\section{Introduction}

Calling $Y$ a connected complex manifold and $\triangle$ the unit open disc in $\Bbb C$, F. Forstneri\v c and J. Winkelmann proved in \cite{fourthpaper:F17} that the set $\mathcal D$ of all holomorphic maps $f\colon\triangle\to Y$ with dense image, is dense in $\mathcal O(\triangle,Y)$.

We are going to present four results which generalize in different directions the above--mentioned one.
The first one is the most straightforward generalization in higher dimension, which is stated for holomorphic embeddings.
The second one still provides approximating holomorphic mappings with dense images but in a more general setting. Moreover, it is no more a "density result" as the approximating mappings do not belong to the set of mappings we approximate.
The last two theorems work the other way around, describing mappings with dense images approximated by holomorphic mappings.

Another result accounting this topic can be found in \cite{fourthpaper:AF18}: given a closed complex submanifold $X\subsetneq\field{C}^n$, for $n>1$, there exists a \emph{complete} (the image of every divergent path in $X$ has infinite length in $\field{C}^n$) holomorphic embedding $f\colon X\hookrightarrow \field{C}^n$ with everywhere dense image; for $n=1$ the same result holds for complete holomorphic embeddings $f\colon\field{C}\hookrightarrow\field{C}^2$.
If moreover $X\cap\field{B}^n\neq0$ and $K\subset X\cap\field{B}^n$ is compact, there exists a Runge domain $\Omega\subset X$ containing $K$ which admits a complete holomorphic embedding $f\colon \Omega\hookrightarrow \field{B}^n$ with dense image.

Finally in \cite{fourthpaper:FS77} it is proved the existence of a holomorphic injective mapping with dense image from the open unit polydisc in $\field{C}^m$ to an $m$--dimensional paracompact connected complex manifold $M$.

The paper is organized as follows: we start by presenting the main results, then a technical section follows. The subsequent section shows the inductive procedure on which the proofs of the main results rely, which in turn are provided in the last section.

I would like to warmly thank E. F. Wold for directing me to write this paper.

\section{Main Results}

All the manifolds in this paper are connected. We will denote with $\mathcal O(X,Y)$ the set of all holomorphic mappings $h\colon X\to Y$, with $\mathcal O_{\operatorname{emb}}(X,Y)$ and $\mathcal O_{\operatorname{inj}}(X,Y)$ the set of all holomorphic embeddings and injections respectively.

\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:thm1
Let $\Omega\subset\field{C}^n$ open, bounded, star--shaped (with respect to $0$) and pseudoconvex. Let $Y$ be a complex manifold.
Then
$$
\{h\in \mathcal O_{\operatorname{emb}}(\Omega,Y)\;:\;\overline{h(\Omega)}=Y\}
$$
is dense inside $\mathcal O_{\operatorname{emb}}(\Omega,Y)$ (with respect the compact convergence topology).
\end{thm}

Observe that the density is considered with respect to the topology of $Y$. The distance $d$ on $Y$ exploited throughout the paper to make computations (namely: it allows to define the distance between two mappings $f,g\colon X\to Y$ on a given $M\subset X$ by $\|f-g\|_M:=\sup\{d(f(x),g(x))\;:\;x\in M\}$) is induced by a Riemannian metric. Such $d$ induces the same topology $Y$ is endowed with.
\begin{rk}\label{fourthpaper:dim
We will implicitly assume $n\le\dim Y$, otherwise $\mathcal O_{\operatorname{emb}}(\Omega,Y)=\emptyset$.
\end{rk}

\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:thm2
Let $X$ be a complex manifold, $Y$ Stein manifold. Then
$$
\mathscr H(X,Y):=\{h\in\mathcal O(X,Y)\;:\;\overline{h(X)}=Y\}
$$
\emph{compactly approximates}
$$
\mathscr G(X,Y):=\{g\in\mathcal O(X,Y)\;:\;g\;\mbox{non constant},\;g(X)\subset\subset Y\}
$$
meaning that, given $g\in\mathscr G(X,Y)$, for every $M\subset X$ compact and for every $\epsilon>0$ there exists $h\in\mathscr H(X,Y)$ such that $\|g-h\|_M<\epsilon$.
\end{thm}
Observe that $\mathscr G(X,Y)=\emptyset$ whenever $X$ is either compact or euclidean: in the former case the holomorphic mappings are constant, in the latter Liouville holds, obtaining again $g$ constant, as its image is bounded. An example of a domain $X$ such that $\mathscr G(X,Y)\neq\emptyset$ is given by any open relatively compact domain $X\subset\subset Y$ in a Stein manifold; just consider any non--constant holomorphic bounded mapping $g\colon X\to Y$, e.g., the inclusion $\iota\colon X\hookrightarrow Y$.

To present the last two theorems, we need the following definition:
\begin{df}\label{fourthpaper:lep
Let $K$ be a compact in $Y$ complex manifold. A point $\zeta\in K$ is \emph{locally exposable} if there exists a $\mathscr{C}^2$--smooth strictly plurisubharmonic function $\rho$ on some open neighborhood $U$ of $\zeta$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\rho(\zeta)=0$ and $d\rho(\zeta)\neq0$\;, and
\item $\rho<0$ on $(K\cap U)\setminus\{\zeta\}$\;.
\end{enumerate}
\end{df}
Definition \ref{fourthpaper:lep} was originally presented in \cite{fourthpaper:DFW18}. It is a generalization of the more standard definition of \emph{local peak point} (see e.g., \cite{fourthpaper:Ran86} pag. 354).

\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:thm3
Let $Y$ be a complex manifold, $K\subset Y$ connected not finite Stein compact.
Then the set of locally exposable points is non--empty and for any such point $x_0\in K$, there exist $U_k\subset Y$ open neighborhood of $K$ and $F_k\in\mathcal O_{\operatorname{inj}}(U_k,Y)$ compactly convergent to $F\colon K\setminus\{x_0\}\to Y$ such that $\overline{F(K\setminus\{x_0\})}=Y$.
\end{thm}

\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:thm4
Let $Y$ be a Stein manifold, $K\subset Y$ connected not finite compact.\\
Denote with $\Gamma$ the closure in $Y$ of the set of locally exposable points for $K$, which is non--empty. Then there exists $U_k\subset Y$ open neighborhood of $K$ and $F_k\in\mathcal O(U_k,Y)$ compactly convergent to $F\colon K\setminus\Gamma\to Y$ such that $\overline{F(K\setminus\Gamma)}=Y$.
\end{thm}

In Theorems \ref{fourthpaper:thm3} and \ref{fourthpaper:thm4} the limit mapping $F$ is not in general holomorphic, as the domain is not in general an open set. But being $F$ obtained as uniform limit of holomorphic mappings, the realization of $F$ could be a consistent definition for a holomorphic map on $K\setminus\{x_0\}$ or $K\setminus\Gamma$.

\medskip

\section{Technical Tools}

The proofs will extensively exploit Theorem 1.1 in \cite{fourthpaper:DFW18} and a slightly different version of it (whose proof follows automatically from the original one) which is as follows:

\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:Erlend
Let $Y$ be a complex manifold and $Y_0\subset Y$ Stein compact.
Let $\zeta\in Y_0$ be locally exposable and $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to Y$ smoothly embedded curve such that $\gamma(0)=\zeta$ and $\gamma((0,\delta])\subset Y\setminus Y_0$ for some $\delta>0$.
Then, for every $V$ open neighborhood of $\gamma$ and for every $\epsilon>0$, there exist the following:
\begin{enumerate}
	\item $U\subset Y$ neighborhood of $Y_0$\;,
	\item an arbitrarily small $V'\subset V$ neighborhood of $\zeta$\;, and
	\item $f\colon U\to Y$ holomorphic mapping such that
		\begin{itemize}
		\item $f(\zeta)=\gamma(1)$\;;
		\item $f(V')\subset V$\;;

		\item $\|f-\id\|_{Y_0\setminus V'}<\epsilon$\;.
		\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
If the whole curve $\gamma((0,1])$ lies in $Y\setminus Y_0$ then $f$ can be chosen to be injective on $U$.
\end{thm}
In \cite{fourthpaper:DFW18} the theorem is formulated in a slightly more general setting and considering only the case $\gamma((0,1])\subset Y\setminus Y_0$.

