This paper derives asymptotic formulas for the size of image sets of iterated rational maps over finite fields, linking Galois group properties to image set growth and applying results to bounds on periodic points in reductions of maps over number fields.
Contribution
It introduces a method to estimate image set sizes of iterated rational maps over finite fields using Galois groups and Chebotarev Density, with applications to periodic points over number fields.
Findings
01
Asymptotic formulas for image set sizes as a function of iteration
02
Connection between Galois groups and image set growth
03
Explicit bounds on periodic points in residue fields
Abstract
Let φ:P1(Fq)→P1(Fq) be a rational map of degree d>1 on a fixed finite field. We give asymptotic formulas for the size of image sets φn(P1(Fq)) as a function of n. This is done using properties of Galois groups of iterated maps, whose connection to the size of image sets is established via the Chebotarev Density Theorem. We apply our results in the following setting. For a rational map defined over a number field, consider the reduction of the map modulo each prime of the number field. We use our results to give explicit bounds on the proportion of periodic points in the residue fields.
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.
Full text
The Image Size of Iterated Rational Maps over Finite Fields
Jamie Juul
Abstract.
Let φ:P1(Fq)→P1(Fq) be a rational map of degree d>1 on a fixed finite field. We give asymptotic formulas for the size of image sets φn(P1(Fq)) as a function of n. This is done using properties of Galois groups of iterated maps, whose connection to the size of image sets is established via the Chebotarev Density Theorem. We apply our results in the following setting. For a rational map defined over a number field, consider the reduction of the map modulo each prime of the number field. We use our results to give explicit bounds on the proportion of periodic points in the residue fields.
1. Introduction
Let φ:P1(Fq)→P1(Fq) be a rational map of degree d>1 on a fixed finite field and let φn denote the n-th iterate of φ. We would like to consider the size of the image setsφn(P1(Fq))={φn(a):a∈P1(Fq)} as n varies and the set of periodic pointsPer(φ)={a∈P1(Fq):φk(a)=a for some k>0}. Image sets are also called value sets and are denoted Vφn by some authors.
The size of φn(P1(Fq)) is eventually constant, as after a certain number of iterates only the periodic points remain in the image. In this paper, we address the question of how fast this contraction occurs.
Many authors have investigated the question of the size of the image or value sets for polynomials f(x)∈Fq[x] which are not necessarily iterates, defined simply as f(Fq)={f(a):a∈Fq}. Note, when the map is defined by a polynomial, one may simply work with Fq rather than P1(Fq) since the point at infinity is fixed. Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer [2] proved for a degree d>1 polynomial f(x)∈Fq[x], if the Galois group of the splitting field of f(x)−t over Fˉq(t) is the full symmetric group Sd, then
[TABLE]
answering a question of Chowla [5]. Other results in this area have been proven in [10, 12, 23].
Remark 1.1*.*
The big-O notation here is used to mean #f(Fq)−(∑k=1dk!(−1)k−1)q<Mq1/2, where M is some constant depending on only d, and in particular is independent of q and f. Further, this bound holds for all values of q.
Throughout this paper big-O notation will be used in the same way. We will use subscripts in big-O notation to denote dependence of the implied constant on the variables in the subscript. In particular, when big-O is used without a subscript, the implied constant is a fixed number (independent of d,q,n and φ). The estimates hold for all values of d, q, and n, unless otherwise noted.
The connection of these problems to Galois theory is established via the Chebotarev density theorem. Specifically, if t is transcendental over Fq, #f(Fq)=Cq+Od(q), where C is the proportion of elements in the Galois group of the splitting field of f(x)−t over Fq(t) fixing some root of f(x)−t, provided the extension is geometric, that is, the splitting field of fn(x)−t does not contain a nontrivial algebraic extension of Fq. The coefficient in Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer’s result is precisely the proportion of elements of Sd with a fixed point. An analogous result holds for a generating coset of the Galois group of f(x)−t over Fˉq(t) in the Galois group of f(x)−t over Fq(t) for the non-geometric case. This idea was also used by Cohen on work toward this and several related questions [6]. Odoni used similar methods to study iterated polynomials, although he was looking at a different application [20]. We build on some of Odoni’s work here.
We fix the following notation. Let φ(x)∈Fq(x) be a rational function with degree d>1. Let Kn=Fq(φ−n(t)) and Kn∗=Fˉq(φ−n(t))=KnFˉq, the splitting fields of φn(x)−t over Fq(t) and Fˉq(t) respectively. We assume φn(x)−t is separable so that Kn/Fq(t) is a Galois extension. This is a generic condition that is easy to verify; in fact it suffices to check that φ′(x)=0. We also introduce the following definition.
Definition 1.2**.**
Let Γ be a finite set acting on a set X. We define the fixed point proportion of Γ, denoted FPP(Γ), to be the proportion of elements in Γ fixing an element of X.
We prove a generalization of equation (1) for iterates of rational functions in Section 2. In Theorem 2.1 we show
[TABLE]
As in equation (1), ϵn=FPP(Gal(Kn/Fq(t))) if Kn∩Fˉq=Fq. More generally ϵn=FPP(σGal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t))) where σGal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t)) is a generator of the factor group \operatorname{Gal}\big{(}K_{n}/{{\mathbb{F}}}_{q}(t)\big{)}\big{/}\operatorname{Gal}\left(K^{*}_{n}/\bar{{\mathbb{F}}}_{q}(t)\right). Unlike in equation (1), we see explicitly how the error term depends on the degree of φn, rather than including this information in the implied constant. We take advantage of the iterated structure of φn to refine the error term.
In Section 3, 4, and 5, we study ϵn in the case Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t)) is an iterated wreath product. If q is large relative to n, this occurs under very general conditions [17, 19, 21].
