arXiv:1708.09262v2 [math.NT] 3 Sep 2017

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 OVER RINGS OF S-INTEGERS WITH
INFINITELY MANY UNITS
ALEKSANDER V. MORGAN, ANDREI S. RAPINCHUK, AND BALASUBRAMANIAN SURY
Abstract. Let O be the ring of S-integers in a number field k. We prove that if the group of units
O× is infinite then every matrix in Γ = SL2 (O) is a product of at most 9 elementary matrices. This
completes a long line of research in this direction. As a consequence, we obtain that Γ is boundedly
generated as an abstract group.

To Alex Lubotzky on his 60th birthday
1. Introduction
Let k be a number field. Given a finite subset S of the set V k of valuations of k containing the
k of archimedian valuations, we let O
set V∞
k,S denote the ring of S-integers in k, i.e.
Ok,S = {a ∈ k× | v(a) ≥ 0 for all v ∈ V k \ S} ∪ {0}.

As usual, for any commutative ring R, we let SL2 (R) denote the group of unimodular 2 × 2-matrices
over R and refer to the matrices




1 a
1 0
E12 (a) =
and E21 (b) =
∈ SL2 (R) (a, b ∈ R)
0 1
b 1
as elementary (over R).
It was established in [Va] (see also [L1]) that if the ring of S-integers O = Ok,S has infinitely
many units, the group Γ = SL2 (O) is generated by elementary matrices. The goal of this paper is
to prove that in this case Γ is actually boundedly generated by elementaries.
Theorem 1.1. Let O = Ok,S be the ring of S-integers in a number field k, and assume that the
group of units O× is infinite. Then every matrix in SL2 (O) is a product of at most 9 elementary
matrices.
The quest to validate this property has a considerable history. First, G. Cooke and P. J. Weinberger [CW] established it (with the same bound as in Theorem 1.1) assuming the truth of a
suitable form of the Generalized Riemann Hypothesis, which still remains unproven. Later, it was
shown in [LM] (see also [M]) by analytic tools that the argument can be made unconditional if
|S| ≥ max(5, 2[k : Q] − 3). On the other hand, B. Liehl [L2] proved the result by algebraic methods
for some special fields k. The first unconditional proof in full generality was given by D. Carter,
G. Keller and E. Paige in an unpublished preprint; their argument was streamlined and made
available to the public by D. W. Morris [MCKP]. This argument is based on model theory and
provides no explicit bound on the number of elementaries required; besides, it uses difficult results
from additive number theory.
In [Vs], M. Vsemirnov proved Theorem 1.1 for O = Z[1/p] using the results of D. R. Heath-Brown
[HB] on Artin’s Primitive Root Conjecture (thus, in a broad sense, this proof develops the initial
1

