On fewnomials, integral points, and a toric version of Bertini’s theorem
By Clemens Fuchs, Vincenzo Mantova, and Umberto Zannier
Abstract
An old conjecture of Erdős and Rényi, proved by Schinzel, predicted a bound for the number of terms of a polynomial $g(x)\in \mathbb{C}[x]$ when its square $g(x)^2$ has a given number of terms. Further conjectures and results arose, but some fundamental questions remained open.
In this paper, with methods which appear to be new, we achieve a final result in this direction for completely general algebraic equations $f(x,g(x))=0$, where $f(x,y)$ is monic of arbitrary degree in $y$ and has boundedly many terms in $x$: we prove that the number of terms of such a $g(x)$ is necessarily bounded. This includes the previous results as extremely special cases.
We shall interpret polynomials with boundedly many terms as the restrictions to 1-parameter subgroups or cosets of regular functions of bounded degree on a given torus $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^l$. Such a viewpoint shall lead to some best-possible corollaries in the context of finite covers of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^l$, concerning the structure of their integral points over function fields (in the spirit of conjectures of Vojta) and a Bertini-type irreducibility theorem above algebraic multiplicative cosets. A further natural reading occurs in non-standard arithmetic, where our result translates into an algebraic and integral-closedness statement inside the ring of non-standard polynomials.
1. Introduction
This paper is concerned with algebraic equations involving fewnomials, also sometimes called sparse, or lacunary polynomials. By this we mean that the number of terms is thought as being fixed, or bounded, whereas the degrees of these terms may vary, and similarly for the coefficients (though they are sometimes supposed to be fixed as well).
This context traces back to several different viewpoints and motivations. For instance, there are issues of reducibility (as in the well-known old theory of Capelli for binomials, and in more recent investigations for $k$-nomials, e.g. by Schinzel Reference 18). Sparse polynomials also occur when thinking of complexity in writing down an algebraic expression; see for instance Davenport’s paper Reference 8 (which also mentions issues related to the ones considered below). In turn, low complexity affects important geometrical or topological aspects (as in Khovanskiĭ’s theory Reference 13).
One perspective and series of relevant questions appeared when Erdős and Rényi raised independently the following attractive conjecture: Suppose that $g(x)$ is a (complex) polynomial such that $g(x)^{2}$ has at most $l$ terms. Then the number of terms of $g(x)$ is bounded dependently only on $l$Reference 9. It turned out that this problem was not innocuous as it might appear; indeed, for infinitely many $l$’s the number of terms of $g(x)$ may be much larger than that of $g(x)^{2}$, in fact $>l^{c}$ for a $c>1$, as was pointed out by Erdős himself Reference 9Reference 18.
The conjecture was proved by Schinzel Reference 17, actually for $g(x)^{d}$ for any given $d > 0$. Schinzel also extended the conjecture to compositions $p(g(x))$ for any given $p\in \mathbb{C}[x]\setminus \mathbb{C}$, which could not be dealt with by his methods. In turn, this was settled in Reference 20.
1.1. Main results
One of the main purposes of the present paper is to achieve a “final” result in the said direction, by treating general algebraic equations of the form $f(x,g(x))=0$, assuming that $f(x,y)\in \mathbb{C}[x,y]$ is a “fewnomial” in $x$ and has an arbitrary degree in $y$; we then seek a bound for the number of terms of $g(x)\in \mathbb{C}[x]$. We shall indeed prove that such a bound exists and that it is actually uniform in the coefficients of $f$, recovering the above mentioned conclusions related to the Erdős-Rényi conjecture (in sharper form) as very special cases. For instance, we prove the following.
The Erdős-Rényi conjecture is re-obtained on taking $f(x,y)=y^2-h(x)$ and also Schinzel’s subsequent conjecture with $f(x,y)=p(y)-h(x)$ (moreover uniformly in the coefficients of $p$).
Results of this type are strongly related to other (apparently far) issues of arithmetic and geometric nature, as we now illustrate. First, we remark that a convenient point of view, adopted here, is to think of a (Laurent) fewnomial as the restriction of a given regular function on a torus $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ to a $1$-parameter subgroup or coset. Indeed, a regular function on $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ is just a Laurent polynomial $f(t_{1},\ldots ,t_{l})$, whereas any connected $1$-parameter subgroup (resp. coset) may be parametrized as $t_{1}=x^{m_{1}},\ldots ,t_{l}=x^{m_{l}}$ (resp. $t_{1}=c_{1}x^{m_{1}},\ldots ,t_{l}=c_{l}x^{m_{l}}$) for integers $m_{1},\ldots ,m_{l}$ (resp. and nonzero constants $c_{1},\ldots ,c_{l}$). Hence, by substitution inside $f$, we obtain a Laurent polynomial in $x$ whose number of terms is bounded independently of the subgroup or coset.Footnote1
1
Naturally, a similar interpretation holds for multivariate fewnomials; however, the issues may usually be reduced to the basic case of a single variable by substitution.
In this view, the above theorem can be rephrased in the following equivalent form.
The numbers $B, B_{1}$ are actually effective, although we skip the details of such calculation. This leads, as we shall see, to a complete algorithmic description of all the possible solutions $g(x)$. Note that moreover the bound is independent of the coefficients of $f$, so that the conclusion remains valid if we use the substitution $t_i \mapsto \lambda _i x^{n_i}$ for some arbitrary numbers $\lambda _i \in \mathbb{C}$.
This viewpoint for instance suggests a generalization of the concept of fewnomial to the case of powers of abelian varieties.Footnote2 A relevant result in this direction can be found in Reference 14. But, more important here, this is useful in the development of the proofs, and it also suggests a number of links with other topics. We will discuss in a moment those which appear to us more relevant.
2
None of the results of this paper are known in that case, and it seems of interest to ask whether an analogue of the Rényi-Erdős or Schinzel’s conjecture is true in that context, already replacing $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}$ with an elliptic curve.
We also point out the following dichotomy between polynomials and rational functions: we shall state a version of Theorem 1.2 for rational functions (see Theorem 2.2), where we drop the assumption that $f$ is monic, and the conclusion will say that $g(x)$ can be written as the ratio of two polynomials with a bounded number of terms that are not necessarily coprime. An instance of this behavior is the cyclotomic polynomial $g(x) = 1 + \dots + x^{n-1}$, which solves the equation $(x^n-1) - g(x)(1-x) = 0$ without being a fewnomial, but that in fact can be written as $g(x) = \frac{x^n - 1}{x-1}$ (observe that the equation is indeed not monic). This phenomenon is intrinsic to the problem, and in fact many results here will be stated twice to account for both polynomials and rational functions.