In Section 3, we define indicatrix polynomials, our main tool for studying fixed point proportions, and give a preliminary result. In Section 4, we perform some fairly involved calculations to obtain precise bounds on ϵn when Gal(Kn/Fq(t))=[G]n for G=Cd,Sd,Ad, or Dd. Here [G]n denotes the n-fold iterated wreath product of the group G with itself, Sd, Ad, and Cd denote the symmetric, alternating, and cyclic groups acting on d letters, and Dd denotes the group of symmetries of a regular d-gon.
In Section 5, we combine our work in Sections 3 and 4 with equation (2) to get our main results, which are bounds on the image size. If φ:P1(Fq)→P1(Fq) is not a bijection, we see that ϵn is defined by a recursive formula and there is a constant cφ such that ϵn=ncφ2+Od(n2logn) for n≥2, see Theorem 5.1. Then we use our calculations from Section 4 to prove Theorem 1.3.
We also give, in Corollary 5.6, a bound on the number of iterates that can occur before the critical orbits must either collide or cycle for degree d rational functions φ(x)∈Fq(x) that are not bijections.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Suppose Kn is tamely ramified over Fq(t) and Gal(Kn/Fq(t))≅[G]n, where G=Cd,Sd, or Ad for any d≥2. Then
[TABLE]
*where ϵn=FPP([G]n). Moreover, ϵn=ncG2+O(n2logn) if n≥2, where cSd=cAd=1 and cCd=d−1.
*
In the case of Dd, we give the value of cDd, but do not prove a result as strong as Theorem 1.3 for this case. We include this case to work toward an application given in Theorem 1.5.
Theorem 1.3 supports the model of random maps, which says a general rational function should behave like a random map. In [8, Theorem 2], Flajolet and Odlyzko show for a random map on a set with q elements, the n-th iterate should have image size asymptotic to (1−τn)q as q→∞, where τ0=0 and τn+1=e−1+τn. It is not hard to see that 1−τn is asymptotic to n2 as n approaches infinity. As mentioned above, for large q the Galois group of the splitting field of fn(x)−t over Fq(t) will be isomorphic to [Sd]n under very general conditions. The estimate in Theorem 1.3 gives the same asymptotic behavior as the heuristic predicts in this case.
In Sections 6 and 7, we turn our attention to polynomial maps defined over the ring of integers of a number field and the reduction of these maps to the residue fields. In Section 6, we focus on two families of polynomials defined over Z, φ(x)=axd+c and φ(x)=(d−1)xd+(da)xd−1. We obtain the following generalization of recent work of Shao [23] and Heath-Brown [14].
Theorem 1.4**.**
Let d>1 and consider φ(x)=axd+c∈Fq(x), where a,c=0. Suppose φn(0)=φm(0) for all i<j≤n.
If q≡1modd, then
[TABLE]
where ϵn=(d−1)n2+O(n2logn) for n≥2.
Shao shows for sufficiently large p and f(x)=x2+1∈Fp[x], we have #fn(Fp)=μnp+On(p), where μn is defined recursively by μ0=1 and μn+1=μn−21μn2 [23, Theorem 1.6]. Note, the implied constant in Shao’s equation depends on the degree of fn(x), which is 2n. More generally, Heath-Brown shows if Fq is a finite field with odd characteristic and f(x)=ax2+bx+c∈Fq[x] has the property that fi(−b/(2a))=fj(−b/(2a)) for all 0≤i<j≤n, then #fn(Fq)=μnq+O(24nq), with μn as above [14].
Theorem 1.4 gives #φn(P1(Fq))=ϵnq+O(22nq). One can recover the recursive formula for μn from our formula for FPP([C2]n) in Section 3.
Finally in Section 7, we find bounds on proportions of periodic points.
Let K be a number field, φ(x) be a polynomial with coefficients in OK, the ring of integers of K. Suppose the critical orbits of φ are infinite and disjoint. Let φp(x) be the reduction of φ(x) modulo p and consider the action of φp:P1(OK/p)→P1(OK/p). Let q=∣OK/p∣.
By [19, Theorem 1.3(b)] and [18, Theorem 3.8(b)], the proportion of periodic points approaches [math] as q approaches infinity. We obtain an explicit version of these results.
Theorem 1.5**.**
Let K be a number field, OK the ring of integers of K, and φ(x)∈OK[x]. Suppose {c∈kˉ:φ′(c)=0}⊆OK and for all m,n∈N, φn(a)=φm(b) for critical points a,b unless a=b and n=m. Let p be a prime of OK, q=∣OK/p∣, and φp:P1(OK/p)→P1(OK/p) be the reduction of φ modulo p.
(a)
If each coset of Gal(K(φ−1(t))/K(t))/Gal(Kˉ(φ−1(t))/Kˉ(t)) contains at least one fixed point free element, then
[TABLE]
2. (b)
Suppose further that K(φ−n(t))∩Kˉ=K. There is a constant A, depending on φ such that if q≥2[K:Q]eA and Gal((OK/p)(φ−1(t))/(OK/p)(t))=G is isomorphic to Sd or Cd for d>1 or Ad for d>5. Then
[TABLE]
A similar statement holds for G=A4, we exclude A4 here for ease of computation.
Although Equation (2) holds for any rational function defined over Fq, the rest of this paper focuses on the case where Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t)) is an iterated wreath product. There is current research focusing on what other groups can occur as Galois groups of these extentions, for example [21, 1]. For the groups that appear, Equation (2) can be used to bound the image size of iterates, given information about the fixed point proportion. The current method involving iterating an indicatrix polynomial will not directly apply, though it may be possible to find recursive formulas or bounds on the fixed point proportions for these other groups as in [1]. Since this work relies on the Chebotarev Density Theorem, the methods in this paper can only be applied when we are able to find explicit bounds on the fixed point proportions of the Galois groups.
2. Bounds on φn(P1(Fq)) in Terms of FPP(Gal(Kn/Fq(t)))
Recall Kn=Fq(φ−n(t)). In this section we prove the following.
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let φ(x)∈Fq(x). Suppose Kn/Fq(t) is a tamely ramified extension and Kn∩Fˉq=Fqr. Then
[TABLE]
for some constant M<6, where σ∈Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) is any element such that σ∣Fqr=Frobq and σGal(Kn/Fqr(t)) denotes the coset of Gal(Kn/Fqr(t)) in Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) containing σ.
