Regular pseudo-hyperovals and regular pseudo-ovals in even characteristic
J. A. THAS
Ghent University, Department of Mathematics, Krijgslaan 281, S22, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[email protected]
Abstract.
S. Rottey and G. Van de Voorde characterized regular pseudo-ovals of PG(3n−1,q), q=2h, h>1 and n prime. Here an alternative proof is given and slightly stronger results are obtained.
1. Introduction
Pseudo-ovals and pseudo-hyperovals were introduced in [10]; see also [12]. These objects play a key role in the theory of translation generalized quadrangles [6, 12]. Pseudo-hyperovals only exist in even characteristic. A characterization of regular pseudo-ovals in odd characteristic was given in [2]; see also [12]. In [8] a characterization of regular pseudo-ovals and regular pseudo-hyperovals in PG(3n−1,q), q even, q=2 and n prime, is obtained. Here a shorter proof is given and slightly stronger results are obtained.
2. Ovals and hyperovals
A k-arc in PG(2,q) is a set of k points, k≥3, no three of which are collinear. Any non-singular conic of PG(2,q) is a (q+1)-arc. If K is any k-arc of PG(2,q), then k≤q+2. For q odd k≤q+1 and for q even a (q+1)-arc extends to a (q+2)-arc; see [3]. A (q+1)-arc is an oval; a (q+2)-arc, q even, is a complete oval or hyperoval.
A famous theorem of B. Segre [9] tells us that for q odd every oval of PG(2,q) is a non-singular conic. For q even, there are many ovals that are not conics [3]; also, there are many hyperovals that do not contain a conic [3].
3. Generalized ovals and hyperovals
Arcs, ovals and hyperovals can be generalized by replacing their points with m-dimensional subspaces to obtain generalized k-arcs, generalized ovals and generalized hyperovals. These have strong connections to generalized quadrangles, projective planes, circle geometries, flocks and other structures. See [6, 12, 10, 11, 2, 7]. Below, some basic definitions and results are formulated; for an extensive study, many applications and open problems, see [12].
A generalized k-arc of PG(3n−1,q), n≥1, is a set of k (n−1)-dimensional subspaces of PG(3n−1,q) every three of which generate PG(3n−1,q). If q is odd then k≤qn+1, if q is even then k≤qn+2. Every generalized (qn+1)-arc of PG(3n−1,q), q even, can be extended to a generalized (qn+2)-arc.
If O is a generalized (qn+1)-arc in PG(3n−1,q), then it is a pseudo-oval or generalized oval or [n−1]-oval of PG(3n−1,q). For n=1, a [0]-oval is just an oval of PG(2,q). If O is a generalized (qn+2)-arc in PG(3n−1,q), q even, then it is a pseudo-hyperoval or generalized hyperoval or [n−1]-hyperoval of PG(3n−1,q). For n=1, a [0]-hyperoval is just a hyperoval of PG(2,q).
If O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn} is a pseudo-oval of PG(3n−1,q), then πi is contained in exactly one (2n−1)-dimensional subspace τi of PG(3n−1,q) which has no point in common with (π0∪π1∪⋯∪πqn)\πi, with i=0,1,⋯,qn; the space τi is the tangent space of O at πi. For q even the qn+1 tangent spaces of O contain a common (n−1)-dimensional space πqn+1, the nucleus of O; also, O∪{πqn+1} is a pseudo-hyperoval of PG(3n−1,q). For q odd, the tangent spaces of a pseudo-oval O are the elements of a pseudo-oval O∗ in the dual space of PG(3n−1,q).
4. Regular pseudo-ovals and pseudo-hyperovals
In the extension PG(3n−1,qn) of PG(3n−1,q), consider n subplanes ξi, i=1,2,⋯,n, that are conjugate in the extension Fqn of Fq and which span PG(3n−1,qn). This means that they form an orbit of the Galois group corresponding to this extension and span PG(3n−1,qn).