The suitable statement for rational functions can be deduced straight away from Theorem 1.2; however, in this paper we shall actually proceed in the opposite direction, first proving a theorem for rational functions, and then recovering Theorem 1.2 (see the final argument in Section 8).
1.2. Integral points on varieties over function fields
Many attractive Diophantine problems concern the $S$-integers$\mathcal{O}_{S}$ and the $S$-units$\mathcal{O}_{S}^{*}$ in a number field $K$.Footnote3 The latter may also be described as just the $S$-integral points for $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}$. For instance, the Mordell-Lang conjecture for tori yields a description of the $S$-integral points on subvarieties $W$ of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$, that is the points on $W$ with $S$-unit coordinates. Such a description follows from the $S$-unit theorem of Evertse, Schlickewei, and van der Poorten, while the general conjecture for tori has been a theorem of Laurent since the 1980s; see Reference 2, Theorem 7.4.7.
3
We recall that $\mathcal{O}_{S}=\{x\in K:|x|_{v}\le 1\ \forall v\not \in S\}$; for instance, for $K=\mathbb{Q}$, the $S$-units are those rationals with numerator and denominator made up only of primes in the finite set $S$.
Instead, much less is known for $S$-integral points on finite covers of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ (except for the case of curves). Take for instance the simple-looking equation $y^{2}=1+x_{1}+x_{2}$, to be solved with $x_{1},x_{2}\in \mathcal{O}_{S}^{*}$ and $y\in \mathcal{O}_{S}$. This represents a double cover of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{2}$, on which we seek the $S$-integral points. Alternatively, they may be described as the $S$-integral points for the affine variety obtained as the complement in $\mathbb{P}_{2}$ of two lines and a suitable conic (see Reference 5). Now, this is a divisor of degree $4$ with normal crossings, so a celebrated conjecture of Vojta predicts that the solutions are not Zariski dense, but this has not yet been proved (see Reference 2, Section 14.3; this special case was proposed explicitly by Beukers in Reference 1).Footnote4
4
This is indeed a “borderline” case of Vojta’s conjecture on integral points, one of the simplest but yet unsolved ones. See Reference 5 for a proof in the function field context.
A related form of this problem has recently been proposed by Ghioca and Scanlon while studying the dynamical Mordell-Lang conjecture in positive characteristic. Specifically, for a given prime $p$, they ask about the integer solutions of $f(y)=c_{1}p^{a_{1}}+\cdots +c_{l}p^{a_{l}}$, in the unknowns $y,a_{1},\ldots ,a_{l}$, where the polynomial $f$ and the constants $c_{1},\ldots ,c_{l}$ are given. Since $p^{a_{i}}$ are $S$-units, this is in turn a special case of seeking the integral points on the cover of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ given by $f(y)=x_{1}+\cdots +x_{l}$.
The methods so far known do not suffice even to treat the former equation (see Reference 7 for some special cases). Actually, the problem arises even in writing down what is expected to be the most general form of the solution. Note that any identity of the shape $f(g(x))=c_{1}x^{m_{1}}+\cdots +c_{l}x^{m_{l}}$, for a polynomial $g$, would produce solutions simply by setting $x=p^{a}$. Hence, it is a primary task to write down all such identities. Note also that such an identity (considered now over $\mathbb{C}$) represents an $S$-integral point on the said cover, but now relative to the function field $\mathbb{C}(x)$ and set $S=\{0,\infty \}$ Footnote5: in fact, the $S$-units of $\mathbb{C}(x)$ are precisely the monomials $cx^{m}$.
5
Here, in accordance with quite a general principle, the integral points over a function field may be used to parametrize the integral points over a number field.
This example makes evident the connection of these topics on integral points with the topic of fewnomials (and with Erdős-Rényi and Schinzel’s mentioned conjectures); indeed, in the case of the problem of Ghioca and Scanlon a complete description in finite terms of the relevant identities follows from Theorem 2 of Reference 20.
The results of the present paper yield a corresponding description in a rather more general situation. Namely, in dealing with an arbitrary finite cover $\pi :W\to \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$, they allow us to parametrize all the regular maps $\rho :\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}\to W$ (i.e., the $S$-integral points on $W$, with respect to the function field $\mathbb{C}(x)$ and set $S=\{0,\infty \}$).Footnote6
6
The case of more general function fields or even more general sets $S$ is not known to us and seems to present subtle difficulties; this happens already by taking $S=\{0,1,\infty \}$. See Reference 6 for some cases related to surfaces.
Here $\psi _{\xi }$ denotes the restriction of $\psi$ to $\{\xi \}\times \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{s}$. The special case $l=2$ of this theorem appears as Theorem 5.1 in Reference 4, in different phrasing and with a completely different (and somewhat involved) proof.
We therefore see that any “$S$-integral point” factors through a map $\psi _{\xi }:\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{s}\to W$ of bounded degree, in the sense that the inverse image of a hyperplane section of $W$ has a bounded degree in $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{s}\subset \mathbb{P}_{s}$. This can be expressed in terms of boundedness of the heights of the integral points. Such a conclusion, which is in a sense the best possible, proves Vojta’s conjectures for $W$ and the integral points in question.Footnote7 As an application, we can prove the following corollary.
7
See e.g. Reference 2, Section 14 for a general formulation of Vojta’s conjectures, especially over number fields. For brevity we omit here any further detail or example.
This is a useful condition which fits within a classification of Kawamata (see, for instance, the remark after Theorem 2 of Reference 6 or Section 5.5.5 of the recent book by Noguchi and Winkelmann Reference 16).
Moreover, this language also makes it more obvious how to prove the special case $l = 1$ (we thank one of the anonymous referees for pointing out this argument). Indeed, for $l = 1$ an integral point is a regular map $\rho : \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}\to W$ such that the composition $\pi \circ \rho : \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}\to W \to \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}$ is the map $x \mapsto \theta x^n$, that is an isogeny composed with a translation. Suppose that one such point exists. It follows easily that the normalization of $W$ is in fact isomorphic to $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}$ itself, and all the integral points can then be easily classified.
