On the Standard Lattices
Rongquan Feng, Longke Tang, Kun Wang

TL;DR
This paper investigates the conditions under which lattices are standard across different norms and dimensions, establishing that all Euclidean lattices are standard up to dimension 4, with specific examples and exceptions for other norms.
Contribution
It proves that all Euclidean lattices are standard in dimensions up to 4 and provides examples of non-standard lattices in higher dimensions for certain norms.
Findings
All Euclidean lattices are standard for n ≤ 4.
Lattices of dimensions 1 and 2 are standard under any norm.
Existence of non-standard lattices in higher dimensions with L^1 norm.
Abstract
A lattice in the Euclidean space is standard if it has a basis consisting vectors whose norms equal to the length in its successive minima. In this paper, it is shown that with the norm all lattices of dimension are standard if and only if . It is also proved that with an arbitrary norm, every lattice of dimensions 1 and 2 is standard. An example of non-standard lattice of dimension is given when the lattice is with the norm.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsOptics and Image Analysis
On the Standard Lattices111Project supported by NSFC (Grant No. 61370187) and by NSFC-Genertec
Joint Fund For Basic Research (Grant No. U1636104)
Rongquan Feng
Longke Tang
Kun Wang
LMAM, School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Abstract
A lattice in the Euclidean space is standard if it has a basis consisting vectors whose norms equal to the length in its successive minima. In this paper, it is shown that with the norm all lattices of dimension are standard if and only if . It is also proved that with an arbitrary norm, every lattice of dimensions 1 and 2 is standard. An example of non-standard lattice of dimension is given when the lattice is with the norm.
MSC (2010): 11H06, 52C05, 52C07
keywords:
lattice, norm, successive minima, standard
††journal: Advances in Mathematics (China)
1 Introduction
A lattice is a discrete additive subgroup of a finitely dimensional -vector space, and geometry of numbers is the theory that occupies itself with lattices. Since the publication of Hermann Minkowski’s Geometrie der Zahlen in 1896 ([6]), lattices have become a standard tool in number theory, especially in the areas of diophantine approximation, algebraic number theory, and the arithmetic theory of quadratic forms ([3]). Despite their apparent simplicity, lattices hide a rich combinatorial structure, which has attracted the attention of great mathematicians over the last two centuries. Now lattices have found numerous applications not only in mathematics, but also in computer science and in cryptography ([5], [8], [9]).
Take linearly independent vectors in an -dimensional Euclidean space . The set of all -linear combinations of (or the abelian group generated by) these vectors is called a lattice in . If , the lattice is said to be of full-rank. All lattices in this article are of full-rank, and if not specified, is with the Euclidean metric, i.e., the ordinary norm. More precisely, we have the following definition:
Definition 1.1**.**
Let be linearly independent vectors in . The set
[TABLE]
is called the lattice generated by , and is called a basis of .
Obviously, a lattice (as a set of points or vectors in a Euclidean space) has many different bases. The following proposition comes directly from the above definition.
Proposition 1.2**.**
Let and be two sets of linearly independent vectors in . Then they generate the same lattice (i.e. is a basis of the lattice generated by ) if and only if they can express each other -linearly, i.e. there exist such that
[TABLE]
For a subset , in general it is not convenient to determine whether is a lattice by finding its basis. Noticing the abelian group structure of , we have the following theorem.
Theorem 1.3**.**
(§3.2, [2]) For a subset , is a lattice in if and only if is a discrete additive subgroup of and not contained in any -dimensional subspace of .
For any vector , denote by the length (norm) of . Let be the closed ball of radius centered at the origin.
Definition 1.4**.**
Let be a lattice in . For , let
[TABLE]
where denotes the subspace of spanned by the set . The sequence is called the successive minima of .
It can be easily seen from the definition that the successive minima of a lattice is unique.
Definition 1.5**.**
Let be a lattice in generated by the basis , and let be the successive minima of . If
[TABLE]
then the basis is said to achieve its successive minima.
By discreteness and the definition of the successive minima, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 1.6**.**
(§3.3, [7]) For a lattice in with the successive minima , there exist -linearly independent vectors satisfies for all .
Clearly the vectors above form an -basis of , but they might not form a basis of .
Definition 1.7**.**
A lattice in is said to be standard if it has a basis achieving its successive minima; otherwise, the lattice is said to be non-standard.
Obviously the lattice is standard. The following result can be checked easily.
