I know it's possible to apply a symbolic perturbation scheme like 'Simulation of Simplicity'(SoS) to geometric predicates like the 4-point orient, to avoid handling degenerate cases. I'm assuming it's also valid to do the same with plane-based geometry, where points are implicitly defined by the intersection of 3 planes, so I can have a similar orient predicate that tells me on which side of a 4th plane the point defined by the first 3 lies. I'd perturb the coefficients of the plane equation instead of the cartesian coordinates of a point.
The problem is that a point could be defined by many different planes. Each vertex in a cube is defined by 3 planes, but the apex of a pyramid has 4. Consistency seems to be everything with schemes like SoS, and I can't figure if it matters which 3 planes I select to define a point. Perhaps it doesn't, as long as every time I refer to that point I use the same 3 planes.
So, the question: Can I choose any 3 planes to represent a point?
Thanks in advance.