1.3. A “Bertini Theorem” for covers of tori
Consider again a (ramified) cover $\pi :W\to \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$, by which we mean a dominant map of finite degree $e$ from the irreducible algebraic variety $W/\mathbb{C}$. When $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ is replaced by the affine space $\mathbb{A}^{l}$, a version of the Bertini irreducibility theorem asserts that for $l>1$, if $H$ is a “general” hyperplane in $\mathbb{A}^{l}$, the fiber $\pi ^{-1}(H)$ is still irreducible. In the present context one may replace $H$ by a general algebraic subgroup (or coset) of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ and ask about the same conclusion. Of course, a marked contrast with the Bertini case is that the algebraic subgroups now form a discrete family, which prevents standard methods from working in this context. In Reference 21, Theorem 3 a positive result was obtained, however, concerning irreducibility only above components of 1-parameter subgroups, and not above arbitrary cosets.
Now, the arguments and results of this paper (completely independent of Reference 21) directly lead to a toric analogue of Bertini’s theorem without the said restriction.
Note that if $\pi$ is already finite onto its image, then $X$ may be omitted from the statement. However, as pointed out by an anonymous referee, to whom we are grateful for the correction, in the general case the subvariety $X$ must be included in the statement; for instance, if $\pi : W \to \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^2$ is the blowup of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^2$ at a point, then the preimage of a coset passing through the point always contains the exceptional divisor. The hypothesis of irreducibility of the pullback is also a necessary condition.Footnote8
8
For instance, when $\pi$ is an isogeny of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$, the cover becomes reducible above every subgroup $\pi (H)$, for any torus $H$ not containing the kernel $K$ of $\pi$, since $\pi ^{-1}(\pi (H))=HK$.
As for Theorem 1.2, the set $\mathcal{E}$ can be given a complete algorithmic description, which is rather uniform in the data. Consider the following particular case. Suppose that the variety $W$ can be represented as the hypersurface $f(t_1,\ldots ,t_l,y)=0$, with $\pi$ given by the projection on the first $l$ coordinates. Assume moreover that $f$ is a (Laurent) polynomial in the $t_i$’s and monic in $y$. Under these assumptions, the map $\pi$ is finite, and the conclusion of Theorem 1.2 gives the following strengthening.
As an application, we immediately obtain the following corollary, in which for a given integer $d>1$ we let $K_{d}(x)$ denote the Kronecker substitution$K_{d}(x)=(x,x^{d},\ldots ,x^{d^{l-1}})$.
This had been obtained in Reference 21 (with a completely different proof), however, without this uniformity, which was left as an open question.
1.4. An application to composite rational functions
One may propose an analogue for rational functions of the already mentioned conjectures of Erdős-Rényi and subsequent ones by Schinzel. Namely, let $f(x)$ be a given rational function and suppose that for a rational function $g(x)$, the composition $f(g(x))$ may be written as a ratio of two polynomials (not necessarily coprime) with at most $l$ terms. Is there a $B=B(f,l)$ such that $g(x)$ may be represented as the ratio of the polynomials with at most $B$ terms? The present methods allow a positive solution of this problem as well, as follows.
Again, we stress that the pairs $P, Q$ and $p, q$ are not necessarily coprime. We also remark that we actually have full uniformity here in the rational function $f$, as the number $B_{2}$ only depends on $l$ and not on $\deg (f)$ (this dependency can be removed thanks to a previous theorem proved by the first and last authors Reference 12; in the same paper, the function $f(x)$ is also described, on bounding its degree in terms of $l$ only, unless $g(x)$ is of certain special shapes listed therein).
1.5. Non-standard polynomials
The notion of fewnomial and our main theorems can be translated naturally in the language of Robinson’s non-standard analysis. We refer the reader to Reference 10 for an introduction to the subject.
Here we just recall that in non-standard analysis one has a map ${}^*$ which sends the standard objects, such as $\mathbb{N}$ or $\mathbb{R}$, to their non-standard counterparts, in a way that preserves all first-order formulas. The easiest example of (non-trivial) map ${}^*$ is the one that sends any set $S$ into the set of sequences with values in $S$ (i.e., $S^\mathbb{N}$) modulo the equivalence relation defined by a fixed non-principal ultrafilter on $\mathbb{N}$ (i.e., $(a_n)\sim (b_n)$ if $\{n\ :\ a_n=b_n\}$ is in the ultrafilter). This introduces new, non-standard elements; for instance, the non-standard ${}^*\mathbb{N}$ contains an element $\omega$, the equivalence class of the sequence $(n)_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$, which is different from any standard natural number.
Concerning our context, we note that the non-standard ${}^*(\mathbb{C}[x])$ contains “polynomials with infinitely many terms,” such as
In this language, statements about fewnomials become quite compact. As an instance of this phrasing, the Erdős-Rényi conjecture proved by Schinzel becomes the following: if $g^2\in \mathcal{F}$ for some $g\in {}^*(\mathbb{C}[x])$, then $g\in \mathcal{F}$. Likewise, Theorem 1.1 translates to the following quite short statement.
This statement was proposed by Fornasiero before the results of this paper, together with its following immediate corollary (which is, in turn, a non-standard translation of Theorem 2.2, stated in the following section).
The latter conclusion is another example of the aforementioned behavior of rational functions, and indeed it corresponds to dropping the assumption that the polynomial is monic in Theorem 1.1.
It is rather easy to see that Theorems ${}^*$1.1 and 1.1 are indeed equivalent. For example, assume Theorem ${}^*$1.1 and suppose by contradiction that Theorem 1.1 is false. Then for some $d,l\in \mathbb{N}$ there should be a sequence $(g_n(x))$ of polynomials whose number of terms grows to infinity, while they also satisfy
which means that ${}^*g(x)$ is integral over $\mathcal{F}$, while it lies in ${}^*(\mathbb{C}[x])$ and not in $\mathcal{F}$, a contradiction.
Although there are details to be worked out, we believe that also our proof of Theorem 1.1 can be translated rather naturally to a shorter argument in the non-standard language; this is being investigated and may appear in a future paper. On the one hand, we would lose effectivity, but on the other, we may be able to avoid the use of the resolution of singularities and directly use the construction of the Puiseux series.
The main potential simplification comes from the fact that many notions, which in the proof depend on appropriately chosen parameters, become absolute. For example, the notion of being “small” with respect to a “large” number, which in our proof depends on a parameter $\varepsilon$ to be chosen carefully, translates to being infinitesimal with respect to the second number.
