On Functional Graphs of Quadratic Polynomials
Bernard Mans, Min Sha, Igor E. Shparlinski, Daniel Sutantyo

TL;DR
This paper investigates the properties of functional graphs generated by quadratic polynomials over prime fields, introducing algorithms for analysis and exploring their structural characteristics through computational results.
Contribution
It presents efficient algorithms for analyzing quadratic polynomial functional graphs and provides extensive statistical data, leading to new conjectures about their structure.
Findings
Number of connected functional graphs computed
Distribution of cycle sizes analyzed
Shape of trees in graphs characterized
Abstract
We study functional graphs generated by quadratic polynomials over prime fields. We introduce efficient algorithms for methodical computations and provide the values of various direct and cumulative statistical parameters of interest. These include: the number of connected functional graphs, the number of graphs having a maximal cycle, the number of cycles of fixed size, the number of components of fixed size, as well as the shape of trees extracted from functional graphs. We particularly focus on connected functional graphs, that is, the graphs which contain only one component (and thus only one cycle). Based on the results of our computations, we formulate several conjectures highlighting the similarities and differences between these functional graphs and random mappings.
| 500,009 | 1,038 | 1,000.009 |
| 500,029 | 1,002 | 1,000.029 |
| 500,041 | 956 | 1,000.041 |
| 500,057 | 1,026 | 1,000.057 |
| 500,069 | 995 | 1,000.069 |
| 500,083 | 987 | 1,000.083 |
| 500,107 | 994 | 1,000.107 |
| 500,111 | 1,010 | 1,000.111 |
| 500,113 | 1,019 | 1,000.113 |
| 500,119 | 920 | 1,000.119 |
| 500,153 | 1,033 | 1,000.153 |
| 500,167 | 1,005 | 1,000.167 |
| 1,000,003 | 1,369 | 1,414.296 |
| 2,000,003 | 1,909 | 2,000.001 |
| 3,000,017 | 2,478 | 2,449.497 |
| 4,000,037 | 2,838 | 2,828.440 |
| 500,009 | 886.224 | 886.235 | 553.445 | 573.355 | 564.194 |
| 500,029 | 885.990 | 886.253 | 553.312 | 587.750 | 564.205 |
| 500,041 | 885.069 | 886.263 | 553.175 | 568.208 | 564.212 |
| 500,057 | 884.963 | 886.277 | 552.870 | 586.037 | 564.221 |
| 500,069 | 885.831 | 886.288 | 552.952 | 558.285 | 564.229 |
| 500,083 | 884.970 | 886.300 | 552.692 | 564.995 | 564.236 |
| 500,107 | 884.507 | 886.322 | 552.674 | 562.690 | 564.250 |
| 500,111 | 884.341 | 886.325 | 552.157 | 575.976 | 564.252 |
| 500,113 | 885.160 | 886.327 | 552.988 | 568.057 | 564.253 |
| 500,119 | 884.559 | 886.332 | 552.597 | 569.750 | 564.257 |
| 500,153 | 884.834 | 886.363 | 552.900 | 589.146 | 564.276 |
| 500,167 | 885.756 | 886.375 | 552.525 | 560.095 | 564.284 |
| 600,011 | 969.139 | 970.822 | 605.632 | 611.914 | 618.044 |
| 700,001 | 1,047.771 | 1,048.599 | 654.317 | 667.624 | 667.559 |
