arXiv:1611.01784v1 [math.RT] 6 Nov 2016

CALCULATING GALOIS GROUPS OF THIRD ORDER LINEAR
DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS
ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

A BSTRACT. Motivated by developing algorithms that decide hypertranscendence of solutions of extensions of the Bessel differential equation, algorithms computing the unipotent
radical of a parameterized differential Galois group have been recently developed. Extensions of Bessel’s equation, such as the Lommel equation, can be viewed as homogeneous
parameterized linear differential equations of the third order. In the present paper, we
give the first known algorithm that calculates the differential Galois group of a third order
parameterized linear differential equation.

1. I NTRODUCTION
The existing methods of studying hypertranscedence of solutions of second order inhomogeneous linear differential equations [16] use results from parameterized differential
Galois theory [11, 27]. In this application, these results essentially limit the consideration of inhomogeneous terms to rational functions. However, the Lommel function with a
non-integer parameter µ, the Anger and Weber functions are all examples of solutions of
inhomogeneous versions of Bessel’s differential equation with inhomogeneous terms that
are not rational functions. Therefore, new techniques in parameterized differential Galois
theory are needed so that the theory can be readily applied to the above functions. In addition, third order linear differential equations with parameters appear in electromagnetic
waves modeling [21, §78].
The hypertranscendence results of [16] are based in part on new results in the representation theory of linear differential algebraic groups. In particular, extensions of a trivial representation by a two-dimensional representation are analyzed there. In the present paper,
we give a deeper development of the representation theory by analyzing three-dimensional
representations of linear differential algebraic groups that are not necessarily extensions
of a trivial representation. Based on this, we present the first algorithm that calculates the
differential Galois group of a third-order homogeneous parameterized linear differential
equation whose coefficients are rational functions.
Our algorithm relies on several existing algorithms in the parameterized differential Galois theory referenced below. For linear differential equations of order two, an algorithmic
development was initiated in [10] and completed in [2]. An algorithm that allows to test if
the parameterized differential Galois group is reductive and to compute the group in that
case can be found in [26]. In [25], it is shown how to compute the parameterized differential Galois group if its quotient by the unipotent radical is conjugate to a group of matrices
with constant entries with respect to the parametric derivations. The algorithms of [25, 26]
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 12H05, 12H20, 13N10, 20G05, 20H20.
Key words and phrases. Differential equations with parameters, differential Galois groups, algorithms.
This work was partially supported by the Austrian Science Foundation FWF, grant P28079, by the NSF grants
CCF-0952591 and DMS-1606334, the NSA grant #H98230-15-1-0245, CUNY CIRG #2248, and PSC-CUNY
grant #69827-00 47.
1

2

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

rely on the algorithm of computing differential Galois groups [17], which has been further
analyzed and improved in [12], in the case of no parameters.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains basic definitions and facts in
differential algebraic geometry, differential algebraic groups, and systems of linear differential equations with parameters phrased in the language most suitable for our description
of our algorithm. The main algorithm is described in Section 3.
2. BASIC

DEFINITIONS AND FACTS

For the convenience of the reader, we present the basic standard definitions and facts
from differential algebraic geometry, differential algebraic groups, and differential modules used in the rest of the paper.
2.1. Differential algebraic geometry.
Definition 2.1. A differential ring is a ring R with a finite set ∆ = {δ1 , . . . , δm } of commuting derivations on R. A ∆-ideal of R is an ideal of R stable under any derivation in
∆.
In the present paper, ∆ will consist of one or two elements. Let R be a ∆-ring. For any
δ ∈ ∆, we denote
Rδ = {r ∈ R | δ(r) = 0},
which is a ∆-subring of R and is called the ring of δ-constants of R. If R is a field and
a differential ring, then it is called a differential field, or ∆-field for short. For example,
(R = Q(x,t), ∆ = {∂/∂x, ∂/∂t}) is a differential field.
The ring of ∆-differential polynomials K{y1 , . . . , yn } in the differential indeterminates,
or ∆-indeterminates, y1 , . . . , yn and with coefficients in a ∆-field (K, ∆), is the ring of polynomials in the indeterminates formally denoted
n
o
δi11 · . . . · δimm yi i1 , . . . , im ≥ 0, 1 ≤ i ≤ n
with coefficients in K. We endow this ring with a structure of a ∆-ring by setting


i +1
δk δi11 · . . . · δimm yi = δi11 · . . . · δkk · . . . · δimm yi .

Definition 2.2 (see [22, Corollary 1.2(ii)]). A differential field (K, ∆) is said to be differentially closed or ∆-closed for short, if, for every finite set of ∆-polynomials F ⊂
K{y1 , . . . , yn }, if the system of differential equations F = 0 has a solution with entries
in some ∆-field extension L, then it has a solution with entries in K.
Let (k, δ) be a differentially closed field, C = kδ , and (F, δ) a δ-subfield of k.
Definition 2.3. A Kolchin-closed (or δ-closed, for short) set W ⊂ kn is the set of common zeroes of a system of δ-polynomials with coefficients in k, that is, there exists
S ⊂ k{y1 , . . . , yn } such that
W = {a ∈ kn | f (a) = 0 for all f ∈ S} .
We say that W is defined over F if W is the set of zeroes of δ-polynomials with coefficients
in F. More generally, for any δ-ring R extending F,
W (R) = {a ∈ Rn | f (a) = 0 for all f ∈ S}.

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

3

Definition 2.4. If W ⊂ kn is a Kolchin-closed set defined over F, the δ-ideal
I(W ) = { f ∈ F{y1 , . . . , yn } | f (w) = 0 for all w ∈ W (k)}
is called the defining δ-ideal of W over F. Conversely, for a subset S of F{y1 , . . . , yn }, the
following subset is δ-closed in kn and defined over F:
V(S) = {a ∈ kn | f (a) = 0 for all f ∈ S} .
Remark 2.5. Since every radical δ-ideal of F{y1 , . . . , yn } is generated as a radical δ-ideal
by a finite set of δ-polynomials (see, for example, [30, Theorem, page 10], [20, Sections VII.27-28]), the Kolchin topology is Ritt–Noetherian, that is, every strictly decreasing
chain of Kolchin-closed sets has a finite length.
Definition 2.6. Let W ⊂ kn be a δ-closed set defined over F. The δ-coordinate ring F{W }
of W over F is the F-∆-algebra

F{W } = F{y1 , . . . , yn } I(W ).

If F{W } is an integral domain, then W is said to be irreducible. This is equivalent to I(W )
being a prime δ-ideal.

Definition 2.7. Let W ⊂ kn be a δ-closed set defined over F. Let I(W ) = p1 ∩ . . . ∩ pq
be a minimal δ-prime decomposition of I(W ), that is, the pi ⊂ F{y1 , . . . , yn } are prime δideals containing I(W ) and minimal with this property. This decomposition is unique up to
permutation (see [20, Section VII.29]). The irreducible Kolchin-closed sets Wi = V(pi ) are
defined over F and called the irreducible components of W . We have W = W1 ∪ . . . ∪Wq .
Definition 2.8. Let W1 ⊂ kn1 and W2 ⊂ kn2 be two Kolchin-closed sets defined over F. A
δ-polynomial map (morphism) defined over F is a map
ϕ : W1 → W2 ,

a 7→ ( f1 (a), . . . , fn2 (a)) , a ∈ W1 ,

where fi ∈ F{y1 , . . . , yn1 } for all i = 1, . . . , n2 .
If W1 ⊂ W2 , the inclusion map of W1 in W2 is a δ-polynomial map. In this case, we say
that W1 is a δ-closed subset of W2 .
2

Example 2.9. Let GLn ⊂ kn be the group of n × n invertible matrices with entries in k.
2
One can see GLn as a Kolchin-closed subset of kn × k defined over F, defined by the equa n2
tion det(X)y − 1 in F k × k = F{X, y}, where X is an n × n-matrix of δ-indeterminates
over F and y a δ-indeterminate over F. One can thus identify the δ-coordinate ring of GLn
over F with F{Y, 1/ det(Y )}, where Y = (yi, j )1≤i, j≤n is a matrix of δ-indeterminates over
F. We also denote the special linear group that consists of the matrices of determinant 1
by SLn ⊂ GLn .
Similarly, if V is a finite-dimensional F-vector space, GL(V ) is defined as the group of
invertible k-linear maps of V ⊗F k. To simplify the terminology, we will also treat GL(V )
as Kolchin-closed sets tacitly assuming that some basis of V over F is fixed.
Remark 2.10. If K is a field, we denote the group of invertible matrices with coefficients
in K by GLn (K).
2.2. Differentail algebraic groups.
2

Definition 2.11. A linear differential algebraic group G ⊂ kn defined over F is a subgroup
of GLn that is a Kolchin-closed set defined over F. If G ⊂ H ⊂ GLn are Kolchin-closed
subgroups of GLn , we say that G is a δ-closed subgroup, or δ-subgroup of H.

