Abstract
We consider the Gauss–Manin differential equations for hypergeometric integrals associated with a family of weighted arrangements of hyperplanes moving parallel to themselves. We reduce these equations modulo a prime integer p and construct polynomial solutions of the new differential equations as p-analogs of the initial hypergeometric integrals. In some cases, we interpret the p-analogs of the hypergeometric integrals as sums over points of hypersurfaces defined over the finite field . This interpretation is similar to the classical interpretation by Yu. I. Manin of the number of points on an elliptic curve depending on a parameter as a solution of a Gauss hypergeometric differential equation. We discuss the associated Bethe ansatz.
1. Introduction
We consider an arrangement of affine hyperplanes in . Let be a first-degree polynomial on whose kernel is . Let , be nonzero complex numbers. An associated multidimensional hypergeometric integral is an integral of the form:
where is a cycle in the complement to the union of the hyperplanes. We assume that the hyperplanes depend on parameters and move parallel to themselves when the parameters change. Then the integral extends to a multivalued holomorphic function of the parameters. The holomorphic function is called a multidimensional hypergeometric function and is associated with this family of arrangements. The simplest example of such a function is the classical hypergeometric function.
The multidimensional hypergeometric functions can be combined into collections so that the functions of a collection satisfy a system of first-order linear differential equations called the Gauss–Manin differential equations.
If all polynomials have integer coefficients and the numbers , are integers, then the Gauss–Manin differential equations can be reduced modulo a prime integer p large enough. The goal of this paper is to construct polynomial solutions of the Gauss–Manin differential equations over the field with p elements. Our solutions are p-analogs of the multidimensional hypergeometric integrals. The construction of the solutions is motivated by the classical paper [1] by Yu. I. Manin (cf. section “Manin’s Result: The Unity of Mathematics” in [2]; see also [3,4]).
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall the basic notions associated with an affine arrangement of hyperplanes in . In Section 3, we consider a family of arrangements of hyperplanes in whose hyperplanes move parallel to themselves when the parameters of the family change. We introduce the Gauss–Manin differential equations and multidimensional hypergeometric integrals. We show that the multidimensional hypergeometric integrals satisfy the Gauss–Manin differential equations (see Theorem 3). In Section 4, we consider the reduction of this situation modulo p and construct polynomial solutions of the Gauss–Manin differential equations over (see Theorem 5), which is the main result of this paper. We interpret our solutions as integrals over under certain conditions (see Theorem 6). Such integrals could be considered as p-analogs of the multidimensional hypergeometric integrals. In Section 5, we consider examples. Under certain conditions, we interpret our polynomial solutions as sums over points on some hypersurfaces over (see Theorem 10). This statement is analogous to the interpretation in Manin’s paper [1] of the number of points on an elliptic curve depending on a parameter as a solution of a Gauss hypergeometric differential equation. In Section 6, we briefly discuss the associated Bethe ansatz. We introduce a system of the Bethe ansatz equations and construct a common eigenvector to geometric Hamiltonians out of every solution of the Bethe ansatz equations (see Theorem 11). We show that the Bethe eigenvectors corresponding to distinct solutions are orthogonal with respect to the associated symmetric contravariant form (see Corollary 3).
2. Arrangements
We recall some facts about hyperplane arrangements, Orlik–Solomon algebras and flag complexes from [5].
2.1. An Affine Arrangement
Let k and n be positive integers, where . Denote .
Let , be an arrangement of n affine hyperplanes in . Denote as the complement. An edge of the arrangement is a nonempty intersection of some hyperplanes of . Denote by the subset of indices of all hyperplanes containing . Denote .
We always assume that the arrangement is essential; that is, has a vertex, an edge that is a point.
An edge is called dense if the subarrangement of all hyperplanes containing it is irreducible: the hyperplanes cannot be partitioned into nonempty sets, so that, after a change of coordinates, hyperplanes in different sets are in different coordinates. In particular, each hyperplane of is a dense edge.
2.2. Flag Complex
For , let denote the set of all flags:
where each is an edge of of codimension j. Let denote the quotient of the free abelian group on by the following relations. For every flag with a gap:
We impose:
in , where the sum is over all flags , such that for all . The abelian group is a free abelian group (see [5], Theorem 2.9.2).
There is an “extension of flags” differential defined by:
where the sum is over all edges of of codimension contained in . It follows from Equation (1) that . Thus we have a complex, the flag complex, .