| 800,011 | 1,120.427 | 1,121.006 | 700.047 | 703.061 | 713.655 |
| 900,001 | 1,188.822 | 1,188.999 | 742.619 | 762.673 | 756.940 |
| 1,000,003 | 1,252.452 | 1,253.316 | 782.026 | 793.388 | 797.886 |
| 2,000,003 | 1,772.078 | 1,772.455 | 1,106.815 | 1,134.598 | 1,128.380 |
| 500,009 | 3,578 | 3,164 | 2,319 |
| 500,029 | 3,620 | 3,291 | 2,327 |
| 500,041 | 3,798 | 3,118 | 2,333 |
| 500,057 | 3,468 | 3,319 | 2,423 |
| 500,069 | 3,556 | 3,129 | 2,089 |
| 500,083 | 3,596 | 3,050 | 2,131 |
| 500,107 | 3,527 | 3,232 | 2,643 |
| 500,111 | 3,732 | 3,237 | 2,244 |
| 500,113 | 3,805 | 3,232 | 2,335 |
| 500,119 | 3,873 | 3,142 | 2,275 |
| 500,153 | 3,472 | 3,380 | 2,754 |
| 500,167 | 3,644 | 3,159 | 2,770 |
| 600,011 | 3,847 | 3,488 | 3,265 |
| 700,001 | 4,350 | 3,670 | 2,950 |
| 800,011 | 4,600 | 4,242 | 3,208 |
| 900,001 | 4,997 | 4,274 | 3,245 |
| 1,000,003 | 5,101 | 4,639 | 3,117 |
| 2,000,003 | 7,637 | 6,848 | 4,309 |
| range of | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1,182 | 39 | 7 | 1,159 | 65 | 4 | 1,193 | 35 | 0 | |
| 1,013 | 20 | 0 | 1,010 | 22 | 1 | 1,019 | 14 | 0 | |
| 967 | 14 | 2 | 970 | 13 | 0 | 976 | 7 | 0 | |
| 949 | 9 | 0 | 941 | 17 | 0 | 950 | 8 | 0 | |
| 921 | 8 | 1 | 921 | 9 | 0 | 926 | 4 | 0 | |
| 915 | 9 | 0 | 920 | 4 | 0 | 921 | 3 | 0 | |
| 868 | 10 | 0 | 872 | 6 | 0 | 868 | 9 | 1 | |
| 895 | 7 | 0 | 897 | 5 | 0 | 899 | 3 | 0 | |
| 869 | 7 | 0 | 869 | 7 | 0 | 866 | 10 | 0 | |
| 874 | 5 | 0 | 878 | 1 | 0 | 876 | 3 | 0 | |
| 81 | 0 | 0 | 79 | 2 | 0 | 81 | 0 | 0 | |
| 74 | 1 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 0 | 74 | 1 | 0 | |
| value of | value of | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 | 271 | 147 |
| 5 | 1 | 2,647 | 1,445 |
| 7 | 3 | 3,613 | 2,653 |
| 11 | 6 | 6,131 | 3,555 |
| 13 | 1 | 6,719 | 107 |
| 17 | 3 | 17,921 | 8,370 |
| 19 | 13 | 18,077 | 15,557 |
| 29 | 4 | 36,229 | 2,229 |
| 157 | 141 | 53,611 | 23,630 |
| 191 | 97 | 64,667 | 60,638 |
| range of | freq | #primes | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 104 | 1,228 | 8.06% | |
| 35 | 1,033 | 3.19% | |
| 32 | 983 | 3.26% | |
| 20 | 958 | 1.98% | |
| 19 | 930 | 2.04% | |
| 16 | 924 | 1.73% | |
| 20 | 878 | 2.28% | |
| 15 | 902 | 1.66% | |
| 15 | 876 | 1.71% | |
| 6 | 879 | 0.68% | |
| 0 | 81 | 0.00% | |
| 1 | 75 | 1.33% |
| range of | freq | #primes | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 268 | 1,228 | 20.36% | |
| 197 | 1,033 | 18.87% | |
| 153 | 983 | 15.16% | |
| 148 | 958 | 15.24% | |
| 126 | 930 | 13.55% | |
| 167 | 924 | 17.97% | |
| 143 | 878 | 16.17% | |
| 143 | 902 | 15.74% | |
| 144 | 876 | 16.44% | |
| 147 | 879 | 16.72% | |
| 13 | 81 | 16.05% | |
| 9 | 77 | 11.69% |
| 1 | 100,003 | 100,003 | 500,009 | 500,009 | 1,000,003 | 1,000,003 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 50,001 | 50,001 | 250,004 | 250,004 | 500,001 | 500,001 |