4

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

We will use the abbreviation LDAG for a linear differential algebraic group.
Proposition 2.12. Let G ⊂ GLn be a linear algebraic group defined over F.
(1) G is an LDAG.
(2) Let H ⊂ G be a δ-subgroup of G defined over F, and the Zariski closure H ⊂ G be the
closure of H with respect to the Zariski topology. In this case, H is a linear algebraic
group defined over F, whose polynomial defining ideal over F is
I(H) ∩ F[Y ] ⊂ I(H) ⊂ F{Y },
where Y = (yi, j )1≤i, j≤n is a matrix of δ-indeterminates over F.
Definition 2.13. Let G be an LDAG defined over F. The irreducible component of G
containing the identity element e is called the identity component of G and denoted by G◦ .
The LDAG G◦ is a δ-subgroup of G defined over F.
Definition 2.14. An LDAG G is said to be connected if G = G◦ , which is equivalent to G
being an irreducible Kolchin-closed set [4, page 906].
Definition 2.15. Let G be an LDAG defined over F and V a finite-dimensional vector
space over F. A δ-polynomial group homomorphism ρ : G → GL(V ) defined over F is
called a representation of G over F.
We shall also say that V is a G-module over F. By a faithful (respectively, simple, semisimple) G-module, we mean a faithful (respectively, irreducible, completely reducible) representation ρ : G → GL(V ).
The image of a δ-polynomial group homomorphism ρ : G → H is Kolchin closed [4,
Proposition 7]. Moreover, if Ker(ρ) = {1}, then ρ is an isomorphism of linear differential
algebraic groups between G and ρ(G) [4, Proposition 8].
Definition 2.16 ([5, Theorem 2]). An LDAG G is unipotent if one of the following equivalent conditions holds:
(1) G is conjugate to a differential algebraic subgroup of the group of unipotent upper
triangular matrices;
(2) G contains no elements of finite order > 1;
(3) G has a descending normal sequence of differential algebraic subgroups
G = G0 ⊃ G1 ⊃ . . . ⊃ GN = {1}
with Gi /Gi+1 isomorphic to a differential algebraic subgroup of the additive group Ga .
One can show that an LDAG G defined over F admits a largest normal unipotent differential algebraic subgroup defined over F [23, Theorem 3.10].
Definition 2.17. Let G be an LDAG defined over F. The largest normal unipotent differential algebraic subgroup of G defined over F is called the unipotent radical of G and
denoted by Ru (G). The unipotent radical of a linear algebraic group H is also denoted by
Ru (H).
Definition 2.18. A non-commutative LDAG G is said to be simple if {1} and G are the
only normal differential algebraic subgroups of G.
Definition 2.19. A quasi-simple linear (differential) algebraic group is a finite central extension of a simple non-commutative linear (differential) algebraic group.
Definition 2.20. An LDAG G is said to be reductive if Ru (G) = {1}.

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

5

Proposition 2.21 ([26, Remark 2.9]). Let G ⊂ GLn be an LDAG. If G ⊂ GLn is a reductive
linear algebraic group, then G is a reductive LDAG.
For a group G, its subgroup generated by {ghg−1h−1 | g, h ∈ G} is denoted by [G, G].
Definition 2.22. Let G be a group and G1 , . . . , Gn subgroups of G. We say that G is the
almost direct product of G1 , . . . , Gn if
(1) the commutator subgroups [Gi , G j ] = {1} for all i 6= j;
(2) the morphism
ψ : G1 × . . . × Gn → G,

(g1 , . . . , gn ) 7→ g1 · . . . · gn

is an isogeny, that is, a surjective map with a finite kernel.
Theorem 2.23 ([16, Theorem 2.25]). Let G ⊂ GLn be a linear differential algebraic group
defined over F. Assume that G ⊂ GLn is a connected reductive algebraic group. Then
(1) G is an almost direct product of a torus H0 and non-commutative normal quasi-simple
linear algebraic groups H1 , . . . , Hs defined over Q;
(2) G is an almost direct product of a Zariski dense δ-closed subgroup G0 of H0 and some
δ-closed subgroups Gi of Hi for i = 1, . . . , s;
(3) moreover, either Gi = Hi or Gi is conjugate by a matrix of Hi to Hi (C);
Definition 2.24. Let G be an LDAG defined over F. We define τ(G), the differential type
of G, to be 0 if tr. degF Quot(F{G◦ }) < ∞ and to be 1 otherwise.
Definition 2.25. Let G be an LDAG defined over F. We say that G is differentially
finitely generated, or simply a DFGG, if G(k) contains a finitely generated subgroup that
is Kolchin dense over F.
2.3. Differential modules and their Galois groups. Our presentation of the (parameterized) differential Galois theory is deliberately based on fiber functors and tensor categories
so that the description of our main algorithm is clearer. Indeed, it is essential for the description to have a correspondence between the operations performed with the differential
module (system of linear differential equations) and with representations of its (parameterized) differential Galois group.
Let K be a ∆ = {∂, δ}-field and k = K ∂ . We assume for simplicity that (k, δ) is a
differentially closed field (this assumption was relaxed in [13, 33, 28]).
Definition 2.26. A ∂-module M over K is a left K[∂]-module that is a finite-dimensional
vector space over K.
Let M be a ∂-module over K and {e1 , . . . , en } a K-basis of M . Let A = (ai, j ) ∈ Matn (K)
be the matrix defined by
n

(2.1)

∂(ei ) = − ∑ a j,i e j ,

i = 1, . . . , n.

j=1

Then, for any m = ∑ni=1 yi ei , where Y = (y1 , . . . , yn )T ∈ K n , we have
!
n

n

i=1

i=1

∂(m) = ∑ ∂(yi )ei − ∑

n

∑ ai, j y j

ei .

j=1

Thus, the equation ∂(m) = 0 translates into the homogeneous system of linear differential
equations ∂(Y ) = AY .

6

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

Definition 2.27. Let M be a ∂-module over K and {e1 , . . . , en } be a K-basis of M . We say
that the linear differential system ∂(Y ) = AY , as above, is associated to the ∂-module M
(via the choice of a K-basis). Conversely, to a given linear differential system ∂(Y ) = AY ,
A = (ai, j ) ∈ K n×n , one associates a ∂-module M over K, namely M = K n with the standard
basis (e1 , . . . , en ) and action of ∂ given by (2.1).
Definition 2.28. A morphism of ∂-modules over K is a homomorphism of K[∂]-modules.
One can consider the category DiffK of ∂-modules over K:
Definition 2.29. We can define the following constructions in DiffK :
(1) The direct sum of two ∂-modules, M1 and M2 , is M1 ⊕ M2 together with the action of
∂ defined by
∂(m1 ⊕ m2 ) = ∂(m1 ) ⊕ ∂(m2).
(2) The tensor product of two ∂-modules, M1 and M2 , is M1 ⊗K M2 together with the
action of ∂ defined by
∂(m1 ⊗ m2) = ∂(m1 ) ⊗ m2 + m1 ⊗ ∂(m2 ).
(3) The unit object 1 for the tensor product is the field K together with the left K[∂]-module
structure given by
(a0 + a1∂ + · · · + an∂n )( f ) = a0 f + · · · + an ∂n ( f )
for f , a0 , . . . , an ∈ K.
(4) The internal Hom of two ∂-modules M1 , M2 exists in DiffK and is denoted by
Hom(M1 , M2 ). It consists of the K-vector space HomK (M1 , M2 ) of K-linear maps
from M1 to M2 together with the action of ∂ given by the formula
∂u(m1 ) = ∂(u(m1 )) − u(∂m1 ).
The dual
of a ∂-module M is the ∂-module Hom(M , 1).
(5) An endofunctor D : DiffK → DiffK , called the prolongation functor, is defined as
follows: if M is an object of DiffK corresponding to the linear differential system
∂(Y ) = AY , then D(M ) corresponds to the linear differential system


A δ(A)
∂(Z) =
Z.
0
A

M∗

The construction of the prolongation functor reflects the following. If U is a fundamental solution matrix of ∂(Y ) = AY in some ∆-field extension F of K, that is, ∂(U) = AU and
U ∈ GLn (F), then
∂(δU) = δ(∂U) = δ(A)U + Aδ(U).