If the extension is geometric (r=1) this simplifies to
[TABLE]
Since Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) must be isomorphic to a subgroup of [Sd]n, we see [Kn:Fq]d≤d!d−1dn−1d<d!dn [20, Lemma 4.1]. Note, this is a direct generalization of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer’s result mentioned in the introduction. The coefficient of q in equation (1) is precisely FPP(Sd). This result applies to rational functions, not just polynomials. It also applies no matter what the Galois group is and regardless of whether or not the extension is geometric.
We use an effective version of the Chebotarev Density Theorem [9, Proposition 6.4.8], which involves the genus of the extension and a count of the ramified primes. We make use of fact that we are working with an iterated function to get refined estimates for these quantities.
We also use the following lemma, which has appeared several places in the literature, [6, 16, 18, 19].
Let α∈P1(Fq) such that (t−α) is unramified in Kn. Then α∈φn(P1(Fq)) if and only if elements of (t−αKn/Fq(t)) fix some root of φn(x)−t, where (t−αKn/Fq(t)) is the Frobenius conjugacy class of the primes of Kn lying above (t−α),
Fix n and let C be a conjugacy class in Gal(Kn/Fq(t)).
Let C(Kn,C) denote the set of points α in P1(Fq) for which the prime (t−α) is unramified in Kn and
(t−αKn/Fq(t))=C.
Let c denote the size of C,
gKn the genus of Kn, Kn∩Fˉq=Fqr, and mn=[Kn:Fqr(t)]. By Proposition 6.4.8 in [9], if τ∣Fqr=Frobq for every τ∈C, then
[TABLE]
otherwise, C(Kn,C) is empty.
Let C′ denote the union of the conjugacy classes in Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) fixing at least one root of φn(x)−t and such that τ∣Fq=Frobq for all τ∈C. Let c′ denote the size of C′ and let C(Kn,C′) denote the set of points α in P1(Fq) for which (t−α) is unramified in the splitting field Kn of φn(x)−t and (t−αKn/Fq(t))⊆C′. Summing the estimate given in equation (3) over each conjugacy class in C′ we see
[TABLE]
Let Rn denote the set of points ramifying in Kn. By Lemma 2.2, φn(P1(Fq))−#C(Kn,C′)≤#Rn. Thus,
[TABLE]
Using a discriminant argument and induction, we can see that any prime ramifying in Kn has the form φn(a)−t where a is a critical point of φ (see [7, Proposition 1] or [19, Lemma 3.4]). Hence, there are at most n(2d−2) ramified primes. By the Riemann-Hurwitz formula we have
[TABLE]
where the upper bound on the sum in the first line is the maximum number of ramified primes times an upper bound on the value of the inner sum.
Plugging these bounds into equation (4) and simplifying, we see
[TABLE]
for a constant M0<3. Since mnc′=FPP(σGal(Kn/Fqr(t))) where σ∈Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) is any element such that σ∣Fqr=Frobq and mn=[Kn:Fqr(t)], we have
3. Indicatrix Polynomials, Wreath Products, and Fixed Point Proportions
The indicatrix polynomial of a set of permutations carries information about how many elements of the set fix each possible number of points. This function was developed by Polya [22], generalized by Harary and Palmer [13], and used in this current context by Odoni [20].
Definition 3.1**.**
Let Γ be a finite set of permutations acting on a finite set X. The indicatrix of Γ is the polynomial
[TABLE]
where trγ is the number of points of X fixed by γ.
For any set Γ, ΦΓ is a polynomial of degree at most ∣X∣ and ΦΓ(1)=1. The coefficient of xi in ΦΓ is the proportion of γ∈Γ with exactly i fixed points. In particular, the constant term of ΦΓ is the proportion of γ in Γ with no fixed points, so FPP(Γ)=1−ΦΓ(0).
For permutation groups G and H, acting on sets X and Y respectively, the wreath product G[H] has a natural action on the set X×Y and the indicatrix function satisfies
[TABLE]
If a group G acts on a set X then the n-fold iterated wreath product [G]n acts on Xn. It follows immediately from Lemma 3.2 that Φ[G]n(x)=ΦGn(x) and FPP([G]n)=1−ΦGn(0). Odoni uses this to show FPP([G]n)=nΦG′′(1)2(1+OG(nlogn)) where OG is a constant depending only on the group G [20, Lemma 4.3].
We extend this idea in the following lemma. We will see in the Section 5 we can apply this lemma in the case Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t))≅[G]n. The proof is similar to [20, Lemma 4.3], we include the details here for completeness.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let G be a transitive subgroup of Sd and τ an element of Sd such that the coset τG has at least one element with no fixed points. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let Φ(x)=ΦτG(x) and X={1,2,…,n}.
We start by showing limn→∞Φn(0)=1. Since G is transitive, for any x∈X we can find an h∈G such that τh(x)=x, then
∣StabτG(x)∣=∣{g∈G:τg(x)=x}∣=∣{g∈G:τg(x)=τh(x)}∣=∣{g∈G:h−1g(x)=x}∣=∣StabG(x)∣. Thus, using the orbit/stabilizer theorem, we see
[TABLE]
Since Φ′(1)=1, the line x=y is tangent to the graph of Φ(x) at x=1.
Also, since the coefficients of Φ are nonnegative, Φ′(x),Φ′′(x)≥0 for all x∈[0,1]. We assumed τG has at least one element with no fixed points, so Φ(0)>0. This implies the graph of Φ(x) lies above the tangent line x=y, that is Φ(x)>x for all x∈[0,1), and hence the sequence {Φn(0)} is strictly increasing. The sequence is also bounded above by 1, so it must converge. The limit must be a fixed point of Φ(x), hence the limit is 1.
