1
$\begingroup$

Let $f(x)\in \mathbb{Z}[X]$ be a polynomial of degree at least $2$. We denote the set of primes $p$ for which $f(x)$ is injective modulo $p$ as $\mathcal{T}$. Then, can we say something about the proportion of polynomials $f(x)$ for which cardinality of the set

$$\#\mathcal{T}(y)\ll \frac{y}{(\log{y})^2}.$$

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Did you mean to have a parameter $x$ controlling the size of the primes which is different from the $x$ used as a variable in the polynomial? $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ Yes both x are different. I will edit it. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 13:42
  • $\begingroup$ I want to make sure I understand the order of quantifiers here. For a fixed $f$, we define $T_f$ to be the set of primes for which $f(x)$ is bijective modulo $p$. So, if $f(x)= x^3$, then $T_f$ is the primes which are $2 \bmod 3$. In that case, the number of such primes which are $\leq y$ is $\sim \tfrac{y}{2 \log y}$, by the PNT in arithmetic progressions. You want to understand, instead, those polynomials $f$ for which $\#\{ p \in T_f: p \leq y \}$ is $O(\tfrac{y}{(\log y)^2})$. Is that right? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 13:47
  • $\begingroup$ Yes exactly @David E Speyer $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 13:51
  • $\begingroup$ How do you define "proportion of polynomials"? It needs to bound both the degrees and coefficients, so this looks very choice-sensitive. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 20:01

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

I'll write $T_f$ for the set of primes $p$ such that $f(x)$ is a bijection $\mathbb{F}_p \to \mathbb{F}_p$. I claim that $T_f$ is always either finite or else $\# \{ p \in T_f : p \leq y \} \sim c \tfrac{y}{\log y}$ for some $c>0$.

The following result is known as Schur's conjecture; a flawed proof was given by Fried, with corrected versions by Turnwald and Müller:

Theorem Let $f(x) \in \mathbb{Z}[x]$. If $T_f$ is infinite, then $f(x)$ is a composition of linear polynomials and Dickson polynomials.

One should note that the Dickson polynomial $D_n(x,0)$ is just $x^n$, so this includes the possibility of including monomials in our composition.

A composition of functions $\mathbb{F}_p \to \mathbb{F}_p$ will be bijective if and only if all the functions composed are bijective. Linear functions are always bijective; the monomial $D_n(x,0)=x^n$ is bijective iff $GCD(n,p-1)=1$ and, for $a \neq 0$, the Dickson polynomial $D_n(x,a)$ is bijective iff $GCD(n,p^2-1)=1$ or, equivalently, $GCD(n,p-1) = GCD(n,p+1)=1$. (This last statement is copied from Lemma 1.4 in Turnwald; I didn't check it.) In short, imposing that our composition is bijective imposes finitely many conditions on the residue class of $p$ modulo various integers.

If these modular conditions can be satisfied by infinitely many primes, then they are satisfied by $\sim c \tfrac{y}{\log y}$ primes $\leq y$, by the PNT in arithmetic progressions.


Polynomials where $T_f$ is infinite are exceptional polynomials. (The definition of "exceptional" is that there are infinitely many prime powers $q$ such that $f$ is bijective on $\mathbb{F}_q$, so it also allows examples like $x^2$ which is bijective on $\mathbb{F}_{2^k}$ but not on $\mathbb{F}_p$ for any odd $p$; imposing bijectivity for infinitely many primes rather than prime powers is obviously even more restrictive.)

As the name suggests, exceptional polynomials are very rare for degree $\geq 5$. For example, they induced maps $\mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ all have solvable monodromy, where as almost all degree $n$ polynomials have monodromy group $S_n$. (Indeed, as Will Sawin points out, this is even a Zariski open condition.)

In degrees $2$, $3$ and $4$, your condition that $T_f$ be infinite is still very rare (although polynomials which are bijective on infinitely many $\mathbb{F}_{2^k}$ or infinitely many $\mathbb{F}_{3^k}$ are not so rare). Indeed, a composition of Dickson polynomials of degree $\leq 4$ must be a composition of $D_2(x,\alpha)$, $D_3(x,\alpha)$ and $D_4(x, \alpha)$ for various values of $\alpha$. The condition that these are bijective imposes either that $GCD(p-1,2)=1$ (impossible for odd $p$), that $GCD(p^2-1,3)=1$ (impossible for $p \neq 3$) or that $GCD(p-1,3)=1$ (this case can happen). So the only case which occurs is the pre-and-post-composition of $D_3(x,0)=x^3$ with linear polynomial. But then the monodromy of $f : \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ is $A_3$ (in other words, $f'(x)$ has a double root), and this does not happen on a Zariski open set.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

The proportion is 1. In fact, there is a nonempty Zariski open set such that all polynomials in the open set satisfy the condition.

Indeed, a sufficient condition, for a polynomial of degree $n$ is that the monodromy group of the covering $\mathbb C \to \mathbb C$ induced by $f$ is the full symmetric group $S_n$. This is sufficient because the covering induced by $f$ mod $p$ will have the same geometric monodromy group for all but finitely many $p$, and will then fail to be injective for all sufficiently large $p$ by Deligne.

A classical sufficient condition for a polynomial to have monodromy group $S_n$ is that it has $n-1$ distinct critical values (over $\mathbb C$). This is certainly a Zariski open condition, and is satisfied for the polynomial $x^n-x$, hence nonempty.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Could you please give reference to the result of Deligne that you are using here.Thanks $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2021 at 7:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Hhhhhhhhhhh No need to invoke Deligne here. If the monodromy group of $f$ over $\mathbb C$ is $S_n$, then $F(X,Y)=(f(X)-f(Y))/(X-Y)$ is absolutely irreducible over $\overline{\mathbb Q}$. A Hilbert Nullstellensatz argument shows that $F(X,Y)$ is absolutely irreducible over $\mathbb F_p$ for all sufficiently big primes $p$. Then Weil (the way easier $1$-dimensional precursor of Deligne) shows that $F=0$ has $p+O(\sqrt{p})$ points over $\mathbb F_p$. In particular, $f$ won't be injective. All this is well known, see e.g. the reference to Turnwald in David E Speyer's answer. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2021 at 9:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .