descriptor of boundary structure: high-curvature regions naturally correspond to transitions between clusters, geometric irregularities, and low-density interfaces. This yields a unified geometric interpretation of boundary, outlier, and transition points. We further introduce an adaptive percentile-based thresholding scheme that enables multiscale boundary extraction without relying on ad hoc density parameters. Beyond detection, we propose a curvature-driven data decomposition that separates samples into smooth (low-curvature) and boundary (high-curvature) subsets, effectively acting as a non-linear geometric filtering mechanism. This representation enhances cluster separability and improves the robustness of downstream unsupervised algorithms. Extensive experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that MCBP consistently improves clustering performance, particularly in complex and high-dimensional scenarios. These results position MCBP as a concrete contribution to Geometric Machine Learning, highlighting the potential of curvature-aware analysis as a unifying paradigm bridging differential geometry and data-driven modeling.
Alexandre L. M. Levada
Federal University of São Carlos 13565-905, São Carlos-SP, Brazil
Neural networks that respect the symmetries of point clouds commonly compute high-order representations of the rotation group to improve their expressivity. Such models are known to be universal, and thus able to separate any pair of point clouds, when using representations of sufficiently high order, yet no precise bound on this order, as a function of the number of points, was previously known. We establish the first quadratic lower and upper degree bounds for polynomials that separate point clouds of n points up to rotations and permutations. By showing Tensor Field Networks and MACE can express all invariant polynomials of a given degree with sufficient representation order, we additionally derive the first explicit, quadratic bound on the representation order sufficient for these architectures to be complete, replacing previous existence results with concrete guarantees. We further show that, under local regularity assumptions, point cloud separation can be achieved with a message-passing-based model using invariants whose degree depends only on the size of a local neighborhood, rather than on the size of the full point cloud. Finally, we provide counterexamples showing MACE must compute high order irreducible representations to separate locally regular point clouds.
Snir Hordan, Harm Derksen, Mircea Petrache +1
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology · Northeastern University · Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Bringing multiscale geometric analysis directly to irregular point clouds remains difficult: quantities such as local dimension, anisotropy, density variation, and geometric transitions are typically estimated through explicit neighborhood, manifold, or graph constructions, or left for neural networks to infer from coordinates. We introduce Heat Field Signatures (HFS), which lift a point cloud to a multiscale family of smooth ambient heat fields, providing a direct interface from discrete samples to geometric analysis. From this field, HFS computes closed-form global and local signatures directly from pairwise distances, capturing heat concentration, intrinsic dimension, anisotropy, and scale transitions. We further introduce the Heat Dimension Spectrum (HDS), a compact summary of multiscale geometric composition. HFS can be used as a closed-form descriptor, a lightweight learned representation, or a geometric feature channel for neural point-cloud models. Across synthetic and real-world benchmarks spanning subcellular, neuronal, tree, and protein data, HFS outperforms strong point-cloud and multiparameter-persistence baselines while substantially reducing end-to-end cost. On SCOP protein-fold classification, HFS improves over the strongest deep baseline by nearly 24 percentage points using coordinates alone, while standalone HFS representations are exactly rotation-invariant by construction. More broadly, HFS turns a classical heat field into a practical interface for multiscale geometric analysis in modern point-cloud learning.
Yuanqing Wang, Yapeng Tian, Baris Coskunuzer
Dept. of Math. Sciences University of Texas at Dallas Richardson, TX, USA · Dept. of Computer Science University of Texas at Dallas Richardson, TX, USA