The normal hyperplanes of a curve at two neighbouring points intersect along an affine subspace of codimension 2 which approaches a limiting position as the points move into coincidence. The affine subspace that assumes this limiting position is called the $2$  -codimensional focal subspace of the curve at the point under consideration.

When the point moves along the curve the $2$  -codimensional focal subspace generates a hypersurface which, by construction, is the envelope of the hyperplanes normal to $\gamma$  , i.e. it is the main component of the focal set.

So the main component of the focal set of a curve is the union (in a one-parameter family) of affine subspaces of codimension 2 (see Claim 3 in subsection 2.2).

Example 5. At a point of a curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$  , the $2$  -codimensional focal subspace is the line through the centre of the osculating circle which is parallel to the bi-normal vector. In classical differential geometry of curves in Euclidean $3$  -space, it is called the polar line (see [10] ).

2.1 The caustic of a family of functions. We will use techniques of singularity theory in order to have a more detailed study of the focal set.

Definition. The caustic of a family of functions depending smoothly on parameters consists of the parameter values for which the corresponding function has a non-Morse critical point.

Example 6. Given a generic curve $\gamma :\mathbb{R}\to {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  , let $F:{\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}\times \mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$  be the $(m+1)$  -parameter family of real functions given by $$F(q,\theta )=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2.$$  The caustic of the family $F$  is given by the set $$\{q\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}:\exists \theta \in \mathbb{R}:F_q^{\prime }(\theta )=0and{F}_q^{\prime \prime }(\theta )=0\}.$$  Proposition A. The caustic of the family $F(q,\theta )=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2$  coincides with the focal set of the curve $\gamma :\mathbb{R}\to {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  .

Proof. The caustic of $F$  is defined by the pair of equations $F_q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)=0$  , $F_q^{\prime \prime }\left(\theta \right)=0$  . For each fixed value of $\theta$  , the set of points $q\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  satisfying the first equation form the hyperplane normal to $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  :

$$F_q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)=-\langle q-\gamma \left(\theta \right),{\gamma }^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)\rangle =0.$$  The set of points $q\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  satisfying both equations for a fixed $\theta$  are thus the stationary points of the normal hyperplane at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  under an infinitesimal variation of it. They form an affine subspace of codimension 2 in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  :

$$F_q^{\prime \prime }\left(\theta \right)=-\langle q-\gamma \left(\theta \right),{\gamma }^{\prime \prime }\left(\theta \right)\rangle +\langle {\gamma }^{\prime }\left(\theta \right),{\gamma }^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)\rangle =0.$$  Of course this subspace coincides with the $2$  -codimensional focal plane of the curve at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  , considered above.

2.2 The natural stratification of the focal set. The focal set of a curve $\gamma :\mathbb{R}\to {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  is stratified in a natural way. The following claims describe the geometry of such stratification for curves without flattenings.

Denote by $A_{\gamma }^k\left(\theta \right)$  , $k=1,\dots ,m+2$  , the set consisting of the centres of all hyperspheres having at least $(k+1)$  -point contact with $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  .

Claim 1. The set $A_{\gamma }^k\left(\theta \right)$  , $k=1,\dots ,m+1$  is an affine subspace of codimension $k$  in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  .

Claim 2. The set $A_{\gamma }^1\left(\theta \right)$  (consisting of the centres of all hyperspheres having at least $2$  -point contact with $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  ) is the hyperplane normal to $\gamma$  at the point $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  .

Definition. The affine subspace $A_{\gamma }^k\left(\theta \right)$  is called $k$  -codimensional focal plane of $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  .

Corollary (of claims 1 and 2). The sequence of focal subspaces $A_{\gamma }^1\left(\theta \right)\supset A_{\gamma }^2\left(\theta \right)\supset \cdots \supset A_{\gamma }^{m+1}\left(\theta \right)$  defines a complete flag on the hyperplane normal to $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  .

Remark. The complete flag $A_{\gamma }^1\left(\theta \right)\supset A_{\gamma }^2\left(\theta \right)\supset \cdots \supset A_{\gamma }^{m+1}\left(\theta \right)$  defines a natural stratification on the hyperplane normal to $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  . This stratification induces a natural stratification on the focal set of $\gamma$  . The stratum of dimension $1$  being the focal curve of $\gamma$  . The $0$  -dimensional stratum consists of isolated points at which the focal curve is singular (it has a cusp, see Proposition 1 in §3). These singular points of the focal curve of $\gamma$  correspond to the vertices of $\gamma$  (for these points the set $A_{\gamma }^{m+2}\left(\theta \right)$  is not empty). Claim 3. The focal set of a smooth curve consists of the centres of all hyperspheres having at least $3$  -point contact with that curve at a point of it (i.e. it is the union of all the $2$  -codimensional focal planes of the curve).