In ξ1 consider an oval O1={x0(1),x1(1),⋯,xqn(1)}. Further, let xi(1),xi(2),⋯,xi(n), with i=0,1,⋯,qn, be conjugate in Fqn over Fq. The points xi(1),xi(2),⋯,xi(n) define an (n−1)-dimensional subspace πi over Fq for i=0,1,⋯,qn. Then, O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn} is a generalized oval of PG(3n−1,q). These objects are the regular or elementary pseudo-ovals. If O1 is replaced by a hyperoval, and so q is even, then the corresponding O is a regular or elementary pseudo-hyperoval.
All known pseudo-ovals and pseudo-hyperovals are regular.
5. Characterizations
Let O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn} be a pseudo-oval in PG(3n−1,q). The tangent space of O at πi will be denoted by τi, with i=0,1,⋯,qn. Choose πi, i∈{0,1,⋯,qn}, and let PG(2n−1,q)⊆PG(3n−1,q) be skew to πi. Further, let τi∩PG(2n−1,q)=ηi and ⟨πi,πj⟩∩PG(2n−1,q)=ηj, with j=i. Then {η0,η1,⋯,ηqn}=Δi is an (n−1)-spread of PG(2n−1,q).
Now, let q be even and let π be the nucleus of O. Let PG(2n−1,q)⊆PG(3n−1,q) be skew to π. If ζj=PG(2n−1,q)∩⟨π,πj⟩, then {ζ0,ζ1,⋯,ζqn}=Δ is an (n−1)-spread of PG(2n−1,q).
Next, let q be odd. Choose τi, with i∈{0,1,⋯,qn}. If τi∩τj=δj, with j=i, then {δ0,δ1,⋯,δi−1,πi,δi+1,⋯,δqn}=Δi⋆ is an (n−1)-spread of τi.
Finally, let q be even and let O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn+1} be a pseudo-hyperoval in PG(3n−1,q). Choose πi, with i∈{0,1,⋯,qn+1}, and let PG(2n−1,q)⊆PG(3n−1,q) be skew to πi. Let ⟨πi,πj⟩∩PG(2n−1,q)=ηj, with j=i. Then {η0,η1,⋯,ηi−1,ηi+1,⋯,ηqn+1}=Δi is an (n−1)- spread of PG(2n−1,q).
Theorem 5.1** (Casse, Thas and Wild [2]).**
Consider a pseudo-oval O with q odd. Then at least one of the (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn,Δ0⋆,Δ1⋆,⋯,Δqn⋆ is regular if and only if they all are regular if and only if the pseudo-oval O is regular. In such a case O is essentially a conic over Fqn.
Theorem 5.2** (Rottey and Van de Voorde [8]).**
Consider a pseudo-oval O in PG(3n−1,q) with q=2h, h>1, n prime. Then O is regular if and only if all (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn are regular.
6. Alternative proof and improvements
Theorem 6.1**.**
Consider a pseudo-hyperoval O in PG(3n−1,q), q=2h,h>1 and n prime. Then O is regular if and only if all (n−1)-spreads Δi, with i=0,1,⋯,qn+1, are regular.
Proof. If O is regular, then clearly all (n−1)-spreads Δi, with i=0,1,⋯,qn+1, are regular.
Conversely, assume that the (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn+1 are regular. Let O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn+1} and let O^={β0,β1,⋯,βqn+1} be the dual of O, with βi being the dual of πi.
Choose βi,i∈{0,1,⋯,qn+1}, and let βi∩βj=αij,j=i. Then
[TABLE]
is an (n−1)-spread of βi.
Now consider βi,βj,Γi,Γj,αij,j=i. In Γj we next consider a (n−1)-regulus γj containing αij. The (n−1)-regulus γj is a set of maximal spaces of a Segre variety S1;n−1; see Section 4.5 in [4]. The (n−1)-regulus γj and the (n−1)-spread Γi of βi generate a regular (n−1)-spread Σ(γj,Γi) of PG(3n−1,q). This can be seen as follows. The elements of Γi intersect n lines U1,U2,⋯,Un which are conjugate in Fqn over Fq, that is, they form an orbit of the Galois group corresponding to this extension. Let αij∩Ul={ul}, with l=1,2,⋯,n. Now consider the transversals T1,T2,⋯,Tn of the elements of γj, with Tl containing ul. The n planes TlUl=θl intersect all elements of γj and Γi. The (n−1)-dimensional subspaces of PG(3n−1,q) intersecting θ1,θ2,⋯,θn are the elements of the regular (n−1)-spread Σ(γj,Γi). The elements of this spread are the points of a plane PG(2,qn), with as lines the (2n−1)-dimensional spaces containing at least two (and then qn+1) elements of the spread. Hence the q+2 elements of O^ containing an element of γj, say βi=βi1,βi2,⋯,βiq+1,βiq+2=βj, are lines of PG(2,qn). Dualizing, the elements πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+2 are points of PG(2,qn).