\begin{lem}\label{fourthpaper:tech
Let $X$ be a metrizable topological space, $W\subset\subset X$ connected not finite. Let $f_k\colon U_k\to X$ be a sequence of continuous mappings, where $U_k\subset X$ is some open neighborhood of $K_k$ and $K_1:=\overline W$, $K_{k+1}:=f_k(K_k)$.
Define $F_k:=f_k\circ\cdots\circ f_1\colon\overline W\to X$ and consider
\begin{itemize}
\item $\{\epsilon_k\}_k$ positive real numbers\;,
\item $\{C_k\}_k$ \emph{compact exhaustion} of $W$, that is $C_k\subset X$ compact, $C_k\subsetneq C_{k+1}$ and $\bigcup_k C_k=W$, and
\item $\{V_{k}'\}_k$ open sets in $X$\;,
\end{itemize}
such that, setting $r_{k}:=\max\{d(x,F_{k}(C_{k}))\;:\;x\in K_{k+1}\},$ the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)$_k$]
\item $V_k'\subset U_k$ and $V_k'\cap K_k\neq\emptyset$\;,
\item \label{fourthpaper:max} $\max\{r_k,\;\|f_k-\id\|_{K_k\setminus V_k'}\}\le\epsilon_k$,\;and
\item \label{fourthpaper:cap} $V_{k+1}'\cap F_{k}(C_{k})=\emptyset$\;.
\end{enumerate}
If $F_k$ converges uniformly on compacts of $W$ to $F\colon W\to X$, then for every $x\in K_{k+1}$
\begin{equation}\label{fourthpaper:dense
d(x,F(W))\le\sum_{n\ge k}\epsilon_{n}\;.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}

\begin{proof}
Let $x\in K_{k+1}$. Then by definition and from \ref{fourthpaper:max} one gets
$$
d(x,F_k(C_k))\le r_{k}\le\epsilon_{k}\;.
$$
\newline
Then \ref{fourthpaper:cap} implies $F_k(C_k)\subset K_{k+1}\setminus V_{k+1}'$ hence \ref{fourthpaper:max}$_{+1}$ says that $f_{k+1}$ moves $F_k(C_k)$ less than $\epsilon_{k+1}$, therefore
$$
d(x,f_{k+1}(F_k(C_k)))\le\epsilon_k+\epsilon_{k+1}\;.
$$
Since $f_{k+1}(F_k(C_k))=F_{k+1}(C_k)\subset F_{k+1}(C_{k+1})\subset K_{k+2}\setminus V_{k+2}'$ we can repeat the argument getting
$$
d(x,\underbrace{f_{k+2}f_{k+1}(F_k(C_k))}_{F_{k+2}(C_k)})\le\epsilon_k+\epsilon_{k+1}+\epsilon_{k+2}\;.
$$
Inductively, for every $m\ge0$ we get
$$
d(x,F_{k+m}(C_k))\le\sum_{j=0}^m\epsilon_{k+j}
$$
\newline
and passing to $\lim_{m\to\infty}$ (which is well defined in left hand side, since the distance is continuous and $\{F_n\}_n$ uniformly converges to $F$ on $C_k$) we get $d(x,F(C_k))\le\sum_{j\ge0}\epsilon_{k+j}$.
Since $F(C_k)\subset F(W)$, we have $d(x,F(W))\le d(x,F(C_k))$ and we conclude.
\end{proof}
Recall now a useful property of Stein manifolds (\cite{fourthpaper:Ran86}, \S 2, Proposition 2.21 and Theorem 3.24):
\begin{thm}\label{fourthpaper:morse
Let $Y$ be a Stein manifold. Then there exists $\rho$, a $\mathscr C^2$--smooth strictly plurisubharmonic exhausting function for $Y$, such that the set of critical points $C:=\{z\in Y\;:\;d\rho(z)=0\}$ is discrete in $Y$.
In particular, for every $c\in\field{R}$, $\{\rho<c\}\subset\subset Y$ and $Y_c:=\{\rho\le c\}$ is a Stein compact.
\end{thm}
\begin{rk}\label{fourthpaper:boundaryptslocexp}
With the notation of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:morse}, we see that every regular boundary point of a strictly pseudoconvex domain $\{\rho<c\}$ is locally exposable: take $\zeta\in\{\rho=c\}\setminus C$; we assume it is the origin in suitable local coordinates. Then considering $\tilde\rho(z):=\rho(z)-c-\epsilon|z|^2$ for $\epsilon$ small enough, we conclude.
\end{rk}

\section{Inductive procedure}
Consider $Q=\{q_n\}_n\subset Y$ such that $\overline Q=Y$.
Fix $\epsilon>0$ and define $\epsilon_k:=\frac\epsilon{2^{k+1}}$.
For Theorems \ref{fourthpaper:thm1} and \ref{fourthpaper:thm2} we fix a compact subset $M$ of the domain, $\Omega$ and $X$ respectively.
In what follows, we exploit Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:Erlend} to get a suitable sequence of holomorphic functions $f_k$ allowing to reach all the points of $Q$ which have not been already reached, so that the image of the composition tends to invade the whole codomain. Along with the $f_k$, we construct both a compact exhaustion $\{C_k\}_k$ of the case domain $\Omega$, $X$, $K\setminus\{x_0\}$ or $K\setminus\Gamma$ so that it fulfills the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{fourthpaper:tech}, and all the other sequences needed.
For the construction of the $f_k$, we will focus on Theorems \ref{fourthpaper:thm2} and \ref{fourthpaper:thm1}; the procedure for the remaining two theorems is alike and it is afterwards explained.
Similarly for the proofs: we worked out the details of the proof of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm2}, which is displayed by proving convergence of the composition of the $f_k$, approximation of the given function, and density of the image. The argument for the remaining three results is analogous and it is subsequently illustrated.
\subsection{Construction of $f_k$ for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm2}}\label{fourthpaper:indthm2
\subsubsection{Existence of locally exposable points and base of the induction}\label{fourthpaper:elep2
Consider $g\colon X\to Y$ holomorphic non--constant such that $g(X)\subset\subset Y$. Set $K_1:=\overline{g(X)}$ and take $c_1\in\field{R}$ such that $K_1\subseteq Y_{c_1}$ and $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}\neq\emptyset$ (see notation of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:morse}) . Consider $\zeta_1\in K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}$; if $\zeta_1\notin C$ then it is locally exposable by Remark \ref{fourthpaper:boundaryptslocexp}, otherwise we slightly move $K_1$ by composing $g$ with a suitable holomorphic small perturbation defined as follows.
Assume $\zeta_1$ is the only point in $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}$. Observe that in suitable local coordinates on $\field{C}^n$, which we split as $z=(z',z'')=x+iy=(x'+iy',x''+iy'')\in\field{C}^k\oplus\field{C}^{n-k}$, we can express $\rho$ near the origin (\cite{fourthpaper:F17}, Lemma 3.10.1) as
$$
\rho(z)={\rho(0)}+E(x',x'',y',y'')+o(|z|^2)
$$
where
$$
E(x',x'',y',y''):=\sum_{j=1}^k(\lambda_jy_j^2-x_j^2)+\sum_{j=k+1}^n(\lambda_jy_j^2+x_j^2)
$$
with $\lambda_j>1$ for $j=1,\dots,k$ and $\lambda_j\ge1$ for $j=k+1,\dots,n$, for some $k\in\{0,1,\dots,n\}$.
Assume $\zeta_1$ to be the origin $0\in\field{C}^n$ in these coordinates, so $\rho(0)=\rho(\zeta_1)=c_1$.
The boundary of any $Y_c$ is defined by $\rho$, so we want to move a small neighborhood of $\zeta_1$ in a suitable direction allowing it to go across the level set $\partial Y_{c_1}$.
Take then any nonzero vector $v=(\xi'+i\eta',\xi''+i\eta'')$ with $\xi'=0\in\field{R}^k$.
By standard results on Stein Manifolds (\cite{fourthpaper:Hor90}, Corollary 5.6.3), given $w\in T_{\zeta_1}Y$ there exists a holomorphic vector field $V\colon Y\to TY$ such that $V(\zeta_1)=w$. In our case we take $w$ to correspond to $v$. The flow of $V$ on some neighborhood $W$ of $K_1$ is a holomorphic mapping $\phi_t\colon W\to Y$ defined for complex times sufficiently small in modulus, say $|t|<T\;,t\in\field{C}$. In local coordinates around $\zeta_1$ it is $\phi_t(0)=tv+o(|t|^2)$ and up to shrinking $T$, we have that
$$
\rho(\phi_t(0))=\rho(0)+t^2E(0,\xi'',\eta',\eta'')+o(|t|^3)>\rho(0)=c_1
$$
for any $|t|<T$, considering now $t\in\field{R}$.