U δ(U)
A δ(A)
Then,
is a fundamental solution matrix of ∂(Z) =
Z. Endowed
0
U
0
A
with all these constructions, it follows from [29, Corollary 3] that the category DiffK is a
δ-tensor category (in the sense of [29, Definition 3] and [19, Definition 4.2.1]).
Definition 2.30. Let M be an object of DiffK . Let {M }⊗,δ denote the smallest full subcategory of DiffK that contains M and is closed under all operations of linear algebra (direct
sums, tensor products, duals, and subquotients) and D. The category {M }⊗,δ is a δ-tensor
category over k. Let {M }⊗ denote the full tensor subcategory of DiffK generated by M .
Then, {M }⊗ is a tensor category over k.

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

7

Similarly, the category Vectk of finite-dimensional k-vector spaces is a δ-tensor category. The prolongation functor on Vectk is defined as follows: for a k-vector space V , the
k-vector space D(V ) equals k[δ]≤1 ⊗k V , where k[δ]≤1 is considered as the right k-module
of δ-operators up to order 1 and V is viewed as a left k-module.
Definition 2.31. Let M be an object of DiffK . A δ-fiber functor ω : {M }⊗,δ → Vectk is
an exact, faithful, k-linear, tensor compatible functor together with a natural isomorphism
between DVectk ◦ ω and ω ◦ D{M }⊗,δ [19, Definition 4.2.7], where the subscripts emphasize

the category on which we perform the prolongation. The pair {M }⊗,δ , ω is called a
δ-Tannakian category.
Theorem 2.32 ([13, Corollaries 4.29 and 6.2]). Let M be an object of DiffK . Since k is
δ-closed, the category {M }⊗,δ admits a δ-fiber functor and any two δ-fiber functors are
naturally isomorphic.
Definition 2.33. Let M be an object of Diffk and ω : {M }⊗,δ → Vectk be a δ-fiber functor.
The group Galδ (M ) of δ-tensor isomorphisms of ω is defined as follows. It consists of the
elements g ∈ GL(ω(M )) that stabilize ω(V ) for every ∂-module V obtained from M
by applying the linear constructions (subquotient, direct sum, tensor product, and dual),
and the prolongation functor. The action of g on ω(V ) is obtained by applying the same
constructions to ω(V ). We call Galδ (M ) the parameterized differential Galois group of
(M , ω) (or of M when there is no confusion).
Theorem 2.34 ([29, Theorem 2]). Let M be an object of DiffK and ω : {M }⊗,δ → Vectk
be a δ-fiber functor. The group Galδ (M ) ⊂ GL(ω(M )) is a linear differential algebraic
group defined over k, and ω induces an equivalence of categories between {M }⊗,δ and
the category of finite-dimensional representations of Galδ (M ).
Definition 2.35. We say that a ∂-module M over K is trivial if it is either (0) or isomorphic
as a ∂-module over K to 1n for some positive integer n. For G a linear differential algebraic
group over k, we say that a G-module V is trivial if G acts identically on V .
Remark 2.36. For M an object of DiffK and ω : {M }⊗,δ → Vectk a δ-fiber functor, the following holds: a ∂-module N in {M }⊗,δ is trivial if and only if ω(N ) is a trivial Galδ (M )module.
Definition 2.37. Forgetting the action of δ, one can similarly define the group Gal(M )
of tensor isomorphisms of ω : {M }⊗ → Vectk . By [9], the group Gal(M ) ⊂ GL(ω(M ))
is a linear algebraic group defined over k, and ω induces an equivalence of categories
between {M }⊗ and the category of k-finite-dimensional representations of Gal(M ). We
call Gal(M ) the differential Galois group of M over K.
Proposition 2.38 ([15, Proposition 6.21]). If M is an object of DiffK and ω : {M }⊗,δ →
Vectk is a δ-fiber functor, then Galδ (M ) is a Zariski dense subgroup of Gal(M ).
Definition 2.39. A ∂-module M is said to be completely reducible (semisimple) if, for
every ∂-submodule N of M , there exists a ∂-submodule N ′ of M such that M = N ⊕ N ′ .
We say that a ∂-operator is completely reducible if the associated ∂-module is completely
reducible.
By [31, Exercise 2.38], a ∂-module is completely reducible if and only if its differential
Galois group is a reductive linear algebraic group. Moreover, for a completely reducible
∂-module M , any object in {M }⊗ is completely reducible.

8

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

Definition 2.40. A linear differential algebraic group G ⊂ GL(V ) is called constant (cf.
[14, Definition 4.1], and also [25, Definition 2.10] for reductive LDAGs) if G preserves a
C-form of V . That is, if one considers G as a group of matrices, G is conjugate to a group
of matrices with constant entries.
Definition 2.41. We say that a differential module V is constant (also known as isomonodromic or completely integrable) if Galδ (V ) is constant (see [8, Proposition 3.9], [14,
Section 6]). We call a semisimple differential module purely non-constant if every its
simple submodule is not constant.
In the language of matrices, if ∂(Y ) = AY is a system of linear differential equations
associated to V , then V is constant if and only if there exists an n × n matrix B with entries
in K such that ∂(B) − δ(A) = AB − BA.
3. T HE ALGORITHM
For simplicity, let (k, δ) be a differentially closed field. Let also K = k(x) be a ∆-field,
where ∆ = {∂, δ}, and ∂ = ∂/∂x . So, k = K ∂ . Let V be a ∂-module over K, dim V = 3,
ω a δ-fiber functor, and so V = ω(V ) is a faithful Galδ (V )-module (to avoid repetition,
∂-modules over K will be denoted by calligraphic letters, and the corresponding regular
letters will be used for their images under ω).
In what follows, we start with preliminary results our algorithm-specific definitions
in Section 3.1, where we also explain what is sufficient to know to consider Galδ (V )
computed. We continue with a description of the algorithm by considering the following
cases that can possibly occur:
(1) Optimized for dim V = 3, and so more efficiently than in [26], we start with computing Galδ (V diag ) (see Definition 3.5) in Section 3.2, which also covers the case of
V∼
= V diag , that is V being semisimple. For checking the latter isomorphism, see [31,
Section 4.2] and the references given there.
(2) We then proceed with computing Galδ (V ) if V is decomposable (can be represented
as a direct sum of a 2-dimensional not semisimple and a 1-dimensional submodules) in
Section 3.3.
(3) If V is indecomposable and V diag has a 2-dimensional simple submodule, then we
compute Galδ (V ) in Section 3.4.
(4) The remaining case of indecomposable V with V diag being a direct sum of three 1dimensional submodules in Section 3.5.
3.1. Preparation. If G = Galδ (V ), as explained above, it can be identified with an LDAG
in GL(V ), where V = ω(V ). To compute G means to provide an algorithm that, given V ,
returns a (finite) set of equations defining G in the ring of differential polynomials in matrix
coefficients, with respect to some basis of V . Note that G can be computed as it is Gal(V )
[17, 12]. If one knows a priori that τ(G) = 0, one can compute G using [25].
Our goal now is to explain an approach to computing G in the case dim V = 3. By
[11, 27], since K = k(x), G is a DFGG, which will be essential. For example, if ρ : G →
GL(W ) is a 1-dimensional representation of G, then τ(ρ(G)) = 0. Note that the case
dim V = 2 has already been considered in [1, 2, 10].
Our approach is related to the following. Let (Hi ,Vi ), i ∈ I, be pairs of algebraic groups
Hi ⊂ GL(V ) containing G, and algebraic Hi -modules Vi , where I is a non-empty finite set.
Let ρi : Hi → GL(Vi ) denote the homomorphisms defining the Hi -module structure on Vi .