Proposition B. The complete flag $A_{\gamma }^1\left(\theta \right)\supset A_{\gamma }^2\left(\theta \right)\supset \cdots \supset A_{\gamma }^{m+1}\left(\theta \right)$  is the osculating flag of the focal curve of $\gamma$  at the point $C_{\gamma }\left(\theta \right)$  . In particular, the hyperplane normal to $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  coincides with the osculating hyperplane of the focal curve of $\gamma$  at the point $C_{\gamma }\left(\theta \right)$  .

Lemma 0. A point $q\in {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  is the centre of a hypersphere having $k$  -point contact with $\gamma$  at the point $\gamma \left({\theta }_0\right)$  if and only if the function $F_q\left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2$  has a critical point of multiplicity $k-1$  at ${\theta }_0$  :

$$F_q^{\prime }\left({\theta }_0\right)=F_q^{\prime \prime }\left({\theta }_0\right)=\dots =F_q^{(k-1)}\left({\theta }_0\right)=0\text{and}{F}_q^k\left({\theta }_0\right)\ne 0.$$  Proof. The sphere of radius $r$  with centre at $q$  is defined by the equation $$g_r\left(x\right)=\frac{1}{2}(\parallel q-x{\parallel }^2-r^2)=0.$$  So a point $q$  is the centre of a hypersphere having $k$  -point contact with $\gamma$  at the point $\gamma \left({\theta }_0\right)$  if and only if the function $g_r\circ \gamma$  has a zero of multiplicity $k$  at $\theta ={\theta }_0$  , for some $r$  , i.e. if and only if the function $F_q\left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2$  has a critical point of multiplicity $k-1$  at ${\theta }_0$  . $\square$  Proof of claims 2 and 3. To prove Claims 2 and 3, use Lemma 0 and repeat the proof of Proposition A. Another proof of Claim 3 follows from Example 6, Lemma 0 and Proposition A. $\square$  Proof of claim 1. Consider the following system of $(m+2)$  equations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{F}_q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)& =& 0\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{F}_q^{\prime \prime }\left(\theta \right)& =& 0\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& ...& \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{F}_q^{(m+2)}\left(\theta \right)& =& 0.\end{array}$$

For each fixed value of $\theta$  , it can be easily seen that the first $k$  equations —written explicitly— define an affine subspace of codimension $k$  in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  (the cases $k=1,2$  , are in the proof of Proposition A). So the set $A_{\gamma }^k\left(\theta \right)$  of centres of all hyperspheres having at least $(k+1)$  -point contact with $\gamma$  at $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  is an affine subspace of ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  . $\square$  Remark. The (generating) family $F(q,\theta )=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2$  together with Sturm theory can be used to calculate the number of vertices of the curve $\gamma$  , see [31] . Remark (for Singularity Theory Specialists). In the setting of the theory of Lagrangian singularities, Lagrangian maps and the caustics of Lagrangian maps, the focal set of the curve $\gamma$  is the caustic of the Normal map associated to $\gamma$  , which is a Lagrangian map defined by the generating family $F(q,\theta )$  (for the notions of caustic, Lagrangian map, Lagrangian singularity and generating family, we refer the reader to [1] and [2] ). Thus the vertices of a curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  correspond to a Lagrangian singularity $A_{m+2}$  of the normal map, that is, the focal set has a “swallowtail” singularity at the centres of the osculating hyperspheres corresponding to the vertices of the curve.

§3. The Proofs of the Results As we mentioned in the introduction, the ideas and techniques of the theory of Lagrangian and Legendrian singularities (singularities of caustics and wave fronts) were an important tool for the discovery of the results of this paper and also for their initial proofs. Some of these results would be difficult to discover only using Frenet frame theory. However, once the results were discovered and proved, the author has made an effort in order to present the proofs as short as possible and as elementary as possible. The author hopes the proofs will be understandable for anyone.

To prove our results we will prove before some lemmas related to the focal curve. Below, $\theta$  denotes any regular parameter of the curve and $s$  denotes the arc length parameter.