2

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

approach of Cooke and Weinberger [CW]); his bound on the number of elementaries required is
≤ 5. Subsequently, the third-named author re-worked the argument from [Vs] to avoid the use of
[HB] in an unpublished note. These notes were the beginning of the work of the first two authors
that has eventually led to a proof of Theorem 1.1 in the general case. It should be noted that our
proof uses only standard results from number theory, and is relatively short and constructive with
an explicit bound which is independent of the field k and the set S. This, in particular, implies
that Theorem 1.1 remains valid for any infinite S.
The problem of bounded generation (particularly by elementaries) has been considered for Sarithmetic subgroups of algebraic groups other than SL2 . A few years after [CW], Carter and
Keller [CK1] showed that SLn (O) for n ≥ 3 is boundedly generated by elementaries for any ring
O of algebraic integers (see [T] for other Chevalley groups of rank > 1, and [ER] for isotropic, but
nonsplit (or quasi-split), orthogonal groups). The upper bound on the number of factors required to
write every matrix in SLn (O) as a product of elementaries given in [CK1] is 12 (3n2 − n) + 68∆ − 1,
where ∆ is the number of prime divisors of the discriminant of k; in particular, this estimate
depends on the field k. Using our Theorem 1.1, one shows in all cases where the group of units
O× is infinite, this estimate can be improved to 12 (3n2 − n) + 4, hence made independent of k –
see Corollary 4.6. The situation not covered by this result are when O is either Z or the ring of
integers in an imaginary quadratic field – see below. The former case was treated in [CK2] with
an estimate 12 (3n2 − n) + 36, so only in the case of imaginary quadratic fields the question of the
existence of a bound on the number of elementaries independent of the k remains open.
From a more general perspective, Theorem 1.1 should be viewed as a contribution to the sustained
effort aimed at proving that all higher rank lattices are boundedly generated as abstract groups. We
recall that a group Γ is said to have bounded generation (BG) if there exist elements γ1 , . . . , γd ∈ Γ
such that
Γ = hγ1 i · · · hγd i,
where hγi i denotes the cyclic subgroup generated by γi . The interest in this property stems from
the fact that while being purely combinatorial in nature, it is known to have a number of farreaching consequences for the structure and representations of a group, particularly if the latter is
S-arithmetic. For example, under one additional (necessary) technical assumption, (BG) implies
the rigidity of completely reducible complex representations of Γ (known as SS-rigidity) – see [R],
[PR2, Appendix A]. Furthermore, if Γ is an S-arithmetic subgroup of an absolutely simple simply
connected algebraic group G over a number field k, then assuming the truth of the MargulisPlatonov conjecture for the group G(k) of k-rational points (cf. [PR2, §9.1]), (BG) implies the
congruence subgroup property (i.e. the finiteness of the corresponding congruence kernel – see [Lu],
[PR1]). For applications of (BG) to the Margulis-Zimmer conjecture, see [SW]. Given these and
other implications of (BG), we would like to point out the following consequence of Theorem 1.1.
Corollary 1.2. Let O = Ok,S be the ring of S-integers, in a number field k. If the group of units
O× is infinite, then the group Γ = SL2 (O) has bounded generation.
We note that combining this fact with the results of [Lu], [PR1], one obtains an alternative
proof of the centrality of the congruence kernel for SL2 (O) (provided that O× is infinite), originally
established by J.-P. Serre [S1]. We also note that (BG) of SL2 (O) is needed to prove (BG) for some
other groups – cf. [T] and [ER].
Next, it should be pointed out that the assumption that the unit group O× is infinite is necessary
for the bounded generation of SL2 (O), hence cannot be omitted. Indeed, it follows from Dirichlet’s