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

9

Definition 3.1. We say that G is
• determined by the pairs (Hi ,Vi ), i ∈ I, if G has finite index in the intersection P of all
◦
◦
ρ−1
i (Gi ), where Gi := ρi (G). In other words, G = P , or equivalently, due to the bijection between the finite sets of connected components of G and of G [26, Corollary 3.7],
G = P ∩ G.
• determined by Vi if Hi = G, i ∈ I. In this case, G = P.
Remark 3.2. It follows that G is determined by Vi if it is determined by some (Hi ,Vi ).
Remark 3.3. Note that Vi are G-modules from the rigid tensor category generated by V
and, if Hi = G, i ∈ I, this property characterizes them.
This notion can be applied for computation of G. Namely, suppose it is known that
G is determined by (Hi ,Vi ) and suppose that we know how to compute Gi . Then we can
compute
\
G = ρ−1
i (Gi ) ∩ G
i∈I

since ρi are given (the intersection with G is needed only if G 6= P). Furthermore, if
Fi ⊂ k{GL(Vi )}, Ji , J ⊂ k{GL(V )}, i ∈ I, are sets of generators of the defining ideals of
Gi , Hi , and H, respectively, then the defining ideal for G is generated by
[

νρ∗i (Fi ) ∪ Ji ∪ J,

i∈I

where ν is a k-linear section of k{GL(V )} → k{Hi }. Again, union with J is only needed
if we do not know whether G = P.
Proposition 3.4. Let Gi ⊂ Pi , i = 1, 2, be subgroups of finite index and all Pi are subgroups
of a group H. Then G1 ∩ G2 ⊂ P1 ∩ P2 has finite index.
Proof. The groups Pi act naturally on the finite sets Xi := Pi /Gi , i = 1, 2. This gives rise to
the action of P1 × P2 on X := X1 × X2 . The group P := P1 ∩ P2 embedded diagonally into
P1 × P2 also acts on X with the stabilizer of the point eG1 × eG2 ∈ X equal G := G1 ∩ G2 .
Since X is finite, G has finite index in P.

Definition 3.5. Let us denote the sum of composition factors for a maximal filtration of V
by V diag . Set also V diag := ω(V diag ).
One can compute Galδ (V diag ) using [26]. However, this can be done simpler in our
case of three dimensions.
Lemma 3.6 ([7, Equation (1), p. 195]). Let G be a linear differential algebraic group and
H be a normal differential algebraic subgroup of G. Then τ(G) = max{τ(H), τ(G/H)}.
Definition 3.7 ([7, Definition 2.6]). The strong identity component G0 of an LDAG G is
defined to be the smallest δ-subgroup H of G such that τ(G/H) < τ(G). An LDAG G is
called strongly connected if G0 = G.
Lemma 3.8. If G and G′ are LDAGs, ϕ : G → G′ is a surjective homomorphism, and
τ(G) = τ(G′ ), then ϕ(G0 ) = G′0 .
Proof. By [7, Remark 2.7.4], ϕ(G0 ) ⊂ G′0 . On the other hand, using Lemma 3.6,
τ(G′ /ϕ(G0 )) = τ(G/G0 Kerϕ) ≤ τ(G/G0 ) < τ(G) = τ(G′ ),
which, by definition, implies that ϕ(G0 ) ⊃ G′0 .



10

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

3.2. Computation of the diagonal. Here, we will explain how to find G = Galδ (V diag ).
Without loss of generality, in this section, let us assume that
(3.1)

V∼
= V diag ,

so we need to compute G. In this case, G is reductive, so
(3.2)

G◦ = S · Z,

an almost direct product of its center Z and a semisimple δ-subgroup S ⊂ SL(V ). Due to
the restriction dim V = 3, one can see that S has to be simple, so it is δ-isomorphic to a
simple algebraic group or its constant points.
Proposition 3.9. Let G be a DFGG such that G◦ is commutative. Then τ(G) = 0.
Proof. By [26, Proposition 2.11], G◦ is a DFGG. Let F ⊂ GL(V ) denote the Zariski closure of G◦ . By [18, Theorem 15.5], F is a direct product of an algebraic torus Fs and a
commutative unipotent group Fu . Let Gs and Gu stand for the projections of G◦ to Fs and
Fu , respectively. Both Gs and Gu are DFGG as homomorphic images of a DFGG. It follows
from [26, Lemmas 2.12 and 2.13] that τ(Gs ) = τ(Gu ) = 0. Since G◦ ⊂ Gs × Gu , τ(G◦ ) = 0.
Hence, τ(G) = 0.

Proposition 3.10. Suppose that G◦ is non-commutative.
(1) If V is simple, then G is determined by (GL(V ),V ⊗ V ∗ ) and (GL(V ), ∧3V ).
(2) If V is not simple, then V = U ⊕ W , where dim U = 1 and W is simple, and G is
determined by (H,W ⊗ W ∗ ) and (H, ∧2W ⊕ U), where W = ω(W ), U = ω(U ), and
H = GL(U) × GL(W ) ⊂ GL(V ).
Proof. By [16, Proposition 2.23], V = ω(V ) is semisimple as a G◦ -module. Suppose that
V is simple. Then V is simple as a G◦ -module. Indeed, since G◦ is non-commutative, V has
an irreducible G◦ -submodule W of dimension ≥ 2. If dimW = 2, then, due to dimV = 3,
W is the only irreducible submodule of V of dimension 2. Since G◦ is normal in G, it
follows that W is a G-submodule of V , which is impossible. Hence, dimW = 3 and V is
simple as a G◦ -module. Set
H = H1 = H2 = GL(V ), V1 := V ⊗ V ∗ ≃ End(V ), V2 := ∧3V.
Recall the notation from Section 3.1: ρi := G → GL(Vi ), i = 1, 2, where the Zariski closure
is taken in GL(V ). We have Ker ρ1 ⊂ H equal the group E of scalar multiplications (by
Schur’s lemma) and Ker ρ2 = SL(V ). It is sufficient to show (see Definition 3.1) that G has
finite index in
Γ := (G · E) ∩ (G · SL(V )) ⊂ GL(V ).
By Proposition 3.4, Γ contains the finite index subgroup
Γ1 := (G◦ · E) ∩ (G◦ · SL(V )) = (S · E) ∩ (Z · SL(V )).
(Here we used (3.2), S ⊂ SL(V ), because S = [S, S], and Z ⊂ E by Schur’s lemma, because
V is a simple G◦ -module, as shown above.) Setting Λ = SL(V ) ∩ E, which is finite, we
obtain G◦ ⊂ Γ1 = G◦ · Λ. Indeed, the inclusion Γ1 ⊃ G◦ · Λ is straightforward. For the
reverse inclusion, for each γ ∈ Γ1 , let s ∈ S, e ∈ E, z ∈ Z, and a ∈ SL(V ) be such that
γ = se = za. Since z is a scalar matrix, z−1 e = s−1 a ∈ SL(V ), and so there exists λ ∈ Λ
such that e = zλ. Therefore, γ = s(zλ) = (sz)λ ∈ G◦ · Λ. Hence, G◦ has finite index in Γ1 ,
and therefore in Γ. Hence, G has finite index in Γ.

