By inspection, I could find a parameterization for a surface $f(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ in $\mathbb{A}_{C}^3$. Such parameterization is of the form $x_i=\frac{\phi_i(s,t)}{\psi_i(s,t)}$ where $\phi_i(s,t)$ and $\psi_i(s,t)$ are polynomials in the variables $s$ and $t$. My question is: is there any criterion to prove that this parameterization is birational or not? A jacobian, a determinant, something like that?

I tried use MAGMA, via the command IsInvertible. The answer was no: that is not a birational parameterization. However, MAGMA works on $\mathbb{A}_{Q}^3$, and I don't know how to extend the field to complex numbers.

The explicit equation of the surface is,

$f(x_1,x_2,x_3)=2x_1^2x_2 - 2x_3 - 5x_1x_2x_3 + 2x_2x_3^2=0$

One possible parameterization is obtained by solving $f(x_1,x_2,x_3)=0$ for $x_2$, since the variable $x_2$ is linear , and by setting $x_1=s$ and $x_3=t$. Such parameterization is clearly birational, with inverse map $s=x_1$ and $t=x_3$. Explicitly,

$x_1 = s$

$x_2 = \frac{2t}{2s^2-5st+2t^2}$

$x_3 = t$

Another possible parameterization is given by,

$x_1 = \frac{s(-1 + 4t^2)}{3t}$

$x_2 = \frac{2(-1 + t^2)}{3st}$

$x_3 = \frac{2s(-1 + t^2)}{3t}$

In this case, I was not able to find the inverse map, and so I believe that this is not a birational parameterization. But how to prove it?

Thanks in advance,

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Do you have a specific surface in mind? If so, is it possible to see the equation? Information on the degree of the surface and whether or not it is singular will help. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Loughran Dec 2 '11 at 12:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is not a real question, since we need to see the surface. $\endgroup$ – Igor Rivin Dec 2 '11 at 15:49
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Map is 2-1 as $(s,t),(-s,-t)$ get mapped to the same point. I'll vote to close as too localized. $\endgroup$ – Felipe Voloch Dec 2 '11 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, Felipe. But is there a general criterion? $\endgroup$ – pepper Dec 2 '11 at 23:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Your surface has a few singularities at infinity. The usual way to construct a parametrisation for a singular cubic surface is to fix a singularity $P$ and consider the set of lines passing through each sufficiently general point and $P$. Such a line intersects the surface at only these two points (as long as the surface is not a cone) and yields a parametrisation. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Loughran Dec 3 '11 at 0:11

Your second "parametrization" is not birational.

Since you have a parametrization, it is easy to check. Indeed, the first parametrization is a birational map $\tau\colon \mathbb{A}^2\to S$, where $S$ is your surface. The second one is a rational map $\mu\colon \mathbb{A}^2\to S$. Because $\tau$ is birational, we can find that $\mu$ is birational if and only if $\tau^{-1}\circ \mu$ is birational.

This map is equal to

$(s,t)\mapsto (\frac{s(-1+4t^2)}{3t},\frac{2s(-1+t^2)}{3t})$

composing with the birational map $(s,t)\mapsto (3st,t)$ we obtain

$(s,t)\mapsto (s(-1+4t^2),2s(-1+t^2))$

which is clearly not birational ($(s,t)$ and $(s,-t)$ have the same image).


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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