Sums over Vanishing Determinants
John Friedlander, Henryk Iwaniec

TL;DR
This paper investigates sums of arithmetic functions over Gaussian integers, focusing on pairs that form singular systems, and explores their properties and implications.
Contribution
It introduces a novel analysis of sums over Gaussian integers constrained by singular systems, expanding understanding of their arithmetic behavior.
Findings
Derived new bounds for sums over Gaussian integers
Identified conditions for singular systems in Gaussian integer pairs
Extended classical results to complex integer domains
Abstract
We study sums of arithmetic functions, defined on Gaussian integers and taken over those pairs of integers whose coordinates give rise to a singular system.
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
TopicsAnalytic Number Theory Research · Mathematical functions and polynomials · Advanced Algebra and Geometry
Sums over Vanishing Determinants
John Friedlander, Henryk Iwaniec
Contents
- 1 Introduction
- 2 A few observations about other restricted sums
- 3 Statement of the theorem
- 4 First estimation of
- 5 Second estimation of
- 6 Leapfrog and completing the proof
1 Introduction
Among the simplest determinants are those which appear in the resolution of systems of two linear equations:
[TABLE]
We are interested in the system (1.1) over the rational integers as well as over the ring . If
[TABLE]
then the system has a unique solution, not necessarily integral. Otherwise, the linear space of solutions, if indeed there are any, has dimension one. Despite the relative simplicity of these determinants, they arise in numerous arithmetic problems. We found our motivation from specific applications, for example its relevance to the problem studied in [FI2]. Therein, questions arise about the summation of arithmetic functions, such as the Möbius function, over singular systems modulo . This means that we encounter sums of the type
[TABLE]
One may say we are summing over the vectors and which are orthogonal modulo .
For notational convenience we prefer to use arithmetic functions defined on Gaussian integers ; in fact the complex analytic structure of will be present. Let us assume for simplicity that , are complex conjugate so our determinant sums are
[TABLE]
Furthermore, for a technical reason, we assume that is supported on odd primitive Gaussian integers , which means has coordinates of different parity, coprime and non-zero:
[TABLE]
Note that .
Our main result gives a non-trivial bound for the sum of over provided is supported on odd primitive numbers , , and that it satisfies a condition (of Siegel-Walfisz type) for uniformity of distribution in arithmetic progressions to small moduli. In this case we are able to prove a non-trivial bound with running, within a few logarithms, up to . See Section 3 for the precise statement and further remarks.
If one were to restrict to Gaussian integers coprime with , then the congruence could be decoupled; it is equivalent to
[TABLE]
This congruence can be detected by the orthogonality of characters on the group
[TABLE]
We obtain
[TABLE]
Note that for squarefree
[TABLE]
while the full group of classes , has larger order, namely .
Although this expression of the determinant sums in terms of characters presents quite an attractive option, we are going to work with congruences modulo for greater transparency. Actually, this turns out to be necessary for the performance of certain transformations, such as switching moduli and enlarging moduli. These techniques, carried out here in Sections 5 and 6 respectively, are reminiscent of the strategy used previously in Sections 12 and 13 of our earlier work [FI1].
The partially reduced determinant sum
[TABLE]
is not very different from (1.3). Precisely, the original sum decomposes as
[TABLE]
where the reduced sum has coefficients . The large divisors can be easily eliminated up to negligible error terms and the small ones make an insignificant deformation of the coefficients. Now, the congruence in the reduced sum can be decoupled as
[TABLE]
where represents the multiplicative inverse of modulo and not complex number conjugation. Detecting (1.11) by additive characters we get
[TABLE]
where the latter inequality comes from positivity and the observation of the term in (1.10). Here and thereafter, the stroke restricts the summation to Gaussian integers with .
If the coefficients can be decoupled along the coordinates, say
[TABLE]
then we have a more favorable expression
[TABLE]
To see this, open the square and change into modulo . Here of course, does stand for the complex conjugate of . This expression can be treated directly by the classical large sieve inequality (consider as a single variable) producing very strong estimates. Unfortunately, (1.13) does not hold in the most interesting cases and we shall need to proceed without use of this property, a task which constitutes the core of our work.
2 A few observations about other restricted sums
When restricted to numbers with , our determinant sum modulo , now denoted by , enjoys the symmetry
[TABLE]
To see this open the square and change into modulo .
The determinant sum modulo which is restricted to numbers with and , denoted by , satisfies
[TABLE]
To see it open the square and write the congruence in the form . Hence, one of the two coprimality conditions , , is redundant and
[TABLE]
Applying Cauchy’s inequality we derive .
3 Statement of the theorem
Let and denote our determinant sums modulo with the coefficients cropped to the disc
[TABLE]
Our goal is to estimate these sums on average over , that is the sums
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
We assume that
[TABLE]
Then the trivial estimation of (1.3) yields
[TABLE]
and we wish to improve it by a factor of an arbitrary power of with nearly as large as . The saving factor need not be very large, yet it is crucial for applications. But, note that the residue class in (1.12) need not be reduced so in general (3.6) cannot be improved. However, it is possible to beat (3.6) if the sequence of coefficients admits a considerable cancellation in sums over residue classes in the Gaussian domain to small moduli. We assume the following:
S-W condition**.**
Let , , and . Then, we have
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
Our main example of satisfying (3.7) is the Möbius function
[TABLE]
In this case, (3.7) is just the Siegel-Walfisz condition in the Gaussian domain.