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

3

Unit Theorem [CF, §2.18] that O× is finite only when |S| = 1 which happens precisely when S is
the set of archimedian valuations in the following two cases:
1) k = Q and O = Z. In this case, the group SL2 (Z) is generated by the elementaries, but has a
nonabelian free
√ subgroup of finite index, which prevents it from having bounded generation.
2) k = Q( −d) for some square-free integer d ≥ 1, and Od is the ring of algebraic integers
integers in k. According to [GS], the group Γ = SL2 (Od ) has a finite index subgroup that admits an
epimorphism onto a nonabelian free group, hence again cannot possibly be boundedly generated.
Moreover, P. M. Cohn [Co] shows that if d ∈
/ {1, 2, 3, 7, 11} then Γ is not even generated by
elementary matrices.
The structure of the paper is the following. In §2 we prove an algebraic result about abelian
subextensions of radical extensions of general field – see Proposition 2.1. This statement, which
may be of independent interest, is used in the paper to prove Theorem 3.7. This theorem is one
of the number-theoretic results needed in the proof of Theorem 1.1, and it is established in §3
along with some other facts from algebraic number theory. One of the key notions in the paper
is that of Q-split prime: we say that a prime p of a number field k is Q-split if it is non-dyadic
and its local degree over the corresponding rational prime is 1. In §3, we establish some relevant
for us properties of such primes (see §3.1) and prove for them in §3.2 the following refinement of
Dirichlet’s Theorem from [BMS].
Theorem 3.3. Let O be the ring of S-integers in a number field k for some finite S ⊂ V k containing
k . If nonzero a, b ∈ O are relatively prime (i.e., aO + bO = O) then there exist infinitely many
V∞
principal Q-split prime ideals p of O with a generator π such that π ≡ a (mod bO) and π > 0 in all
real completions of k.
Subsection 3.3 is devoted to the statement and proof of the key Theorem 3.7, which is another
key number-theoretic result needed in the proof of Theorem 1.1. In §4, we prove Theorem 1.1 and
Corollary 1.2. Finally, in §5 we correct the faulty example from [Vs] of a matrix in SL2 (Z[1/p]),
where p is a prime ≡ 1(mod 29), that is not a product of four elementary matrices – see Proposition
5.1, confirming thereby that the bound of 5 in [Vs] is optimal.
Notations and conventions. For a field k, we let kab denote the maximal abelian extension of k.
Furthermore, µ(k) will denote the group of all roots of unity in k; if µ(k) is finite, we let µ denote
its order. For n ≥ 1 prime to char k, we let ζn denote a primitive n-th root of unity.
In this paper, with the exception of §2, the field k will be a field of algebraic numbers (i.e., a
finite extension of Q), in which case µ(k) is automatically finite. We let Ok denote the ring of
algebraic integers in k. Furthermore, we let V k denote the set of (the equivalence classes of) nonk and V k denote the subsets of archimedean and nonarchimedean
trivial valuations of k, and let V∞
f
valuations, respectively. For any v ∈ V k , we let kv denote the corresponding completion; if v ∈ Vfk
then Ov will denote the valuation ring in kv with the valuation ideal p̂v and the group of units
Uv = O×
v.
k , and O = O
Throughout the paper, S will denote a fixed finite subset of V k containing V∞
k,S the
corresponding ring of S-integers (see above). Then the nonzero prime ideals of O are in a natural
bijective correspondence with the valuations in V k \ S. So, for a nonzero prime ideal p ⊂ O we
let vp ∈ V k \ S denote the corresponding valuation, and conversely, for a valuation v ∈ V k \ S we
let pv ⊂ O denote the corresponding prime ideal (note that pv = O ∩ p̂v ). Generalizing Euler’s

4

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

ϕ-function, for a nonzero ideal a of O, we set
φ(a) = |(O/a)× |.

For simplicity of notation, for an element a ∈ O, φ(a) will always mean φ(aO). Finally, for a ∈ k× ,
we let V (a) = { v ∈ Vfk | v(a) 6= 0 }.
Given a prime number p, one can write any integer n in the form n = pe ·m, for some non-negative
integer e, where p /| m. We then call pe the p-primary component of n.
2. Abelian subextensions of radical extensions.
In this section, k is an arbitrary field. For a prime p 6= char k, we let µ(k)p denote the subgroup
d
of µ(k), consisting of elements satisfying xp = 1 for some d ≥ 0. If this subgroup is finite, we set
λ(k)p to be the non-negative integer satisfying |µ(k)p | = pλ(k)p ; otherwise, set λ(k)p = ∞. Clearly
Q
√
if µ(k) is finite, then µ = p pλ(k)p . For a ∈ k× , we write n a to denote an arbitrary root of the
polynomial xn − a.
The goal of this section is to prove the following.
Proposition 2.1. Let n ≥ 1 be an integer prime to char k, and let u ∈ k × be such
that u ∈
/ µ(k)p k×
√
n
n
for all p | n. Then the polynomial x − u is irreducible over k, and for t = u we have
n
,
k(t) ∩ kab = k(tm ) where m = Y
gcd(n, pλ(k)p )

p

p|n

with the convention that

gcd(n, p∞ )

is simply the p-primary component of n.