| 3 | 33,333 | 33,334 | 166,669 | 166,669 | 333,333 | 333,334 |
| 4 | 24,890 | 25,000 | 125,000 | 125,002 | 249,890 | 250,000 |
| 5 | 20,061 | 20,000 | 99,353 | 100,001 | 199,310 | 200,000 |
| 6 | 16,775 | 16,667 | 83,664 | 83,334 | 165,852 | 166,667 |
| 7 | 14,179 | 14,286 | 71,582 | 71,429 | 143,109 | 142,857 |
| 8 | 12,474 | 12,500 | 62,541 | 62,501 | 125,266 | 125,000 |
| 2 | 50,001 | 50,001 | 250,004 | 250,004 | 500,001 | 500,001 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 24,951 | 25,000 | 125,160 | 125,002 | 250,171 | 250,000 |
| 6 | 16,156 | 16,667 | 83,185 | 83,334 | 166,660 | 166,667 |
| 8 | 12,509 | 12,500 | 62,652 | 62,501 | 124,727 | 125,000 |
| 10 | 10,083 | 10,000 | 50,422 | 50,000 | 99,975 | 100,000 |
| 12 | 8,389 | 8,333 | 41,542 | 41,667 | 82,577 | 83,333 |
| 14 | 7,192 | 7,143 | 35,661 | 35,714 | 71,611 | 71,428 |
| 16 | 6,292 | 6,250 | 31,186 | 31,350 | 62,220 | 62,500 |
| 18 | 5,503 | 5,555 | 27,941 | 27,778 | 55,923 | 55,555 |
| 20 | 5,009 | 5,000 | 24,662 | 25,000 | 50,135 | 50,000 |
| 1000 | 117 | 100 | 533 | 500 | 954 | 1,000 |
| 2000 | 48 | 50 | 243 | 250 | 489 | 500 |
| 100,003 | 521,337 | 538,640 | 638,643 | 548,722 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200,003 | 1,113,083 | 1,147,694 | 1,347,697 | 1,166,748 |
| 300,007 | 1,730,420 | 1,782,805 | 2,082,812 | 1,810,962 |
| 400,009 | 2,364,734 | 2,434,894 | 2,834,903 | 2,472,154 |
| 500,009 | 3,011,626 | 3,098,914 | 3,598,923 | 3,145,966 |
| 600,011 | 3,667,637 | 3,772,277 | 4,372,288 | 3,829,859 |
| 700,001 | 4,333,622 | 4,455,913 | 5,155,914 | 4,522,041 |
| 800,011 | 5,005,995 | 5,145,194 | 5,945,205 | 5,221,530 |
| 900,001 | 5,685,731 | 5,842,337 | 6,742,338 | 5,927,145 |
| 1,000,003 | 6,369,257 | 6,543,317 | 7,543,320 | 6,638,411 |
| % | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 50,111 | 7,090,084 | 14,091,820 | 50.31% |
| 100,003 | 19,845,915 | 39,530,737 | 50.20% |
| 200,003 | 56,210,936 | 112,088,213 | 50.15% |
| 300,007 | 103,203,596 | 205,901,181 | 50.12% |
| 400,009 | 158,746,944 | 317,089,081 | 50.06% |
| 500,009 | 221,941,725 | 443,336,032 | 50.06% |
| 1,000,003 | 627,460,216 | 1,253,326,817 | 50.06% |
| % | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 50,111 | 27,877 | 55,668 | 50.08% |
| 100,003 | 52,923 | 105,612 | 50.11% |
| 200,003 | 115,746 | 231,583 | 49.98% |
| 300,007 | 161,975 | 323,410 | 50.08% |
| 400,009 | 222,865 | 445,931 | 49.98% |
| 500,009 | 298,060 | 595,142 | 50.08% |
| 1,000,003 | 542,592 | 1,086,147 | 49.96% |
| average of | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | 0.797 | 0.837 | 0.837 | 0.837 |
| 100 | 0.846 | 0.875 | 0.873 | 0.872 |
| 500 | 0.920 | 0.952 | 0.925 | 0.941 |
| 1,000 | 0.940 | 0.925 | 0.948 | 0.942 |
| 2,000 | 0.956 | 0.981 | 0.944 | 0.960 |
| 5,000 | 0.970 | 0.927 | 0.916 | 0.977 |
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.