Now consider βi2 and γj, and repeat the argument. Then there arise n planes θl′ intersecting all elements of γj and Γi2. The (n−1)-dimensional subspaces of PG(3n−1,q) intersecting θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′ are the elements of the regular (n−1)-spread Σ(γj,Γi2). The elements of this spread are the points of a plane PG′(2,qn), with as lines the (2n−1)-dimensional spaces containing qn+1 elements of the spread. Hence βi1,βi2,⋯,βiq+2 are lines of PG′(2,qn). Dualizing, the elements πi1.πi2,⋯,πiq+2 are points of PG′(2,qn).
First, assume that {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}∩{θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}=∅. Consider πi1,πi2,πi3,πi4. The planes of PG(3n−1,qn) intersecting these four spaces constitute a set M of maximal spaces of a Segre variety S2;n−1 [1]. The planes θ1,θ2,⋯,θn,θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′ are elements of M. It follows that (θ1∪θ2∪⋯∪θn)∩(θ1′∪θ2′∪⋯∪θn′)=∅.
Consider any (n−1)-dimensional subspace π∈{πi5,πi6,⋯,πiq+2} of PG(3n−1,q). We will show that π is a maximal subspace of S2;n−1. Let θi∩πj={tij},θi′∩πj={tij′},i=1,2,⋯,n,j=i1,i2,⋯,iq+2. If tij1tij2∩tij3tij4={vi},tij1′tij2′∩tij3′tij4′={vi′}, with j1,j2,j3,j4 distinct, then v1,v2,⋯,vn are conjugate and similarly v1′,v2′,⋯,vn′ are conjugate. Hence ⟨v1,v2,⋯,vn⟩=⟨v1′,v2′,⋯,vn′⟩ defines a (n−1)-dimensional space over Fq which intersects θ1,θ2,⋯,θn′ (over Fqn).The points tij, with j=i1,i2,⋯,iq+2, generate a subplane of θi, and the points tij′, with j=i1,i2,⋯,iq+2, generate a subplane of θi′, with i=1,2,⋯,n. Let q=2h and let F2v be the subfield of Fqn=F2hn over which these subplanes are defined; so v∣hn. Then v<hn as otherwise the spreads of PG(3n−1,q) defined by θ1,θ2,⋯,θn and θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′ coincide, clearly not possible. The (n−1)-regulus γj implies that the subplanes contain a line over Fq, so h∣v. As n is prime we have v=h, so 2v=q. Hence the 2n subplanes are defined over Fq. It follows that the q+2 elements πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+2 are maximal subspaces of the Segre variety S2;n−1. Hence π is a maximal subspace of S2;n−1. It follows that π1,π2,⋯,πq+2 are maximal subspaces of S2;n−1.
Now consider a PG(2,q) which intersects πi1,πi2,πi3,πi4. The (n−1)-dimensional spaces πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+2 are maximal spaces of S2;n−1 which intersect PG(2,q); they are maximal spaces of the Segre variety S2;n−1∩PG(3n−1,q) of PG(3n−1,q).
Consider πi1 and also a PG(2n−1,q) skew to πi1. If we project πi2,πi3,⋯,πiq+2 from πi1 onto PG(2n−1,q), then by the foregoing paragraph the q+1 projections constitute a (n−1)-regulus of PG(2n−1,q). Similarly, if we project from πis, s any element of {1,2,⋯,q+2}. Equivalently, if s∈{1,2,⋯,q+2} then the spaces βis∩βit, with t=1,2,⋯,s−1,s+1,⋯,q+2, form a (n−1)-regulus of βis.