Now let ϵn=1−Φn(0) and En=ϵn1, so ϵn is strictly decreasing to [math] and En is strictly increasing to ∞. Note,
[TABLE]
Using the fact that Φ(1)=1 and Φ′(1)=1, we have
[TABLE]
and hence
[TABLE]
where f(x) is a polynomial of degree less than or equal to d−2 and g(x) is a polynomial of degree d−1. Further, g(x)=xd(1−Φ(1−x1)), so g(x)>0 for all x>1. This implies g(x)xf(x) is continuous on (1,∞). Since deg(xf(x))≤deg(g(x)), the limit limx→∞g(x)xf(x) is finite. Hence g(x)xf(x) is bounded on (1,∞), and so for all x>1 we have g(x)f(x)<xC1 for some constant C1.
Applying equation (5) recursively, we see
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have En+1≥En+2Φ′′(1)−C1En−1. Since En is strictly increasing to infinity as n→∞, there is some N depending on Φ such that En≥Φ′′(1)4C1 for all n≥N. Thus, En≥EN+(n−N)4Φ′′(1) for all n≥N. It follows that En≥C2n for some constant C2 depending on Φ.
Substituting into equation (6) and setting C=C2C1, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, En−2nΦ′′(1)≤Clogn for n≥2. From this we can see
[TABLE]
Note, the constants C1,C2 depend on the polynomial Φ and hence on τG.
There are only finitely many subgroups G of Sd and for each G only finitely many choices of τ∈Sd so that τG has a fixed point. Hence, taking the maximum of the implied constants over all choices for τ and G in Sd, we can write
[TABLE]
∎
4. Bounds for Wreath Products of Cyclic, Symmetric, Alternating, and Dihedral Groups
The following lemma will be useful throughout this section.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let Φ(x) and Ψ(x) be increasing functions on an interval I. If Φ(x)≤Ψ(x) for all x∈I then,
[TABLE]
for all x∈I.
Proof.
This follows by induction on n. We have
Φn+1(x)=Φ(Φn(x))≤Ψ(Φn(x))≤Ψ(Ψn(x))=Ψn+1(x),
where the first inequality follows from the n=1 case and the second follows from the induction hypothesis and the fact that Ψ(x) is an increasing function.
∎
4.1. Fixed point proportion for [Cd]n
Let Φd(x) denote the indicatrix of Cd, the cyclic group with d elements. Then Φdn(x) is the indicatrix of [Cd]n. Note,
[TABLE]
Proposition 4.2**.**
For all d≥2,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Fix d. Let an=Φdn(0)
and bn=(d−1)(1−an)2. We will show n+1<bn<n+4+log(n). First, b1=d−12d so 2<b1≤4. We have
[TABLE]
We look at the numerator and denominator of the fraction more closely. First note the denominator simplifies as
[TABLE]
This is an alternating sum with decreasing terms, hence it is greater than the sum of the first two terms d−12d(bnd−1−bnd−2).
The numerator is
[TABLE]
Note, this is an alternating sum with decreasing terms. Hence, the numerator is positive and is less than
[TABLE]
Since the fraction is positive, we see that bn+1>bn+1 for all n and hence by induction, bn>n+1 for all n.
Also,
[TABLE]
Thus, we see
[TABLE]
∎
4.2. Fixed point proportion for [Sd]n
Let Φd(x) denote the indicatrix of Sd, the symmetric group on d letters.
Lemma 4.3**.**
For d≥2,
[TABLE]
where Φk(0)=∑i=0ki!(−1)i. Thus, Φd′(x)=Φd−1(x).
Proof.
The coefficient of xj is the proportion of elements of Sd fixing j letters. Note, there are (jd) choices for the j fixed letters, and then (d−j)!Φd−j(0) ways to permute the remaining letters so that none are fixed. Thus, the coefficient is d!(jd)(d−j)!Φd−j(0)=j!Φd−j(0), and further
[TABLE]
The formula for Φk(0) is given in [4, Corollary 2.6].
∎
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let k≥2. Then for all d>k,
[TABLE]
on the interval [0,1] with equality only when x=1.
Proof.
We let Φ1(x)=x and we let Φ0(x)=1.
It is clear from the definition of the indicatrix that Φd(1)=1 for any d. Also, since Φj(0)=∑i=0ji!(−1)i, we see that these inequalities hold when x=0.
Now we proceed by induction on k, starting with the cases k=0 and k=1.
Note, Φd(x)<1=Φ0(x) for all x∈[0,1). Also, since
[TABLE]
on [0,1), the function Φd(x)−x is decreasing to [math] as x approaches 1, and hence is positive on this interval. Thus, Φd(x)>x=Φ1(x) for all d>1.
If k is even and d>k, then k−1 is odd and by the induction hypotheses
[TABLE]
so Φd(x)−Φk(x) is increasing to [math] and hence Φd(x)<Φk(x) on [0,1). Similarly, if k is odd and d>k, then
[TABLE]
and hence Φd(x)>Φk(x) on [0,1).
∎
Proposition 4.5**.**
For all d≥2,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 4.4, Φd(x)≤Φ2(x) for all d. So the lower bound follows from Proposition 4.2 and Lemma 4.1 since C2=S2.
For the upper bound, Proposition 4.4 implies Φd(x)≥Φ3(x) for all d. By Lemma 4.1, it suffices to show Φ3n(0)≥1−n+22 for all n. Let an=Φ3n(0).
Note, a1=1/3=1−2/3. If an≥1−2/(n+2) for some n≥1, then
[TABLE]
∎
4.3. Fixed point proportion for [Ad]n
Let Φd(x) denote the indicatrix of Ad, the alternating group on d letters.
Lemma 4.6**.**
For d≥2,
[TABLE]
where Φk(0)=(−1)k−1k!k−1+∑i=0ki!(−1)i. Thus, Φd′(x)=Φd−1(x).
Proof.
Note, there are (jd) choices for the j fixed letters, and then 2(d−j)!Φd−j(0) ways to permute the remaining letters so that none are fixed and the permutation is even. Thus, the coefficient is d!/2(jd)2(d−j)!Φd−j(0)=j!Φd−j(0).