By continuity of $(z,t)\mapsto\phi_t(z)$ and of $\rho$, the flow will drag a whole small neighborhood of $\zeta_1$ beyond $\partial Y_{c_1}$ and for sufficiently small times it will be the only piece of $K_1$ crossing the boundary (as we are assuming that $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}$ is just one point), that is: there exist $T'<T$ and $U$ neighborhood of $\zeta_1$ sufficiently small, so that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\rho(\phi_t(z))>\rho(0),\;\;\forall z\in U\cap K_1,\;\;T'/2<t<T'$\;;
\item $\rho(\phi_t(z))\le\rho(0),\;\;\forall z\in K_1\setminus U,\;\;\;0\le t<T'$\;;
\item $\phi_t(U\cap K_1)\cap C=\emptyset,\;\;\forall\; T'/2<t<T'$.
\end{itemize}
So, considering now $\widetilde K_1:=\phi_t(K_1)$ for any $T'/2<t<T'$, there exists some $c>c_1$ such that $\widetilde K_1\subseteq Y_c$ and $\widetilde K_1\cap\partial Y_c\setminus C\neq\emptyset$.

If $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}$ contains more than one point, either it is not discrete or it is a finite set. In the former case $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}\setminus C\neq \emptyset$, in the latter we may assume $K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}=\{\zeta_1,\zeta_1'\}$; then, applying the previous argument to one of these points, the piece of $K_1$ that is dragged across $\partial Y_{c_1}$, could be not only $U\cap K_1$, but also $U'\cap K_1$, for any small time (where $U,U'\subset Y$ are suitably small neighborhoods of $\zeta_1$ and $\zeta_1'$ respectively), leading to a similar $\widetilde K_1$ and achieving the same conclusion. Therefore, up to consider $\phi_t\circ g$ instead of $g$, we may assume that $\exists \zeta_1\in K_1\cap\partial Y_{c_1}\setminus C$, which is then locally exposable by Remark \ref{fourthpaper:boundaryptslocexp} and could be sent to any point of $Y\setminus K_1$ by the holomorphic mapping $f_1$ provided by Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:Erlend} (see next section).

Finally define $f_0:=\id_Y$, $C_0:=\emptyset$, $F_0:=f_0$ and $n_0:=0$.

\subsubsection{Inductive step}\label{fourthpaper:indpr2
Assume we have the following: $K_k\subset Y$ compact, $c_k\in\field{R}$ such that $K_k\subseteq Y_{c_k}$ and $\exists\zeta_k\in K_k\cap\partial Y_{c_k}\setminus C$, $F_{k-1}$ holomorphic on some neighborhood of $K_1$, with $F_{k-1}(K_1)=K_k$, $C_{k-1}\subset X$ compact and $n_{k-1}\in \field{N}$.

Consider then a smoothly embedded curve $\gamma_k\colon[0,1]\to Y$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)$_k$]
\item $\gamma_k(0)=\zeta_k$\;;
\item $\gamma_k(1)=q_{n_k}$ where $n_k:=\min\{n>n_{k-1}\;:\;q_n\notin K_k\}$\;;
\item $\gamma_k((0,\delta_k])\subset Y\setminus Y_{c_k}$ for some $\delta_k>0$\;.
\end{enumerate}
Then for every $V_k$ open neighborhood of $\gamma_k$, Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:Erlend} guarantees there exist
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\arabic*)$_k$]
\item
 $U_k\subset Y$ neighborhood of $Y_{c_k}$\;;
\item
$V_{k}'\subset (V_{k}\cap B(\zeta_{k},\epsilon_{k}))\setminus F_{k-1}(g(M\cup C_{k-1}))$\;;\label{fourthpaper:ind
\item
$f_k\colon U_k\to Y$ holomorphic such that the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*)$_k$]
\item
$f_k(\zeta_k)=q_{n_k}$\;;
\item $f_k(V_k')\subset V_k$\;;
\item\label{fourthpaper:fprop} $\|f_k-\id\|_{Y_{c_k}\setminus V_k'}<\epsilon_k$\;.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
Observe that to apply Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:Erlend}, $V_k'$ needs to be a neighborhood of the locally exposable point $\zeta_k$; moreover to have convergence (see next section) it has to avoid the image of (the fixed compact $M$ and) the compact $C_{k-1}$. This cannot happen if $g$ is constant, as $F_{k-1}(g(M\cup C_{k-1}))=K_k=\{\zeta_k\}$ so $V_k'$ would be a punctured neighborhood of $\zeta_k$; moreover $\zeta_k\in Y_{c_k}\setminus V_k'$ and \ref{fourthpaper:fprop} would fail for $\epsilon_{k}$ small enough.
Set $K_{k+1}:=f_k(K_k)$; up to perturbing $f_k$ as we did with $g$, there exists $c_{k+1}\in\field{R}$ such that $K_{k+1}\subseteq Y_{c_{k+1}}$ and $\exists\zeta_{k+1}\in K_{k+1}\cap\partial Y_{c_{k+1}}\setminus C$; then  $F_k:=f_k\circ F_{k-1}$ is holomorphic on some neighborhood of $K_1$ and $F_k(K_1)=K_{k+1}$; we finally choose a compact $C_k\subset X$ large so that $\max\{d(x,F_k(g(C_k))):x\in K_{k+1}\}\le\epsilon_k$ and $C_{k-1}\subsetneq C_k$. The induction may proceed.
\subsection{Construction of $f_k$ for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm1}}\label{fourthpaper:indthm1
\subsubsection{Existence of a locally exposable point}\label{fourthpaper:elep1
Let $g\in \mathcal O_{\operatorname{emb}}(\Omega,Y)$.
Exploiting sharshapedness and up to considering $g_{\delta}(z)=g((1-\delta)z)$ for $0<\delta<1$, we can suppose without loss of generality $g$ to be holomorphic and injective on $U$ a Stein neighborhood of $\overline\Omega$.
Call $R=\max_{z\in\overline\Omega}|z|$, let $\zeta_0\in\partial\Omega$ be such that $|\zeta_0|=R$ and define $\rho(z):=|z|^2-R^2$ which is strictly plurisubharmonic, hence $\zeta_0$ is a locally exposable point by Remark \ref{fourthpaper:boundaryptslocexp}.
Define $\zeta_1:=g(\zeta_0)$ and $K_1:=g(\overline{\Omega})$.

If $\dim Y=n$, then $\zeta_1$ is locally exposable with respect to $\rho_1:=\rho\circ g^{-1}$ and $K_1$ is a Stein compact, in fact $W_{\alpha}=g_\alpha(\Omega),\;\;0<\alpha<\delta$ is a neighbourhood basis of Stein domains since each $W_\alpha$ is biholomorphic to $\Omega$ which is holomorphically convex. In this case, $\zeta_1$ is locally exposable and $K_1$ is a Stein compact asking $g$ for mere injectivity.

