Area of a null-homotopic word ($\mathrm{Area}(w)$)

For a word $w\in F(S)$ representing the identity in $⟨S\mid R⟩$, its area is the least $N$ for whichin $F(S)$, where $r_i\in R$ and ${\epsilon }_i\in \{-1,1\}$.

The Dehn function of a finite presentation isIt measures the worst number of relator applications needed to prove a null word of bounded length.

Choose bounded-length substitutions $T$ from the first generating set to the second, and $U$ back. Each substituted relator of the second group presentation has bounded area in the first, and every generator correction $a(UT(a){)}^{-1}$ has bounded area. Substitution into a minimal second-presentation diagram and filling the correction strips givesThe reverse construction gives the opposite inequality. Thus the optimal Dehn functions are coarsely equivalent, and the existence of a recursive isoperimetric bound, hence solvability of the word problem for a group, is independent of the finite group presentation.

A nondecreasing function bounding the area of every null word of length at most $n$ is an isoperimetric function for a finite group presentation. The Dehn function is the minimal such bound. A subrecursive bound means one dominated by a total computable function. Arbitrarily enlarged bounds are not invariants: even a group presentation with zero area function admits both linear and exponential upper bounds, which are not equivalent under the usual coarse comparison.

A finite group presentation has a recursive upper bound on its Dehn function exactly when its word problem for a group is decidable. If the maximal relator length is $\ell$ and a word has length $n$, a diagram of area at most $N$ can be chosen with at most $\ell N+n$ edges. Enumerating all finite labelled planar diagrams within that bound gives a terminating test. Conversely, a word decider identifies the finitely many null words of length at most $n$; exhaustive finite diagram searches find their minimal areas, whose maximum computes the Dehn function.