On Functional Graphs of Quadratic Polynomials
Bernard Mans
B.M.: Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
,
Min Sha
M.S.: Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
,
Igor E. Shparlinski
I.S.: Department of Pure Mathematics, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
and
Daniel Sutantyo
D.S.: Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney,NSW 2109, Australia
Abstract.
We study functional graphs generated by quadratic polynomials over prime fields. We introduce efficient algorithms for methodical computations and provide the values of various direct and cumulative statistical parameters of interest. These include: the number of connected functional graphs, the number of graphs having a maximal cycle, the number of cycles of fixed size, the number of components of fixed size, as well as the shape of trees extracted from functional graphs. We particularly focus on connected functional graphs, that is, the graphs which contain only one component (and thus only one cycle). Based on the results of our computations, we formulate several conjectures highlighting the similarities and differences between these functional graphs and random mappings.
Key words and phrases:
Polynomial maps, functional graphs, finite fields, random maps, algorithms
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
05C20, 05C85, 11T24
1. Introduction
Let be the finite field of elements and of characteristic , with . For a function , we define the functional graph of as a directed graph on nodes labelled by the elements of where there is an edge from to if and only if . For any integer , let be the -th iteration of .
These graphs are particular as one can immediately observe that each connected component of the graph has a unique cycle (we treat fixed points as cycles of length ). An example for the functional graph of is given in Figure 1.1.
Recently, there have been an increasing interest in studying, theoretically and experimentally, the graphs generated by polynomials of small degree (such as quadratic polynomials), and how they differ, or not, from random mappings [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1990]. We refer to [Bellah et al. 2016, Bridy and Garton 2016, Burnette and Schmutz 2017, Flynn and Garton 2014, Konyagin et al. 2016, Ostafe and Sha 2016] and the references therein.
In this paper, we concentrate on the case of quadratic polynomials over prime fields. In fact, up to isomorphism we only need to consider polynomials , (see the proof of [Konyagin et al. 2016, Theorem 2.1]). For simplicity, we use to denote the functional graph generated by . For this case, in [Konyagin et al. 2016, Section 4] the authors have provided numerical data for the number of distinct graphs , the statistics of cyclic points, the number of connected components, as well as the most popular component size.
Different from the aspects in [Konyagin et al. 2016], we consider several questions related to distributions of cyclic points and sizes of connected components of when runs through the elements in . In particular, we are interested in characterising connected functional graphs , that is, the graphs which contain only one component (and thus only one cycle).
In this paper, we focus on characterising the functional graphs by providing direct parameters such as the number of (connected) components. We then characterise various cumulative parameters, such as the number of cyclic points and the shape of trees extracted from functional graphs. We highlight similarities and differences between functional graphs [Konyagin et al. 2016] and random mappings [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1990], and we also pay much attention to features of connected functional graphs. While obtaining theoretic results for these questions remains a challenge, we introduce efficient algorithms and present new interesting results of numerical experiments.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we develop a fast algorithm that determines whether a functional graph is connected, which is used to compute the number of connected functional graphs. In Section 3, we compare the number of cyclic points in connected graphs with those in all graphs modulo . In Section 4 and Section 5 respectively, we consider the number of components with small number of cyclic points and with small size. Finally, in Section 6 we illustrate the statistics of trees in functional graphs.
Throughout the paper, we use the Landau symbol . Recall that the assertion is equivalent to the inequality with some absolute constant . To emphasise the dependence of the implied constant on some parameter (or a list of parameters) , we write . We also use the asymptotic symbol .
2. Counting connected graphs
In this section, we introduce a new efficient algorithm that quickly detects connected functional graphs, and formulate some conjectures for the number of connected graphs based on our computations.
2.1. Preliminaries and informal ideas of the algorithm
Let be the set such that is connected. We also denote by the number of connected graphs with . Clearly the graph is not connected, and also by [Vasiga and Shallit 2004, Corollary 18 (a)] is also not connected if , and so if . In fact, the functional graphs with values and lead to graphs with a particular group structure (and thus the structure of these graphs deviates significantly from the other graphs, see [Vasiga and Shallit 2004]).
