Remove both closures under the ri hypothesis and record attainment.
Theorem 16.4.3 (sum vs infimal convolution without closures).
The intersection of the polars is contained in the polar of the sum.
The polar of the sum is contained in the intersection of the polars.
Corollary 16.4.2.1: Let K₁, …, Kₘ be non-empty convex cones in ℝⁿ. Then the polar cone of
their Minkowski sum is the intersection of their polar cones:
(K₁ + ⋯ + Kₘ)^∘ = K₁^∘ ∩ ⋯ ∩ Kₘ^∘.
Negating a set flips the inner dual cone.
The inner-product polar set is the negation of the inner dual cone.
The double inner-product polar of a convex cone is its closure.
The polar of the sum of polars is the intersection of the closures.
The double polar of the sum of polars is the closure of that sum.
Corollary 16.4.2.2. Let K₁, …, Kₘ be non-empty convex cones in ℝⁿ. Then
(cl K₁ ∩ ⋯ ∩ cl Kₘ)^∘ = cl (K₁^∘ + ⋯ + Kₘ^∘).
In this development, cl is closure, ∩ is ⋂, and K^∘ is represented as the set
{xStar | ∀ x ∈ K, ⟪x, xStar⟫ ≤ 0}.
The support function of a nonempty convex cone is the indicator of its polar.
Indicator functions determine their sets.
Corollary 16.4.2.3: Let K₁, …, Kₘ be non-empty convex cones in ℝⁿ. If the cones ri Kᵢ,
i = 1, …, m, have a point in common, then
(K₁ ∩ ⋯ ∩ Kₘ)^∘ = (K₁^∘ + ⋯ + Kₘ^∘).
In this development, K^∘ is represented as the set {xStar | ∀ x ∈ K, ⟪x, xStar⟫ ≤ 0} and
ri is euclideanRelativeInterior.