Now assume that the condition {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}∩{θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}=∅ is satisfied for any choice of βi,βj,γj,βi2. In such a case every (n−1)-regulus contained in a spread Γs defines a Segre variety S2;n−1 over Fq. Let us define the following design D. Points of D are the elements of O^, a block of D is a set of q+2 elements of O^, containing at least one space of a (n−1)-regulus contained in some regular spread Γs, and incidence is containment. Then D is a 4−(qn+2,q+2,1) design. By Kantor [5] this implies that q=2, a contradiction.
Consequently, we may assume that for at least one quadruple βi,βj,γj,βi2 we have
[TABLE]
In such a case the qn+2 elements of O^ are lines of the plane PG(2,qn). It follows that O is regular. ■
Theorem 6.2**.**
Consider a pseudo-oval O in PG(3n−1,q), with q=2h,h>1 and n prime. Then O is regular if and only if all (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn are regular.
Proof. If O is regular, then clearly all (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn are regular.
Conversely, assume that the (n−1)-spreads Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn are regular. Let O={π0,π1,⋯,πqn}, let πqn+1 be the nucleus of O, let Oˉ=O∪{πqn+1}, let O^ be the dual of O, let Oˉ^ be the dual of Oˉ, and let βi be the dual of πi.
Choose βi,i∈{0,1,⋯,qn+1}, and let βi∩βj=αij,j=i. Then
[TABLE]
is an (n−1)-spread of βi.
Now consider βi,βj,Γi,Γj,αij, with j=i and i,j∈{0,1,⋯,qn}. In Γj we next consider a (n−1)-regulus γj containing αij and αj,qn+1. The (n−1)-regulus γj is a set of maximal spaces of a Segre variety S1;n−1. The (n−1)-regulus γj and the (n−1)-spread Γi of βi generate a regular (n−1)-spread Σ(γj,Γi) of PG(3n−1,q). Such as in the proof of Theorem 6.1 we introduce the elements Ul,ul,Tl,θl,l=1,2,⋯,n, and the plane PG(2,qn). The q+2 elements of Oˉ^ containing an element of γj, say βi=βi1,βi2,⋯,βiq,βj=βiq+1,βqn+1, are lines of PG(2,qn). Dualizing, the elements πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+1,πqn+1 are points of PG(2,qn).
Now consider βi2 and γj, and repeat the argument. Then there arise n planes θl′ of PG(3n−1,qn) intersecting all elements of γj and Γi2, and a (n−1)-spread Σ(γj,Γi2) of PG(3n−1,q). The elements of this spread are the points of a plane PG′(2,qn). The spaces βi1,βi2,⋯,βiq+1,βqn+1 are lines of PG′(2,qn). Dualizing, the elements πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+1,πqn+1 are points of PG′(2,qn).
First, assume that {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}∩{θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}=∅. Consider πi1,πi2,πi3,πi4. The planes of PG(3n−1,qn) intersecting these four spaces constitute a set M of maximal spaces of a Segre variety S2;n−1. The planes θ1,θ2,⋯,θn,θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′ are elements of M. It follows that (θ1∪θ2∪⋯∪θn)∩(θ1′∪θ2′∪⋯∪θn′)=∅. Let π∈{πi5,πi6,⋯,πiq+1,πqn+1}. As in the proof of Theorem 6.1 one shows that π is a maximal subspace of S2;n−1. It follows that πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+1,πqn+1 are maximal subspaces of S2;n−1.
Next consider a PG(2,q) which intersects πi1,πi2,πi3,πi4. The (n−1)-dimensional spaces πi1,πi2,⋯,πiq+1,πqn+1 are maximal spaces of S2;n−1 which intersect the plane PG(2,q); they are maximal spaces of the Segre variety S2;n−1∩PG(3n−1,q) of PG(3n−1,q). Such as in the proof of Theorem 6.1 it follows that the spaces βqn+1∩βit, with t=1,2,⋯,q+1, form a (n−1)-regulus of βqn+1.