We first treat the case n = pd where p is a prime.
Proposition 2.2. Let p be a prime number 6= char k, and let u ∈ k × \ µ(k)p (k× )p . Fix an integer
√
d
d ≥ 1, set t = p u. Then
γ

k(t) ∩ kab = k(tp ) where γ = max(0, d − λ(k)p ).

We begin with the following lemma.
√
Lemma 2.3. Let p be a prime number 6= char k, and let u ∈ k × \ µ(k)p (k× )p . Set k1 = k( p u).
Then
(i) [k1 : k] = p;
(ii) µ(k1 )p = µ(k)p
√
(iii) None of the p u are in µ(k1 )p (k1× )p .
Proof. (i) follows from [La, Ch. VI, §9], as u ∈
/ (k× )p .
(ii): If λ(k)p = ∞, then there is nothing to prove. Otherwise, we need to show that for λ = λ(k)p ,
/ k1 . Assume the contrary. Then, first, λ > 0. Indeed, we have a tower of inclusions
we have ζpλ+1 ∈
k ⊆ k(ζp ) ⊆ k1 . Since [k1 : k] = p by (i), and [k(ζp ) : k] ≤ p − 1, we conclude that [k(ζp ) : k] = 1,
i.e. ζp ∈ k.
/ k, we have
Now, since ζpλ+1 ∈
q
(1)
k1 = k(ζpλ+1 ) = k( p ζpλ ).

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

5

√
√
But according to Kummer’s theory (which applies because ζp ∈ k), the fact that k( p a) = k( p b)
for a, b ∈ k× implies that the images of a and b in k× /(k× )p generate the same subgroup. So,
it follows from (1) that uζpi ∈ (k× )p for some i, and therefore u ∈ µ(k)p (k× )p , contradicting our
choice of u.
√
√
(iii): Assume the contrary, i.e. some p-th root p u can be written in the form p u = ζap for some
a ∈ k1× and ζ ∈ µ(k1 )p . Let N = Nk1 /k : k1× → k× be the norm map. Then
√
N ( p u) = N (ζ)N (a)p .
√
√
Clearly, N (ζ) ∈ µ(k)p , so N ( p u) ∈ µ(k)p (k× )p . On the other hand, N ( p u) = u for p odd, and
−u for p = 2. In all cases, we obtain that u ∈ µ(k)p (k× )p . A contradiction.

A simple induction now yields the following:
Corollary 2.4. Let p be a prime number 6= char k, and let u ∈ k × \ µ(k)p (k× )p . For a fixed integer
√
d
d ≥ 1, set kd = k( p u). Then:
(i) [kd : k] = pd ;

(ii) µ(kd )p = µ(k)p , hence λ(kd )p = λ(k)p .
Of course, assertion (i) is well-known and follows, for example, from [La, Ch. VI, §9].
Lemma 2.5. Let p be a prime number 6= char k, and let u ∈ k × \ µ(k)p (k× )p . Fix an integer
√
d
d ≥ 1, and set t = p u and kd = k(t). Furthermore, for an integer j between 0 and d define
√
d−j
j
ℓj = k(tp ) ≃ k( p u). Then any intermediate subfield k ⊆ ℓ ⊆ kd is of the form ℓ = ℓj for some
j ∈ {0, . . . , d}.
Proof. Given such an ℓ, it follows from Corollary 2.4(i) that [kd : ℓ] = pj for some 0 ≤ j ≤ d.
d
Since any conjugate of t is of the form ζ · t where ζ p = 1, we see that the norm Nkd /ℓ (t) is of the
d

form ζ0 tp , where again ζ0p = 1. Then ζ0 ∈ µ(kd )p , and using Corollary 2.4(ii), we conclude that
j
ζ0 ∈ k ⊆ ℓ. So, tp ∈ ℓ, implying the inclusion ℓd−j ⊆ ℓ. Now, the fact that [kd : ℓd−j ] = pj implies
that ℓ = ℓd−j , yielding our claim.