Essentially in [Konyagin et al. 2016, Algorithm 3.1], a rigorous deterministic algorithm using Floyd’s cycle detection algorithm and needing function evaluations (that is, of complexity ) has been used to test whether is a connected graph. Instead of evaluating via this algorithm which would need function evaluations, we introduce a more efficient heuristic approach in practice, which is specifically useful for computations of a family of graphs (not just a single graph).
The main idea is to first check quickly whether has more than one small cycle (i.e., more than one component). A graph has a component with a cycle of size if and only if the equation has a solution which is not a solution to any of the equations with . The roots of are the cyclic points in the graph. For this we need the dynatomic polynomials
[TABLE]
where is the Möbius function, see [Silverman 2007, Section 4.1]. Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
For example
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Clearly, if has a cycle of length , then any point in this cycle is a root of the polynomial . However, the roots of might be not all lying in cycles of length ; for instance see [Silverman 2007, Example 4.2]. Certainly, is not connected if has a root for two distinct values of with and . Alternatively, if has more than distinct roots, this indicates that has at least two cycles, which again implies that has more than one connected component.
As we show later, it turns out that this occurs frequently and thus we can rule out the connectivity of most of the graph , quickly. A relatively small number of remaining suspects can be checked via the rigorous deterministic algorithm from [Konyagin et al. 2016, Algorithm 3.1].
2.2. Algorithm
Algorithm 2.1 is to determine whether a graph is connected or not, where we in fact use instead of .
The algorithm starts by checking if there is any cycle of size 1 in the graph. Since only contains simple roots and has degree 2, if , then there are two cycles of size 1 and thus two separate components in the graph. Otherwise, there is at most one component with a cycle of size 1 in the graph .
Next, we compute from until while keeping track of the number of cycles that has been detected. Here, we have several possibilities:
- •
if , then there are no cycle of size in the graph.
- •
if , then there is exactly one cycle of size .
- •
if , then there are at least two different cycles in the graph.
When , there are no cycle of size since there are not enough roots to form one. Similarly, if , then there are more than cyclic points in the graph, of which at least of them form one cycle, and so there are more than one cycle in the graph.
Finally, if at this stage the algorithm detects , then there is exactly one cycle of size . By contradiction, if there is no cycle of size , then there must be at least two cycles of size less than , and so we would have detected that at a previous iteration, thus returning ‘false’.
Once we are done with the first loop, either we have found one cycle with size at most , or we have not found any small cycles at all. We then proceed with a graph traversal until we find two cycles.
2.3. Statistics of the number of connected graphs
We implement Algorithm 2.1 by using NTL [NTL 2016] and PARI/GP [Pari 2016], choosing in our computations. We collect values of for some primes (as shown in Table 2.1) that lead us to the following conjecture:
Conjecture 2.1**.**
* as .*
Here, we also pose a weaker conjecture:
Conjecture 2.2**.**
For any prime , .
Conjecture 2.2 predicts that there always exists a connected functional graph generated by quadratic polynomials modulo . Indeed, according to our computations, Conjecture 2.2 is true for all primes .
We also investigate the existence of connected functional graphs having (only) one cycle of size .
If the graph is connected and has one cycle of size , then the equation has two identical roots (corresponding to fixed points), and so and the root . Thus, we only need to check the graph generated by in .
We have tested all the primes up to 100000 and we only have found two such examples: one is in , and the other is in . Furthermore, we have:
Proposition 2.3**.**
For any prime with p\equiv\textrm{511}\pmod{12}, there is no functional graph having only one cycle of size .
Proof.
Note that we only need to consider the graph . Since is a fixed point of and there is an edge from to , we consider the equation in , that is, whether is a square in . However, if p\equiv\textrm{511}\pmod{12}, is not a square in . Then, the in-degree of is zero, and so must have more than one cycle. This completes the proof. \sqcap$$\sqcup
So, we pose the following conjecture:
Conjecture 2.4**.**
For any prime , there is no functional graph having only one cycle of size .