Lemma 1. Let $\gamma :\theta \mapsto \left({\phi }_1\right(\theta ),\dots ,{\phi }_{m+1}(\theta \left)\right)$  be a good curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  . The velocity vector $q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)$  of the focal curve of $\gamma$  at $\theta$  is proportional to the $m^{th}$  -normal vector ${\mathbf{n}}_m\left(\theta \right)$  of $\gamma$  .

Proof. Consider the (generating) family of functions $F:\mathbb{R}\times {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}\to \mathbb{R}$  defined by $$F_q\left(\theta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\parallel q-\gamma \left(\theta \right){\parallel }^2.$$  Write $g=\frac{{\gamma }^2}{2}$  . As in §2, use the fact that $-F=\gamma \cdot q-\frac{{\gamma }^2}{2}-\frac{q^2}{2}$  to recall that the following system of $m+1$  equations defines the focal curve $q\left(\theta \right)$  of $\gamma$  :

$$\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccc}{\gamma }^{\prime }\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{\prime }& =& 0,\\ {\gamma }^{\prime \prime }\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{\prime \prime }& =& 0,\\ & ...& \\ {\gamma }^{(m+1)}\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{(m+1)}& =& 0.\end{array}\end{array}$$

(*)

Derive each equation with respect to $\theta$  to obtain a second system of equations:

$$\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccc}{\gamma }^{\prime }\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)+{\gamma }^{\prime \prime }\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{\prime \prime }& =& 0,\\ {\gamma }^{\prime \prime }\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)+{\gamma }^{\prime \prime \prime }\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{\prime \prime \prime }& =& 0,\\ & ...& \\ {\gamma }^{\left(m\right)}\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)+g^{(m+1)}\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{(m+1)}& =& 0,\\ {\gamma }^{(m+1)}\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)+g^{(m+2)}\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{(m+2)}& =& 0.\end{array}\end{array}$$

(**)

Combine the $i^{th}$  equation of system $(**)$  with the $(i+1{)}^{th}$  equation of system $(*)$  , for $i=1,\dots ,m$  , to obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccc}{\gamma }^{\prime }\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)& =& 0,\\ {\gamma }^{\prime \prime }\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)& =& 0,\\ & ...& \\ {\gamma }^{\left(m\right)}\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)& =& 0.\end{array}\end{array}$$

(* * *)

This means that the velocity vector $q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)$  is orthogonal to the osculating hyperplane of $\gamma$  , i.e. $q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)$  is proportional to the $m^{th}$  -normal vector ${\mathbf{n}}_m$  . $\square$  Proposition 1. A non-flattening point of a good curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  is a vertex if and only if the velocity vector of the focal curve is zero.

Proof. If the point $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  is a vertex of $\gamma$  , then besides the system of equations $(*)$  obtained in the proof of Lemma 1, it also satisfies the equation:

$${\gamma }^{(m+2)}\cdot q\left(\theta \right)-g^{(m+2)}=0,$$  which combined with the last equation of system $(**)$  gives the equation $${\gamma }^{(m+1)}\cdot q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)=0.$$  The preceding equation together with the system $(***)$  imply that for a non-flat vertex $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  of the curve $\gamma$  the velocity vector $q^{\prime }\left(\theta \right)$  of the focal curve is zero.

Conversely, if a point $\gamma \left({\theta }_0\right)$  is not a vertex then the corresponding point of the focal curve satisfies the relation $${\gamma }^{(m+2)}\left({\theta }_0\right)\cdot q\left({\theta }_0\right)-g^{(m+2)}\left({\theta }_0\right)\ne 0,$$  which together with the last equation of $(**)$  , for $\theta ={\theta }_0$  , imply that $q^{\prime }\left({\theta }_0\right)\ne 0.$  $\square$  Lemma 1 and Proposition 1 were also stated in [19] , where the condition to the point to be a non-flattening is unfortunately absent. Without this condition Proposition 1 does not hold.