1.6. Fewnomials and unlikely intersections
This instance does not directly use results of the present paper, but we still discuss it because it is far from being unrelated.
As already mentioned at the end of Section 1.1, several results here contain a dichotomy lacunary polynomials $\leftrightarrow$ lacunary rational functions, where by the latter terminology we mean rational functions which may be represented as ratios of fewnomials, possibly non-coprime, as in Theorem 1.7. Recall the standard example $(x^{n}-1)/(x-1)$, which shows that a lacunary rational function which is a polynomial is not necessarily a fewnomial. This gives rise to the following problem, also posed independently by Zieve.
Suppose that a rational function $r(x) \in \mathbb{C}(x)$ can be represented as the ratio $r(x) = g(x^{n_{1}}, \ldots , x^{n_{l}}) / h(x^{n_{1}}, \ldots , x^{n_{l}})$, where the integers $n_{i}$ vary, while $g,h$ are fixed coprime polynomials in $\mathbb{C}[t_{1},\ldots ,t_{l}]$. (In accordance with the viewpoint illustrated above, we are viewing $r(x)$ as the restriction of a fixed rational function $g/h$ on $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ to a one-dimensional algebraic subgroup which may vary.) One may ask the following question.
For instance, the above example comes from $g=t_{2}-1$,$h=t_{1}-1$ on $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{2}$; in this case it is easy to check that the only one-dimensional algebraic subgroups which make $g/h$ a (Laurent) polynomial are given by $t_{2}=t_{1}^{n}$ for integer $n$ (as in the example).
Therefore, in particular, we have two coprime polynomials $g,h$ such that they become non-coprime (or such that $h$ becomes invertible) along the one-dimensional subtorus of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ parametrized by $t_{i}\mapsto x^{n_{i}}$. This kind of problem also appeared in a conjecture of Schinzel, which was later recognized as a special case of the more recent Zilber-Pink conjecture in the realm of the so-called unlikely intersections. See Reference 22 for a discussion of this topic, especially Chapter 2. This conjecture of Schinzel was confirmed by Bombieri and the third author (see Reference 18, Appendix), and it was later refined with other methods, in collaboration also with Masser, in Reference 3, Theorem 1.5, in a work proving the Zilber-Pink conjecture for intersections with one-dimensional subgroups.
These last results give an answer to the above question, showing that the relevant algebraic subgroups are contained in a finite union $\mathcal{E}=\mathcal{E}_{g,h}$ of proper algebraic subgroups of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$. Given this, one may restrict to the subgroups in $\mathcal{E}$ and continue by induction to write down all the possibilities: it turns out that the relevant one-dimensional algebraic subgroups are precisely those contained in a certain finite union $\mathcal{E}'$ of proper algebraic subgroups on which $g/h$ becomes regular.
It is to be remarked that the more general question in which one-dimensional algebraic subgroups are replaced by one-dimensional algebraic cosets does not admit a similar solution. This corresponds to the ratio $g(\theta _{1}x^{n_{1}},\ldots ,\theta _{l}x^{n_{l}})/h(\theta _{1}x^{n_{1}},\ldots , \theta _{l}x^{n_{l}})$ being a polynomial, for integers $n_{i}$ and nonzero constants $\theta _{i}$. We do not know of any method able to deal with such a question in full generality.
Another connection to integral points was pointed out to us by one of the referees, and we are grateful for it. Starting from the rational function $r(t_1,\ldots ,t_l) = g(t_1,\ldots ,t_l) / h(t_1,\ldots ,t_l)$, one can blow up the codimension-two subvariety of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^l$ defined by the simultaneous vanishing of $g$ and $h$, and remove the strict transform of the subvariety of $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^{l}$ defined by $h = 0$. Let $W$ be the resulting variety. Then the one-dimensional (translates of) algebraic subgroups which are solutions to Question 1.8 correspond to regular maps $\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}\rightarrow W$. With this interpretation a solution for the problem of translates can possibly be given for $l = 2$ (the case of surfaces) under some normal-crossings conditions which will depend on $h$ and are generically satisfied.
1.7. Proof methods and quantitative issues
The strategy of the proofs here follows only in part the pattern of Reference 20; this shall be outlined in more detail in Section 3 (before the formal arguments). The main technical issue is finding an appropriate way of expanding $g(x)$ as a kind of multivariate Puiseux series. This is done here by using first the theory of resolution of singularities to reduce to a rather regular case in which one can use multivariate analytic expansions. An earlier version of the proofs involved a different, more complicated construction of certain Puiseux-type expansions, but no use of resolution of singularities. The approach was dropped in favor of the present one for the sake of simplicity, but it may be of independent interest, and it can still be found in an earlier draft of this paper Reference 11.
A by-product is a completely effective output of the proofs: one can obtain effective estimates for the involved quantities, and effective parametrizations (provided of course one deals with cases in which the fields and the equations which occur are finitely presented). However, we do not give here explicit bounds, which in any case would have the shape of highly iterated exponentials.Footnote9
9
In the original cases of the Erdős-Rényi conjecture, doubly exponential bounds had been obtained by Schinzel Reference 17, reduced later to a single exponential by Schinzel and the third author Reference 19.
The following three statements are variations regarding irreducible factors and the dichotomy rational functions $\leftrightarrow$ polynomials mentioned in the Introduction.
The first one concerns factorizations.
(By symmetry, a similar conclusion holds automatically for the coefficients of $h$.)
Note that we recover Theorem 1.2 on taking $(y-g(x))$ as the first factor. The converse deduction is also not difficult but shall be explained later. The other variations concern rational functions.
It is easy to see that Theorem 1.2 implies Theorem 2.2, but the converse deduction does not appear as straightforward (we stress yet again the point that the polynomial $g$ in the conclusion of Theorem 2.2 is represented as a quotient of two polynomials which need not be coprime). In this paper, we actually prove Theorem 2.2 first, and then deduce Theorem 1.2 (and Theorem 2.1) via a general integrality argument.
2.2. Reductions
We are going to prove Theorem 2.2 first, and we can use some standard arguments to reduce the theorem to a simpler situation. In a moment, we shall reduce both Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 about rational functions to the case where $f$ is monic in $y$, and $n_{1},\dots ,n_{l}$ are non-negative. We obtain the following statements, in which the assumption is as in Theorem 1.2 (or Theorem 2.1), but the conclusion is as in Theorem 2.2 (resp. Theorem 2.3).