Now assume that the condition {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}∩{θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}=∅ is satisfied for any choice of βi,βj,γj,βi2, j=i and i,j∈{0,1,⋯,qn}. Let α1,α2,α3 be distinct elements of Γqn+1. Then βi,βj,γj,βi2 can be chosen in such a way that α1∈βi,α2∈βj,α2∈γj,βi2∩βj∈γj with α3∈βi2. Hence the (n−1)-regulus in βqn+1 defined by α1,α2,α3 is subset of Γqn+1. From [4] now follows that the (n−1)-spread Γqn+1 of βqn+1 is regular. By Theorem 6.1 the pseudo-hyperoval Oˉ is regular, and so O is regular. But in such a case the condition {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}∩{θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}=∅ is never satisfied, a contradiction.
Consequently, we may assume that for at least one quadruple βi,βj,γj,βi2 we have {θ1,θ2,⋯,θn}={θ1′,θ2′,⋯,θn′}. In such a case the qn+2 elements of Oˉ^ are lines of the plane PG(2,qn). It follows that Oˉ, and hence also O, is regular. ■
Theorem 6.3**.**
Consider a pseudo-hyperoval O in PG(3n−1,q), q=2h,h>1 and n prime. Then O is regular if and only if at least qn−1 elements of {Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn+1} are regular.
Proof. If O is regular, then clearly all (n−1)-spreads Δi, with i=0,1,⋯,qn+1, are regular.
Conversely, assume that ρ, with ρ≥qn−1, elements of {Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn+1} are regular.
If ρ=qn+2, then O is regular by Theorem 6.1; if ρ=qn+1, then O is regular by Theorem 6.2.
Now assume that ρ=qn and that Δ2,Δ3,⋯,Δqn+1 are regular. We have to prove that Δ0 is regular. We use the arguments in the proof of Theorem 6.2. If one of the elements α1,α2,α3, say α1, in the proof of Theorem 6.2 is β0∩β1, then let γj contain βj∩βi,βj∩β0,βj∩β1 and let βi2=β1, with i,j∈{2,3,⋯,qn+1}. Now see the proof of the preceding theorem.
Finally, assume that ρ=qn−1 and that Δ3,Δ4,⋯,Δqn+1 are regular. We have to prove that Δ0 is regular. We use the arguments in the proof of Theorem 6.2. If exactly one of the elements α1,α2,α3, say α1, in the proof of Theorem 6.2 is β0∩β1 or β0∩β2, then proceed as in the preceding paragraph with βi2=β1,β2. Now assume that two of the elements α1,α2,α3, say α1 and α2, are β0∩β1 and β0∩β2. Now consider all (n−1)-reguli in Δ0 containing α1 and α3, and assume, by way of contradiction, that no one of these (n−1)-reguli contains α2. The number of these (n−1)-reguli is q−1qn−2, and so q=2, a contradiction. It follows that the (n−1)-regulus in β0 defined by α1,α2,α3 is contained in Δ0. Now we proceed as in the proof of Theorem 6.2. ■
7. Final remarks
7.1. The cases q=2 and n not prime
For q=2 or n not prime other arguments have to be developed.
7.2. Improvement of Theorem 6.3
Let D=(P,B,∈) be an incidence structure satisfying the following conditions.
∣P∣=qn+1, q even, q=2;
the elements of B are subsets of size q+1 of P and every three distinct elements of P are contained in at most one element of B;
Q is a subset of size δ of P such that any triple of elements in P with at most one element in Q, is contained in exactly one element of B;
Assumption : Any such D is a 3−(qn+1,q+1,1) design whenever δ≤δ0 with δ0≤q−2.
Theorem 7.1**.**
Consider a pseudo-hyperoval O in PG(3n−1,q), q=2h,h>1 and n prime. Then O is regular if and only if at least qn+1−δ0 elements of {Δ0,Δ1,⋯,Δqn+1} are regular.
Proof. Similar to the proof of Theorem 6.3. ■
7.3. Acknowledgement
We thank S. Rottey and G. Van de Voorde for several helpful discussions.