Lemma 2. Let $\gamma :\mathbb{R}\to {\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  be a good curve with ${\kappa }_m\ne 0$  . The derivative of its parametrised focal curve $C_{\gamma }$  with respect the arc length $s$  of $\gamma$  is $$C_{\gamma }^{\prime }=(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m){\mathbf{n}}_m.$$  Proof of Theorem 1, Proposition 0 and Lemma 2. Consider the parametrised focal curve of $\gamma$  :

$$C_{\gamma }\left(s\right)=(\gamma +c_1{\mathbf{n}}_1+c_2{\mathbf{n}}_2+\cdots +c_m{\mathbf{n}}_m)\left(s\right).$$  Denote $C_{\gamma }\left(\theta \right)$  , $\gamma \left(\theta \right)$  and so on by $C_{\gamma }$  , $\gamma$  , etc. Derive $C_{\gamma }$  with respect to the arc length of $\gamma$  and use Frenet equations of $\gamma$  to obtain:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{C}_{\gamma }^{\prime }& =& \mathbf{t}+c_1(-{\kappa }_1\mathbf{t}+{\kappa }_2{\mathbf{n}}_2)+c_1^{\prime }{\mathbf{n}}_1+\cdots +c_{m-1}^{\prime }{\mathbf{n}}_{m-1}+c_m(-{\kappa }_m{\mathbf{n}}_{m-1})+c_m^{\prime }{\mathbf{n}}_m\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& (1-c_1{\kappa }_1)\mathbf{t}+(c_1^{\prime }-{\kappa }_2{c}_2){\mathbf{n}}_1+(c_2^{\prime }+c_1{\kappa }_2-c_3{\kappa }_3){\mathbf{n}}_2+\cdots \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & +(c_i^{\prime }+c_{i-1}{\kappa }_i-c_{i+1}{\kappa }_{i+1}){\mathbf{n}}_i+\cdots +(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m){\mathbf{n}}_m.\end{array}$$

By Lemma 1, the first $m-1$  components of $C_{\gamma }^{\prime }$  vanish. Consequently

$$\begin{array}{c}{C}_{\gamma }^{\prime }=(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m){\mathbf{n}}_m\end{array}$$

(1)

and the following equalities hold:

$$\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccc}1& =& {\kappa }_1{c}_1,\\ c_1^{\prime }& =& {\kappa }_2{c}_2,\\ c_2^{\prime }& =& -{\kappa }_2{c}_1+{\kappa }_3{c}_3,\\ ...& ...& ⋮\\ c_{m-1}^{\prime }& =& -c_{m-2}{\kappa }_{m-1}+c_m{\kappa }_m.\end{array}\end{array}$$

(2)

Equation (1) proves Lemma 2. Use the fact that the radius $R_m$  of the osculating hypersphere satisfies $R_m^2=\parallel C_{\gamma }-\gamma {\parallel }^2$  to obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}(R_m^2{)}^{\prime }& =& \langle C_{\gamma }-\gamma ,C_{\gamma }-\gamma {\rangle }^{\prime }\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& 2\langle C_{\gamma }^{\prime }-{\gamma }^{\prime },C_{\gamma }-\gamma \rangle \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& 2\langle (c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m){\mathbf{n}}_m-\mathbf{t},c_1{\mathbf{n}}_1+\cdots +c_m{\mathbf{n}}_m\rangle \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& =& 2c_m(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m);\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{c}\begin{array}{ccc}i.e.(R_m^2{)}^{\prime }& =& 2c_m(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m).\end{array}\end{array}$$

(3)

Thus for $c_m\ne 0$  , $c_m^{\prime }-\frac{(R_m^2{)}^{\prime }}{2c_m}=-c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m$  . This equation together with the set of equations $\left(2\right)$  (using our conventions $c_0=0$  and $c_0^{\prime }=1$  ) prove Theorem 1. Equation (3) and Theorem 3 prove Proposition 0. $\square$  Proof of Theorem 3 and of its Corollary. By Lemma 2, we have that $$C_{\gamma }^{\prime }=(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m){\mathbf{n}}_m.$$  Proposition 1 implies thus that a point of the curve $\gamma$  is a vertex if and only if $c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m=0$  . $\square$  Proof of Theorem 2. The proof will be done by induction. Use the scalar Frenet equations of Theorem 1 to obtain that $${\kappa }_1=\frac{1}{c_1},{\kappa }_2=\frac{c_1^{\prime }}{c_2}=\frac{c_1{c}_1^{\prime }}{c_1{c}_2}and{\kappa }_3=\frac{c_2^{\prime }+c_1{\kappa }_2}{c_3}=\frac{c_2^{\prime }+c_1\frac{c_1^{\prime }}{c_2}}{c_3}=\frac{c_2{c}_2^{\prime }+c_1{c}_1^{\prime }}{c_2{c}_3}.$$  Suppose that

$$\begin{array}{c}{\kappa }_i=\frac{c_{i-1}{c}_{i-1}^{\prime }+\cdots +c_2{c}_2^{\prime }+c_1{c}_1^{\prime }}{c_{i-1}{c}_i}.\end{array}$$

(4)

The scalar Frenet equations of Theorem 1 imply that $c_{i+1}{\kappa }_{i+1}=c_i^{\prime }+c_{i-1}{\kappa }_i$  .