Let us now prove that $\zeta_1$ and $K_1$ are still a locally exposable point and a Stein compact respectively even in the case $\dim Y=m>n$.
Working with local charts we can assume to work on open subsets of $\Bbb C^m$.
Since $dg(\zeta)$ has full rank $n$ at each point $\zeta\in U$, it is $\imm dg(\zeta)\simeq \Bbb C^n$ and up to a linear change of coordinates, we can assume $\imm dg(\zeta_0)=\Bbb C^n\times\{0\}^{m-n}$ and obviously $\imm dg(\zeta_0)\bigoplus\spann_{\Bbb C}(e_{n+1},\dots,e_m)=\Bbb C^m$. Define then, for $(z_1,\dots,z_m)\in U\times\Bbb C^{m-n}$
$$
\tilde g(z_1,\dots,z_m):=g(z_1,\dots,z_n)+z_{n+1}e_{n+1}+\cdots+z_{m}e_{m}\;.
$$
Clearly $\tilde g(\zeta_0,0)=\zeta_1$ and it is locally invertible near $(\zeta_0,0)$. Call $h\colon A\to B$ the inverse, where $A,B\subset\Bbb C^m$ are open neighborhoods of $\zeta_1$ and $(\zeta_0,0)$ respectively and since
$$
\pi_j\circ h(z)=z_j\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;j=n+1,\dots,m\;,
$$
we have that
$$
g(U)\cap A=
\{z\in A\;:\;z_{n+1}=\cdots=z_m=0\}\;;
$$
we worked around $\zeta_1$, but the same argument holds for any other point (regardless of whether it is regular or singular) so $g(U)$ is a complex subvariety; in particular, it is \emph{locally closed} (every point in $g(U)$ has an open neighborhood $W$ such that $g(U)\cap W$ is closed in $W$), thus it admits a Stein neighborhood basis (\cite{fourthpaper:F17}, Theorem 3.1.1). The same holds for any $g(U')$, with $\overline{\Omega}\subset U'\subset U$, therefore $K_1$ is a Stein compact. Define now
$$
\rho_1(z):=\rho\circ \alpha(z)+\sum_{j=n+1}^m|z_j|^2\;,
$$
where $\alpha:=\pi_{|\Bbb C^n}\circ h\colon A\to U$ and $\pi_{|\Bbb C^n}\colon\Bbb C^m\to\field{C}^n$ is the projection on the first $n$ coordinates. The term $\rho\circ \alpha$ is plurisubharmonic as $\rho$ is such and $\alpha$ is holomorphic; moreover
$$
L_w(\rho\circ\alpha;t)=L_{\alpha(w)}(\rho;\alpha'(w)t)>0
$$
for every $t\in\Bbb C^m,\;\pi_{|\Bbb C^n}(t)\neq0,\;w\in A$,
in fact $\ker \alpha'(w)=\{0\}^n\times\Bbb C^{m-n}$ for any $w\in A$ and $\rho$ is strictly plurisubharmonic. Therefore we add the plurisubharmonic term $\beta(z):=\sum_{j=n+1}^m|z_j|^2$. Clearly
$$
L_w(\beta;t)=\beta(t)>0
$$
for every $t\in\Bbb C^{m},\;\pi_{|\Bbb C^{m-n}}(t)\neq0,\;w\in A$. Therefore $\rho_1$ is strictly plurisubharmonic on $\zeta_1$ (actually on the whole $A$). It is clear that $\rho_1(\zeta_1)=0$ and $\rho_1<0$ on $A\cap K_1\setminus\{\zeta_1\}$; then a computation shows that $d\rho_1(\zeta_1)\neq0$, hence $\zeta_1$ is locally exposable in $K_1$ with respect to $\rho_1$.

\subsubsection{Inductive procedure}\label{fourthpaper:indpr1
Let us observe that $Y\setminus K_1$ is connected, in fact if $n=1$, $\Omega$ is simply connected (being starshaped) thus its boundary is connected and so is its image.

Let $n\ge2$ and $\dim Y=n$; then $g(\Omega)$ is a Stein domain, which has connected boundary for $\dim Y\ge2$ (see \cite{fourthpaper:Ser55}, pag. 22).

The remaining case, by Remark \ref{fourthpaper:dim}, is $n\ge2$ and $m=\dim Y>n$. In this case just observe that $g(\Omega)$ is a complex submanifold of complex codimension $m-n\ge1$, so its complement is connected.

Assume we have $K_k\subset Y$ Stein compact, $\zeta_k\in K_k$ locally exposable with respect to some strictly plurisubharmonic $\rho_k$, $C_{k-1}\subset\Omega$ compact, $F_{k-1}$ holomorphic injective on some neighborhood of $K_1$ such that $F_{k-1}(K_1)=K_{k}$. The construction of $f_k\colon U_k\to Y$ is as in Section \ref{fourthpaper:indpr2}, with $Y_{c_k}=K_k$ (Stein compact) and $\gamma_k((0,1])\subset Y\setminus Y_{c_k}$ (which can be achieved since $Y\setminus Y_{c_k}$ is connected, as above), allowing $f_k$ to be injective on $U_k$ and setting $\zeta_{k+1}:=f_k(\zeta_k)=q_{n_k}$ (which is locally exposable with respect to $\rho_{k+1}:=\rho_k\circ f_k^{-1}$).
Finally set $K_{k+1}:=f_k(K_k)$ Stein compact, $F_k:=f_k\circ F_{k-1}$ holomorphic injective on some open neighborhood of $K_1$ and $C_k\subset \Omega$ as in Section \ref{fourthpaper:indpr2}. In particular $F_k(K_1)=K_{k+1}$ and $\{C_k\}_k$ is a compact exhaustion of $\Omega$.

\subsection{Construction of $f_k$ for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm3}}
Since $K$ is a Stein compact, there exists $U\subset Y$ Stein neighborhood of $K$ and consequently a plurisubharmonic exhausting function $\rho\colon U\to\field{R}$ as recalled in Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:morse}.
Then, the existence of at least one locally exposable point $x_0\in K$ is guaranteed by the argument of Section \ref{fourthpaper:elep2}, with $x_0, K, U$ playing the role of $\zeta_1, K_1$ and $Y$ respectively and being $\{C_k\}_k$ compact exhaustion for $K\setminus\{x_0\}$.
So, given any $x_0\in K$ locally exposable, the rest of the inductive procedure is as in Section \ref{fourthpaper:indpr1}, except for $M$ and $g$ which here just do not play any role, with $x_0, K, \rho$ playing the role of $\zeta_1, K_1$ and $\rho_1$ respectively.

\subsection{Construction of $f_k$ for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm4}}
The construction is as in Section \ref{fourthpaper:indthm2}, with no $M$, no $g$, with $K$ playing the role of $K_1$ and $\{C_k\}_k$ compact exhaustion for $K\setminus\Gamma$.
At each step we get a locally exposable point $\zeta_{k}\in K_k\cap\partial Y_{c_k}\setminus C$, sent to $q_{n_k}$ by $f_k$ and corresponding to some $x_k\in K=K_1$, which is locally exposable as well (thus $\{x_k\}_k\subset\Gamma$).