The formula for Φk(0) is given in [4, Corollary 2.6].
∎
Lemma 4.7**.**
Let k≥3 and d>k. Then,
[TABLE]
on the interval [0,1] with equality only when x=1.
Proof.
We will prove this by showing when k is even Φk+2(x)≥Φk(x) and Φk+1(x)≥Φk(x) for x∈[0,1) and when k is odd Φk+2(x)≤Φk(x) and Φk+1(x)≤Φk(x) for x∈[0,1). It is clear from the definition of the indicatrix that Φd(1)=1 for any d.
It is easy to check Φ5(x)−Φ3(x)=(60x5+3x2+4x+52)−(3x3+32)<0 and Φ4(x)−Φ3(x)=(12x4+32x+41)−(3x3+32)<0 for all x∈[0,1), establishing the result in these cases.
If k is even, then (Φk+2(x)−Φk(x))′=Φk+1(x)−Φk−1(x) and (Φk+1(x)−Φk(x))′=Φk(x)−Φk−1(x), by induction on k, each of these will be negative for x∈[0,1). This implies that Φk+2(x)−Φk(x) and Φk+1(x)−Φk(x) are decreasing to [math] on [0,1) and hence are positive on this interval. Similarly, if k is odd, each of these derivatives will be positive and hence increasing to [math] on [0,1), so they negative on this interval.
∎
Proposition 4.8**.**
For all d≥5,
[TABLE]
and n+22<FPP([A4]n)<n+1−log(n)2.
Proof.
It is easy to check that ΦS3(x)≤ΦA6(x) and ΦA5(x)≤ΦS2(x) for all x∈[0,1]. Hence, by Lemma 4.7ΦS3(x)≤ΦAd(x)≤ΦS2(x) for all d≥5. Then the result for d≥5 follows from Lemma 4.1 and Proposition 4.5.
Now, for d=4, write an=Φ4n(0) and let bn=1−an2, we will show n+1−log(n)<bn<n+2. Note, 2<b1=38<3. For n≥2, we have
[TABLE]
We can see 3x2−3x+4−2/xx2+2x−2 is positive and decreasing for x≥2. Since bn>2 for all n, we have bn+1<bn+1<n+2 and 3bn3−3bn2+4bn−2bn2+2bn−2=bn13bn2−3bn+4−bn2bn2+2bn−2<3bn2. Hence
Let d≥3 and let Φd(x) denote the indicatrix of Dd, the dihedral group of symmetries on a regular polygon with d sides.
If d is odd, then
[TABLE]
and if d is even, then
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.9**.**
Let d>k≥2. If k,d are both even or both odd then
[TABLE]
on the interval [0,1] with equality only when x=1 and if k is odd
[TABLE]
Proof.
It is clear from the definition of the indicatrix that Φd(1)=1 for any d.
Let d>k≥2 with k,d even. Then
[TABLE]
on [0,1). Thus, the function Φd(x)−Φk(x) is decreasing to [math] as x approaches 1, and hence is positive on this interval and Φd(x)>Φk(x).
Similarly, if d>k≥2 with k,d odd, then
[TABLE]
on [0,1) and Φd(x)>Φk(x).
Finally, if k is odd then Φk+1(0)>Φk(0) and
[TABLE]
on [0,1). So the function Φk+1(x)−Φk(x) is decreasing to [math] as x approaches 1, and hence is positive on this interval. Thus, Φk+1(x)>Φk(x) for all odd k≥3.
∎
Proposition 4.10**.**
For all d≥3,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Lemmas 4.9 and 4.1, it suffices to show FPP([D3]n)<n+22. This follows from Proposition 4.5 since D3=S3.
∎
5. Bounds on Image Size
In this section we use the results of the previous sections to give bounds on the image size of iterates of a rational map φ when the Galois group of the geometric part of the splitting field extension is an iterated wreath product.
Theorem 5.1**.**
Suppose Kn/Fq(t) is tamely ramified, Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t))≅[G]n for some group G, and φ:P1(Fq)→P1(Fq) is not a bijection. Then
[TABLE]
where ϵn=FPP(σGal(Kn/Fqr(t))) and Fqr=K1∩Fˉq for any σ∈Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) such that σ∣Fqr=Frobq. Moreover, ϵ1=1−Φ(0) and ϵn=nΦ′′(1)2+Od(n2logn) for n≥2, where Φ(x) is the indicatrix function for the coset (σ∣K1)Gal(K1/Fqr(t)).
Proof.
Let Fqr=K1∩Fˉq. Then Gal(K1/Fqr(t))≅G and
[TABLE]
by [19, Lemma 3.3]. Hence, we must have Gal(Kn/Fqr(t))≅[G]n and Kn∩Fˉq=Fqr by [19, Proposition 3.6].
Let σ be any element of Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) such that σ∣Fqr=Frobq. Let Φ(x) be the indicatrix function for the coset (σ∣K1)Gal(K1/Fqr(t)) in Gal(K1/Fq(t)). Then by [18, Lemma 2.2], ΦσGal(Kn/Fqr(t))=Φn. Since we assumed φ:Fq→Fq is not a bijection, at least one element of (σ∣K1)Gal(K1/Fqr(t)) has no fixed points by [11, Lemma 4.3 and Proposition 4.4]. Let ϵn=FPP(σGal(Kn/Fqr(t)))=1−Φn(0). Note, d[Kn:Fqr(t)]=d∣G∣d−1dn−1≤∣G∣dn. Then by Theorem 2.1 we have,
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.3, ϵn=nΦ′′(1)2+Od(n2logn). By the proof of Lemma 3.3, ϵn<nC2 for some constant C2 depending on Φ. Let C be the maximum over all such constants for transitive subgroups G of Sd and τ∈Sd such that τG is transitive, this constant depends only on d. Substituting into the last equation,
Suppose Kn is tamely ramified over Fq(t) and Gal(Kn/Fq(t))≅[G]n, where G=Cd,Sd, or Ad for any d≥2. Then
[TABLE]
*where ϵn=FPP([G]n). Moreover, ϵn=ncG2+O(n2logn) if n≥2, where cSd=cAd=1 and cCd=d−1.