Note that since $f$ is monic in $y$, it follows that $g(x)$ is actually a polynomial, but the conclusion only says that $g$ is represented by a quotient of two polynomials which need not be coprime. Thus this proposition is a weak form of Theorem 1.2. It is similar for its corollary.
Both are clearly special cases of the original Theorems 2.2 and 2.3. As we now show, it is not difficult to deduce the latter statements from them.
Moreover, as promised earlier, we can easily deduce Theorem 2.3 from Theorem 2.2. Thanks to the above reductions, it is sufficient to deduce Proposition 2.6 from Proposition 2.5.
The exact same argument can also be used to show that Theorem 2.1 follows from Theorem 1.2.
2.3. Further lemmas
In the course of our proof, we will need on a few occasions to replace $x$ with an auxiliary variable $x_{n}$ such that $x_{n}^{n}=x$. In the next lemma, we show that these substitutions do not affect our statements, so they may be considered as immaterial.
Another easy reduction shows that if we find a $\mathbb{Z}$-linear relation with bounded coefficients between the exponents $n_{1},\dots ,n_{l}$, then we may actually remove one of the exponents. This is also crucial for our induction on $l$.
3. Introduction to the proof
In order to prove Theorem 2.2, we build up on the same technique of Reference 20 but with the additional use of the theory of resolution of singularities to reduce to a sufficiently regular case. Indeed, the underlying expansions depend not quite on the variable $x$, but on the $l$ variables $t_{1},\dots ,t_{l}$; it is well known that expansions of algebraic functions of several variables often depend on subtle geometric features.
For the sake of illustration, we explain the strategy of the proof in a simpler example where this combinatorial aspect is missing. We work by induction on $l$.
Say that, as in the original Erdős-Rényi conjecture (a special case of Theorem 1.2), we start with the polynomial
is the ratio of two polynomials with few terms, we may expand $g(x)$ with the binomial series; namely, letting $h(x):=c_{1}x^{n_{1}}+\dots +c_{l}x^{n_{l}}$, we may easily obtain the multinomial expansion
It is crucial that $k_{1},\dots ,k_{l}$ run through natural numbers. Assuming that $0<n_{1}\leq n_{2}\leq \dots \leq n_{l}$, if $n_{1}\ge \varepsilon n_{l}$ for some fixed $\varepsilon >0$, each exponent $k_{1}n_{1}+\dots +k_{l}n_{l}$ is at least $(k_{1}+\dots +k_{l})\varepsilon n_{l}$. Since the degree of $g(x)$ must be $(n_{l}/2)$, we find that all terms must eventually cancel except possibly for those such that $(k_{1}+\dots +k_{l})\leq 1/(2\varepsilon )$, leading to the bound $(2\varepsilon )^{-l+1}/l!$ for the number of terms.
This consideration always works for $l=1$ (with $\varepsilon =1$), and in particular we obtain the base case of our induction. However, in general we have no lower bound at all for $n_{1}/n_{l}$. To cope with this difficulty, the principle in Reference 20 is that if some terms $n_{1}, \dots , n_{p}$ are very small compared to $n_{l}$, we can group together these small contributions as follows: we define
As before, we can expand the powers of $h_{1}(x)$, which involve the large exponents only; however, the new coefficients will not be constants, as before, but actually functions in the hyperelliptic function field $\mathbb{C}(x,\delta (x)^{1/2})$. Despite this radically new feature, a theorem in Diophantine approximation over function fields (see Section 6) allows one to reduce to the inductive hypothesis at $p<l$, provided $n_{p+1}$ is large enough, by which we mean that it is greater than $\varepsilon n_{l}$ for an absolute $\varepsilon >0$. Of course, for some $0\leq p<l$ we must indeed have that $n_{p}$ is small, whereas $n_{p+1}$ is large, concluding the argument.
In the general case, we wish to apply the same approximation technique. However, a direct attempt at expanding $g(x)$ as a kind of multivariate series might fail; The main issue is that we may have monomials involving exponents that are combinations of $n_{1},\dots ,n_{l}$ with negative coefficients, in which case a combination of large exponents may become small, and it is not as easy any more to separate the big ones from the small ones. These obstacles appear when $g(0)$ is a non-simple root of $f({\mathbf{0}},y)$.Footnote10
10
These issues are entirely avoided in the cases considered in Reference 20, where multinomial expansions suffice.
We shall overcome these obstacles by applying a suitable monoidal transformation to our original equation. Although $g(0)$ might still be a non-simple root of $f({\mathbf{0}}, y)$, the transformation will guarantee that $g(x)$ can still be expanded as in the original case. The choice of the monoidal transformation relies on the theory of resolution of singularities.Footnote11
11
We recall that an earlier draft of this paper contained a different proof based on a careful construction of a Puiseux-type expansion rather than the resolution of singularities Reference 11.
In order to obtain our desired expansion of $g(x)$ as a “pseudo-analytic series,” we prove that Proposition 2.5 can be further reduced to a special case in which the polynomial $f$ is sufficiently regular.
Let $f \in \mathbb{C}[t_1, \dots , t_l, y]$ be as in Proposition 2.5. Assume, as we may, that $f$ is irreducible. Let $\mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_l, z)$ be the function field generated by the independent variables $t_1, \dots , t_l$ and an algebraic function $z$ such that $f(t_1, \dots , t_l, z) = 0$.
Let $W$ be a projective non-singular model of the function field $\mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_l, z)$. For each $i = 1, \dots , l$, let $\mathcal{D}_i$ be the set of the irreducible components of the divisor of $t_i$, and let $\mathcal{D} := \bigcup _{i=1}^l \mathcal{D}_i$. By the known theory of resolution of singularities, after applying some blowups, we may further assume that the divisors appearing in $\mathcal{D}$ are non-singular and have normal crossings.
Let $\phi : \mathbb{P}_1 \to W$ be the unique non-constant map such that
•
$t_i \circ \phi = x^{n_i}$ for all $i=1, \dots , l$;
•
$z \circ \phi = g(x)$,
where $x$ is the standard coordinate function $x : \mathbb{P}_1 \to \mathbb{P}_1$. Let $P := \phi (0)$.
Note that one might reformulate the above notion in a more compact and geometric way by only referring to the map $\phi$. However, we prefer to keep an explicit reference to the polynomial $g(x)$ and the numbers $n_1, \dots , n_l$.