\section{Proofs}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm2}}
\begin{proof}
$F_k\colon K_1= \overline{g(X)}\to Y$ is holomorphic. Then from \ref{fourthpaper:ind}$_{+1}$ it follows that for every fixed $j$
\begin{align}\label{fourthpaper:claim
F_k(g(C_j))\subset K_{k+1}\setminus V_{k+1}'
\end{align}
holds true for every $k\ge j$.
Hence we get that, for every fixed $j$
\begin{equation}\label{fourthpaper:ineq
\|F_{k+1}-F_k\|_{g(C_j)}=\|f_{k+1}-\id\|_{F_k(g(C_j))}\le\|f_{k+1}-\id\|_{K_{k+1}\setminus V_{k+1}'}<\epsilon_k\;
\end{equation}
is true for every $k\ge j$, so $\{F_k\}_k$ converges on compact subsets of $g(X)$ to $F\colon g(X)\to Y$ holomorphic.
As above, \ref{fourthpaper:ind}$_{+1}$ implies $F_k(g(M))\subset K_{k+1}\setminus V_{k+1}' $ for every $k$, hence inequality $\eqref{fourthpaper:ineq}$ holds true for all $k$, thus
\begin{align*}
\|F-\id\|_{g(M)}
&\le\sum_{k\ge0}\|F_{k+1}-F_k\|_{g(M)}<\epsilon\;,
\end{align*}
allowing us to conclude that $\|h-g\|_M<\epsilon$, where $h=F\circ g\colon X\to Y$ is the approximating mapping.
We now check it actually has dense image.
If $h(X)$ is not dense in $Y$, then there exists an open ball $B\subset Y$ such that
$$
\beta:=d(B,h(X))>0\;.
$$
The construction of the sets $K_k$ and the sequence $\{n_k\}_{k\ge1}$ allows to consider a partition of $Q$ as
\begin{align*}
&q_{n_{k-1}},\dots,q_{n_{k}-1}\in{K_{k}},\;\;k\ge1\;.
\end{align*}
In this way we can define the sequence
$$
k(n):=j\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;n=n_{j-1},\dots,n_j-1,\;\;\mbox{for}\;\;j\ge1\;
$$
and we have
$q_n\in K_{k(n)}$ holds true for all $n$;
 the sequence $n\mapsto k(n)$ is increasing and such that $k(n)\to+\infty$ as $n\to+\infty$ (otherwise $\exists\widetilde k,N$ such that $q_n\in K_{\widetilde k}$ for all $n\ge N$, so $Q$ would not be dense). Since $g(X)\subset\subset Y$, it follows by Lemma \ref{fourthpaper:tech} that
$$
d(q_n,h(X))= d(q_n,F(g(X)))\le\sum_{j\ge k(n)-1}\epsilon_{j}\;.
$$
This last sum is less than $\beta$ for any $n\ge n_{\beta}$, for a suitably large $n_\beta$. Therefore $\{q_n\}_{n>n_{\beta}}$, which is still dense in $Y$, does not meet an open ball, contradiction.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm1}}
\begin{proof} It is the same as the previous proof. Just observe that now $F_k$ is defined on $K_1=g(\overline\Omega)$, it is holomorphic injective and so is $F$. Since $g$ is injective by assumption, then the approximating mapping $h=F\circ g$ is holomorphic injective as well.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm3}}
\begin{proof}
The mappings $F_k$ are defined, holomorphic and injective on some open neighborhood of $K$ and converge to $F\colon K\setminus\{x_0\}\to Y$ uniformly on compacts of $K\setminus\{x_0\}$. The construction of mappings $f_k$ ensures, as for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm2}, to achieve $\overline {F(K\setminus\{x_0\})}=Y$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm4}}
\begin{proof}
As for Theorem \ref{fourthpaper:thm3} (except for injectivity of $F_k$), with $K\setminus\Gamma$ instead of $K\setminus\{x_0\}$.
\end{proof}

 \newpage


\section{INTRODUCTION AND RELATED WORK} \label{sec:introduction}
\section{Introduction and Related Work} \label{sec:introduction}

Formable crust shape displays allow users to freely explore smooth surfaces through haptic interactions, a concept known as ``digital clay'' \cite{Rossignac_Allen_Book_Glezer_Ebert-Uphoff_Shaw_Rosen_Askins_Bai_Bosscher_2003, Bosscher_Ebert-Uphoff_2003}. This class of displays embed the actuation mechanism into the surface itself instead of requiring arrays of discrete actuators \cite{Follmer_Leithinger_Olwal_Hogge_Ishii_2013, Siu_Gonzalez_Yuan_Ginsberg_Follmer_2018}, reducing assembly bulk and enabling curved surface rendering. By using elastomeric materials as flexible substrates, several actuation methods have been proposed for creating controllably deformable surfaces, including pneumatics \cite{Stanley_Okamura_2015, Shah_Yang_Yuen_Huang_Kramer_Bottiglio_2021}, hydraulics \cite{Rossignac_Allen_Book_Glezer_Ebert_Uphoff_Shaw_Rosen_Askins_Bai_Bosscher_2003}, and shape memory alloys \cite{Coelho_Ishii_Maes_2008}. However, these typically require complicated and expensive fabrication or high power consumption, inhibiting large-scale continuous shape displays.

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={2pt 0 0 0},clip]{figures/20220916_conceptual_diagram_v7_compressed_v4-compressed_1.pdf}
    \caption{Conceptual diagram for a 2-layer stack used to integrate electroadhesion with auxetic sheets. The bottom sheet's auxetic unit cells (AUCs, blue) are rotated by 90$^\circ$ relative to the top sheet's AUCs (orange), causing their squares to rotate in opposite directions when stretched. (a) Auxetic layer stack stretched axially by force $4f$. The left AUC is locked in place via electroadhesion, while the right AUC is free to expand. (b) Locking only part of a formable crust shape display's surface results in global shape change. (c) Exploded view of the electroadhesive layer stack for a single AUC. (d) Electroadhesive normal force $f_{ea}$ is generated between the metallized electrodes and amplified by the dielectric film when a voltage differential is applied.}
    \label{fig:conceptual_diagram}
\end{figure}

Auxetic structures present a promising alternative to elastomeric materials when integrating programmable-stiffness capabilities into flexible surfaces. Auxetics have a negative Poisson's ratio ($\nu < 0$), allowing them to expand and conform to high-curvature surfaces without collapsing \cite{Sedal_Memar_Liu_Menguc_Corson_2020, Konakovic-Lukovic_Panetta_Crane_Pauly_2018}. Despite their flexibility, auxetics can be made from traditional materials and plastics using monolithic manufacturing techniques like flexible printed circuit board (PCB) fabrication and laser cutting. This lowers assembly complexity and cost while integrating electronics for programmable actuation \cite{Jang_Won_Kim_Kim_Oh_Lee_Kim_2022}. Prior work has applied these properties to create passive auxetic skins for soft robots and shape displays with pre-programmed stiffness profiles, allowing a single device to produce a variety of output shapes by manually changing the skin wrapped around it at the time \cite{Sedal_Memar_Liu_Menguc_Corson_2020, Konakovic-Lukovic_Panetta_Crane_Pauly_2018, Rafsanjani_Zhang_Liu_Rubinstein_Bertoldi_2018}. However, little work has embedded programmable stiffness capabilities into auxetic materials to modulate the shape output at runtime. We propose that by fabricating auxetic sheets as flexible PCBs, we can integrate planar electroadhesion actuation into a flexible form factor for scalable, low-cost, and low-power on-demand stiffness control.

Electroadhesion is the electrostatic attractive force between two metallized surfaces separated by a dielectric material and held at a potential difference. It has gained increasing interest for its high force output given its low mass and power consumption \cite{Guo_Leng_Rossiter_2020}, with applications including low-profile clutches \cite{Zhang_Gonzalez_Guo_Follmer_2019, Park_Drew_Follmer_Rivas-Davila_2020, Ramachandran_Shintake_Floreano_2019}, exoskeleton actuation \cite{Diller_Collins_Majidi_2018, Hinchet_Vechev_Shea_Hilliges_2018}, and conformal grippers \cite{Aukes_Heyneman_Ulmen_Stuart_Cutkosky_Kim_Garcia_Edsinger_2014, Han_Hajj-Ahmad_Cutkosky_2020, Seitz_Goldberg_Doshi_Ozcan_Christensen_Hawkes_Cutkosky_Wood_2014}.

Fig. \ref{fig:conceptual_diagram} shows a conceptual diagram for the layer stack we used to integrate electroadhesion with auxetic sheets, for use as a strain limiting layer in a formable crust shape display. We fabricated auxetic sheets as flexible PCBs with metallized electrodes on each AUC, and one sheet (colored blue in Fig. \ref{fig:conceptual_diagram}) is assembled with a square of conductive adhesive and a dielectric film to amplify the electrostatic attractive force. When another auxetic sheet (colored orange) with exposed metallized electrodes is rotated by 90$^\circ$ and laid over the assembled sheet, their squares rotate in opposite directions when stretched. Applying a voltage between the two layers generates an electroadhesive normal force by which friction can generate a shear braking torque, locking the AUC and preventing it from expanding. This layer stack can even be extended to three or more auxetic sheets by metallizing both sides of the flexible PCB and alternating high voltage and ground layers. Fig. \ref{fig:conceptual_diagram}(b) demonstrates how locally locking selected AUCs results in global shape change when overlaid as a strain limiting layer on top of an inflatable LDPE pouch. Low-stiffness regions inflate more given an isotropic pressure input, achieving higher curvature than locked surface regions.