Substitute equation $\left(4\right)$  to obtain $$c_{i+1}{\kappa }_{i+1}=c_i^{\prime }+\frac{c_{i-1}{c}_{i-1}^{\prime }+\cdots +c_2{c}_2^{\prime }+c_1{c}_1^{\prime }}{c_i}=\frac{c_i{c}_i^{\prime }+\cdots +c_2{c}_2^{\prime }+c_1{c}_1^{\prime }}{c_i}.\square$$  Proof of Theorem 4. We have $R_l^2=c_1^2+\cdots +c_l^2$  . Thus $R_l{R}_l^{\prime }=c_1{c}_1^{\prime }+\cdots +c_l{c}_l^{\prime }$  . Combine last equation with the formula of Theorem 2 to obtain $$R_l{R}_l^{\prime }=c_l{c}_{l+1}{\kappa }_{l+1},for1\le l<m.$$  For a generic curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  the first $m-1$  Euclidean curvatures are nowhere vanishing and the $m^{th}$  Euclidean curvature may vanish at isolated points, which do not coincide with the points at which $R_{m-1}$  is critical. Thus for a generic curve in ${\mathbb{R}}^{m+1}$  , $m>1$  , $R_l^{\prime }=0$  if and only if either $c_l=0$  or $c_{l+1}=0$  for $1\le l<m$  . Moreover, for a smoothly immersed curve the function $c_1=R_1=1/{\kappa }_1$  never vanishes. This proves Theorem 4. $\square$  Proof of Theorem 5. Write $\sigma \left(s\right)$  for the value of the arc length parameter of $C_{\gamma }$  at $C_{\gamma }\left(s\right)$  . We assume that the orientations of the parametrised focal curve $C_{\gamma }$  given by the arc length parameter $s$  of $\gamma$  and by the arc length parameter $\sigma$  of $C_{\gamma }$  coincide. Lemma 2 and Theorem 3 imply that at a non-vertex of $\gamma$  , the unit tangent vector of the parametrised focal curve $C_{\gamma }$  is

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathbf{T}=\frac{(c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m)}{|c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m|}{\mathbf{n}}_m=\varepsilon {\mathbf{n}}_m.\end{array}$$

(5)

Moreover, for any non vertex $$\frac{ds}{d\sigma }=\frac{1}{|c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m|}.$$  In order to obtain that

$$\begin{array}{c}{\mathbf{N}}_1={\delta }_1{\mathbf{n}}_{m-1}\end{array}$$

(6)

$$\text{and}{K}_1=\frac{\left|{\kappa }_m\right|}{|c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m|},$$  derive equation (5) with respect to $\sigma$  and apply Frenet equations of $\gamma$  taking into account that the first $m-1$  Euclidean curvatures of a generic curve are always positive. In the same way, use equation (6) to obtain $${\mathbf{N}}_2={\delta }_2{\mathbf{n}}_{m-2}\text{and}{K}_2=\frac{{\kappa }_{m-1}}{|c_m^{\prime }+c_{m-1}{\kappa }_m|}.$$  To finish the proof, apply induction process. $\square$  References