The purpose of this section is to show that it suffices to prove the conclusion of Proposition 2.5 in the special case in which the solution is regular.
In what follows, given a divisor $D$ and a regular function $u$, we let $v_D(u)$ denote the order of $u$ at $D$. Note that since $f$ has degree at most $d$ in each variable, we have $|v_D(t_i)| \leq d^{l}$ for all $D \in \mathcal{D}$.
Thanks to the above observation, in order to prove Proposition 2.5, it shall be sufficient to prove the following special version which has a few more hypotheses.
5. From multivariate expansions to algebraic approximations
We now start our argument toward the proof of Proposition 4.3. From now up to Section 8, assume that we are working under the assumptions of Proposition 4.3, and in particular that $n_1,\dots ,n_l \in \mathbb{N}^{*}$ and $g(x) \in \mathbb{C}[x]$ form a regular solution of $f(x^{n_1}, \dots , x^{n_l}, g(x)) = 0$, where $f \in \mathbb{C}[t_1,\dots ,t_l,y] \setminus \mathbb{C}$ is irreducible, is monic in $y$, and has degree at most $d$ in each variable.
Under the notation of Section 4, regularity means that $t_1, \dots , t_l$ are local parameters at $P = \phi (0)$, which means that there is an embedding of the regular functions at $P$ into $\mathbb{C}[[t_1, \dots , t_l]]$. Since moreover the function $z$ is integral over $\mathbb{C}[t_1, \dots , t_l]$, we obtain an embedding
Therefore, fix one such $p = 0, \dots , l - 1$. We write $\mathbf{t}$ for the vector $(t_{p+1}, \dots , t_l)$. If $\mathbf{k}$ is a vector of integers $\mathbf{k}= (k_{p+1}, \dots , k_l)$, we write $\mathbf{t}^{\mathbf{k}} := t_{p+1}^{k_{p+1}} \cdot \dots \cdot t_l^{k_l}$. With this notation, the above embedding yields a (unique) expansion
We now specialize the above expansion along the curve $\phi (\mathbb{P}_1)$ and pull it back to $\mathbb{P}_1$. Recall that the ring of functions on $\mathbb{P}_1$ that are regular at the origin can be embedded (uniquely) into $\mathbb{C}[[x]]$. Under this embedding, the specialization and the pullback simply mean that we specialize at $t_i = x^{n_i}$ term by term.
We first specialize at $t_i = x^{n_i}$ for $i = 1, \dots , p$. Since $n_i \neq 0$ for all $i$, each series $\alpha _{\mathbf{k}}$ converges at $t_i = x^{n_i}$ to a series $\tilde{\alpha }_{\mathbf{k}} \in \mathbb{C}[[x]]$, and we have
where $\mathbf{n}= (n_{p+1}, \dots , n_{l})$ and $\mathbf{k}\cdot \mathbf{n}$ denotes the usual scalar product. Note that such expansion is convergent again since $n_{i} \neq 0$ for all $i$.
Equation (Equation 5.3) yields an expansion of $g(x)$ resembling an analytic expansion, but with coefficients that are themselves functions of $x$, providing the first ingredient toward the proof of Proposition 4.3. We now use (Equation 5.1) and (Equation 5.2) to deduce some bounds on the coefficients $\alpha _{\mathbf{k}}$ and $\tilde{\alpha }_{\mathbf{k}}$.
For $L \in \mathbb{N}$, let $F_L$ be the field generated by $\{\alpha _{\mathbf{k}} \,:\, |\mathbf{k}| \leq L\}$ over $\mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_p)$, where $|\mathbf{k}|$ is the $1$-norm of $\mathbf{k}\in \mathbb{N}^{l-p}$, and $F_{\infty } := \bigcup _{L \in \mathbb{N}}F_L$. By Proposition 5.1, $[F_{\infty }:\mathbb{C}(x)] \leq d$. Similarly, let $\tilde{F}_L$ be the field generated by $\{\tilde{\alpha }_{\mathbf{k}} \,:\, |\mathbf{k}| \leq L\}$ over $\mathbb{C}(x)$, and $\tilde{F}_{\infty } := \bigcup _{L \in \mathbb{N}}F_L$. Again, $[\tilde{F}_{\infty }:\mathbb{C}(x)] \leq d$. Let $h$ be the logarithmic height of the function field $\tilde{F}_{\infty }/\mathbb{C}$ normalized so that $h(x) = [\tilde{F}_{\infty }:\mathbb{C}(x)] \leq d$.
6. Diophantine approximation
Now that we have found a suitable expansion of $g(x)$ as a convergent sum of algebraic functions, we proceed as in Reference 20. Recall the following lemma.
A rather straightforward application of the above lemma to (Equation 5.3) yields the following (using the notations of Section 5).
7. The case of linear dependence
Note that outcome (1) of Proposition 6.2 is that $g(x)$ is $\mathbb{C}$-linearly dependent on $\{\tilde{\alpha }_{\mathbf{k}} \,:\, |\mathbf{k}| \leq L\}$ for a certain $L \in \mathbb{N}$. In this section, we study what happens when this is the case.
Let $L \in \mathbb{N}$. Fix $\alpha$ to be a primitive element of $F_L/\mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_p)$ given by Proposition 5.3, with the corresponding irreducible polynomial $q \in \mathbb{C}[t_1, \dots , t_p, y]$. Let also $e = [F_L:\mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_p)]$. Then for all $|\mathbf{k}| \leq L$ we can write
where $q_{i,\mathbf{k}} \in \mathbb{C}(t_1, \dots , t_p)$.
8. Proof of the main theorem
Finally, we can prove Proposition 4.3. We shall then prove that it implies Theorem 1.2.
Chasing back the series of deductions, this finally proves Theorem 2.2. The proof of Theorem 1.2 now follows the same argument found in Reference 20.
9. Proofs of the remaining assertions
From Theorem 2.2 we can now deduce the various statements given in Section 1 with a relatively small effort.
We first prove Theorem 1.3 and its Corollary 1.4 on integral points, i.e., regarding the regular maps $\rho :\mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}\to W$ for a given finite cover $W\to \mathbb{G}_{\mathrm{m}}^l$.
The proof of the toric version of Bertini’s Theorem 1.5 follows a similar pattern.
Finally, the only remaining statement is the analogue for composite rational functions of Schinzel’s conjecture, namely Theorem 1.7.