2.3. Orlik–Solomon Algebra
Define abelian groups , as follows. For , set . For , is generated by ℓ-tuples of hyperplanes , subject to the relations:
- (i)
- if are not in general position (i.e., if ).
- (ii)
- for every permutation .
- (iii)
- For any hyperplanes that have a non-empty intersection, , and that are not in general position:where denotes omission.
The abelian group is a free abelian group, (see [6]; [5], Theorem 2.9.2).
The Orlik–Solomon algebra of the arrangement is the direct sum endowed with the product given by . It is a graded skew-commutative algebra over .
2.4. Orlik–Solomon Algebra as an Algebra of Differential Forms
For each hyperplane , pick a polynomial of degree 1 on whose zero set is H; that is, let be an affine equation for H. Consider the logarithmic differential form:
on . We note that does not depend on the choice of but only on H. Let be the -algebra of differential forms generated by 1 and , . The assignment defines an isomorphism of graded algebras. Henceforth we shall not distinguish between and .
2.5. Duality—See [5] (cf. [7], Section 2.5)
The vector spaces and are dual. The pairing is defined as follows. For in general position, set , where and:
For any , define if for some , and otherwise.
2.6. Flag and Orlik–Solomon Spaces over a Field
For any field and , we define:
2.7. Weights
An arrangement is weighted if a map , is given; is called the weight of . For an edge , define its weight as .
2.8. Contravariant Form and Map—See [5]
The weights determine a symmetric bilinear form on , given by:
where the sum is over all unordered ℓ-element subsets. The form is called the contravariant form. It defines a homomorphism:
where the sum is taken over all ℓ-tuples , such that:
Theorem 1
([5], Theorem 3.7). For , choose a basis of the free abelian group . Then with respect to that basis, the determinant of the contravariant form on equals the product of suitable non-negative integer powers of the weights of all dense edges of of codimension not greater than ℓ.
Corollary 1.
If the weights of all dense edges of are nonzero, then the contravariant map is an isomorphism for all ℓ.
2.9. Aomoto Complex
Define:
Multiplication by defines a differential:
on , . The complex is called the Aomoto complex. The master function corresponding to the weighted arrangement is the function:
where each is an affine equation for the hyperplane . Then .
Theorem 2
([5], Lemma 3.2.5; and [8], Lemma 5.1). The Shapovalov map is a homomorphism of complexes:
2.10. Singular Vectors
An element is called singular if . Denote by:
the subspace of all singular vectors.
2.11. Arrangements with Normal Crossings Only
An essential arrangement is with normal crossings only, if exactly k hyperplanes meet at every vertex of . Assume that is an essential arrangement with normal crossings only.
A subset is called independent if the hyperplanes intersect transversally. A basis of is formed by , where are independent ℓ-element subsets of J. The dual basis of is formed by the corresponding vectors . These bases of and are called standard.
In , we have:
for any permutation . For an independent subset , we have and , for any distinct elements of the standard basis.
3. A Family of Parallelly Transported Hyperplanes
3.1. An Arrangement in
Recall that . Consider with coordinates , with coordinates , the projection . Fix n nonzero linear functions on , , , where . Define n linear functions on :
In , define the arrangement:
Denote .
For every fixed , the arrangement induces an arrangement in the fiber over of the projection. We identify every fiber with . Then consists of hyperplanes , defined in by the same equations, . Denote:
as the complement to the arrangement .
We assume that for any , the arrangement has a vertex. This means that the span of is k-dimensional.
A point is called good if has normal crossings only. Good points form the complement in to the union of suitable hyperplanes called the discriminant.
3.2. Discriminant
The collection induces a matroid structure on J. A subset is a circuit in if are linearly dependent but any proper subset of C gives linearly independent ’s.
For a circuit , let be a nonzero collection of complex numbers such that . Such a collection is unique up to multiplication by a nonzero number.
For every circuit C, we fix such a collection and denote . The equation defines a hyperplane in . It is convenient to assume that for and write .
For any , the hyperplanes in have a nonempty intersection if and only if . If , then the intersection has codimension in .
Denote by the set of all circuits in . Denote . The arrangement in has normal crossings only, if and only if .
3.3. Good Fibers
For any , the spaces , are canonically identified. Namely, a vector of the first space is identified with the vector of the second.
Assume that weights are given. Then each arrangement is weighted. The identification of spaces , for identifies the corresponding subspaces and and the corresponding contravariant forms.
For a point , denote , . The triple does not depend on under the above identification.
3.4. Geometric Hamiltonians (cf. [9,10])
For any circuit , we define a linear operator in terms of the standard basis of (see Section 2.11).
For , denote . Let be an independent ordered subset and be the corresponding element of the standard basis. Define if . If for some , then using the skew-symmetry property of Equation (5), we can write:
with . Define:
Lemma 1
([9]). The operator is symmetric with respect to the contravariant form.
Consider the logarithmic differential one-forms:
in variables , . For any circuit , we have:
Lemma 2
([9], Lemma 4.2; and [10], Lemma 5.4). We have:
Proof.
The lemma is a direct corollary of the definition of the maps . ☐
The identity in Equation (8) is called the key identity.
Recall that and . For , we introduce the -valued rational functions in by the formula:
Then:
The functions are called geometric Hamiltonians.
Corollary 2.
The geometric Hamiltonians are symmetric with respect to the contravariant form, for , .
3.5. Gauss–Manin Differential Equations
The Gauss–Manin differential equations with parameter are given by the following system of differential equations on a -valued function :
where are the geometric Hamiltonians defined in Equation (9).
We introduce the master function:
on . The function defines a rank-one local system on , whose horizontal sections over open subsets of are univalued branches of multiplied by complex numbers.
For and an element , we interpret the integration map , as an element of . The vector bundle:
has a canonical flat Gauss–Manin connection. A locally constant section of the Gauss–Manin connection defines a -valued function:
The integrals:
are called the multidimensional hypergeometric integrals associated with the master function .
Theorem 3
([10]). The function takes values in and gives solutions of the Gauss–Manin differential equations.
The condition that the function takes values in may be reformulated as the system of equations:
3.6. Proof of Theorem 3
We sketch the proof following [3,5]. The intermediate statements of this sketch are used further when constructing solutions of the Gauss–Manin differential equations over a finite field . The proof of Theorem 3 is based on the following cohomological relations, Equations (21) and (24).
For any , denote:
We have:
where the dots denote the terms having differentials . We note that the rational function has the form:
where is a polynomial with integer coefficients in variable and , , (see Equation (6)). For any , we write:
where the dots denote the terms having differentials , and are rational functions in of the form:
Here, are polynomials with integer coefficients in variable and , , (see Equation (6)). The formula:
implies the identity:
where denotes the differential with respect to the variables t.
Now we deduce a corollary of the key identity, Equation (8). Choose . For any independent , we write:
where the dots denote the terms that contain with , and the coefficients are rational functions in of the form:
Here, are polynomials with integer coefficients in variable and , , (see Equation (6)).
Equation (8) implies that for any , we have:
where denotes the differential with respect to the variables t.
3.7. Remarks
It is known from [5] that for generic , all -valued solutions of the Gauss–Manin Equation (11) are given by Equation (13). Hence, we have the following statement.
Theorem 4
([10]). The geometric Hamiltonians , preserve and commute on , namely, for all and .
4. Reduction Modulo p of a Family of Parallelly Transported Hyperplanes
4.1. An Arrangement in over
Similarly to Section 3.1, we consider with coordinates , with coordinates , the projection . Fix n nonzero linear functions on , , , with integer coefficients . Define n linear functions on :
where .
Recall the matroid structure on J, the set of all circuits in , and the linear functions labeled by , where the functions are defined in Section 3.2. Each of these functions is determined up to multiplication by a nonzero constant.
Definition 1.
We fix the coefficients to be integers such that the greatest common divisor of equals 1.
This is possible as all are integers. This choice of the coefficients defines the function uniquely up to multiplication by .
Let p be a prime integer and be the field with p elements. Let be the natural projection. We introduce the following linear functions in with coefficients in :
The collection induces a matroid structure on J. A subset is a circuit in if are linearly dependent over but any proper subset of C gives linearly independent ’s.
Definition 2.
We say that a prime integer p is good with respect to the collection of linear functions if all linear functions in Equation (26) are nonzero and the matroid structures and on J are the same.
In the following, we always assume that p is good with respect to the collection of linear functions .
We have logarithmic differential forms:
in variables , with coefficients in . For any circuit , we have:
Assume that the nonzero integer weights are given, where , . The constructions of Section 3 give us the following:
- (i)
- A vector space over with standard basis indexed by all independent subsets of J.