Proposition 1.8**.**
If a lattice has an orthogonal basis (i.e. a basis which contains mutually orthogonal vectors), then is standard, and this basis achieves the successive minima.
It is natural to discuss whether a given lattice is standard, especially to determine the dimensions of which all lattices are standard. By Theorem 1.6, a lattice in contains linearly independent vectors achieving its successive minima, and there is a sublattice generated by them. By using the Hadamard inequality and Minkowski’s inequality, an estimate of the order of the quotient group was given in [4]. This gave the result that all lattices of dimensions not greater than are standard. The case of dimension 4 was also discussed in [4].
In this paper, we will give a direct geometric proof that with the norm all lattices of dimension are standard if and only if in Sections 2 and 3. A brief discussion on lattices in of arbitrary norms is given in Section 4.
2 High-dimensional Cases
We first give an example of non-standard lattice when the dimension is greater than 4.
Theorem 2.1**.**
For , there exist non-standard lattices in .
Proof.
For , let
[TABLE]
then is a discrete additive subgroup of not contained in any -dimensional subspace. By Theorem 1.3 it is a lattice. In fact, it has , , …, , as a basis.
On the one hand, note that for all nonzero , if
[TABLE]
then for all , so
[TABLE]
if
[TABLE]
then there exists some with , so
[TABLE]
Note also that there are linearly independent vectors of length 2 in , e.g. , where is the vector whose -th coordinate is 1 and all other coordinates are 0’s, so the successive minima of is .
On the other hand, note that every basis of must contain a vector with odd coordinates. In fact, if all have even coordinates, then cannot be expressed as a -linear combination of them, which is a contradiction. Suppose that has odd coordinates, by the previous discussion, we have
[TABLE]
therefore, no basis of can achieve the successive minima, which shows that is non-standard. ∎
Note that van der Waerden [11] gave the same counterexample in 1956 and it can also be found in [5].
3 Low-dimensional Cases
In this section, we will prove that all lattices of dimension less than 5 are standard.
Proposition 3.1**.**
Every lattice in is standard.
Proof.
Let be a basis of a lattice ; then
[TABLE]
Obviously,
[TABLE]
so is standard. ∎
In order to discuss lattices of other dimensions, we give a lemma about the structure of a lattice in firstly.
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let be a lattice in generated by , and let satisfy
[TABLE]
Then for any , we have
[TABLE]
(the minimum value exists because of the discreteness of ). Furthermore, the equality holds only when are mutually orthogonal, for all , and
[TABLE]
for some , .
Proof.
Use induction on . For the lemma is obvious. Assume it is true for dimension . Since ia a basis of the -linear vector space , we have that
[TABLE]
where , . Take with . Let and be the orthogonal projections of and respectively onto the hyperplane spanned by . The lattice generated by is a lattice in of dimension . By the induction hypothesis, since , there exists a vector such that
[TABLE]
Projecting to the line orthogonal to the above hyperplane , we have
[TABLE]
and then . Since , , by Pythagorean theorem we have
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Since , , again by Pythagorean theorem, we have
[TABLE]
which completes the proof of the inequality, i.e., satisfies . Note that in order to achieve the equality, we must have
[TABLE]
and have to be mutually orthogonal with length by the induction hypothesis, , and , i.e. has to be orthogonal to the hyperplane spanned by . In addition, has to be half-integers by the induction hypothesis, and is a half-integer since . It is clear that the equality holds under the above conditions, which completes the proof. ∎
Theorem 3.3**.**
For , every lattice in is standard.
Proof.
Use induction on . We have proved the case of in Theorem 3.1. Assume that the theorem holds for dimension (). Denote the lattice by and its successive minima by . By Theorem 1.6, there exists an -basis of with for . Let be the hyperplane spanned by , we can see that is a discrete additive subgroup of and not contained in any -dimensional subspace of , hence by Theorem 1.3 is a lattice in the -dimensional Euclidean space . By definition the successive minima of the lattice is . By the induction hypothesis, is standard, i.e. there exists a basis of with . Let , then , which implies that is an -basis of .
Let . If is non-standard, for any (such exists since the non-standard is not generated by ), by Lemma 3.2, there exists some such that
[TABLE]
It is clear that (by the additive group structure of lattice) , , and is contained in , so . In other words, is also an -basis of . Hence, by the definition of the successive minima, we have
[TABLE]
(If , since , . Choose such that , then are linearly independent vectors with length , which is a contradiction.) Hence .