*
Proof.
For φ, Kn as in the theorem, Kn/Fq(t) must be a geometric extension by [19, Proposition 3.6]. Hence by Theorem 2.1,
[TABLE]
where ϵn=FPP([G]n). By Propositions 4.2, 4.5, and 4.8, ϵn<n+1−logn2. So we can see ϵnn<3.
Substituting we see
[TABLE]
Since we have shown for each group cG(n+4+logn)2<ϵn<cG(n+1−logn)2 we can see ∣ϵn−ncG2∣<cG(n2+4n+nlogn)2logn+8<n24.05logn for n≥2.
∎
Now we describe rather mild conditions on the critical orbits of φ that allow us to use the above results.
Let k be a field, φ∈k(x), and t transcendental over k. Let Kn=k(φ−n(t)) and let critφ denote the set of critical points of φ in kˉ.
Let k be a field, and suppose K1∩kˉ=k. Fix N∈N and suppose
φn(a)=φm(b) for a,b∈critφ and n,m≤N unless a=b and n=m (i.e. there are no critical orbit relations).
Then Gal(KN/k(t))=[G]N where G=Gal(K1/k(t)).
Let k be a field with chark=2. Suppose Gal(K1/k(t))≅Sd, there is some a∈critφ with multiplicity one, and for all b∈critφ and all m≤n≤N, φn(a)=φm(b) unless m=n and b=a. Then Gal(KN/k(t))≅[Sd]N.
Using these results and the results of this section we have the following.
Corollary 5.5**.**
Let φ(x)∈Fq(x). Suppose Kn/Fq(t) is tamely ramified. Then we have the following.
(a)
If φ satisfies the conditions in **[19, Theorem 3.1]** and G=Gal(K1/Fq(t)), then for all n≤N,
[TABLE]
where ϵn=nΦG′′(1)2+Od(n2logn) for n≥2.
2. (b)
If φ satisfies the conditions in **[17, Theorem 3.1]**, then for all n≤N,
[TABLE]
where ϵn=n2+O(n2logn) for n≥2.
Proof.
This follows immediately from Theorem 5.1, Theorem 1.3, [19, Theorem 3.1], and [17, Theorem 3.1].
∎
We finish this section by using our results to bound the number of iterates that can occur before the critical orbits collide or cycle.
Corollary 5.6**.**
Let φ(x)∈Fq(x) have degree d and suppose φ(x)∈Fq(x) is not a bijection. Then there is some N depending on d such that φi(a)=φj(b) for some i,j<loglogqNq and critical points a,b with (a,i)=(b,j).
Proof.
If Gal(K1∗/Fˉq(t))=G and φi(a)=φj(b) for all i,j≤n unless a=b and i=j then by [19, Theorem 3.1] we have Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t))=[G]n. On the other hand, if Gal(Kn∗/Fˉq(t))=[G]n for n=⌊logdloglogq⌋−2 then Theorem 5.1 implies, ϵnq=Od(loglogqq). Since n≤logdloglogq−2,
we have ∣G∣dn≤d!dn≤d!d2logq=qd2logd!<q1/4. Hence using Theorem 5.1 again, we conclude there is some constant depending on d such that
[TABLE]
If k=#φn(P1(Fq))+1, then for any critical point a, the points φn(a),φn+1(a),…,φn+k(a) cannot all be distinct. Thus, φi(a)=φj(a) for some i<j<n+k, where n+k=⌊logdloglogq⌋−1+loglogqCq=Od(loglogqq).
∎
6. Examples
In this section we apply our results to two families of polynomials. Theorem 1.4 follows from the next theorem.
Theorem 6.1**.**
Let d>1 and consider φ(x)=axd+c∈Fq(x), where a,c=0. Suppose φn(0)=φm(0) for all i<j≤n.
If q≡1modd, then
[TABLE]
If q≡1modℓ for any ℓ∣d with ℓ>1, then
[TABLE]
where G=Gal(K1/Fq(ζd,t))≅Cd and σ∈G with σ∣Fq(ζd)(x)=xq.
Otherwise, φq:Fq→Fq is a bijection, so φn(Fq)=Fq for all n.
Further, if a,c∈Z+ we can consider φ(x)∈Z(x) and
φq(x)=axd+c∈Fq(x), the reduction of φq of φ modulo q.
Then the first equation holds for all Fq with charFq>(a+c)d−1dn−1 and q≡1modd.
Proof.
If q≡1modd, Fq contains a d-th root of unity so K1∩Fˉq=Fq. Then the hypotheses of [19, Theorem 3.1] hold and Corollary 5.5 implies
#φn(P1(Fq))=ϵnq+O(ddnq1/2), where ϵn=(d−1)n2+O(n2logn).
If Fq contains any ℓ-th root of unity for ℓ∣d with ℓ>1 then K1∩Fˉq=Fq(ζd) let σ∈Gal(Kn/Fq(t)) be an element with the property σ∣Fq(ζd)=Frobq. Then by Theorem 5.1,
#φn(P1(Fq))=ϵnq+Od(ddnq1/2) where ϵn=nΦσG′′(1)2+Od(n2logn)
and σG=(σ∣K1)Gal(K1/Fq(ζd,t)).
If Fq does not contain any ℓ-th roots of unity for ℓ>1 dividing d, then φ:Fq→Fq is a bijection so φn(Fq)=Fq for all n.
Note, if a,c∈Z+ we can consider φ(x)∈Z(x) and
φq(x)=axd+c∈Fq(x), the reduction of φq of φ modulo q.
A simple induction shows 0<φn−1(0)<φn(0)≤(a+c)d−1dn−1 for all n. So we have
[TABLE]
for all Fq with charFq>(a+c)d−1dn−1 and q≡1modd.