Theorem**.**
Suppose is supported on odd primitive numbers , , and that it satisfies (3.7). Then, we have
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
4 First estimation of
We begin with (see (1.12))
[TABLE]
We write the fraction in its lowest terms and decompose (4.1) into , where
[TABLE]
and is the complementary sum in which . We estimate by the large sieve inequality as follows:
[TABLE]
For estimation of we appeal to the S-W condition (3.7). To this end we generalize (3.7) as follows:
S-W condition**.**
Let , , , and . Then we have
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
Proof.
Relax the coprimality condition by the Möbius formula. Accordingly the sum (4.2) splits into
[TABLE]
For apply (3.7) with replaced by and replaced by , getting the bound (4.2). For we estimate trivially by . ∎
Now we are ready to apply (4.2) for the estimation of . To this end fix , modulo and apply (4.2) with , , and . The number of relevant classes is , so the inner sum over in is bounded by . Hence
[TABLE]
Choosing and adding the above bounds for and we conclude that
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
Next we use (4.3) to estimate . We estimate in (1.10) trivially by
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
where is a constant at our disposal. This gives
[TABLE]
where the coefficients in are . These coefficients satisfy the condition (4.2) with replaced by ; hence the upper bound (4.2) is larger by a factor . This factor can be ignored because in (4.2) is arbitrary. Therefore (4.3) applies to every in (4.4) giving
[TABLE]
Hence we conclude (choose and ):
Lemma 4.1**.**
For , we have
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
Note that Lemma 4.1 yields (3.9) if .
5 Second estimation of
In this section we reduce the problem for larger moduli to that for smaller ones by switching divisors. For a technical reason we subdivide the range of moduli into dyadic segments. Since it suffices to estimate the weighted sum
[TABLE]
where is a fixed smooth function supported on with . Recall that
[TABLE]
and are cropped to the disc .
The determinant vanishes only for the diagonal terms which yields the contribution
[TABLE]
On the off-diagonal we have
[TABLE]
Let be a constant to be specified later. If we estimate trivially getting the contribution
[TABLE]
We are left with
[TABLE]
where runs over the segment
[TABLE]
We need to separate the variables , involved in the weight function without contaminating the coefficients , too much. For this job it is convenient to choose in the form of the convolution
[TABLE]
where , are supported on the segments . We have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It follows from the support of that , hence by (5.7), and it follows from the support of that . Therefore the variable in the integral representation (5.10) runs over the segment
[TABLE]
Truncating the Mellin integral
[TABLE]
to the segment and using the bound , we obtain
[TABLE]
The contribution to of the above error term is
[TABLE]
by a trivial estimation. Hence
[TABLE]
We treat by its Fourier series expansion. Putting we write
[TABLE]
This is an even periodic function of of period so we have
[TABLE]
with the coefficients
[TABLE]
By the support of it follows that . Hence the trivial estimation yields . If we can integrate by parts two times getting
[TABLE]
Hence the trivial estimation yields . Combining the two estimations we obtain
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
with any . We choose so the error term contributes to
[TABLE]
by a trivial estimation. We are left with
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Recall that , , and runs over the segment (5.7).
Our first estimation (4.5) is applicable to with replaced by giving
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Adding the bounds (5.3), (5.5), (5.13), (5.16) to (5.20) (with changed into , as we may since is arbitrary), we obtain
[TABLE]
Now, choosing , we get
Lemma 5.1**.**
The weighted sum (5.1) satisfies
[TABLE]
where is any positive number and the implied constant depends only on .
Note that, on taking , (5.21) yields
[TABLE]
if . We still need to cover the middle range
[TABLE]
6 Leapfrog and completing the proof
We are able to estimate the sum over this middle range of moduli by transforming it to a sum over larger moduli covered in the previous section. We accomplish this by enlarging artificially with the aid of the primes in a segment , where is at our disposal. To simplify the notation we hide which controls the support of and so we put . Given a prime , we write
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Note that in the second sum we dropped the condition , as we can by positivity. The second sum is just the determinant sum modulo with the coefficients , which we denote by . For large it will be sufficient to estimate trivially. In the first sum we write and ignore that runs over the multiples of , as we can by positivity. Hence the first sum is bounded by . We end up with the “enlarging moduli inequality”
[TABLE]
which holds for every and prime .
The sum in (6.1) can be estimated trivially as follows:
[TABLE]
Put
[TABLE]
Multiply (6.1) by and sum over , getting:
Lemma 6.1**.**
For any and we have
[TABLE]
where the implied constant is absolute.
From we go to using the approximate formula (4.4). First, for every in (4.4) we apply (6.2) getting
[TABLE]
Now, for every and we apply (5.21) (recall that ) and sum over getting
[TABLE]
Here , , are arbitrary. We take , , so and getting
[TABLE]
If then the middle term of (6.3) is covered by the last one. Finally, summing (6.3) over dyadic segments and incorporating (4.5)with , we obtain the bound (3.9). This completes the proof of the Theorem.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[FI 1] J.B. Friedlander and H. Iwaniec, The polynomial X 2 + Y 4 superscript 𝑋 2 superscript 𝑌 4 X^{2}+Y^{4} captures its primes, Ann. Math. 148 (1998), 945–1040.
- 2[FI 2] J.B. Friedlander and H. Iwaniec, Coordinate distribution of Gaussian primes, (ar Xiv, 1811.05507).