- (ii)
- A vector subspace consisting of all linear combinationssatisfying the equations:
- (iii)
- A symmetric bilinear -valued contravariant form on defined by the formulas:for any independent and , for any distinct elements of the standard basis.
For any circuit , we define a linear operator by the formula of Section 3.4, in which the numbers are replaced with . We have the key identity:
For , we define the -valued rational functions in by the formula:
We call the functions the geometric Hamiltonians. The geometric Hamiltonians are symmetric with respect to the contravariant form for , .
The Gauss–Manin differential equations over with parameter are given by the following system of differential equations:
The goal of this paper is to construct polynomial -valued solutions of these differential equations.
4.2. Polynomial Solutions
Let a prime integer p be good with respect to . Let be nonzero integer weights , .
Choose positive integers , such that:
in . Introduce the master polynomial:
where are defined in Equation (25). For any , the function is a polynomial in with integer coefficients. For fixed , consider the Taylor expansion:
where for any . We denote by the projection of to . Denote:
Theorem 5.
We note that the space of polynomial solutions of Equations (27) and (30) is a module over the ring , as .
Proof.
To prove that satisfies Equations (27) and (30), consider the Taylor expansions at of both sides of Equations (21) and (24) divided by . We note that the Taylor expansions are well defined as a result of Equations (17), (19) and (23). We project the Taylor expansions to . Then the terms coming from the -summands equal zero, as (mod p). ☐
4.3. Relation of Solutions to Integrals over
For a polynomial and a subset , we define the integral:
We consider the vector of polynomials:
Theorem 6.
- (i)
- If for , then:
- (ii)
Proof.
5. Examples
5.1. Case —See [3]
Let , be nonzero complex numbers. We consider the master function of complex variables:
Let be a vector with distinct coordinates. We consider the n-vector , where:
The integrals are over a closed (Pochhammer) curve in on which one fixes a uni-valued branch of the master function to make the integral well-defined. Starting from such a curve chosen for a given , the vector can be analytically continued as a multivalued holomorphic function of z to the complement in to the union of the diagonal hyperplanes .
Theorem 7.
The vector satisfies the algebraic equation:
and the differential equations:
where:
and all the remaining entries equal zero, (see [5]; [11], Section 1.1).
Example 1.
Let , , and . Then , where:
In this case, the curve may be thought of as a closed path on the elliptic curve:
Each of these integrals is an elliptic integral. Such an integral is a branch of an analytic continuation of a suitable Euler hypergeometric function up to a change of variables.
Example 2.
Let be a prime integer. Let , and (cf. Example 1). For such κ and , the algebraic Equation (41) and the differential Equation (42) are well-defined when reduced modulo p. Choose the master polynomial:
Consider the Taylor expansion of the polynomial (see (35)):
Let be the projection of to . Then the vector is a solution of the differential Equation (42) over and (see Theorem 5).
If and , then:
by Theorem 6.
Let . Let be the affine curve:
over . For a rational function , define the integral:
as the sum over all points , where is defined.
Theorem 8.
Remark 1.
Theorems 5 and 8 say that the integrals are polynomials in and the tuple of polynomials:
in these discrete variables satisfies the system of Gauss–Manin differential equations (cf. Example 1).
Remark 2.
In [1], Section 2 and in [2], an equation analogous to Equation (48) for is considered, where the left-hand side is the number of points on over and the right-hand side is the reduction modulo p of a solution of a second-order Gauss hypergeometric differential equation. We note that the number of points on is the discrete integral over of the constant function .
Proof of Theorem 8.
The proof is analogous to the reasoning in [1], Section 2 and [2]. It is easy to see that:
We note that , as for , the degree of the left-hand side is less than (see Theorem 6). ☐
See more examples with in ([3], Section 1).
5.2. Counting on Two-Folded Covers
As in Section 4.1, we consider n nonzero linear functions on , , , with integer coefficients . Let a prime integer be good with respect to .
Assume that all weights are equal to and . Under these assumptions, consider the algebraic Equation (27) and differential Equation (30). To construct a solution of these equations, choose a master polynomial , and consider the Taylor expansion of the polynomial:
at , to obtain the solution:
of the algebraic Equation (27) and differential Equation (30) by taking the coefficient of of the Taylor expansion (see Theorem 5).