In this work, we motivate the integration of electroadhesion as a programmable stiffness actuation mechanism for auxetic sheets. We characterize these stiffening properties across a variety of materials and match the experimental data to a kinematic model with good conformity. We explore the ability of locking multiple AUCs in an auxetic array to control the sheets' axial and transverse stiffness, achieving global shape change when stretched. Finally, we demonstrate the ability of this actuator to modulate the shape output of a continuous, formable crust shape display.

\section{Design of an Individual Electroadhesive Auxetic Unit Cell Layer Stack} \label{sec:characterization_2x2}

\begin{figure}
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={10pt 10pt 0 0},clip]{figures/20220915_dimensional_diagram_v3.pdf}
    \caption{Dimensional drawing of square AUC when (a) unstretched and (b) stretched. The metallized pad is offset by 0.444mm to account for space taken up by electrical wiring.}
    \label{fig:kinematics_dimension_drawing}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Planar Kinematic Model} \label{subsec:kinematic_model}
We first develop a planar kinematic model for our electroadhesive auxetic layer stack to understand the relevant design variables. We chose to study square unit cells for their Poisson's ratio $\nu = -1$, which allows the sheet to retain geometric similarity to its original shape even when stretched \cite{Tang_Yin_2017, Jang_Won_Kim_Kim_Oh_Lee_Kim_2022}. A dimensional diagram of our square AUC is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:kinematics_dimension_drawing}. Each square has side length $a$ and out-of-plane thickness $t$, and the hinge joint between squares is modeled as a beam with width $\delta$ and length $c$. When stretched by an applied linear force $f$, each node reaches an angle $\theta$ with respect to the force axis, and each hinge joint reaches a radius of curvature $\rho$ and bending angle $\phi = 2\theta$. The final length along the force axis thus becomes:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:final_length}
    l_f = 2a(\cos(\theta) + \sin(\theta)) + 2c\paren{\frac{\sin(\theta)}{\theta}}
\end{equation}

Inspired by \cite{Sedal_Memar_Liu_Menguc_Corson_2020}, we can estimate the AUC's equilibrium position $\theta$ by balancing the torques for each individual square from the applied force $\tau_f$, the bending of the hinge joints $\tau_j$, and the frictional torque from electroadhesion $\tau_{ea}$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:kinematics_dimension_drawing}(b). The model below relies on three key assumptions: no out-of-plane motion, no buckling or plastic deformation, and that the hinge joints act as Euler-Bernoulli beams with no length change along their neutral axes.

The torque created by the applied force $f$ is found by taking the cross product of the position vector to the rightmost and leftmost corners and the force $f$. Adding both torques together, we get that:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:torque_applied_force}
    \tau_{f} = fa(\cos(\theta) - \sin(\theta))
\end{equation}

As derived by \cite{Tang_Yin_2017}, we can model the hinge joints as Euler-Bernoulli beams. The bending radius and resulting torque from all four corners are thus:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:radius_cut_junction}
    \rho = \frac{c}{\phi}=\frac{c}{2\theta}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:torque_cut_junction}
    \tau_j = \frac{4EI}{\rho} = \frac{2E}{3} \paren{\frac{\delta^3 t}{c}} \theta
\end{equation}
where $E$ is the substrate's Young's modulus and $I = \frac{\delta^3 t}{12}$ is the hinge joint's area moment of inertia.

Finally, the frictional torque from electroadhesion can be modelled by integrating the the cross product of the position vector relative to the node's center and the frictional force. The normal force created from electroadhesion is:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:normalforce_electroadhesion}
    f_{ea} = \frac{\epsilon_0 \epsilon_r}{2} \paren{\frac{A}{d^2}} V^2 =: \sigma A
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_0 = 8.854\cdot 10^{-12} N/V^2$ is the permittivity of free space, $\epsilon_r$ is the relative permittivity of the dielectric material, $A$ is the overlap area of the charged electrodes, $d$ is the dielectric thickness, $V$ is the potential difference, and $\sigma$ serves as the electrostatic pressure.

Assuming a frictional coefficient $\mu$ and, for simplicity, that the overlap area is a square of side length $a_{ov}$, we can then compute the frictional torque as:
\begin{align} \label{eq:torque_electroadhesion}
    \tau_{ea} &= \int r \mu \sigma dA \\
    &= \mu \sigma \int_{-a_{ov}/2}^{a_{ov}/2}\int_{-a_{ov}/2}^{a_{ov}/2} \sqrt{x^2 + y^2} \textrm{ } dx \textrm{ } dy \nonumber \\
    &= \frac{\mu \sigma a_{ov}^3}{6} \paren{\textrm{arsinh}(1) + \sqrt{2}}\nonumber
\end{align}

By balancing the torque equation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:torque_balance}
    \tau_f - \tau_j - \tau_{ea} = 0
\end{equation}
we can solve for the equilibrium angle $\theta$ via a root-finding algorithm such as Newton's method.

\subsection{Testing Setup for an Individual Auxetic Unit Cell} \label{subsec:sts2x2_testing_setup}
In order to test the performance of electroadhesion as a rotary friction mechanism for auxetic sheets, we patterned an auxetic unit cell into a flexible printed circuit board (PCB) (PCBWay, Shenzhen, China). The polyimide substrate is $t = 50$ \textmu m thick, and the AUC has dimensions $a = 17$ mm, $c = 3$ mm, and $\delta = 0.71$ mm. Because of the space taken up by wiring electrical traces, the total overlap area between copper electrodes on adjacent auxetic layers is 180.34 mm$^2$, for an average $a_{ov} = 13.43$ mm when unstretched.

We consider three dielectric films, which provide different trade-offs in price, relative permittivity, and thickness:
\begin{itemize}
    \item Aluminium-sputtered mylar (CS Hyde Company, Illinois, USA), 25 \textmu m thick mylar with a 25 nm Al layer, $\epsilon_r = 3$, cost = 0.00065 USD/cm$^2$ in bulk (4.6 m$^2$ rolls)
    \item Silver-sputtered PVDF-HFP (PolyK Technologies, LLC, Philadelphia, USA), 10 \textmu m thick biaxially oriented PVDF-HFP (90/10 wt) with 100 nm Ag layer, $\epsilon_r = 13$, cost = 0.0059 USD/cm$^2$ in bulk (68 m$^2$ rolls)
    \item Non-metallized PVDF-TrFE-CFE (PolyK Technologies, LLC), 22 \textmu m thick PVDF-TrFE-CFE (7 mol\% CFE), $\epsilon_r = 50$, cost = 0.19 USD/cm$^2$ in bulk (1.5 m$^2$ rolls)
\end{itemize}

Dielectrics and conductive adhesives were cut using a quasi-CW DPSS UV laser cutter (DPSS Lasers Inc., Series 3500). Dielectric films were cut into 17mm squares to match the auxetic pattern. For mylar and PVDF-HFP, we etched away their metallized sputter's 0.7mm outer ring to prevent arcing and adhered them to a 14mm square of 3M 1182 double-sided copper tape, before assembling them onto the flexible PCB as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:conceptual_diagram}. The non-metallized PVDF-TrFE-CFE was backed with 3M 9703 z-axis anisotropic conductive transfer tape before being cut and assembled.

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{figures/20220914_sts2x2_testing_setup_v3-compressed_2.pdf}
    \caption{Testing setup for measuring the linear force vs. strain of an individual auxetic unit cell layer stack.}
    \label{fig:sts2x2_testing_setup}
\end{figure}

The testing setup, shown in Fig. \ref{fig:sts2x2_testing_setup}, measures hysteresis curves for the linear force required to stretch a multi-layer AUC stack under both locked and unlocked states. The flexible PCBs have four metallized mounting holes at the midpoint of their hinge joints. Each mounting hole is clamped between two threaded standoffs, which are connected to electrical ground and friction fit into ball bearings for free rotation as the AUC expands. The ball bearings are held in place vertically by a cover slip and given horizontal travel to expand when stretched, as expected from the auxetic structure's negative Poisson's ratio. All mounting components for the ball bearings are 3D printed with a glossy finish from VeroWhitePlus photopolymer using a Strasys Objet24 material jetting printer, ensuring a low coefficient of friction ($\mu = 0.34$). The hysteresis tests were conducted using an Actuonix S20 linear actuator, and linear force readings are measured at 20 Hz by a Loadstar Sensors RAPG-100G-A load cell. Because the tight space constraints make it difficult to actively actuate both the top and bottom AUCs at 90$^\circ$ angles relative to each other, we only actively stretch the bottom layer and let the other lie passively on top.