Acknowledgments
The authors express gratitude to A. Fornasiero for raising the question in the non-standard setting, thus renewing interest in this problem, and to D. Ghioca and T. Scanlon for informing them about their conjecture and its link with the problems discussed here. The authors also wish to thank the anonymous referees for the very detailed reading and the various important comments, corrections, and further pointers to the literature.
F. Beukers, Ternary form equations, J. Number Theory 54 (1995), no. 1, 113–133, DOI 10.1006/jnth.1995.1105. MR1352640, Show rawAMSref\bib{Beukers1995}{article}{
author={Beukers, F.},
title={Ternary form equations},
journal={J.~Number Theory},
volume={54},
date={1995},
number={1},
pages={113\textendash 133},
issn={0022-314X},
review={\MR {1352640}},
doi={10.1006/jnth.1995.1105},
}
Reference [2]
Enrico Bombieri and Walter Gubler, Heights in Diophantine geometry, New Mathematical Monographs, vol. 4, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511542879. MR2216774, Show rawAMSref\bib{Bombieri2006}{book}{
author={Bombieri, Enrico},
author={Gubler, Walter},
title={Heights in Diophantine geometry},
series={New Mathematical Monographs},
volume={4},
publisher={Cambridge University Press, Cambridge},
date={2006},
pages={xvi+652},
isbn={978-0-521-84615-8},
isbn={0-521-84615-3},
review={\MR {2216774}},
doi={10.1017/CBO9780511542879},
}
Reference [3]
E. Bombieri, D. Masser, and U. Zannier, Anomalous subvarieties—structure theorems and applications, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 19 (2007), Art. ID rnm057, 33, DOI 10.1093/imrn/rnm057. MR2359537, Show rawAMSref\bib{Bombieri2007}{article}{
author={Bombieri, E.},
author={Masser, D.},
author={Zannier, U.},
title={Anomalous subvarieties\textemdash structure theorems and applications},
journal={Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN},
date={2007},
number={19},
pages={Art. ID rnm057, 33},
issn={1073-7928},
review={\MR {2359537}},
doi={10.1093/imrn/rnm057},
}
Reference [4]
Pietro Corvaja and Umberto Zannier, On the integral points on certain surfaces, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 20 (2006), Art. ID 98623, DOI 10.1155/IMRN/2006/98623. MR2219222, Show rawAMSref\bib{Corvaja2006}{article}{
author={Corvaja, Pietro},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={On the integral points on certain surfaces},
journal={Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN},
date={2006},
number={20},
pages={Art. ID 98623},
issn={1073-7928},
review={\MR {2219222}},
doi={10.1155/IMRN/2006/98623},
}
Reference [5]
Pietro Corvaja and Umberto Zannier, Some cases of Vojta’s conjecture on integral points over function fields, J. Algebraic Geom. 17 (2008), no. 2, 295–333, DOI 10.1090/S1056-3911-07-00489-4. MR2369088, Show rawAMSref\bib{Corvaja2008}{article}{
author={Corvaja, Pietro},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Some cases of Vojta's conjecture on integral points over function fields},
journal={J. Algebraic Geom.},
volume={17},
date={2008},
number={2},
pages={295\textendash 333},
issn={1056-3911},
review={\MR {2369088}},
doi={10.1090/S1056-3911-07-00489-4},
}
Reference [6]
Pietro Corvaja and Umberto Zannier, Algebraic hyperbolicity of ramified covers of $\mathbb{G}^2_m$ (and integral points on affine subsets of $\mathbb{P}_2$), J. Differential Geom. 93 (2013), no. 3, 355–377. MR3024299, Show rawAMSref\bib{Corvaja2013}{article}{
author={Corvaja, Pietro},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Algebraic hyperbolicity of ramified covers of $\mathbb {G}^2_m$ (and integral points on affine subsets of $\mathbb {P}_2$)},
journal={J. Differential Geom.},
volume={93},
date={2013},
number={3},
pages={355\textendash 377},
issn={0022-040X},
review={\MR {3024299}},
}
Reference [7]
Pietro Corvaja and Umberto Zannier, Finiteness of odd perfect powers with four nonzero binary digits(English, with English and French summaries), Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 63 (2013), no. 2, 715–731. MR3112846, Show rawAMSref\bib{Corvaja2013a}{article}{
author={Corvaja, Pietro},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Finiteness of odd perfect powers with four nonzero binary digits},
language={English, with English and French summaries},
journal={Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)},
volume={63},
date={2013},
number={2},
pages={715\textendash 731},
issn={0373-0956},
review={\MR {3112846}},
}
Reference [8]
James Harold Davenport and Jacques Carette, The Sparsity Challenges. In 2009 11th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing, 3–7, IEEE, 2009, DOI 10.1109/SYNASC.2009.62.
Reference [9]
Paul Erdős, On the number of terms of the square of a polynomial, Nieuw Arch. Wiskunde (2) 23 (1949), 63–65. MR0027779, Show rawAMSref\bib{Erdos1949}{article}{
author={Erd\H {o}s, Paul},
title={On the number of terms of the square of a polynomial},
journal={Nieuw Arch. Wiskunde (2)},
volume={23},
date={1949},
pages={63\textendash 65},
review={\MR {0027779}},
}
Reference [10]
Michael D. Fried and Moshe Jarden, Field arithmetic, 3rd ed., Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics], vol. 11, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2008. Revised by Jarden. MR2445111, Show rawAMSref\bib{Fried2008}{book}{
author={Fried, Michael D.},
author={Jarden, Moshe},
title={Field arithmetic},
series={Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics]},
volume={11},
edition={3},
note={Revised by Jarden},
publisher={Springer-Verlag, Berlin},
date={2008},
pages={xxiv+792},
isbn={978-3-540-77269-9},
review={\MR {2445111}},
}
Reference [11]
Clemens Fuchs, Vincenzo Mantova, and Umberto Zannier, On fewnomials, integral points and a toric version of Bertini’s theorem, 2014, arXiv 1412.4548v1.