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

11

If V is not simple, then there exist U and W such that dim U = 1, dim W = 2, and
V = U ⊕ W . Let ρ1 : H → GL(W ⊗ W ∗ ) and ρ2 : H → GL(∧2W ⊕ U), where
H = H1 = H2 = GL(U) × GL(W ) ⊂ GL(V ).
Ker ρ1 equals the group of transformations acting by scalar multiplications on U and W ,
and Ker ρ2 = SL(W ). Since S = [S, S], S ⊂ SL(W ). By Schur’s lemma, Z ⊂ Ker ρ1 . Therefore,
Γ′1 := (G◦ · Kerρ1 ) ∩ (G◦ · Kerρ2 ) = (S · Kerρ1 ) ∩ (Z · SL(W )),
which, by Proposition 3.4, has finite index in
Γ′ := (G · Kerρ1 ) ∩ (G · Kerρ2 ) ⊂ GL(U) × GL(W ).
Let Λ′ = Kerρ1 ∩ SL(W ), which is finite. We have G◦ · Λ′ ⊂ Γ′1 . For each γ ∈ Γ′1 , let
s ∈ S, e ∈ Kerρ1 , z ∈ Z, and a ∈ SL(W ) be such that γ = se = za. Since z and s commute,
z−1 e = s−1 a ∈ SL(W ), and so there exists λ ∈ Λ′ such that e = zλ. Therefore, γ = s(zλ) =
(sz)λ ∈ G◦ · Λ′ , and so Γ′1 ⊂ G◦ · Λ′ . Hence, G◦ has finite index in Γ′1 , and therefore in Γ′ .
Hence, G has finite index in Γ′ .

Remark 3.11. In the notation of Proposition 3.10, the groups Galδ (∧3 V ) and
Galδ (∧2 W ⊕ U ) can be computed since their differential type is 0 by Proposition 3.9.
Moreover, Galδ (V ⊗ V ∗ ) and Galδ (W ⊗ W ∗ ) are quasi-simple, so can be computed using
[26, Algorithm 5.3.2].
3.3. Decomposable case. Let us consider the situation in which V is a direct sum of its
nontrivial submodules U and W , and dim U = 1. (One of them has to be of dimension 1.)
The case of semisimple V (or, equivalently, W ) is treated by Propositions 3.9 and 3.10.
So, we are interested in what happens if W is not a direct sum.
We will use the following result for differential modules of dimension 2 (see [25, Theorem 2.13], [16, Proposition 3.21], and [2]).
Proposition 3.12. Let G′ be an LDAG and W a 2-dimensional faithful G′ -module such that
W diag = U1 ⊕ U2 , dimUi = 1. Then one of the following holds:
(CQ) U1 ⊗ U2∗ is constant and τ(G′ )=0;
(CR) U1 ⊗ U2∗ is non-constant and W is semisimple;
(NC) U1 ⊗ U2∗ is non-constant and Ru (G′ ) ≃ Ga .
Proposition 3.13. Suppose V = U ⊕ W , dim U = 1, dim W = 2, and W is not semisimple. Let W diag = W1 ⊕ W2 .
(1) If Galδ (W1 ⊗ W2∗ ) is constant, then τ(G) = 0.
(2) Otherwise, G is determined by V diag .
Proof. The first case follows from Proposition 3.12 and Lemma 3.6. For the second case,
let W0 ⊂ W be a G-invariant 1-dimensional subspace, and define
H ⊂ GL(U) × GL(W ) ⊂ GL(V )
to be the group of transformations preserving W0 . We have G ⊂ H. We claim that G is
determined by (H,V diag ). It suffices to show that G contains the kernel N ∼
= Ga of the
action of H on V diag . We have
N ⊂ GL(W ) ⊂ GL(V ).

12

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

Let
ϕ : GL(U) × GL(W ) → GL(W )
be the projection homomorphosm and GW = ϕ(G). By the hypothesis and Proposition
3.12, GW ⊃ N. Since N ∼
= Ga , it is strongly connected [7, Example 2.7(1)]. Moreover,
since GW /N is diagonal and is a DFGG,
τ(GW /N) = 0 < τ(GW ) = 1.
Therefore, by definition, N = (GW )0 . Hence, N = ϕ(G0 ). Since G is a DFGG, its restriction
to GL(U) is of type zero and, therefore, the image of G0 in GL(U) is of type zero as well.
Moreover, by [7, Remark 2.7.5], we conclude that G0 acts trivially on U. Therefore, since
G0 ⊂ GL(U) × N, and G0 acts trivially on V diag , we conclude G0 ⊂ N, hence N = G0 ⊂
G.

3.4. Indecomposable case with a 2-dimensional simple component.
Proposition 3.14. Suppose that V is indecomposable and V diag is the sum of two simple
submodules W1 and W2 , of dimension 1 and 2, respectively. Suppose additionally that G◦
is not commutative. If Galδ (W1∗ ⊗ W2 ) is constant, then τ(G) = 0. If Galδ (W1∗ ⊗ W2 ) is
not constant, then G is detemined by ω(V )diag .
Proof. Since the image of G under ρ : G → GL(W1 ) is a DFGG, it is of type zero. If W :=
W1∗ ⊗ W2 is constant, so is (W1∗ ⊗ V )diag . Hence, the image of G under ϕ : G → GL(W1∗ ⊗
V ) is of type zero by [25, Proposition 2.19]. Since Kerϕ consists of scalar transformations,
it is isomorphic to a subgroup of ρ(G), therefore τ(Kerϕ) = 0. We conclude by Lemma 3.6
that
τ(G) = max{τ(Kerϕ), τ(ϕ(G))} = 0.
Suppose now that W is non-constant. Replacing V with V ∗ if needed, we obtain

W2 ⊂ V .
By [16, Proposition 3.12], there is a G-equivariant embedding of Ru (G) into W . Since W
is irreducible and non-constant, it does not have nonzero proper invariant δ-subgroups by
[16, Proposition 3.21]. Therefore, either Ru (G) = {1} or Ru (G) ≃ W . In the latter case,
since dimW = 2, G is determined by V diag .
Finally, let us show that Ru (G) is non-trivial. Suppose the contrary: G is reductive. Then
G◦ is reductive and, by [16, Proposition 2.23], V is not semisimple as a G◦ -module, because
V is indecomposable. Since G◦ is non-commutative, it contains a non-trivial semisimple
part S. Note that S embeds into D := GL(W1 ) × GL(W2 ), therefore into [D, D] ≃ SL2 . By
[6, Theorem 19], either S ≃ SL2 or S ≃ SL2 (C).
If V were semisimple as an S-module, it would also be semisimple as a G◦ -module.
Indeed, let W ′ be an S-submodule of V such that V = W2 ⊕ W ′ as S-modules. Since G◦ =
Z · S and W ′ and W2 are simple non-isomorphic S-modules, Z and, therefore, G◦ must
preserve each of them. Since V is not semisimple as a G◦ -module, we conclude that V
is not semisimple as an S-module. Since all differential representations of SL2 (C) are
algebraic, they are also completely reducible. On the other hand, by [24, Theorem 4.11],
every indecomposable differential representation of SL2 of dimension 3 is irreducible. 

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

13

3.5. Indecomposable upper-triangular case. It remains to consider the case in which
there exists a G-invariant filtration
(3.3)

0 = V0 ⊂ V1 ⊂ V2 ⊂ V3 = V,

where dimVr = r. Denote the subgroup of GL(V ) preserving the flag (3.3) by B. We have
G ⊂ B. Let us choose an ordered basis E := {e1 , e2 , e3 } of V such that Vr is spanned by
e1 , . . . , er . With respect to E, B can be identified with the subgroup of upper triangular
matrices in GL3 (k). Let B′ denote the subgroup of B consisting of the elements preserving
ke2 .
We will use the notation for the cases from Proposition 3.12 to describe the cases for
V . For example, we say that V is of type (CQ,CR) if V2 and V /V1 correspond to CQ and
CR, respectively. There are 3 × 3 = 9 such pairs.
• Due to the duality V ↔ V ∗ , it suffices to consider only 6 cases (e.g., we do not need to
treat (CQ,CR) once we have done (CR,CQ)).
• The case (CQ,CQ) implies that V diag is constant, so τ(G) = 0.
• The case (CR,CR) implies that V is decomposable, hence we can use Proposition 3.13
to deal with this case. We will now assume that V is indecomposable.
So, it remains to consider the cases (CR,CQ), (CR,NC), (CQ,NC), and (NC,NC).
• If V2 is semisimple, denote the invariant complement to V1 in V2 by U . Then V /U is
either of type (CQ) or (NC), otherwise V would have been decomposable.
– Since the module ω(V /V1 ⊕ V /U ) is faithful, the case (CR,CQ,CQ) – we include
the type of V /U in the end – implies τ(G) = 0.
– For the case (CR,CQ,NC), we can identify G with a subgroup of B′ . Then G is
determined by (B′ , ω(V1 ⊕ V /V1 )). Indeed, it is sufficient to show that G contains
the group



 1 0 a

(3.4)
Z = 0 1 0 , a ∈ k .