\subsection{Characterization Results for a Single Auxetic Unit Cell} \label{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2}
Fig. \ref{fig:ets2x2_force_vs_strain} shows a sample hysteresis curve from the setup in Sec. \ref{subsec:sts2x2_testing_setup}. Testing was restricted to within 5\% strain to more accurately assess the effect of rotational friction without linear sliding, although higher voltages clearly show the slippage point around 3.5\% strain where the AUCs' locking ability gets outweighed by the load cell's spring constant of 1850 N/m.  The 2-layer PVDF-HFP dielectric film achieved the largest locked-over-unlocked stiffness variation of 7.6x with a locked linear stiffness of 1500 N/m, calculated as the average ratio of slopes across a 1\% strain range. It achieves this with a maximum power draw of 50 \textmu W/AUC, highlighting the low power consumption of electroadhesion relative to its locking force. Mylar and PVDF-TrFE-CFE achieved maximum stiffness variations of 4.6x and 7.0x, respectively. We proceed with PVDF-HFP for future experiments.

\begin{figure}[!t]
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{figures/20220915_23_12_44_sts2x2_force_vs_strain.pdf}
    \caption{Hysteresis curve for the linear force required to stretch a 2-layer AUC stack with PVDF-TrFE-CFE dielectric. Voltage was applied only during the stretching phase. The 95\% confidence interval is shown over $N = 4$ trials at each voltage, and data is smoothed using a moving average filter.}
    \label{fig:ets2x2_force_vs_strain}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!th]
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{figures/20220915_23_13_16_ets2x2_force_vs_voltage_vs_numlayers_expected.pdf}
    \caption{Additional linear force required to stretch a 2-, 3-, and 4-AUC stack when locked, as compared to when unlocked. Results are averaged over $N = 3$ trials, and the dotted lines show the fitted solid mechanics models.}
    \label{fig:ets2x2_force_vs_voltage_vs_numlayers}
\end{figure}

Fig. \ref{fig:ets2x2_force_vs_voltage_vs_numlayers} shows the additional linear force required to stretch a locked auxetic unit cell layer stack at 5\% strain, as compared to the unlocked layer stack. The solid mechanics model in Sec. \ref{subsec:kinematic_model} is plotted for comparison and generally matches the experimental trends. The solid mechanics model involves two fitted parameters. The Young's modulus $E$ is first fit using Brent's method to the unlocked AUCs' experimental data with an average fit of $E$ = 2.1 GPa ($\sigma$ = 0.4 GPa). Second, the effective frictional constant is fit to an average $\mu_{eff}$ = 0.13 ($\sigma$ = 0.14) to account for non-idealities in assembly that might introduce air gaps in between the dielectric and metallized electrodes. This Young's modulus and fitted efficiency match closely with values seen in the literature \cite{MCKEEN2017147, Zhang_Gonzalez_Guo_Follmer_2019, Hinchet_Vechev_Shea_Hilliges_2018}. Across all tests, the fitted solid mechanics model achieves a Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) of 0.094 N. As shown by the horizontal predicted and experimental curves at high voltage, both PVDF-HFP and PVDF-TrFE-CFE achieve near-maximal locking in this testing apparatus.

\section{CHARACTERIZATION OF 5x5 AUXETIC UNIT CELL LAYER STACK} \label{sec:characterization_5x5}
\section{Characterization of 5x5 Auxetic Unit Cell Layer Stack} \label{sec:characterization_5x5}

\subsection{Assembly of a 5x5 AUC Layer Stack} \label{assembly_5x5}
In order to explore how the results for an individual AUC extend to an auxetic array, we patterned a flexible PCB with a 5x5 array of square unit cells with the same geometry as in Sec. \ref{subsec:sts2x2_testing_setup}. Towards its functionality as a variable-stiffness surface for a formable crust shape display, we tested whether locking local subsets of AUCs can affect the array's global axial and transverse stiffness. We assembled the layer stack with PVDF-HFP as the dielectric, based on results in Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2}. Each flexible PCB includes through holes around the edges for easy mounting. Pin headers were soldered to the flexible PCBs and connected to ribbon cables, which were then routed to a logic PCB using the NMOS source follower circuit shown in Fig. \ref{fig:nmos_source_follower} for programmatic control of each auxetic unit cell via row-column addressing. A high voltage transistor (STMicroelectronics STB12NM60N) switches a row on one auxetic layer to either high voltage or ground, while another does the same to columns of the second layer. A high voltage DC-DC converter (EMCO F50) shifts applied voltages from 0.51 - 1.29 V to 200 - 600 V. A resistor ($R_1 = 10$ M$\Omega$) is used to limit current draw, and another resistor ($R_2 = 1$ k$\Omega$) limits burden on the Teensy 4.1 microcontroller supplying $V_{in}$. This high-voltage logic circuitry consumes a maximum of 72.2 \textmu A/AUC at 600 V. For portability, however, the below results were collected without this logic PCB by manually powering different electrode pairs.

\begin{figure}
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth,clip]{figures/20220910_nmos_source_follower_v3.pdf}
    \caption{Logic circuit for driving an individual AUC. High voltage is supplied from a DC-DC voltage converter, and $V_{in}$ is obtained from a Teensy 4.1. AUCs can be modeled as capacitors $C \approx 8.3$ nF and two resistors $R \approx 1.2 \Omega$ in series.}
    \label{fig:nmos_source_follower}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Axial Stiffness Variation of a 5x5 AUC Layer Stack} \label{subsec:characterization_5x5_linear}
In order to measure the ability of an auxetic layer stack to modulate its axial stiffness, we axially offset the dielectric-assembled auxetic sheet by half of an AUC relative to the second layer, and clamped the ends of both sheets at this offset using acrylic sheets and M2 screws through each flexible PCB's through holes. This causes the unit cells on subsequent layers to rotate in opposite direction just like when testing individual AUCs in Sec. \ref{subsec:sts2x2_testing_setup}, with the exception of only being able to lock 90\% of the electroadhesive pads at a time.

We tested this multi-layer stack on an Instron 5560 with a 100 N load cell, with pictorial results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_pictures} and force vs. strain results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_force_vs_strain} for the cases when 0\%, the bottom 40\%, and all of the available 90\% of the rows were locked at 500 V. Tests were conducted up to 5\% strain with a 0.1\%/s strain rate. Scaled predictions in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_force_vs_strain} were computed by treating the 5x5 cell array as a spring array with five columns in parallel and four springs in serial in each column (ignoring one AUC/column because of the attachment offset), and computing the entire array's axial stiffness based on the maximum 7.6x locked-over-unlocked stiffness ratio measured in Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2} for an individual AUC.

As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_force_vs_strain}, the unlocked case has the lowest stiffness and matches well with the predicted global axial stiffness. Unlike with individual AUCs, which had fixed boundary conditions at each corner, the full sheet is free to deform out-of-plane. The 90\% locked case's out-of-plane deformation in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_pictures} highlights the necessity for some compliance when reaching the 5\% strain target, as shown by how its slope gradually decreases in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_linear_force_vs_strain} as AUCs slip and detach. Notably, both locked cases are much stiffer than predicted, which we hypothesize is because differences in how the two auxetic sheets deform out-of-plane actually press individual AUCs together, creating greater locking forces than the electroadhesion alone could produce.