3. Counting cyclic points in functional graphs
We now assess the number of cyclic points in functional graphs modulo . For the minimal and maximal numbers of cyclic points in graphs , we refer to [Konyagin et al. 2016, Table 4.1], where the cases are excluded. Roughly speaking, the reason why these two cases are excluded is that the number of cyclic points is maximized on the cases quite often; see [Konyagin et al. 2016, Section 4.3] for more details. In this section, we also follow this convention.
Let be the total number of cyclic points of , and let be the largest number of cyclic points in a single component of . Clearly we have for any and when .
Furthermore, we define the average and largest values of these quantities:
[TABLE]
We remark again that if .
Numerical experiments in [Konyagin et al. 2016, Section 4.3] suggest that the average number of cyclic points modulo , taken over all graphs modulo (excluding ), is , which is consistent with the behaviour of random maps (see [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1990, Theorem 2(ii)]). Here we show that this is not the case for connected graphs (see Table 3.1). In that case, is smaller than , i.e. there are fewer cyclic points than those for non-connected graphs on average. Notice that both and are both close to (and although close to each other, is slightly larger).
In Table 3.2, one can see that the largest cycles usually do not appear in the connected graphs, which appears surprising and shows the existence of components with a large cycle even when the graph is disconnected. In addition, the difference is large, while the difference of and is small.
Let us also define the following three families of parameters on which the values , and are achieved, that is
[TABLE]
It is certainly interesting to compare the sizes , and and also investigate the mutual intersections between these families.
We find that typically these sets have one value of in common, and rarely more than two. As increases, the frequency of the sets having or more elements decreases, but does not disappear completely, as can be seen in Table 3.3.
For the set intersections, we start with . With Table 3.1, we have observed that , thus it is reasonable to expect that is empty. We remark that if is not empty, then , and so for any the graph is connected, and thus . Therefore, for any prime , if , then we must have that is empty. Our experiments with odd prime counted only 20 occurrences of primes where the intersection is non-empty and in fact contains only one value of , shown in Table 3.4.
Since we have observed only one value of for each prime in the above table, we conjecture that:
Conjecture 3.1**.**
For any prime , we have .
We also consider the intersection ; see Table 3.5. Clearly, if is not empty, then we have . One could expect the number of primes with non-empty intersections to decrease as increases, however even if our experiments show some reduction overall, it remains unclear.
The most surprising result comes from the observation of the intersection . As Table 3.6 shows, the event that this intersection is not empty is rather common. For any , the graph not only has the maximal number of cyclic points but also has a maximal cycle.
Note that for the last two rows we only give primes in the ranges and , respectively, due to the limits of our current computational facilities.
4. Statistics of small cycles
We now study components by analysing the distribution of the size of their cycles. Let be the number of cycles of length in the graph . Let
[TABLE]
be the number of cycles of length over all graphs modulo . Clearly, we have for any ; see [Peinado et al. 2001, Theorems 1 and 2] for better bounds of .
Proposition 4.1**.**
For any integer , there is a constant depending only on such that for any prime we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We can assume that . For any fixed , notice that any point contributing to is a root of the polynomial . Conversely, any root of contributes to for some (possibly ). Thus, we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, from [Morton and Patel 1994, Theorem 2.4 (c)] and noticing , we know that if and with , where is a point lying in a cycle of length , then , that is, the discriminant of is zero. Note that as a polynomial in the degree of is at most , and as a polynomial in the degree of is at most . Then, as a polynomial in , the degree of the discriminant of is at most . Thus, except for at most values of , we have that is a simple polynomial in . Hence, we have
[TABLE]
In addition, combining [Morton 1996, Corollary 1 to Theorem B] with [Morton and Vivaldi 1995, Proposition 3.2], if we view as an integer polynomial in variables and , then is an absolutely irreducible polynomial. Then, by Ostrowski’s theorem, there exists a positive integer depending only on such that for any the polynomial is absolutely irreducible modulo in variables and . It is also easy to see by induction on that is of total degree at most as a bivariate polynomial in and , and the same is true for . Thus, by the Hasse-Weil bound (see [Lorenzini 1996, Section VIII.5.8]) we obtain
[TABLE]
which, together with (4.1), implies the desired result (as we can always assume that , so ). \sqcap$$\sqcup
In particular, we see from Proposition 4.1 that for any fixed integer ,
[TABLE]
Note that using [Gao and Rodrigues 2003, Theorem 1] or [Ruppert 1986, Satz B] or [Zannier 1997, Corollary], one can obtain an explicit form for . However, any such estimate has to depend on the size of the coefficients of (considered as a bivariate polynomial in and over ) and is likely to be double exponential in .
