Daniel G. Zhu
Abstract:For a positive integer $k$, let $m(k)$ be the minimum positive integer $m$ such that $mx$ can be written as an integer linear combination of $k$th powers of integer polynomials. We correct an error in a 1976 formula of Chinburg and Henriksen for $m(k)$.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to correct an error in a formula of Chinburg and Henriksen in 1976 regarding the linear combination of the \(k\)-th powers of integer polynomials. Specifically, for a positive integer \(k\), define \(m(k)\) as the smallest positive integer \(m\) such that \(mx\) can be expressed as an integer linear combination of the \(k\)-th powers of integer polynomials. There are errors in the formula of Chinburg and Henriksen, especially when dealing with even \(k\).
### Specific problem description
1. **Definition and background**:
- For a positive integer \(k\), \(m(k)\) is defined as the smallest positive integer \(m\) such that \(mx\) can be expressed as an integer linear combination of the \(k\)-th powers of integer polynomials.
- Given a positive integer \(k\) and a ring \(R\), let \(J(k, R)\) be the additive subgroup generated by the \(k\)-th powers of elements in \(R\), and let \(G(k, R)\subseteq\mathbb{Z}\) be the set of integers \(m\) such that \(mR\subseteq J(k, R)\).
- Since \(G(k, R)\) is an additive subgroup of \(\mathbb{Z}\), it can be expressed as \(m(k, R)\mathbb{Z}\), where \(m(k, R)\geq0\) is unique.
- In particular, define \(m(k) = m(k,\mathbb{Z}[x])\).
2. **Chinburg and Henriksen's formula**:
- Chinburg and Henriksen gave an explicit formula for \(m(k)\) and decomposed it as:
\[
m(k)=k\cdot\prod_{p | k}p^{\alpha_k(p)}\cdot\prod_{p\nmid k}p^{\beta_k(p)}
\]
- They claimed:
- For an odd prime \(p\) and when \(k\) is a multiple of \(p\), if \(k > p\), then \(\alpha_k(p)=1\), otherwise \(\alpha_k(p) = 0\).
- For an even \(k\), if \(k = 2\), then \(\alpha_k(2)=0\); if \(k\) is a multiple of \(2^{j - 1}\) (where \(j\geq2\)), then \(\alpha_k(2)=2\); otherwise \(\alpha_k(2)=1\).
- For \(k\) not a multiple of \(p\), if \(k\) is a multiple of a positive integer of the form \(\frac{p^m r-1}{p^r - 1}\), then \(\beta_k(p)=1\), otherwise \(\beta_k(p)=0\).
3. **Discovered errors**:
- There are errors in item (2) of Chinburg and Henriksen's results. The error occurs at the end of the proof of Proposition 13, where they performed an invalid operation modulo the ideal \(I\subseteq\mathbb{Z}[x]\).
4. **Main contributions of the paper**:
- This paper corrects the above - mentioned error and gives the correct formula:
- For \(k = 2\), we have \(\alpha_2(2)=0\).
- For \(k>2\) and \(k\) is even.