A cell scheme, and what it trades
cell-scheme draws the mesh shaded by area, which is the only way the schemes differ visibly; hex-tiling is the scheme that cannot close; cell-precision is what a cell identifier costs in digits; cell-tradeoff is area against shape; and cell-query is what happens when a disc is asked of a mesh of cells.
Every one of these is the same generator answering a different question, which is why they share a file, a set of colour roles and a set of assertions. Changing it changes all 5.
13 essays call it. Every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay argues about.
What it draws
One picture per question the family answers. Each has a page of its own.
Where it is called
Changing this changes every one of these figures.
More faces, less distortion, more cutting
The five regular solids are where polyhedral mapping stops, and they stop because there are only five rather than for any reason about maps. Subdivide instead, and the family runs to any number of faces with two fitted exponents: distortion falls as the reciprocal of the count and cutting rises as its square root.
An address is an area
A cell identifier does not name a place, it names a region — so its precision is an area rather than a length. On the obvious lon/lat scheme that area varies by a factor of 10 at level 4 and 163 at level 8, and the factor doubles with every level: the same identifier length means less ground the further north it is used.
Hexagons cannot tile the sphere
Hexagons are the best cell shape a plane offers and the sphere will not take them. Euler's formula forces exactly twelve pentagons into any such tiling — twelve at 42 cells and twelve at 642, while the hexagon count rises twenty-one-fold — and each of the twelve is measurably smaller than the hexagons around it.
A cell system trades area for shape
A grid can hold every cell to exactly the same area or hold every cell nearly square, and the measurement says it cannot do both: the equal-area cube's areas agree to a part in a thousand and its worst cell is 1.29 times as long as it is wide, while the tangent-warped cube holds shape to 1.19 and lets area vary by 20 per cent.
A query is a disc, and a disc is not a cell
Everything a cell system does is an address lookup except the one question anybody actually asks it: find everything within five kilometres of here. That is a disc, and the number of cells it fetches is not its area divided by a cell's — at the radii a query is really made at, it is three to seventeen times that.
The address is a curve through the sphere
A database does not fetch a set of cells, it reads ranges of identifiers — so the cost of a query is how many runs its cells form, not how many cells it needs. Hilbert order wins that measurement and loses the one usually quoted for it: its neighbouring cells are further apart in identifier than row-major's, on average and at worst.
The same data on two grids
Five essays have addressed, queried and ordered cells within one scheme and nobody has moved a number between two. Doing it exactly — area-weighted, both directions — preserves the total to 2 × 10⁻¹⁶ and loses 39 per cent of the field's own standard deviation in a single round trip; six round trips leave 23 per cent of its variance. The quantity that would reveal the damage is the one that never moves.
Cells that are rectangles in no coordinate
The previous rung measured what moving a field between two cell schemes costs, and did it between two schemes whose cells are longitude–latitude rectangles — which is what made every overlap a rectangle with a closed-form area. The schemes anybody actually argues about have cells that are rectangles in no coordinate, and their overlaps have to be clipped.