On the irreducibility of multivariate
polynomials1
Anuj Jakhar

arXiv:1612.01702v1 [] 6 Dec 2016

Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Mohali
Abstract. Let (K, v) be a henselian valued field of arbitrary rank. In this paper, we give an
irreducibility criterion for multivariate polynomials over K using valuation theory.
Keywords : Polynomial Irreducibility, multivariate polynomials.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification : 12E05.

1

Introduction

Throughout the paper, (K, v) is a henselian valued field of arbitrary rank with value group Gv ,
e be an algebraic
residue field K̄v , valuation ring Rv and x1 , · · · , xn are indeterminates. Let K
e The value group of ṽ is the divisible group
closure of K and ṽ be fixed prolongation of v to K.

of Gv and the residue field of ṽ is the algebraic closure of K̄v . K(x) and K(x1 , · · · , xn ) are
rational function fields over K with one variable and n variables respectively. For any a ∈ Rv ,
ā will denote the v-residue of a, i.e., the image of a under the canonical homomorphism of Rv
onto K̄v . If f (x1 , · · · , xn ) ∈ Rv [x1 , · · · , xn ], then f¯(x1 , · · · , xn ) ∈ K̄v [x1 , · · · , xn ] will stand for

the polynomial obtained by replacing the coefficients of f by their corresponding v-residues.
e then the restriction of ṽ to K(a1 , · · · , an ) will be denoted by va1 ···an and for
If a1 , · · · , an ∈ K
e L̄, G(L) will denote respectively the residue field, the value group of the
any subfield L of K,

valuation of L which is the restriction of ṽ.
e and δ ∈ Gṽ . Then pair (α, δ) ∈ K
e × Gṽ will be called minimal with
Definition. Let α ∈ K
e the condition ṽ(α − β) ≥ δ implies [K(α) : K] ≤ [K(β) : K]
respect to K if for every β ∈ K,
e
i.e., if α has least degree over K in the closed ball B(α, δ) = {β ∈ K|ṽ(α
− β) ≥ δ}.
Example. If f (x) ∈ Rv [x] be a monic polynomial of degree m ≥ 1 with f¯(x) irreducible over
the residue field of v and α is a root of f (x), then (α, δ) is a minimal pair for each positive δ
e with degree [K(β) : K] < m, then ṽ(α − β) ≤ 0, for otherwise
in Gṽ , because whenever β ∈ K
ᾱ = β̄, which in view of Fundamental Inequality would imply that [K(β) : K] ≥ [K̄(β̄ : K̄] =
[K̄(ᾱ : K̄] = m leading to a contradiction.
1

The financial support from IISER Mohali is gratefully acknowledged by the author.

1

Let w be an extension of v to K(x). w is called residual transcendental extension of v if
e × Gṽ , for
K̄w /K̄v is a transcendental extension. To the minimal pair (0, 0) belonging to K
P
every polynomial F (x) = ai xi ∈ K[x], w is defined as
i

w(F ) = mini (v(ai ))
is called Gauss extension of v to K(x) and K̄w = K̄v (x̄) is the simple transcendental extension
of K̄v where x̄ is the residue of x and Gw = Gv .
e
e
The valuation w̃ of K(x),
defined on K(x)
by
w̃(

X

ai (x − α)i ) = mini {ṽ(ai ) + iδ}

i

will be referred to as the valuation defined by the pair (α, δ).
e
If w is an extension of v to K(x) then there exists an extension w̃ of w to K(x)
such that w̃
is also an extension of ṽ. If w is an residual transcendental extension of v to K(x) then there
e × Gṽ respect to K where α is separable over K.
exists a minimal pair (α, δ) ∈ K

Let φ1 (x1 ) ∈ K[x1 ], · · · , φn (xn ) ∈ K[xn ] be minimal polynomials of α1 , · · · , αn respectively.
Let wi be an residual transcendental extension of v to K(xi ) defined by a minimal pair (αi , δi ) ∈
e × Gṽ for 1 ≤ i ≤ n and let wi (φi ) = λi for 1 ≤ i ≤ n, wi (φj ) = 0 for i 6= j, 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n.
K

Each polynomial f (x1 , · · · , xn ) ∈ K[x1 , · · · , xn ] can be written uniquely as
f (x1 , · · · , xn ) =

X

ai1 ···in (x1 , · · · , xn )φ1 (x1 )i1 · · · φn (xn )in ,

i1 ,··· ,in ≥0

where deg ai1 ···in (α1 , · · · , αj−1 , xj , αj+1 , · · · , αn ) <deg φj (xj ) for 1 ≤ j ≤ n then w defined as
w(f (x1 , · · · , xn )) = mini1 ···in (vα1 ···αn (ai1 ···in (α1 , · · · , αn )) + i1 λ1 + · · · + in λn )