Let . Let be the affine hypersurface:
over . Recall that , where is the natural projection.
For a rational function define the integral:
as the sum over all points with well-defined .
Theorem 9.
Let:
Proof.
It is easy to see the following cf. [1,2]:
Lemma 3.
Proof.
Because p is good and is independent, we have . Hence we may choose , , to be affine coordinates on . Then:
☐
Lemma 4.
Proof.
Theorem 9 is proved. ☐
Remark 3.
5.3. Counting on -Folded Covers
Let be a positive integer. As in Section 4.1 and Section 5.2, we consider n nonzero linear functions on , , , with integer coefficients . Let a prime integer p be good with respect to and .
Assume that all weights are equal to . Under these assumptions, consider the algebraic Equation (27) and differential Equation (30). To construct a solution of these equations, choose a master polynomial , and consider the Taylor expansion at of the polynomial in Equation (49) to obtain the solution of the algebraic Equation (27) and differential Equation (30) by taking the coefficient of of the Taylor expansion (see Theorem 5 and Formula (50)).
Let . Let be the affine hypersurface:
over (cf. Section 5.2).
Theorem 10.
Let a prime integer p be good with respect to . Let and . Let:
Then for any independent we have:
This theorem is a generalization of [3], Example 1.7 and Theorem 9.
Proof.
It is easy to see that:
The first sum on the right-hand side equals zero by Lemma 3.
Consider the Taylor expansion of the polynomial . Consider the monomials of the form , where are positive integers. If , the second inequality in Equation (57) implies that the coefficients of such monomials in the Taylor expansion are all equal to zero, and hence the sum equals zero for . If , the first inequality in Equation (57) implies that among the monomials of the form , only may appear with a nonzero coefficient in the Taylor expansion. Hence:
by Theorem 6. The theorem is proved. ☐
Remark 4.
The inequalities of Equation (57) are implied by the system of inequalities:
independently of p. If , then the inequality implies inequality, , and is enough for Theorem 10 to hold. In particular, if , then is admissible.
6. Bethe Ansatz
The goal of the Bethe ansatz is to construct mutual eigenvectors of the geometric Hamiltonians defined in Equation (29).
As in Section 4.1, Section 5.2 and Section 5.3, we consider n nonzero linear functions on , , , with integer coefficients . Let a prime integer p be good with respect to . Let be nonzero integer weights , .
Recall the functions with . Assume that is such that for any . Then are well-defined linear operators on .
Introduce the system of the Bethe ansatz equations:
with respect to the unknown .
Theorem 11.
Proof.
Corollary 3.
Proof.
Because , there exists i such that . Hence has distinct eigenvalues on , , but is symmetric:
☐
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by NSF grants DMS-1362924, DMS-1665239.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
- Manin, Y.I. The Hasse-Witt Matrix of an Algebraic Curve. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 1961, 25, 153–172. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Clemens, H.C. A Scrapbook of Complex Curve Theory, 2nd ed.; Graduate Studies in Mathematics; AMS: Providence, RI, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Schechtman, V.; Varchenko, A. Solutions of KZ Differential Equations Modulo p. arXiv, 2017; arXiv:1707.02615. [Google Scholar]
- Varchenko, A. Remarks on the Gaudin Model Modulo p. arXiv, 2017; arXiv:1708.06264. [Google Scholar]
- Schechtman, V.; Varchenko, A. Arrangements of Hyperplanes and Lie Algebra Homology. Invent. Math. 1991, 106, 139–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bjorner, A. On the Homology of Geometric Lattices. Algebra Univ. 1984, 14, 107–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varchenko, A.; Young, C. Cyclotomic discriminantal arrangements and diagram automorphisms of Lie algebras. arXiv, 2016; arXiv:1603.07125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Felder, G.; Markov, Y.; Tarasov, V.; Varchenko, A. Differential Equations Compatible with KZ equations. Math. Phys. Anal. Geom. 2000, 3, 139–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varchenko, A. Bethe Ansatz for Arrangements of Hyperplanes and the Gaudin Model. Mosc. Math. J. 2006, 6, 195–210. [Google Scholar]
- Varchenko, A. Quantum Integrable Model of an Arrangement of Hyperplanes. SIGMA 2011, 7, 032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Varchenko, A. Special Functions, KZ Type Equations, and Representation Theory; CBMS, Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, n. 98; AMS: Providence, RI, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
© 2017 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).