0 0 1

which is the kernel of the action of B′ on W := ω(V1 ⊕ V /V1 ). Since the image of
G in GL(W ) has differential type 0 by the assumption and Proposition 3.9, and, on
the other hand, τ(G) = 1 by the NC part of (CR,CQ,NC), the kernel of the action
of G on W (which belongs to Z) has differential type 1. Then it coincides with Z,
since every proper subgroup of Ga has differential type 0 [7, Example 2.7(1)].
– The case (CR,NC,CQ) becomes (CR,CQ,NC), which we have considered, after the
permutation of V1 and U.
– It remains to consider the case (CR,NC,NC). Let g ∈ G. Then there exist polynomial
functions a, c, e : G → k× and differential polynomial functions b, d : G → k such
that, for all g ∈ G,


a(g)
0
b(g)
c(g) d(g) .
(3.5)
g= 0
0
0
e(g)
We claim that G is determined by ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ). We will show this for a more
general situation: the polynomial function ac can be taking values in C× (we will

14

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

use this later dealing with the case (CQ,NC)). It is sufficient to show that G contains




1 0 u


(3.6)
Y := y(u, v) := 0 1 v , u, v ∈ k .


0 0 1

Note that τ(G) = 1 by the NC conditions. It follows that τ(Ru (G)) = 1 since
G/ Ru (G) is commutative, hence of type 0 by Proposition 3.9. In particular, G
is not reductive. Since the images of ae and ce are not contained in C× , it follows
from [16, Proposition 3.21] that Ru (G) is a vector space over k. Since Ru (G) can
be identified with a submodule of ω(V2 ⊗ (V /V2 )∗ ) by [16, Lemma 3.6], we have,
up to a permutation of e1 and e2 , the following possibilities:
(1) Ru (G) = Y ;
(2) Ru (G) = {y(u, 0), u ∈ k} ⊂ Y ;
(3) a = c and Ru (G) ∼
= Ga .
In case (1), there is nothing left to prove. Case (3) reduces to case (2) by a suitable choice of basis of V . Suppose we have case (2). By the NC condition,
Ru (Galδ (V /V1 )) ∼
= Ga . Therefore, for every h ∈ k, there exist h1 ∈ k× and h2 ∈ k
such that


h1 0 h2
z :=  0 1 h  ∈ G.
0 0 1
Then, for all h ∈ k,


h1 0 0
(3.7)
y(−h2 , 0)z =  0 1 h ∈ G.
0 0 1
Let




 f1 0 0

Γ = G ∩  0 1 f  , f1 ∈ k× , f ∈ k ,


0 0 1
which is a differential algebraic subgroup with τ(Γ) = 1 by (3.7). Since the restriction of Γ to V1 , being a differential algebraic subgroup of the restriction of G to V1 ,
is of type 0 and by [7, Remark 2.7.5],



 1 0 0

Γ0 = 0 1 f  , f ∈ k ,


0 0 1

which is normal in G, unipotent, and not contained in Ru (G), as we are in case (2).
Contradiction.
• It remains to consider (NC,NC) and (CQ,NC).
Proposition 3.15. Let G ⊂ GLn (k) be a subgroup and G its Zariski closure. Then
[G, G] = [G, G].

Proof. Since the commutator group of a linear algebraic group is Zariski closed [18, Proposition 17.2], we have
[G, G] ⊂ [G, G].

The other inclusion follows immediately from [32, Theorem 4.3(c)].

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

15

Proposition 3.16. Suppose that G is of type (NC,NC).
(1) If [G, G] is commutative, then G is determined by V2 .
(2) If [G, G] is not commutative, then G is determined by V diag .
Proof. Since G is of type (NC,NC), τ(G) = 1. Since G is solvable, (G/ Ru (G))◦ , being a connected solvable reductive LDAG, is a δ-torus. Hence, by Proposition 3.9,
τ(G/ Ru (G)) = 0. Therefore, by definition, G0 ⊂ Ru (G).
Let r stand for the Lie algebra of Ru (G) (see [16, Section 4.1] for a quick and sufficient
overview) and Z be defined by (3.4). Then, under the matrix conjugation,
A := r/(r ∩ Lie Z)
is a G-invariant δ-subgroup of the semisimple (2-dimensional) G-module
L := Lie [B, B]/ LieZ
(recall that B is the group of all upper triangular matrices, and so Lie[B, B] is the Lie
algebra of upper triangular matrices with 0 on the diagonal). By the (NC,NC) assumption
and since, for all a, b, ai j , 1 6 i 6 j 6 3,


−1 

 
23
12 a33
22
a aa11
a − aa11
0 aa11
a11 a12 a13
0 a 0
a11 a12 a13
a22 b
a33
 0 a22 a23  0 0 b  0 a22 a23  = 0
,
0
a22 b
0 0 0
0
0 a33
0
0 a33
0
0
0

G acts on L purely non-constantly (Definition 2.41). Therefore, by [16, Proposition 3.21],
A is a k-subspace of L. By [3, Proposition 22], the projections of A onto the (1, 2) and
(2, 3) entries are non-trivial. Hence, if A 6= L, then the action of G on L is isotypic:
a22
a11
=
(3.8)
a22
a33
on G. Moreover, if A 6= L, there exists c ∈ k× such that



 0 a b

(3.9)
r ⊂ 0 0 ca , a, b ∈ k .


0 0 0

Therefore, r is a commutative Lie algebra, and so Ru (G) is commutative. If A = L, then
r ⊃ [r, r] = Lie Z. Therefore, if A = L, then r = Lie[B, B], and so Ru (G) is the whole group
of unipotent matrices [B, B]. Since [G, G] is normal and unipotent,
[G, G] ⊂ Ru (G).
Therefore, if [G, G] is non-commutative, so is Ru (G). By the above, this implies that
[B, B] ⊂ G.
Hence, G is determined by V diag .
Suppose now that [G, G] is commutative. We will show that
Ru (G) = Ru (G).

(3.10)

It would follow then that G is determined by V2 . Indeed, let ρ : G → GL(V2 ) be the restriction to V2 of the natural representation of G on V . (3.8) implies that Ker ρ consists of
unipotent matrices. Hence, Ker ρ ⊂ Ru (G). If (3.10) holds, then
G ⊂ ρ−1 (ρ(G)) = G · Kerρ ⊂ G · Ru (G) = G · Ru (G) = G.
Therefore, G is determined by V2 .

16

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

As we have shown above, A 6= L and

a11
a22

=

a22
a33

on G. In particular, the function

a11
= (a11 /a22 )2
a33
from G to k× does not have its image contained in C× . This is the character of the action
of G on Lie Z by conjugation. Since Lie G ∩ Lie Z is G-invariant, [16, Proposition 3.21]
implies that Lie G ∩ LieZ is a k-subspace of Lie Z, and so either Z ⊂ G or Z ∩ G = {1}.
Suppose first that Z ⊂ G. Since [G, G] is commutative, Proposition 3.15 implies
that [G, G] is commutative. This is possible only if Lie Ru (G)/ Lie Z is proper in L: if
LieRu (G)/ Lie Z = L, Ru (G) = [B, B], which is not commutative. Since Lie Ru (G)/ Lie Z
contains A, it therefore coincides with A (all non-zero proper k-subspaces of L are maximal
since dimk L = 2). Since Z ⊂ Ru (G), we conclude that the Lie algebras of Ru (G) and of
Ru (G) coincide. Hence, by [3, Proposition 26], (3.10) holds.
It remains to consider the case in which [G, G] is commutative and Z ∩ G = {1}. By
rescaling e3 , we will assume that c = 1 in (3.9). Hence, there exists a differential polynomial ϕ(x) such that



 1 x ϕ(x)

x , x ∈ k .
(3.11)
Ru (G) = 0 1


0 0
1
Since Ru (G) is a group, for all x, y ∈ k,

ϕ(x + y) = ϕ(x) + ϕ(y) + xy.