(1)

satisfies all valuation conditions on K[x1 , · · · , xn ] and w is residual transcendental extension of
v to K(x1 , · · · , xn ) (cf. [2, Proposition 2.3]). With the above notations, the following theorem
is already known (see [2, Proposition 2.3]).
Theorem 1.A For (K, v) minimal pairs (αi , δi ), let φi (xi ), wi , λi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n and f (x1 , · · · , xn )
be as above. Let w be a valuation defined by (1). Then following holds:
(i) Gw = Gvα1 ···αn + Zλ1 + · · · Zλn .
(ii) Let ei be the smallest positive integer such that ei λi ∈ G(K(αi )), then there exists hi ∈
K[xi ] such that deg hi < deg φi and vαi (hi (αi )) = ei λi .
(iii) The wi -residue of

φi (xi )ei
hi (xi )

is transcendental over K̄vαi for all i and the residue field of w is
2

K̄w = K̄vα1 ···αn (Z1 , · · · , Zn ), where Zi =

φi (xi )ei
hi (xi )

for i = 1, · · · , n.

Definition 1.1. For (K, v) minimal pairs (αi , δi ), let φi (xi ), wi , λi , ei , hi (xi ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n and
w be as in above theorem. A monic polynomial f (x1 , · · · , xn ) belonging to K[x1 , · · · , xn ] is said
to be a lifting of a monic polynomial T (Z1 , · · · , Zn ) belonging to K̄va1 ···an (Z1 , · · · , Zn ) having
degree t1 + · · · + tn with degZi T (Z1 , · · · , Zn ) = ti ≥ 1 with respect to (αi , δi ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n if the
following three conditions are satisfied:
n
P
(i) deg f (x1 , · · · , xn ) =
ei ti deg φi with degxi f (x1 , · · · , xn ) = ei ti deg φi .
i=1

(ii) w(f (x1 , · · · , xn )) = w(

n
Q

hi (xi )ti ) =

i=1

ei ti λi .
(iii) w-residue of

f (x1 ,··· ,xn )
n
Q
hi (xi )ti

n
P

ei ti λi with wi (f (α1 , · · · , αi−1 , xi , αi+1 · · · , αn )) =

i=1

is T (Z1 , · · · , Zn ), where Zi is the wi -residue of

φi (xi )ei
.
hi (xi )

i=1

Example. Clearly, (0, 0) ∈ K × Gv is a (K, v) minimal pair. It can be easily seen that a
usual lifting x4 y 4 + ax3 y 3 + bx3 y + cxy 3 + dxy + ex + f of a monic polynomial T (x, y) =
¯ + ēx + f¯ belonging to K̄v [x, y] is indeed a lifting of T (Y, Z)
x4 y 4 + āx3 y 3 + b̄x3 y + c̄xy 3 + dxy
with repect to minimal pairs (α1 , δ1 ) = (0, 0) = (α2 , δ2 ), h1 (x) = 1 = h2 (y).
Now we state the main result of the article which says that:
Theorem 1.2. Let v be a valuation of a field K. For (K, v) minimal pairs (αi , δi ), let
φi (xi ), wi , λi , ei , hi (xi ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n, f (x1 , · · · , xn ) and w be as in Theorem 1.A. If f (x1 , · · · , xn )
∈ K[x1 , · · · , xn ] is a lifting of a monic irreducible polynomial T (Z1 , · · · , Zn ) 6= Zi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n
having degree t1 + · · · + tn with degZi T (Z1 , · · · , Zn ) = ti ≥ 1 belonging to K̄va1 ···an (Z1 , · · · , Zn ),
then f (x1 , · · · , xn ) is irreducible over K.
It may be pointed out that Theorem 2.2 of [1] is the special case of the above theorem.

2

Proof of Theorem 1.2.

For the sake of simplicity, we prove this result for n = 2. The proof for the general case follows
exactly similar.
Suppose that f (x1 , x2 ) can be written as u(x1 , x2 )s(x1 , x2 ) with u(x1 , x2 ), s(x1 , x2 ) in K[x1 , x2 ].
Let
u(x1 , x2 ) =