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={10pt 0 0 0},clip]{figures/20220916_instron_linear_pictures_v6-compressed.pdf}
    \caption{Example photos of the 5x5 AUC layer stack undergoing linear tests on an Instron at different locking conditions. Red boxes outline the locked cells.}
    \label{fig:instron_linear_pictures}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={10pt 10pt 0 10pt}, clip]{figures/20220916_14_47_23_instron10x10_linear_force_vs_strain.pdf}
    \caption{Linear force vs. strain for a 5x5 AUC layer stack under different locking conditions. Shaded regions show the 95\% confidence interval, averaged over $N = 3$ trials. High-uncertainty regions correspond to AUC slippage during individual tests. Dotted lines show the expected initial slope based on individual AUC data in Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2}.}
    \label{fig:instron_linear_force_vs_strain}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Transverse Stiffness Variation of a 5x5 AUC Layer Stack} \label{subsec:characterization_5x5_rotary}
We also tested the ability of this multi-layer stack to modulate its transverse stiffness and bend when given rotational freedom. The testing method was identical to Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_5x5_linear}'s, except the mounting brackets were attached to ball bearings for free rotation and we varied the number of columns locked instead of rows. Results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:instron_rotary_pictures} and Fig. \ref{fig:instron_rotary_bendingangle_vs_numcolumns}.

Fig. \ref{fig:instron_rotary_bendingangle_vs_numcolumns} highlights the influence of higher strain, and thus larger out-of-plane deformation, on the experimental data. Predicted results were obtained by solving an optimization problem for the minimum spring energy needed to position the 5x5 AUC spring array at the desired strain, based on the maximum 7.6x locked-over-unlocked stiffness ratio demonstrated in Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2} for an individual AUC. The experimental data matches the theory well for small strain, but similar to Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_5x5_linear} the locking forces exceed predictions for higher strain. Future work should investigate these discrepancies further, but in Sec. \ref{sec:sdts_integration} we see that in practice mounting auxetic skins onto a soft robotic body creates boundary constraints that naturally limit out-of-plane deformation.

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={10pt 0 0 0},clip]{figures/20220916_instron_rotary_pictures_v6-compressed.pdf}
    \caption{Example photos of the 5x5 AUC layer stack undergoing bending angle tests on an Instron at different locking conditions at 5\% strain. The total angle is computed by adding the rotations of the top and bottom mounts.}
    \label{fig:instron_rotary_pictures}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={5pt 10pt 0 10pt},clip]{figures/20220915_23_11_55_instron_rotary_angle.pdf}
    \caption{Bending angle vs. percentage of columns locked in a 5x5 AUC layer stack. Dotted lines show the expected bending angle based on individual AUC data in Sec. \ref{subsec:characterization_results_ets2x2}.}
    \label{fig:instron_rotary_bendingangle_vs_numcolumns}
\end{figure}
\section{INTEGRATION OF AUXETIC SKINS INTO A CONTINUOUS SHAPE DISPLAY} \label{sec:sdts_integration}
\section{Integration of Electroadhesive Auxetic Skins into a Formable Crust Shape Display} \label{sec:sdts_integration}

In order to test the performance of our electroadhesive auxetic skin for on-demand stiffness variation in a continuous shape display, we mounted it onto an inflatable LDPE pouch and measured its ability to modulate the shape output. Shown in Fig. \ref{fig:sdts_layerstack}, the inflatable pouch comprises a 50x50 cm$^2$ sheet of 30 \textmu m thick LDPE film crumpled to fit under the 20x20 cm$^2$ auxetic skin. The LDPE is locked at the edges between two laser cut acrylic sheets, and when pressurized air is pumped into the interior cavity the pouch balloons outwards into a uniform dome. The same 5x5 auxetic arrays used in Sec. \ref{sec:characterization_5x5} are mounted on top of the LDPE pouch, with the dielectric-assembled bottom sheet rotated by 90$^\circ$ relative to the top sheet. M2 mounting screws are threaded through the entire height of this assembly stack to fix the edges together.

Fig. \ref{fig:sdts_sideview} shows a side view of the electroadhesive auxetic skins modulating the output shape's curvature depending on the number of columns locked. Pressure is held at 1 kPa, which for the given assembly maximized inflation without electroadhesive slippage during any of the tested locking conditions. The auxetic skins enable a 2.3x decrease in global curvature between the unlocked and 100\% locked cases, and they achieve a 2.0x change in output slope between the display's left and right sides for the 80\% locked case. The LDPE pouch serves as a conformal substrate, limiting the out-of-plane deformation and detachment observed in Sec. \ref{sec:characterization_2x2}. Fig. \ref{fig:sdts_isometricview} further demonstrates how programmatically locking different sets of AUCs enables a single auxetic pattern to output a variety of global output shapes.

While data resolution still falls behind state-of-the-art \cite{Stanley_Okamura_2015, Zhang_Gonzalez_Guo_Follmer_2019} due to the inability to lock AUCs to the base plate, these results are promising for the application of electroadhesive auxetic skins as a programmable surface for formable crust shape displays, highlighting the ability of variable stiffness surfaces to actively control deformation and achieve shape change. The low cost (0.88 USD/AUC at quantities of 100 flexible PCBs, including high voltage logic circuitry), low power consumption (50 \textmu W/AUC), low profile ($<$300 \textmu m thickness), and usage of monolithic manufacturing techniques to lower assembly complexity decrease the barrier to entry traditionally required for distributed tactile displays, opening new options for fast prototyping and scalable deployment.

\begin{figure}
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={2pt 0 0 0}, clip]{figures/20220916_sdts_layerstack_v7-compressed_1.pdf}
    \caption{Full assembly stack of electroadhesive auxetic sheets onto an inflatable LDPE pouch to form a shape display.}
    \label{fig:sdts_layerstack}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{figures/20220914_03_34_26_sdts_pet_sideview_legend_compressed_v4.png}
    \caption{Side view of the shape display modulating its output shape based on the percentage of columns locked. Pressure is held at 1 kPa. Curves are smoothed with a quadratic Savitzky-Golay filter for visualization purposes.}
    \label{fig:sdts_sideview}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!h]
    \centering

    \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,trim={10pt 0 0 0},clip]{figures/20220916_sdts_pictures_v4-compressed.pdf}
    \caption{(Left) Perspective view of the shape display modulating its output shape for different locking conditions: (a) locking the top 40\%, (b) locking the top 60\%, (c) locking the top right 36\%, and (d) locking the bottom left 36\%. (Right) Top-down views, demonstrating how the locked cells (boxed in red) expand noticeably less than the unlocked cells.}
    \label{fig:sdts_isometricview}
\end{figure}
\section{CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK}
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}

In this work, we motivate the application of electroadhesion as a layer jamming actuation mechanism for auxetic sheets and demonstrate its usage as a programmable strain limiting skin for a formable crust shape display. By using monolithic fabrication techniques such as flexible PCB manufacturing and laser cutting, these actuators present a scalable, low-cost, low-power, and easy to assemble approach to integrating variable stiffness capabilities into flexible robot systems. We demonstrated the ability of a multi-layer auxetic stack to programmatically modulate its axial and transverse stiffness, opening new possibilities in high degree-of-freedom control of soft robotic systems.

Our current design also has some drawbacks, notably in its simplified planar kinematic modeling and limited output shape change. Future work should investigate new analytical 3D models for electroadhesive auxetic skins, factoring in plastic and out-of-plane deformation. Additionally, further work is needed to develop a numerical optimization framework that can build on this model to produce optimal auxetic patterns supporting greater strain and thus increased global shape change. Future work should also consider locking shape display surfaces to the base plate for extra degrees of freedom \cite{Stanley_Okamura_2015}. Finally, other soft robotic applications such as vine robots \cite{Do_Banashek_Okamura_2020} and haptic clutches \cite{Hinchet_Vechev_Shea_Hilliges_2018} which also require low-profile, on-demand stiffness control should be explored.

\addtolength{\textheight}{-7.5cm}

\section*{Acknowledgments}

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship grant no. DGE-1656518, the National Science Foundation CAREER award grant no. 2142782, and the Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship grant no. FG-2021-15851. Part of this work was performed at the Stanford Nano Shared Facilities (SNSF), supported by the National Science Foundation under award ECCS-2026822. We also acknowledge Kai Zhang, who ideated and prototyped early passive versions of this system.

\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
\input{bibliography.bbl}

\end{document}