∎
Theorem 6.2**.**
Let d≥3 and consider φ(x)=(d−1)xd+(da)xd−1∈Fq(x), where ad(d−1)=0. Suppose φi(−a)=φj(−a) for all i<j≤n. Then
[TABLE]
Further, let 2≤a∈Z, φ(x)=(d−1)xd+(da)xd−1∈Z(x), and φq(x)=(d−1)xd+(da)xd−1∈Fq(x), the reduction of φ modulo q.
If charFq>(2d)d−1dn−1−1adn and char(Fq)∤d then
the above equation holds.
We first prove a proposition using the following two lemmas. These are fairly standard results from algebraic number theory stated here without proof. Results similar to the next lemma can also be found in [11] and [25].
Let M/K be a finite Galois extension with Galois group G. Let H be a subgroup of G and L=MH be the corresponding intermediate field. Let q be a prime of M and p:=q∩K. Let X be the transitive G-set G/H. Then there is a bijection between the set of orbits of X under the action of D(q∣p), the decomposition group of q over p, and the set of extensions P of p to L with the property: If P corresponds to Y then the length of Y is e(P∣p)f(P∣p) and Y is the disjoint union of f(P∣p) orbits of length e(P∣p) under the action of I(q∣p), the inertia group of q over p.
We will consider the case K=k(t), L=K(θ) where θ is a root of φ(x)−t. Then M=K(φ−1(t)). Further, since the set G/H corresponds to the set of K homomorphisms of K(θ) into K(φ−1(t)), the elements of G/H correspond to roots of φ in K(φ−1(t)). In this case, Lemma 6.3 implies there is a one-to-one correspondence between the set of orbits of the roots of φ under the action of the decomposition group D(q∣p) and the set of extensions of p to K(θ) with the property from Lemma 6.3.
Lemma 6.4** (Kummer’s Theorem, see [15], Theorem 7.4).**
Let R be an integral domain with fraction field K, L be a finite extension of K, and R′ be the integral closure of R in L. Let p be a nonzero prime ideal in R and θ an element of L such that the integral closure of Rp in L is Rp[θ]. Suppose f(x) is the minimal polynomial of θ over K, fˉ(x) is the reduction of f(x) modulo p, and fˉ(x) factors into distinct irreducible polynomials
[TABLE]
then pR′ factors as pR′=P1e1…Ptet where f(Pi∣p)=deg(gi).
Proposition 6.5**.**
Let k be an algebraically closed field. Let φ(x)=(d−1)xd+(da)xd−1∈k(x). Suppose a,d,(d−1)=0. Then Gal(k(φ−1(t))/k(t))≅Sd.
Proof.
Using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula it is easy to see that k(t) has no extensions of degree d>1 which are unramified at all finite primes and tamely ramified at the prime at infinity, see [17, Lemma 2.11]. Consider the group
[TABLE]
which is a subgroup of Gal(k(φ−1(t))/k(t)). Since the fixed field of I is an unramified extension of k(t), we have k(φ−1(t))I=k(t) and hence I=Gal(k(φ−1(t))/k(t)). We study the ramified primes.
The critical points of φ are [math] and −a, which have multiplicities d−1 and 1 respectively. From the polynomial discriminant formula, we see that the primes of k(t) ramifying in k(φ−1(t)) are φ(0)−t and φ(−a)−t see [7].
First, consider p=(φ(0)−t)=(t). Let θ be any root of φ(x)−t then since k is algebraically closed, θ is integral over k[t] and the integral closure of k[t] in k(θ) is k[θ]. Since φ(x)−t≡φ(x)≡xd−1((d−1)x+da)modp, we have pk[θ]=P1d−1P2 by Lemma 6.4. Then Lemma 6.3 implies that for any q in k(φ−n(t)) lying over p, I(q∣p) acts transitively on d−1 roots of φ(x)−t and fixes the remaining root.
Now consider p′=(φ(−a)−t)=(±ad−t). Since −a is a critical point of multiplicity one, for any q lying above p′, I(q∣p′) is generated by a single transposition [17, Corollary 2.8].
We see from the above arguments that I=Gal(k(φ−1(t))/k(t)) is a subgroup of Sd containing at least one transposition and at least one subgroup acting transitively on d−1 elements.
Also, since I is the Galois group and φ(x)−t is irreducible, I must be transitive.
Suppose I′⊂I acts transitively on {θ1,…,θd−1} and fixes θd. Let (θi,θj) be any transposition in I. Since I is transitive we can find σ∈I such that σ(θi)=θd. Then σ(θi,θj)σ−1=(σ(θj),θd)∈I. Denote σ(θj)=θk.
We claim that <I′,(θk,θd)>≅Sd and hence I≅Sd. For any θℓ∈{θ1,…,θd−1} we can find τ∈I′ sending θk to θℓ then τ(θk,θd)τ−1=(θℓ,θd). Thus, any transposition of the form (θℓ,θd) is in <I′,(θk,θd)>, it is a standard exercise in group theory to show that these transpositions generate Sd.
∎
Suppose φqn(−a)=φqm(−a) for any m≤n. By Proposition 6.5,
Gal(Fˉq(φ−1(t))/Fˉq(t))≅Sd. Since Sd≅Gal(Fˉq(φ−1(t))/Fˉq(t))⊆Gal(Fq(φ−1(t))/Fq(t)), we have Gal(Fq(φ−1(t))/Fq(t))≅Sd. Hence by Corollary 5.5,
[TABLE]
where ϵn=n2+O(n2logn).
Now let a∈Z with a≥2 and consider φ(x)∈Z(x).
We claim the orbit of −a is infinite. To see this, note if d is odd then φ(−a)=ad. Then since φ(x) is a strictly increasing function on the interval (0,∞), we have φn(−a)>φn−1(−a) for all n. If d is even, then φ(−a)=−ad and φ2(−a)=(d−1)ad2−dad2−d+1=ad2−d+1((d−1)ad−1−d)>0. Again, since φ(x) is increasing on the interval (0,∞), φn(−a)>φn−1(−a) for all n>2. We can see by induction that φn(−a)<(2d)d−1dn−1−1adn for all n>1.