X

uij (x1 , x2 )φ1 (x1 )i φ2 (x2 )j , s(x1 , x2 ) =

i,j≥0

X
i,j≥0

3

sij (x1 , x2 )φ1 (x1 )i φ2 (x2 )j

be the canonical representation of u(x1 , x2 ), s(x1 , x2 ) with respect to φ1 (x1 ), φ2 (x2 ). Then by
(1), we have
w(u(x1 , x2 )) = mini,j (vα1 α2 (uij (α1 , α2 )) + iλ1 + jλ2 ) = vα1 α2 (ui1 j1 (α1 , α2 )) + i1 λ1 + j1 λ2 .
w(s(x1 , x2 )) = mini,j (vα1 α2 (sij (α1 , α2 )) + iλ1 + jλ2 ) = vα1 α2 (si2 j2 (α1 , α2 )) + i2 λ1 + j2 λ2 .
Consequently,
w(f (x1 , x2 )) = w(u(x1, x2 ))+w(s(x1 , x2 )) = vα1 α2 (ui1 j1 (α1 , α2 )si2 j2 (α1 , α2 ))+(i1 +i2 )λ1 +(j1 +j2 )λ2 .
Since e1 , e2 be the smallest positive integer such that ei λi ∈ G(K(αi )) for i = 1, 2, w1 (φ2 ) =
w2 (φ1 ) = 0 and w1 (f (x1 , α2 )), w2 (f (α1 , x2 )) are given to be e1 t1 λ1 , e2 t2 λ2 repectively. It follows
that e1 divides (i1 + i2 ), e2 divides (j1 + j2 ). Write
i1 = l1 e1 + l0 , 0 ≤ l0 < e ; j1 = l1′ e2 + l0′ , 0 ≤ l0′ < e2 ,
i2 = l3 e1 + l2 , 0 ≤ l2 < e ; j2 = l3′ e2 + l2′ , 0 ≤ l2′ < e2 ,
then l0 + l2 = e1 c1 where c1 = 0 or 1 and l0′ + l2′ = e2 c2 where c′ = 0 or 1. Consequently,
′

′

φ1 (x1 )l2 φ2 (x2 )l2 u(x1 , x2 )
φ1 (x1 )l0 φ2 (x2 )l0 s(x1 , x2 )ui1 j1 (x1 , x2 )
f (x1 , x2 )φ1 (x1 )e1 c1 φ2 (x2 )e2 c2
=
′
′
h1 (x1 )t1 +c1 h2 (x2 )t2 +c2
ui1 j1 (x1 , x2 )h1 (x1 )l1 +c1 h2 (x2 )l2 +c2
h1 (x1 )t1 −l1 h2 (x2 )t2 −l1
Using (1), Theorem 1.A and definition 1.1, one can easily check that the left hand side and the
first factor of the right hand side of the above equation have w-valuation zero. Thus taking
the image of above equation in the residue field, one can see that
Z1c1 Z2c2 T (Z1 , Z2) = T1 (Z1 , Z2 )T2 (Z1 , Z2 )

(2)

ei

i)
for i = 1, 2 and T1 , T2 are (respectively the image of the first and the second
where Zi = φhi (x
i (xi )
factors on the right hand side) polynomials over K̄vα1 α2 .

If l0 > 0, then l2 > 0 and these would imply that T1 and T2 have no constant term, which is
false since c1 ≤ 1 and T (Z1 , Z2 ) is not equal to Z1 , Z2 . Therefore, we must have l0 = l2 = c1 = 0.
Similarly, we have l0′ = l2′ = c2 = 0. Thus (2) together with the irreducibility of T implies that
one of T1 or T2 , say T2 is a constant. So, we conclude that deg u(x1 , x2 ) ≤ deg f (x1 , x2 ) =
2
2
2
P
P
P
ei ti deg φi (xi ) =
ei degZi T (Z1 , Z2 )deg φi (xi ) =
ei degZi T1 (Z1 , Z2 )deg φi (xi ) ≤ deg
i=1

i=1

i=1

u(x1 , x2 ). It follows that deg f (x1 , x2 ) = deg u(x1 , x2 ), which proves the irreducibility of
4

f (x1 , x2 ) over K.
Example 2.1. Let K = Q with 3-adic valuation v3 defined by v3 (3) = 1. Let f (x, y) =
x2 y 2 + 3xy + 6x + 3y + 1 be a poynomial. One can check that for (α1 , δ1 ) = (0, 0) = (α2 , δ2 ),
h1 (x) = h2 (y) = 1, e1 = e2 = 1, f (x, y) is lifting of an irreducible polynomial T (Y, Z) =
Y 2 Z 2 + 1 over Z/3Z. Therefore f (x, y) is irreducible over Q.
Remark 2.2. It can be easily checked that in the case of one variable, Eisenstein polynomials
are lifting of an irreducible polynomial.

References
[1] S. K. Khanduja, J. Saha, On a generalization of Eisenstein’s Irreducibility Criterion, Mathematika, 44 (1997), 37-41.
[2] Figen Öke, Extensions of a Valuation on K to K(x1 , · · · , xn ) defined by Distinguished
Pairs, Int. Math. Forum, Vol. 5, 37 (2010), 1805-1812.

5