1. Arnold V.I., Varchenko A.N., Gussein–Zade S.M., Singularities of Differentiable Maps, Vol. 1, Birkhäser (1986).
2. Arnold V.I., Singularities of caustics and wave fronts, Kluwer, Maths. and its Appls., Soviet series, vol.62., 1991.
3. Arnold V.I., Sur les propriétés des projections Lagrangiennes en géométrie symplectique des caustiques, Rev. mat. Univ. Complut. Madrid, 1995, 8:1, p.109–119.
4. Arnold V.I., On the Number of Flattening Points of Space Curves, Amer. Math. Soc. Trans. Ser. 171, 1995, p. 11–22.
5. Arnold V.I., The Geometry of Spherical Curves and the Algebra of Quaternions, Russian Math. Surveys 50:1, 1–68 (1995).
6. Arnold V.I., Towards the Legendrian Sturm Theory of Space Curves, Funct. Anal. and Appl. Vol. 32 No.2. (1998) p.75–80.
7. Barner M., Über die Mindestanzahl stationärer Schmiegeebenen bei geschlossenen Streng-Konvexen Raumkurven, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg, 20, 1956, 196–215.
8. Blaschke W., Vorlesungen über Differentialgeometrie I, 3th ed. Spriger-Verlag, Berlin, 1930.
9. Blaschke W., Leichweiß K., Elementare Differentialgeometrie, 5th reworked Edition, Spriger-Verlag, Berlin, 1973.
10. Darboux G., Leçons sur la théorie des surfaces, Vol.1, Chap.1, 2nd revised and enlarged Edition, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1914.
11. Ghys E., Cercles osculateurs et géométrie lorentzienne, Talk at the Jounée inaugurale de CMI, Marseille, February 1995.
12. Hilbert D., Cohn Vossen S., Geometry and the Imagination, Chelsea Pub. Comp., N. Y. 1952.
13. Kazarian M., Nonlinear Version of Arnol'd's Theorem on Flattening Points, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t.323, Série I, no.1, 1996, p. 63–68.
14. Kneser A., Bemerkungen über die Anzahl der Extreme der Krümmung auf geschlossenen Kurven und über verwandte Fragen in einer nicht–euklidischen Geometrie, Festschrift Heinrich Weber zu Seinem Siebzigsten Geburstag, Teubner, Leipzig, 1912, pp.170–180.
15. Mohrmann H., Die minimalzahl der stationären Ebenen eines räumlichen Ovals, Sitz. Ber. klg. Bayerichen Akad. Wiss. Math. Phys., Kl., 1917, 1–3.
16. Mukhopadhyaya S., New Methods in the Geometry of a Plane Arc I, Bull. Calcutta Math. Soc. 1, 1909, p.31–37.
17. Ovsienko V. and Tabachnikov S., Sturm theory, Ghys Theorem on zeroes of the Schwarzian derivative and flattenings of Legendrian curves, Selecta Math. New Series 2:2 (1996) p.297–307.
18. Romero-Fuster M.C., Convexly-generic curves in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$  , Geometriae Dedicata 28 (1988), 7–29.
19. Romero-Fuster M.C., Sanabria-Codesal E., Generalized evolutes, vertices and conformal invariants of curves in ${\mathbb{R}}^{n+1}$  , Indag. Math. N.S. 10(2), (1999) p.297–305.
20. Sedykh V.D., The Theorem About Four Vertices of a Convex Space Curve, Functional Anal. Appl. 26:1 (1992), 28–32.
21. Segre B., Alcune proprietà differenziali delle curve chiuse sghembe, Rend. Mat. 6 (1) (1968), 237–297.
22. Shcherbak O.P., Projectively Dual Space Curves and Legendre Singularities, Proc. Tbilisi Univ., 232–233, 280–336, (1982); English transl. in Selecta Math. Soviet., 5, No.4, 391–421 (1986).
23. Uribe-Vargas R., On the Higher Dimensional Four-Vertex Theorem, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t.321, Série I, 1995, p. 1353–1358.
24. Uribe-Vargas R., On the ( $2k+2$  )-Vertex and ( $2k+2$  )-Flattening Theorems in Higher Dimensional Lobatchevskian Space, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t.325, Série I, 1997, p. 505–510.
25. Uribe-Vargas R., Four-Vertex Theorems in Higher Dimensional Spaces for a Larger Class of Curves than the Convex Ones, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t.330, Série I, 2000, p. 1085–1090.
26. Uribe-Vargas R., Singularités symplectiques et de contact en géométrie différentielle des courbes et des surfaces, PhD. Thesis, Université Paris 7, 2001. (In English).
27. Uribe-Vargas R., Rigid Body Motions and Arnold's Theory of Fronts on ${\mathbb{S}}^2\subset {\mathbb{R}}^3$  , J. of Geometry and Physics, 45/1-2, 2003, pp. 91-104.
28. Uribe-Vargas R., On Polar Duality, Lagrange and Legendre Singularities and Stereographic Projection to Quadrics, Proceedings of London Mathematical Society, 87/3 (2003) 701-724.
29. Uribe-Vargas R., On 4-Flattening Theorems and the Curves of Carathéodory, Barner and Segre, Journal of Geometry, 77 (2003) 184-192.
30. Uribe-Vargas R., On Singularities, “Perestroikas” and Differential Geometry of Space Curves, L'Enseigement Mathématique, t.50 (2004) 69–101.
31. Uribe-Vargas R., 4-Vertex Theorems, Sturm Theory and Lagrangian Singularities, Mathematical Physics, Geometry and Analysis, 7 (2004) 223-237.