MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Where can I learn about the invariant theory associated with actions of cyclic groups (as opposed to symmetric groups)?

E.g., do the functions $x+y+z$, $xy+yz+zx$, and $x^2y+y^2z+z^2x$ generate the ring of all cyclically-symmetric polynomials in $x$, $y$, and $z$?

Web-accessible and free references would be preferred.

share|cite|improve this question
Probably here: ? – Mark Sapir Mar 24 '13 at 12:54
There is an example with the cyclic group of order 5 in B.Sturmfels' "Algorithms in invariant theory", Sect. 2.7. The latter section has a general treatment of finite abelian groups, too. It actually looks as if the number of generators of the ring grows quite fast as n increases, e.g. in the case of n=5 you need 11 generators. Counting/finding generators amounts to dealing with certain integer points in a lattice... B.Sturmfels' "Algorithms in invariant theory" (2nd edition) ISBN 978-3-211-77416-8 Springer 2008, Wien New-York – Dima Pasechnik Mar 24 '13 at 16:06
The ring of polynomials invariant under this 3-element cyclic group $G$ cannot be the ring of polynomials in invariants of degree $1,2,3$ because the product of these degrees is $6 \neq |G|$. In fact it is known that a finite subgroup $G$ of ${\rm GL}_n({\bf R})$ has an invariant ring generated by only $n$ polynomials iff $G$ is generated by reflections (linear transformations conjugate to ${\rm diag}(1,1,\ldots,1,-1)$), and the cyclic groups of order $n>2$ do not satisfy this criterion. – Noam D. Elkies Mar 24 '13 at 16:50
You need one more degree three generator in the three-variable case, for example $xyz$. – Tom Goodwillie Mar 24 '13 at 16:51
The ring of fully symmetric polynomials in three variables is freely generated by $x+y+z$, $xy+xz+yz$, and $xyz$. The element $(x-y)(y-z)(z-x)$ is a square root of a polynomial in those three, and surely this yields a presentation of the ring of cyclically invariant functions. – Tom Goodwillie Mar 24 '13 at 17:13

A good reference is Richard Stanley's "Invariants of finite groups and their applications to combinatorics," Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 1 (1979), 475–511. His example 3.6 is a cyclic group of order 4.

share|cite|improve this answer

Consider the action of the cyclic group $G$ of order $n$ acting on an $m$-dimensional vector space $V$. I'll assume you are working over an algebraically closed field $k$ (or at least a field containing the nth roots of unity). Over such a field the elements of the cyclic group are diagonalizable. Thus the group is generated by $g=\diag(\omega^{-a_1},\dots,\omega^{-a_m})$ where $\omega$ is a primitive nth root of unity and the $a_i$ are integers (which may be assumed to lie between 0 and $n-1$.

If $\{x_1,\dots,x_m\}$ is a basis for $V^*$ dual to the diagonal basis for $V$, then $g$ acts via $g\cdot x_i = \omega^{a_i} x_i$. Hence if $t = x_1^{e_1}\cdots x_m^{e_m}$ is a monomial then $g\cdot t = \omega^{a_1e_1 + \cdots a_me_m} t$. Since a function is invariant iff it is a linear combination of invariant monomials, the invariant theory reduces to solving the linear congruence $a_1e_1 + \cdots a_me_m \equiv 0 \pmod{n}$ for $(e_1,\dots,e_m)$. These solutions form a monoid in $N^m$. Finding a set of minimal generators for $k[V]^G$ amounts to finding minimal generators for this monoid. This is not really solved in general but there has been a lot of study, as you might imagine.

I suggest the following references.

Weidong Gao, Alfred Geroldinger, Zero-sum problems in finite abelian groups: A survey, Expo. Math. 24 (2006) 337 – 369

John C. Harris and David L. Wehlau, Non-Negative Integer Linear Congruences, Indagationes Mathematicae {\bf 17} No. 1 (2006) 37-44. arXiv:math/0409489v1

Pingzhi Yuan, On the index of minimal zero-sum sequences over finite cyclic groups, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 114 (2007) 1545–1551

Finally, I'll mention that things are much much more complicated (equivalent to the invariant theory of SL(2,C)) when the characteristic of $k$ divides $n$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.