If or , the contradiction above shows that is standard. If , all inequalities above must be equalities. Now by Lemma 3.2,
[TABLE]
implies that are mutually orthogonal, , i.e. , and for any , one has for some , . So
[TABLE]
Moreover, since there exists a vector , where , , for any , , we have
[TABLE]
hence , which implies that
[TABLE]
It is clear that is a basis of the lattice , which achieve the successive minima. Thus is standard, which completes the proof. ∎
4 Arbitrary Norms
Note that the definition of lattice depends only on the algebraic structure of as a linear space, but the successive minima depends on the norm. An interesting discussion on successive minima with respect to arbitrary norms can be found in [1]. In this section, we require no longer the Euclidean metric in . We will see that in an arbitrary norm in , every lattice is standard if and only if . The case of is trivial and the proof in Proposition 3.1 still applies. The proof of next theorem shows the the algebraic structure of the lattice in deeply.
Theorem 4.1**.**
For an arbitrary norm in , every lattice is standard.
Proof.
Let denote the lattice in and denote its successive minima. Let be such that
[TABLE]
the minimum value exists because of the discreteness of . Thus . Let be such that
[TABLE]
at the end of the proof we will prove that such vector exists, and the minimum value exists because of the discreteness of . Therefore and generate , and . Moreover, are linearly independent with norm , hence . We need only to prove that , which shows has a basis achieving its successive minima, and thus is standard.
Assume otherwise, . Then there exist two linearly independent vectors in with norm and respectively. Thus at least one of these two linearly independent vectors is linearly independent with . Denote this vector by and write
[TABLE]
with . So , and , which implies, by the definition of , that , and thus since by Proposition 1.2. Therefore .
Write with , where . Note that by Proposition 1.2, , so by the choice of , . Hence
[TABLE]
since and . Thus, , contradicting the fact that . This completes the proof.
Now we will prove that there exists such that , i.e. is a basis of the lattice . By Theorem 1.3, is an additive subgroup, which can be regarded as a finitely generated free -module of rank , and be its free -submodule of rank . Then the quotient module is finitely generated. By the structure theorem of finitely generated module over principle ideal domains (§1.5, [10]), is a direct sum of a free -module and a torsion -module
[TABLE]
i.e., . It is easy to see that is trivial, hence is a free -module. In fact, if there exists , i.e. , then there exists an integer such that , i.e. . Suppose that , , then . Since , . Hence , and
[TABLE]
where is the greatest integer not greater then . Contradicting the definition of . So is trivial.
It is clear that is not trivial, and choose a basis of the free module of rank , then is a basis of the free module of rank . Hence , and then . Thus satisfies , as required. ∎
Proposition 4.2**.**
For , there exists non-standard lattices in with -norm.
Proof.
We can show that the lattice constructed in the proof of Theorem 2.1 are non-standard with -norm for . Similar as the proof in Theorem 2.1, the successive minima of is , but any vector in with odd coordinates has norm . This implies that is non-standard. ∎
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Rainer Schulze-Pillot from Universitaet des Saarlandes for pointing out some valuable information on the topics in this paper, and also to Chunhui Liu from Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 for his helpful advices.
References
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] J.W.S. Cassels, An Introduction to the Geometry of Numbers, 2nd ed, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1971.
- 2[2] P.M. Gruber and C.G. Lekkerkerker, Geometry of Numbers, 2nd ed, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Amsterdam, 1987.
- 3[3] H.W. Lenstra, JR., Lattices, Algorithmic Number Theory: Lattices, Number Fields, Curves and Cryptography, Edited by J.P. Buhler and P. Stevenhagen, Cambridge University Press, MSRI Publications Vol. 44, 2008, pp. 127-181.
- 4[4] J. Martinet, Perfect Lattices in Euclidean Spaces, Springer, New York, 2003.
- 5[5] D. Micciancio and S. Goldwasser, Complexity of Lattice Problems, A Cryptographic Perspective, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.
- 6[6] H. Minkowski, Geometrie der Zahlen, Teubner-Verlag, Leipzig, 1896.
- 7[7] C.L. Siegel, Lectures on the Geometry of Numbers, Springer, New York, 1989.
- 8[8] R. Silva, P-L. Cayrel and J. Buchmann, Post-quantum cryptography: Lattice identification schemes, Publicationes Mathematicae-DEBRECEN, 79(3-4), 2011, pp. 729-748.