We can also compute the exact values of and .
Proposition 4.2**.**
For any odd prime , we have and .
Proof.
First, note that any point contributing to is a root of for some , and also
[TABLE]
is solvable if and only if is a square. Since there are squares in , we have .
Now, it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
If a point lies in a cycle of length in , then it is a root of and also it is not a root of . However, if there exists a point such that
[TABLE]
then we must have . So, if , then any root of lies in a cycle of length . Thus, noticing that
[TABLE]
is solvable if and only if is a square, we have and conclude the proof. \sqcap$$\sqcup
Table 4.1 shows the for some values of (in these cases, we also included the graphs and ). This is consistent with Proposition 4.1.
5. Distribution of components with size
We now study the components of functional graphs by analysing the distribution of their sizes. For the minimal and maximal numbers of components in graphs as well as the popular component size, we refer to [Konyagin et al. 2016, Sections 4.4 and 4.5].
Let be the number of components taken over all modulo , and let be the number of those components with size (that is, there are nodes in the component). Furthermore, let
[TABLE]
Clearly,
[TABLE]
We first have:
Proposition 5.1**.**
For any odd prime , .
Proof.
If is a component of of size , then it is easy to see that for some such that is a fixed point (that is, ) and the equation has no solution in (that is, is not a square).
In other words, for any , if we choose , then is a fixed point in and . So, it is equivalent to count how many such that is not a square in . Since , it is also equivalent to count how many such that is not a square in .
If is a square in , say , then we have . Let , then , and so
[TABLE]
So, for such pairs we obtain a one-to-one correspondence between pairs and pairs . It is easy to see that for any ,
[TABLE]
So, by counting the pairs , there are values of such that is a square. Therefore, there are values of such that is not a square. This completes the proof. \sqcap$$\sqcup
It has been predicted in [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1990, Theorem 2 (i)] that
[TABLE]
which has a small bias (about ) over the real value; see [Konyagin et al. 2016, Table 4.2]. Here, we improve the precision of this estimate. First, we note that each node in has in-degree two or zero except for the node , since only [math] maps to . Therefore, each component in any graph has an even number of nodes unless it is the component containing [math] and . So, each graph has exactly one component of odd size. It follows that
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
For even-sized components, the situation is not as straightforward. In our experiments, we noticed that the number of even-sized components with size is very close to as shown in Table 5.1 for and for and (i.e., even for larger values of ).
Now, using as an approximation of the number of components of size for any even , we can get an approximation for . First, when , we have , and there are about values of such even . In general, if , we have , and there are about values of such even , which contributes to around components of even size.
Fixing a positive integer , for we use the above estimate, while for we use the estimate , and so the total number of components of even size is around
[TABLE]
which, together with the approximation of the harmonic series, is approximated by
[TABLE]
where is the Euler constant. So, we denote
[TABLE]
which is an approximation of .
Table 5.2 shows the difference between the two values for several large primes. We overestimate the actual value by about 2%.
6. Shape of trees in functional graphs
Finally, in order to reveal more detailed features of functional graphs, we consider the trees attached to such graphs.
In the functional graph corresponding to , each node in a cycle, except for (if lies in a cycle), is connected to a unique node (say ) which is not in the cycle. Naturally, we treat the node as the root of the binary tree attached to a cyclic point in the graph . Thus, we can say that each node in a cycle of , expect for , is associated with a binary tree – in fact a full binary tree, unless [math] is a node in the tree. For example, in Figure 1.1, there are full binary trees attached to the cyclic points. Let be the number of such binary trees with nodes in , and let
[TABLE]
and for the connected graphs equivalents, let
[TABLE]
Note that is the total number of trees attached to all such functional graphs , and has a similar meaning but with restriction to connected functional graphs.