(3.12)

2

e(x) = ϕ(x) − x2 . Then (3.12) is equivalent to, for all x, y ∈ k, ϕ
e(x +
For all x ∈ k, define ϕ
e(x) + ϕ
e (y). Therefore, ϕ
e is a homogeneous linear differential polynomial. Let γi ∈ k
y) = ϕ
e = ∑ γi x(i) . By the basis change e2 7→ e2 − γ0 e1 , we may assume that γ0 = 0.
be such that ϕ
i

For all a, λ ∈ k× and b, c, d ∈ k, let



aλ2
M(λ, a, b, c, d) =  0
0


ab ac
aλ ad  .
0
a

Let N be the normalizer of Ru (G) in B. A computation shows that

e(λx) = λ2 ϕ
e(x) + (b − λd)x .
N = M(λ, a, b, c, d) | λ, a ∈ k× , b, c, d ∈ k : ∀x ∈ k ϕ

22
. By the NC condition, f (G) is a
Let f : G → k× be the homomorphism given by aa33
×
Zariski dense δ-subgroup of k . By [3, Proposition 31], C× ⊂ f (G). Since G ⊂ N, for
all λ ∈ C× , there exist a ∈ k× , b, c, d ∈ k such that M(λ, a, b, c, d) ∈ G, which implies that
e = 0. Therefore,
ϕ

Ru (G) = Ru (G)

(3.13)

λ, a ∈ k×

and, for all
a, b, c, d, e ∈ k, if

and b, c, d ∈ k, M(λ, a, b, c, d) ∈ N implies that b = λd. Hence, for all


a 0
0 c
0 0


b
d  ∈ N,
e

then d = 0. Let F ⊂ G be the δ-subgroup defined by a12 = a23 = 0. Since Z ∩ G = {1},
F ∩ Ru (G) = {1} and F acts faithfully on V diag , and so F is commutative. Hence, F
is commutative. For any b ∈ B, there exists u ∈ Ru (G) such that a12 (bu) = 0. Thus,

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

17

G = F ⋉ Ru (G). Since there exist a, b, c, d ∈ k such that M(2, a, b, c, d) ∈ G, there exists
v ∈ Ru (G) and a′ , c′ ∈ k such that
vM(2, a, b, c, d) = M(2, a′ , 0, c′ , 0) =: m ∈ F.
Suppose that Ru (F) = Z. Let 1 6= z ∈ Z. Then m−1 zm 6= z. This contradicts the commutativity of F. Therefore, F is reductive. By [18, Corollary 7.4] and (3.13), we conclude
that
G = F ⋉ Ru (G) = F ⋉ Ru (G).


Thus, (3.10) holds.

Lemma 3.17. Let A ⊂ k× be a Kolchin closed subgroup that has a non-constant element.
If ϕ : A → k and ψ : k → k are differential polynomial maps such that
(3.14)

ϕ(ab) = aϕ(b) + bϕ(a)

∀ a, b ∈ A

(3.15)

ψ(ax) = aψ(x) + xϕ(a)

∀ a ∈ A, x ∈ k,

then there exist a0 , a1 ∈ k such that, for all x ∈ k and a ∈ A,
ψ(x) = a0 x + a1x′

and ϕ(a) = a1 a′ .

Proof. Note that A has to be Zariski dense in k, and therefore has to contain all non-zero
elements of the constants C ⊂ k [3, Proposition 31]. Condition (3.14) implies that the
restriction of ϕ to Q× is a derivation from Q× to k and, therefore, is the zero map (using a
standard argument). This implies that ϕ(C× ) = {0}, because the restriction of ϕ to C× is
polynomial. Therefore, condition (3.15) implies that, for all c ∈ C× and x ∈ k,
ψ(cx) = cψ(x).

(3.16)

Hence, ψ(0) = ψ(2 · 0) = 2 · ψ(0), and so ψ(0) = 0. Let h be the order of ψ. In coordinates,
ψ(y) ∈ k[y, y′ , . . . , y(h) ]. Then (3.16) implies that deg ψ ≤ 1. Let a0 , . . . , ah ∈ k be such that
h

ψ(y) = ∑ ai y(i) .
i=0

Condition (3.15) also implies that, for all a ∈ A,
ϕ(a) = ψ(a) − aψ(1).

(3.17)
Hence, for all a, b ∈ A,

ψ(ab) = aψ(b) + bψ(a) − abψ(1).
We then have, for all a, b ∈ A,


h
h
i  
i
∑ ai ∑ j a( j)b(i− j) = ∑ ai ab(i) + ba(i) − aba0,
i=0
i=0 j=0
which implies that
 


h
i
∑ ai ∑ j a( j)b(i− j) = ∑ ai ab(i) + ba(i) .
i=2
i=2 j=0
h

i

Hence, for all a, b ∈ A,
h

i−1 

∑ ai ∑

i=2

j=1


i ( j) (i− j)
a b
= 0.
j

18

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

For each non-constant a ∈ A, this implies that the non-zero linear differential polynomial
h
i−1  
i ( j) (i− j)
a y
f (y) := ∑ ai ∑
i=2 j=1 j
is in the defining ideal of A. Let b ∈ A be another non-constant element. Since C is algebraically closed, b is transcendental over C, and so b, b2 , . . . , bh are linearly independent
over C and f (bi ) = 0 for all i. This contradicts with f (y) = 0, being an (h − 1)-st order linear differential equation over k, having a solution space that is (h − 1)-dimensional
over C. Thus, h = 1, and so ψ(y) = a0 y + a1 y′ . Finally, by (3.17), for all a ∈ A,
ϕ(a) = a0 a + a1a′ − aa0 = a1 a′ .

Proposition 3.18. Suppose that G is of type (CQ,NC). Then, either
(1) G is determined by ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ) or

∗
(2) V2 is not semisimple, the restriction of G to ω V2 ⊗ (V /V2 ) is reductive, and V
belongs to the tensor category generated by the first prolongation of V /V1 .

Proof. Since the restriction of G to ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ) is of type 0, the NC condition implies
that G0 is contained in Y defined by (3.6). Moreover, the restriction of G0 to ω(V /V1 ) is
isomorphic to Ga .
The character of the action of G on Lie Z, where Z is defined by (3.4), by conjugation
11
equals aa33
, whose image is not contained in C× by the (CQ,NC) assumption. Since Lie G ∩
LieZ is G-invariant, [16, Proposition 3.21] implies that LieG ∩ Lie Z is a k-subspace of
LieZ, and so either Z ⊂ G or Z ∩ G = {1}.
If V2 is semisimple, then G is determined by ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ), as was noticed while
dealing with the case (CR,NC,NC). From now on, we will assume
that V2 is not semisim∗
ple. Let G′ denote the restriction of G to ω V2 ⊗ (V /V2 ) . Suppose that Ru (G′ ) 6= {1}.
Hence, there exist x, y, z,t, u, v ∈ k such that xt 6= 0, v 6= 0,




t xt yt
1 0 u
g1 := 0 t zt  ∈ G,
and
g2 := 0 1 v ∈ G.
0 0 t
0 0 1
Since xv 6= 0 and


1
−1
0
1 6= g1 g2 g−1
g
=
1
2
0


0 xv
1 0  ∈ Z,
0 1

Z ⊂ G. Hence, G contains Y = ZG0 and, thus, is determined by ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ).
It remains to consider the case of reductive G′ . Since [G′ , G′ ] is unipotent and, therefore,
connected, [G′ , G′ ] ⊂ Ru (G′ ) = {1}. Hence, G′ is commutative. Since V2 is not semisimple, we conclude that V1 ∼
= V2 /V1 . Thus, there exist a Kolchin closed subgroup A ⊂ k× ,
×
A 6= C , and a differential polynomial ϕ of positive order (it cannot be replaced by a usual
polynomial) such that, for every g ∈ G, there exist t, u, v ∈ k and a ∈ A such that t 6= 0,


at ϕ(a)t ut
at
vt  ,
(3.18)
g = 0
0
0
t
and, for all a ∈ A, there exist t, u, v ∈ k, such that


at ϕ(a)t ut
0
at
vt  ∈ G
0
0
t

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

19

If Z ⊂ G, then G contains Y = ZG0 and, therefore, is determined by ω(V2 ⊕ V /V2 ). If
Z 6⊂ G, then there exists a differential polynomial ψ such that



 1 0 ψ(x)

Ru (G) = 0 1
x  x∈k .


