The Minkowski Bound and Class Group Computations
Class group computations are grounded in foundational results such as Theorem 1 and Dirichlet’s class number formula [
18]. The Minkowski bound
provides a theoretical upper limit on the norms of ideal representatives in
, ensuring that every ideal class contains a representative ideal with norm
. This result follows directly from the Hermite–Minkowski theorem, which establishes the finiteness of number fields with bounded discriminants.
Although the Minkowski bound provides a rigorous theoretical foundation, its direct application to practical class group computations, particularly for imaginary quadratic fields, is limited by its computational inefficiency. Instead, methods such as Gauss’s enumeration of reduced quadratic forms are preferred due to their compatibility with the arithmetic structure of quadratic fields. These methods enable precise computation of class numbers and identification of ideal class representatives with reduced computational complexity.
In this study, the Minkowski bound was leveraged as a theoretical tool to underline the finiteness properties of class groups and to establish the relationship between discriminants and the structure of . Practical computations, however, were carried out using domain-specific algorithms optimized for quadratic fields, demonstrating both efficiency and precision.
- Step 1:
Computing the Minkowski bound.
The Minkowski bound for a number field
K is defined as
where:
: the number of real embeddings of K;
: the number of pairs of complex embeddings of K;
: the degree of K;
: the absolute value of the discriminant of K.
For imaginary quadratic fields, where
and
, the Minkowski bound simplifies to
Consider
, where
. In this case, we compute
This result implies that only primes
need to be considered. Factoring these primes within
, the ideal classes
and
generate
. Verification through the resolution of norm equations and examination of the group closure properties confirms that
is cyclic of order 3, with
.
- Step 2:
Practical computation of class groups.
For imaginary quadratic fields, the practical computation of is most effectively achieved through the enumeration of reduced quadratic forms. This approach exploits the established correspondence between ideal classes in and the equivalence classes of binary quadratic forms of the same discriminant. Such methods not only ensure completeness of the generating set, but also rigorously validate its independence and closure properties.
Each rational prime
is factored in
, the ring of integers of
K, as
where
are distinct prime ideals. By analyzing these factorizations, the ideal classes
form a generating set for
. Rigorous verification of the independence and closure properties of these generating sets ensures their completeness and correctness in representing the class group structure.
This study highlights the efficacy of reduced-form enumeration in determining the cyclicity and overall structure of , particularly for fields with small discriminants, as demonstrated in the case .
- Step 3:
Validation via Dirichlet’s class number formula.
Dirichlet’s class number formula for imaginary quadratic fields relates
, the discriminant
, and the residue of the Dedekind zeta function
at
:
where
w is the number of roots of unity in
K (
for imaginary quadratic fields).
For , numerical computation of confirms . This agreement with the theoretical predictions obtained via reduced-form enumeration demonstrates the validity of the computational approach and underscores the interplay between numerical methods and theoretical frameworks.
- Step 4:
On lattice-based methods.
Lattice-based methods, such as the Lenstra–Lenstra–Lovász (LLL) algorithm [
19], are widely recognized for their efficiency in solving high-dimensional lattice problems and have broad applications in computational number theory. However, for imaginary quadratic fields, the arithmetic simplicity of these fields allows for the use of specialized techniques, such as Gauss’s method of reduced quadratic form enumeration, which are more efficient and context-specific.
This study employs methods tailored to imaginary quadratic fields, leveraging their unique structural properties to achieve both computational efficiency and theoretical rigor. While lattice-based algorithms remain essential in broader contexts, their direct application to quadratic fields is limited due to the availability of more optimized approaches. By aligning the computational framework with the inherent characteristics of imaginary quadratic fields, this study highlights the importance of selecting domain-specific methods in advancing class group computations.
Definition 4. If , the norm of is defined as .
Definition 5. Let and be A-modules. We write to indicate that is a submodule of .
If is a prime ideal of A, and G is a finite A-module, the -rank of G, denoted by , is defined as the dimension of the vector space over the field . Explicitly, Definition 6. Let k be a positive integer or ∞. If and G is a finite A-module, then (or represents the number of A-epimorphisms from to G. DefineThe value quantifies the number of surjective homomorphisms from a free module to G. If
G is a finite
A-module, then
is the
k-weight, and
. If
, let
Definition 7. Since every finite A-module G can be written as , defineIf , then , where . Let α be an integral ideal, and define the k-weight of α aswhere denotes summation over G up to A-isomorphism with . The concept of provides a compact way to encode the structure of G using ideals. The k-weight measures the contribution of all modules associated with α to certain combinatorial or arithmetic quantities, such as lattice point enumeration in ideal-related spaces.
Definition 8. Let G be an abelian group and p a prime number. If for every there exists such that , then G is called a p-primary group. For a general abelian group G, let denote the p-part of G.
Theorem 2. Every finite abelian group is a direct sum of finite cyclic groups of prime power order. More generally, every finite abelian group is a direct sum of finite cyclic groups (see [20] (Theorem 5.13)). Definition 9. A module J is called projective if there exists another module M such that , where F is a free module (see Chapter III, Section 4 in [21]). Theorem 3. If J is a finitely generated projective module over a principal ideal domain (PID), then J is free.
Proof. By definition, a module J is projective if and only if it is a direct summand of a free module, that is, there exists a free module F and a module M such that . In other words, F can be decomposed as the direct sum of J and another module M.
Since
J is a finitely generated module over a principal ideal domain (PID), we apply the structure theorem for finitely generated modules over a PID (see [
21] (Theorem 7.3)). The structure theorem states that every finitely generated module
E over a PID can be decomposed as
where
is the torsion submodule (elements annihilated by some non-zero element of the ring), and
F is a free module.
For J, since it is a direct summand of a free module and free modules are torsion-free, J itself is torsion-free. This implies that the torsion part is trivial, i.e., . Thus, J is free. □
Definition 10. Let S be a subset of A. Then, S is called a multiplicatively closed set in A, if S satisfies the following two conditions:
- 1.
;
- 2.
If , then ,
Suppose
A is a domain and
S is a multiplicatively closed set of
A. Then,
represents the localization of
A with respect to
S and is defined as
Addition and multiplication in
are defined as follows:
Let
be a prime ideal of
A, and let
. Then,
is called the
localization of
A at
and is denoted
. It is a local ring.
If
J is a projective
A-module, define the localization of
J at
S as
. In this case,
is a projective module over
. The localization of a Dedekind domain is a principal ideal domain. Moreover, projective modules over a principal ideal domain are free, so projective modules over a Dedekind domain are locally free [
22].
Definition 11. Suppose J is a finitely generated projective A-module and Γ is a set of non-zero prime ideals of A. If , the rank of J at is defined as the rank of as a free module over , where and are the localizations of J and A at . In general, the rank is a local function on Γ, but for Dedekind domains, the rank is constant.
Theorem 4 ([
22])
. If A is a Dedekind domain and J is a projective module, then , where I is a non-zero ideal and . Note. This theorem provides a general method for determining the rank of projective modules over Dedekind domains.