An interesting question is whether these trees behave similarly to random full binary trees. First we observe that there is a significant proportion of trees with just one node, as shown in Table 6.1 for the general case and in Table 6.2 for connected graphs. This motivates us to pose the following conjecture, which seems to be reasonable because exactly half of elements in are not square.
Conjecture 6.1**.**
We have as .
Second, for large trees, we check the average height of the trees in the graphs. It has been shown in [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1982, Theorem B] that the average height of full binary trees with internal nodes is
[TABLE]
This means that for a random full binary tree, its height is asymptotic to when goes to the infinity. In our situation, for each tree with internal nodes and height , we compute the ratio and find the average of this ratio for all graphs modulo . (Again, a tree is not always guaranteed to be a full binary tree, since [math] might be a node in the tree, but the impact of this happening is negligible, and at any case, we collect trees of both sizes and .)
In Table 6.3, we compare the ratio of (see [Flajolet and Odlyzko 1982, Table II]) with the average ratio of of the trees in our graphs. One can see that they are close.
7. Future Directions
One of the most important directions in this area is developing an adequate random model predicting the statistical characteristics of the functional graphs of polynomials, see [Martin and Panario 2016] for some initial, yet promising results in this direction.
Based on our computations, we pose several conjectures about the functional graphs of quadratic polynomials. Investigating whether they are true or not may help to characterise functional graphs generated by quadratic polynomials and understand the similarities and differences between these functional graphs and random mappings.
The other interesting problem is to count the number of functional graphs modulo generated by quadratic polynomials up to isomorphism; see [Konyagin et al. 2016, Theorem 2.8] for a lower bound. In [Gilbert et al. 2001, Conjecture C] the authors conjectured that for any odd prime , there are such functional graphs up to isomorphism, and they confirmed this for all the odd primes up to 1009 not equal to . Under our computations, we confirm this conjecture for all the odd primes up to 100000 not equal to .
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Patric Morton and Michael Zieve for several useful suggestions and literature references, especially concerning dynatomic polynomials.
For the research, B.M. was partially supported by the Australian Research Council Grants DP140100118 and DP170102794, M.S. by the Macquarie University Research Fellowship, I.S. by the Australian Research Council Grants DP130100237 and DP140100118.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[Bellah et al. 2016] E. Bellah, D. Garton, E. Tannenbaum and N. Walton, ‘A probabilistic heuristic for counting components of functional graphs of polynomials over finite fields’, Preprint , 2016 (see http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.07667 ).
- 2[Bridy and Garton 2016] A. Bridy and D. Garton, ‘Dynamically distinguishing polynomials’, Preprint , 2016 (see http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.09186 ).
- 3[Burnette and Schmutz 2017] C. Burnette and E. Schmutz, ‘Periods of iterated rational functions over a finite field’, Intern. J. Number Theory , 13 (2017), no.5, 1301-1315.
- 4[Flajolet and Odlyzko 1982] P. Flajolet, A. Odlyzko, ‘The average height of binary trees and other simple trees’, J. Comput. System Sci. , 25 (1982), no. 2, 171-213.
- 5[Flajolet and Odlyzko 1990] P. Flajolet, A. Odlyzko, ‘Random mapping statistics’, Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 434 (1990), 329-354.
- 6[Flynn and Garton 2014] R. Flynn and D. Garton, ‘Graph components and dynamics over finite fields’, Intern. J. Number Theory , 10 (2014), 779–792.
- 7[Gao and Rodrigues 2003] S. Gao and V. M. Rodrigues, ‘Irreducibility of polynomials modulo p via Newton polytopes’ J. Number Theory , 101 (2003), 32–47.
- 8[Gilbert et al. 2001] C. L. Gilbert, J. D. Kolesar, C. A. Reiter and J. D. Storey, ‘Function digraphs of quadratic maps modulo p 𝑝 p ’, Fibonacci Quart. , 39 (2001), 32–49.