0 0
1
Since the conjugation by (3.18) preserves Ru (G), we obtain the restriction on ψ:
ψ(ax) = aψ(x) + xϕ(a)

∀ a ∈ A, x ∈ k.

Hence, by Lemma 3.17, there exist a0 ∈ k and a1 ∈ k× such that ψ(x) = a0 x + a1x′ and
ϕ(a) = a1 a′ for all x ∈ k and a ∈ A. By the change of basis with the matrix


1 aa01 0
0 1
0


a1
0 0 a11

in representation (3.18), ϕ(a) and u in (3.18) can be replaced by a′ and v′ , respectively.
Hence, V is in the tensor category generated by (V /V1 )(1) .

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to Charlotte Hardouin for productive discussions and useful
suggestions.
R EFERENCES
[1] C. Arreche. Computing the differential Galois group of a parameterized second-order
linear differential equation. In Proceedings of the 39th International Symposium on
Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, ISSAC 2014, pages 43–50, New York, 2014.
ACM Press. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2608628.2608680.
[2] C. Arreche.
On the computation of the parameterized differential Galois group for a second-order linear differential equation with differential
parameters.
Journal of Symbolic Computation, 75:25–55, 2016.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsc.2015.11.006.
[3] P. Cassidy. Differential algebraic groups. American Journal of Mathematics, 94:
891–954, 1972. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/2373764.
[4] P. Cassidy. Differential algebraic groups. American Journal of Mathematics, 94:
891–954, 1972. URL http://www.jstor.org/stable/2373764.
[5] P. Cassidy. Unipotent differential algebraic groups. In Contributions to algebra: Collection of papers dedicated to Ellis Kolchin, pages 83–115. Academic Press, 1977.
[6] P. Cassidy. The classification of the semisimple differential algebraic groups and
linear semisimple differential algebraic Lie algebras. Journal of Algebra, 121(1):
169–238, 1989. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(89)90092-6.
[7] P. Cassidy and M. Singer.
A Jordan–Hölder theorem for differential algebraic groups.
Journal of Algebra, 328(1):190–217, 2011.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2010.08.019.
[8] P. Cassidy and M. F. Singer. Galois theory of parametrized differential equations and
linear differential algebraic group. IRMA Lectures in Mathematics and Theoretical
Physics, 9:113–157, 2007. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.4171/020-1/7.

20

ANDREI MINCHENKO AND ALEXEY OVCHINNIKOV

[9] P. Deligne. Catégories tannakiennes. In The Grothendieck Festschrift, Volume II,
Modern Birkhäuser Classics, pages 111–195. Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 1990. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-8176-4575-5.
[10] T. Dreyfus.
Computing the Galois group of some parameterized linear differential equation of order two.
Proceedings of
the American Mathematical Society, 142:1193–1207, 2014.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-2014-11826-0.
[11] T. Dreyfus.
A density theorem in parameterized differential Galois
theory.
Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 271(1):87–141, 2014.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/pjm.2014.271.87.
[12] R. Feng. Hrushovski’s algorithm for computing the Galois group of a linear
differential equation. Advances in Applied Mathematics, 65:1–37, 2015. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aam.2015.01.001.
[13] H. Gillet, S. Gorchinskiy, and A. Ovchinnikov. Parameterized Picard–Vessiot extensions and Atiyah extensions. Advances in Mathematics, 238:322–411, 2013. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2013.02.006.
[14] S. Gorchinskiy and A. Ovchinnikov. Isomonodromic differential equations and differential categories. Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées, 102:48–78,
2014. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matpur.2013.11.001.
[15] C. Hardouin and M. F. Singer.
Differential Galois theory of linear difference equations.
Mathematische Annalen, 342(2):333–377, 2008.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00208-008-0238-z.
[16] C. Hardouin, A. Minchenko, and A. Ovchinnikov.
Calculating differential Galois groups of parametrized differential equations, with applications to hypertranscendence.
Mathematische Annalen, 2016.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00208-016-1442-x.
[17] E. Hrushovski.
Computing the Galois group of a linear differential equation.
In Differential Galois theory (Bedlewo, 2001), volume 58 of Banach Center Publ., pages 97–138. Polish Acad. Sci., Warsaw, 2002. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.4064/bc58-0-9.
[18] J. E. Humphreys. Linear algebraic groups. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1975. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-9443-3.
[19] M. Kamensky.
Model theory and the Tannakian formalism.
Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 367:1095–1120, 2015.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-2014-06062-5.
[20] I. Kaplansky. An introduction to differential algebra. Hermann, Paris, 1957.
[21] L. Landau and E. Lifshitz. The Classical Theory of Fields, volume 2 of Course of
Theoretical Physics. Butterworth–Heinemann, 4rd revised English edition, 1980.
[22] D. Marker. Model theory of differential fields. In Model theory, algebra,
and geometry, volume 39 of Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications, pages 53–63. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. URL
http://library.msri.org/books/Book39/files/dcf.pdf.
[23] A. Minchenko and A. Ovchinnikov. Zariski closures of reductive linear differential algebraic groups. Advances in Mathematics, 227(3):1195–1224, 2011. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2011.03.002.
[24] A. Minchenko and A. Ovchinnikov. Extensions of differential representations of SL2
and tori. Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 12(1):199–224, 2013.
URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1474748012000692.

THIRD ORDER LINEAR DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS WITH PARAMETERS

21

[25] A. Minchenko, A. Ovchinnikov, and M. F. Singer.
Unipotent differential algebraic groups as parameterized differential Galois groups.
Journal
of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 13(4):671–700, 2014.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1474748013000200.
[26] A. Minchenko, A. Ovchinnikov, and M. F. Singer. Reductive linear differential
algebraic group and the Galois groups of parametrized linear differential equations. International Mathematics Research Notices, 2015(7):1733–1793, 2015. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnt344.
[27] C. Mitschi and M. F. Singer. Monodromy groups of parameterized linear differential
equations with regular singularities. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc., 44(5):913–930, 2012.
[28] J. Nagloo and O. León Sánchez. On parameterized differential Galois extensions. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 220(7):2549–2563, 2016. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpaa.2015.12.001.
[29] A. Ovchinnikov. Tannakian categories, linear differential algebraic groups, and
parametrized linear differential equations. Transformation Groups, 14(1):195–223,
2009. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00031-008-9042-9.
[30] J. F. Ritt. Differential Algebra. American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, Vol. XXXIII. American Mathematical Society, New York, N. Y., 1950.
[31] M. van der Put and M. F. Singer.
Galois theory of linear differential equations.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003.
URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55750-7.
[32] W. C. Waterhouse.
Introduction to affine group schemes, volume 66 of
Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-6217-6.
[33] M. Wibmer. Existence of ∂-parameterized Picard-Vessiot extensions over fields
with algebraically closed constants. Journal of Algebra, 361:163–171, 2012. URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2012.03.035.
U NIVERSITY OF V IENNA , D EPARTMENT OF M ATHEMATICS , O SKAR -M ORGENSTERN -P LATZ 1, V I AUSTRIA
E-mail address: an.minchenko@gmail.com

ENNA ,

D EPARTMENT OF M ATHEMATICS , CUNY, Q UEENS C OLLEGE , 65-30 K ISSENA B LVD , Q UEENS , NY
11367, USA
E-mail address: aovchinnikov@qc.cuny.edu