Reference [12]
Clemens Fuchs and Umberto Zannier, Composite rational functions expressible with few terms, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 14 (2012), no. 1, 175–208, DOI 10.4171/JEMS/299. MR2862037, Show rawAMSref\bib{Fuchs2012}{article}{
author={Fuchs, Clemens},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Composite rational functions expressible with few terms},
journal={J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS)},
volume={14},
date={2012},
number={1},
pages={175\textendash 208},
issn={1435-9855},
review={\MR {2862037}},
doi={10.4171/JEMS/299},
}
Reference [13]
A. G. Khovanskiĭ, Fewnomials, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 88, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1991. Translated from the Russian by Smilka Zdravkovska. MR1108621, Show rawAMSref\bib{Khovanski1991}{book}{
author={Khovanski\u \i , A. G.},
title={Fewnomials},
series={Translations of Mathematical Monographs},
volume={88},
note={Translated from the Russian by Smilka Zdravkovska},
publisher={American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI},
date={1991},
pages={viii+139},
isbn={0-8218-4547-0},
review={\MR {1108621}},
}
Reference [14]
Steven S. Y. Lu, On surfaces of general type with maximal Albanese dimension, J. Reine Angew. Math. 641 (2010), 163–175, DOI 10.1515/CRELLE.2010.032. MR2643929, Show rawAMSref\bib{Lu2010}{article}{
author={Lu, Steven S. Y.},
title={On surfaces of general type with maximal Albanese dimension},
journal={J. Reine Angew. Math.},
volume={641},
date={2010},
pages={163\textendash 175},
issn={0075-4102},
review={\MR {2643929}},
doi={10.1515/CRELLE.2010.032},
}
Reference [15]
R. C. Mason, Diophantine equations over function fields, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 96, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511752490. MR754559, Show rawAMSref\bib{Mason1984}{book}{
author={Mason, R. C.},
title={Diophantine equations over function fields},
series={London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series},
volume={96},
publisher={Cambridge University Press, Cambridge},
date={1984},
pages={x+125},
isbn={0-521-26983-0},
review={\MR {754559}},
doi={10.1017/CBO9780511752490},
}
Reference [16]
Junjiro Noguchi and Jörg Winkelmann, Nevanlinna theory in several complex variables and Diophantine approximation, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], vol. 350, Springer, Tokyo, 2014, DOI 10.1007/978-4-431-54571-2. MR3156076, Show rawAMSref\bib{Noguchi2014}{book}{
author={Noguchi, Junjiro},
author={Winkelmann, J\"org},
title={Nevanlinna theory in several complex variables and Diophantine approximation},
series={Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences]},
volume={350},
publisher={Springer, Tokyo},
date={2014},
pages={xiv+416},
isbn={978-4-431-54570-5},
isbn={978-4-431-54571-2},
review={\MR {3156076}},
doi={10.1007/978-4-431-54571-2},
}
Reference [17]
A. Schinzel, On the number of terms of a power of a polynomial, Acta Arith. 49 (1987), no. 1, 55–70. MR913764, Show rawAMSref\bib{Schinzel1987}{article}{
author={Schinzel, A.},
title={On the number of terms of a power of a polynomial},
journal={Acta Arith.},
volume={49},
date={1987},
number={1},
pages={55\textendash 70},
issn={0065-1036},
review={\MR {913764}},
}
Reference [18]
A. Schinzel, Polynomials with special regard to reducibility, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 77, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. With an appendix by Umberto Zannier, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511542916. MR1770638, Show rawAMSref\bib{Schinzel2000}{book}{
author={Schinzel, A.},
title={Polynomials with special regard to reducibility},
series={Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications},
volume={77},
note={With an appendix by Umberto Zannier},
publisher={Cambridge University Press, Cambridge},
date={2000},
pages={x+558},
isbn={0-521-66225-7},
review={\MR {1770638}},
doi={10.1017/CBO9780511542916},
}
Reference [19]
Andrzej Schinzel and Umberto Zannier, On the number of terms of a power of a polynomial, Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 20 (2009), no. 1, 95–98, DOI 10.4171/RLM/534. MR2491571, Show rawAMSref\bib{Schinzel2009}{article}{
author={Schinzel, Andrzej},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={On the number of terms of a power of a polynomial},
journal={Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl.},
volume={20},
date={2009},
number={1},
pages={95\textendash 98},
issn={1120-6330},
review={\MR {2491571}},
doi={10.4171/RLM/534},
}
Reference [20]
Umberto Zannier, On composite lacunary polynomials and the proof of a conjecture of Schinzel, Invent. Math. 174 (2008), no. 1, 127–138, DOI 10.1007/s00222-008-0136-8. MR2430978, Show rawAMSref\bib{Zannier2008}{article}{
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={On composite lacunary polynomials and the proof of a conjecture of Schinzel},
journal={Invent. Math.},
volume={174},
date={2008},
number={1},
pages={127\textendash 138},
issn={0020-9910},
review={\MR {2430978}},
doi={10.1007/s00222-008-0136-8},
}
Reference [21]
Umberto Zannier, Hilbert irreducibility above algebraic groups, Duke Math. J. 153 (2010), no. 2, 397–425, DOI 10.1215/00127094-2010-027. MR2667137, Show rawAMSref\bib{Zannier2010}{article}{
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Hilbert irreducibility above algebraic groups},
journal={Duke Math. J.},
volume={153},
date={2010},
number={2},
pages={397\textendash 425},
issn={0012-7094},
review={\MR {2667137}},
doi={10.1215/00127094-2010-027},
}
Reference [22]
Umberto Zannier, Some problems of unlikely intersections in arithmetic and geometry, Annals of Mathematics Studies, vol. 181, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2012. With appendixes by David Masser. MR2918151, Show rawAMSref\bib{Zannier2012}{book}{
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={Some problems of unlikely intersections in arithmetic and geometry},
series={Annals of Mathematics Studies},
volume={181},
note={With appendixes by David Masser},
publisher={Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ},
date={2012},
pages={xiv+160},
isbn={978-0-691-15371-1},
review={\MR {2918151}},
}
Show rawAMSref\bib{3718452}{article}{
author={Fuchs, Clemens},
author={Mantova, Vincenzo},
author={Zannier, Umberto},
title={On fewnomials, integral points, and a toric version of Bertini's theorem},
journal={J. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={31},
number={1},
date={2018-01},
pages={107-134},
issn={0894-0347},
review={3718452},
doi={10.1090/jams/878},
}
Settings
Change font size
Resize article panel
Enable equation enrichment
(Not available in this browser)
Note. To explore an equation, focus it (e.g., by clicking on it) and use the arrow keys to navigate its structure. Screenreader users should be advised that enabling speech synthesis will lead to duplicate aural rendering.