Fix q with charFq>(2d)d−1dn−1−1adn. Then φqn(−a)=φqm(−a) for any m≤n, so the result holds.
∎
7. Explicit Bounds on Proportions of Periodic Points
In this section we prove Theorem 1.5. Fix a polynomial φ(x)∈OK[x] where OK is the ring of integers of a number field K. Suppose that the critical points of φ(x) belong to OK. We label the set of critical points critφ.
Suppose further that
[TABLE]
We start with a definition and lemma that we will need to prove part (b) of the theorem.
Definition 7.1**.**
Let K be a number field and MK the set of places of K. For any α∈K define the height of α to be H(α)=(∏v∈MKmax{∣α∣v,1}nv)[K:Q]1 where nv=[Kv:Qv]. Here Kv and Qv denote the v-adic completions of K and Q respectively. Define the logarithmic height of α to be h(α)=logH(α) (see [3] or [24]).
Lemma 7.2**.**
Let φ(x)∈OK[x] as above and let d be the degree of φ. Then there exists a constant B such that H(φr(c))<Bdn for all r≤n and all c∈critφ. Further, if p is a prime of OK with N(p)>(2B2dn)[K:Q], all of the points in the critical orbits up to the n-th iterate will remain distinct in OK/p, where N(p)=∣OK/p∣.
Proof.
By [24, Theorem 3.11], for any polynomial φ(x)∈K[x] of degree d, there are explicitly computable constants C1,C2 depending only on φ such that
[TABLE]
We can rewrite this using the logarithmic height as
[TABLE]
and taking C=max{∣logC1∣,∣logC2∣}, we see
[TABLE]
Then following the arguments in the proof of [24, Theorem 3.20] we see
[TABLE]
Thus, dr1h(φr(α))≤h(α)+d−1C for all α∈K and r≤n.
Also since, critφ is finite we can find a constant D such that h(c)<D for all c∈critφ.
If c∈critφ, then we have h(φr(c))≤dr(h(c)+d−1C)≤dr(D+d−1C). Let B=eD+d−1C, then H(φr(c))≤Bdn for all r≤n and all c∈critφ.
Now let p be a prime of OK lying over p∈Z. Let q=pdegp=∣OK/p∣. Note if α≡βmodp for α,β∈OK, then q=N(p) divides NK/Q(α−β)=∏σσ(α−β), where the product is taken over the distinct embeddings of K into Qˉ. Hence, q≤∣NK/Q(α−β)∣∞=H(∏σσ(α−β))=H(α−β)[K:Q]≤(2H(α)H(β))[K:Q] where the last inequality follows from [3, Proposition 1.5.15].
Thus, if φr(a)≡φm(b)modp for m,r≤n and a,b∈critφ, then N(p)≤(2B2dn)[K:Q].
Taking q=N(p)>(2B2dn)[K:Q] ensures all of the points in the critical orbits will remain distinct in OK/p. It suffices to choose n<logdlog(logq−[K:Q]log2)−log(2[K:Q]logB).
∎
If each coset of Gal(K(φ−1(t))/K(t))/Gal(Kˉ(φ−1(t))/Kˉ(t)) contains at least one fixed point free element, then the same is true for the reduction to Ok/p=Fq for any p. Also by [19, Proposition 4.1], Gal(Fˉq(φ−1(t))/Fˉq(t))≅[G]n for all but finitely many primes q. For these primes, by Corollary 5.5,
[TABLE]
where ϵn=nΦG′′(1)2+Od(n2logn).
Choose n=⌊logdloglogq−2⌋, then n1=Od(loglogq1) and ∣G∣dn<q1/4. So we can see
[TABLE]
Now assume the hypotheses of part (b) of the theorem. Let A=max{d2,logB2[K:Q]}. Fix a prime p in OK such that ∣Ok/p∣=q≥2[K:Q]eA. Take n=⌊logdlog(logq−[K:Q]log2)−logA⌋≥0. Then q≥(2B2dn)[K:Q] and by Lemma 7.2, the critical orbits remain distinct in OK/p=Fq up to the n-th iterate. Applying [19, Theorem 3.1], we see Gal(Kn/Fq(t))=[G]n where G=Gal(K1/Fq(t)).
where ϵn=FPP([G]n).
Suppose G=Cd or Sd, or G=Ad and d=4, so we have ϵn<n+12.
Since n<logdloglogq−2logd,
we have
[TABLE]
Also since n+11<log(logq−[K:Q]log2)−logAlogd, we have
[TABLE]
∎
Bibliography25
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] Robert L. Benedetto, Xander Faber, Benjamin Hutz, Jamie Juul, and Yu Yasufuku. A large arboreal Galois representation for a cubic postcritically finite polynomial. Res. Number Theory , 3:Art. 29, 21, 2017.
2[2] B. J. Birch and H. P. F. Swinnerton-Dyer. Note on a problem of Chowla. Acta Arith. , 5:417–423 (1959), 1959.
3[3] Enrico Bombieri and Walter Gubler. Heights in Diophantine geometry , volume 4 of New Mathematical Monographs . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.
4[4] Nigel Boston, Walter Dabrowski, Tuval Foguel, and et al. The proportion of fixed-point-free elements of a transitive permutation group. Comm. Algebra , 21(9):3259–3275, 1993.
5[5] Sarvadaman Chowla. The Riemann zeta and allied functions. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. , 58:287–305, 1952.
6[6] S. D. Cohen. The distribution of polynomials over finite fields. II. Acta Arith. , 20:53–62, 1972.
7[7] J. Cullinan and F. Hajir. Ramification in iterated towers for rational functions. Manuscripta Math. , 137(3-4):273–286, 2012.
8[8] P. Flajolet and A. M. Odlyzko. Random mapping statistics. In Advances in cryptology—EUROCRYPT ’89 (Houthalen, 1989) , volume 434 of Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. , pages 329–354. Springer, Berlin, 1990.