j

√
d
Proof of Proposition 2.2. Set λ = λ(k)p . Then for any d ≤ λ the extension k( p u)/k is abelian,
and our assertion is trivial. So, we may assume that λ < ∞ and d > λ. It follows from Lemma 2.5
j
that ℓ := k(t) ∩ kab is of the form ℓd−j = k(tp ) for some j ∈ {0, . . . , d}. On the other hand, ℓd−j /k
d−j
d−j
of tp , implying
is a Galois extension of degree pd−j , so must contain the conjugate ζpd−j tp
√
d−j
that ζpd−j ∈ ℓd−j . Since ℓd−j ≃ k( p
u), we conclude from Corollary 2.4(ii) that d − j ≤ λ,
γ
i.e. j ≥ d − λ. This proves the inclusion ℓ ⊆ k(tp ); the opposite inclusion is obvious.
Proof of Proposition 2.1.√Let n = pα1 1 · · · pαs s be the prime factorization of n, and for i = 1, . . . , s
set ni = n/pαi i . Let t = n u and ti = tni (so, ti is a pαi i -th root of u). Using again [La, Ch. VI, §9]
we conclude that [k(t) : k] = n, which implies that
(2)

[k(t) : k(ti )] = ni for all i = 1, . . . , r.

6

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

Since for K := k(t) ∩ kab the degree [K : k] divides n, we can write K = K1 · · · Ks where Ki is
an abelian extension of k of degree pβi i for some βi ≤ αi . Then the degree [Ki (ti ) : k(ti )] must be
a power of pi . Comparing with (2), we conclude that Ki ⊆ k(ti ). Applying Proposition 2.2 with
d = αi , we obtain the inclusion
(3)

p

γi

γi

Ki ⊆ k(ti i ) = k(tni pi ) where γi = max(0 , αi − λ(k)pi ).

It is easy to see that the g.c.d. of the numbers ni pγi i for i = 1, . . . , s is
m= Y

n
gcd(n, pλ(k)p )

.

p|n

γ1

γs

Furthermore, the subgroup of k(t)× generated by tn1 p1 , . . . , tns ps coincides with the cyclic subgroup with generator tm . Then (3) yields the following inclusion
K = K1 · · · Ks ⊆ k(tm ).
Since the opposite inclusion is obvious, our claim follows.



Corollary 2.6. Assume that µ = |µ(k)| < ∞. Let P be a finite set of rational primes, and define
Y
µ′ = µ ·
p.
p∈P

Given u ∈ k× such that

u∈
/ µ(k)p (k× )p for all p ∈ P,

for any abelian extension F of k the intersection
E := F ∩ k
is contained in k

√
µ


u, ζµ′ .

√
µ′

u, ζµ′



Proof. Without loss of generality we may assume that ζµ′ ∈ F , and then we have the following
tower of field extensions


√ 
√
√
′
k µ u , ζµ′ ⊂ E µ u ⊂ k µ u , ζµ′ .



Q
√
√
′
We note that the degree k µ u , ζµ′ : k µ u , ζµ′ divides p∈P p. So, if we assume that the
assertion
the lemma
is false,
the
 of √
 then we should be able to find to find a prime
 p∈

√
√P that divides
√
µ
µ
µ′
µ
′
′
degree E ( u) : k
u , ζµ , and therefore does not divide the degree k
u , ζµ : E ( u) .
√
√
√
The latter
implies that pµ u ∈ E ( µ u). But this contradicts Proposition 2.1 since E ( µ u) =
√
E · k ( µ u) is an abelian extension of k.


BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

7

3. Results from Algebraic Number Theory
1. Q-split primes. Our proof of Theorem 1.1 heavily relies on properties of so-called Q-split
primes in O.
Definition. Let p be a nonzero prime ideal of O, and let p be the corresponding rational prime.
We say that p is Q-split if p > 2, and for the valuation v = vp we have kv = Qp .
For the convenience of further references, we list some simple properties of Q-split primes.
Lemma 3.1. Let p be a Q-split prime in O, and for n ≥ 1 let ρn : O → O/pn be the corresponding
quotient map. Then:
(a) the group of invertible elements (O/pn )× is cyclic for any n;
(b) if c ∈ O is such that ρ2 (c) generates (O/p2 )× then ρn (c) generates (O/pn )× for any n ≥ 2.
Proof. Let p > 2 be the rational prime corresponding to p, and v = vp be the associated valuation
of k. By definition, kv = Qp , hence Ov = Zp . So, for any n ≥ 1 we will have canonical ring
isomorphisms
(4)

O/pn ≃ Ov /p̂nv ≃ Zp /pn Zp ≃ Z/pn Z.

Then (a) follows from the well-known fact that the group (Z/pn Z)× is cyclic. Furthermore, the
isomorphisms in (4) are compatible for different n’s. Since the kernel of the group homomorphism
(Z/pn Z)× → (Z/p2 Z)× is contained in the Frattini subgroup of (Z/pn Z)× for n ≥ 2, the same is
true for the homomorphism (O/pn )× → (O/p2 )× . This easily implies (b).

Let p be a Q-split prime, let v = vp be the corresponding valuation. We will now define the level
ℓp (u) of an element u ∈ O×
v and establish some properties of this notion that we will need later.
Let p > 2 be the corresponding rational prime. The group of p-adic units Up = Z×
p has the
natural filtration by the congruence subgroups
It is well-known that

i
U(i)
p = 1 + p Zp for i ∈ N.

Up = C × U(1)
p
where C is the cyclic group of order (p − 1) consisting of all roots of unity in Qp . Furthermore,
(i)
the logarithmic map yields a continuous isomorphism Up → pi Zp , which implies that for any
u ∈ Up \ C, the closure of the cyclic group generated by u has a decomposition of the form
hui = C ′ × U(ℓ)
p

for some subgroup C ′ ⊂ C and some integer ℓ = ℓp (u) ≥ 1 which we will refer to as the p-level of
u. We also set ℓp (u) = ∞ for u ∈ C.
Returning now to a Q-split prime p of k and keeping the above notations, we define the p-level
ℓp (u) of u ∈ O×
v as the the p-level of the element in Up that corresponds to u under the natural
identification Ov = Zp . We will need the following.
Lemma 3.2. Let p be a Q-split prime in O, let p be the corresponding rational prime, and v = vp
the corresponding valuation. Suppose we are given an integer d ≥ 1 not divisible by p, a unit
u ∈ O×
v of infinite order having p-level s = ℓp (u), and integer ns , and an element c ∈ Ov such
that uns ≡ c (mod ps ). Then for any t ≥ s there exists an integer nt ≡ ns (mod d) for which
unt ≡ c (mod pt ).

8

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

Proof. In view of the identification Ov = Zp , it is enough to prove the corresponding statement
for Zp . More precisely, we need to show the following: Let u ∈ Up be a unit of infinite order and
p-level s = ℓp (u). If c ∈ Up and ns ∈ Z are such that uns ≡ c (mod ps ), then for any t ≥ s there
(s)
exists nt ≡ ns (mod d) such that unt ≡ c (mod pt ). Thus, we have that uns ∈ cUp , and we wish to
show that
\
uns · hud i cUp(t) 6= ∅.
(t)

Since cUp is open, it is enough to show that

uns · hud i

(5)

\

cU(t)
p 6= ∅.
(s)

But since ℓp (u) = s and d is prime to p, we have the inclusion hud i ⊃ Up , and (5) is obvious.



2. Dirichlet’s Theorem for Q-split primes. We will now establish the existence of Q-split
primes in arithmetic progressions.
Theorem 3.3. Let O be the ring of S-integers in a number field k for some finite S ⊂ V k containing
k . If nonzero a, b ∈ O are relatively prime (i.e., aO + bO = O) then there exist infinitely many
V∞
principal Q-split prime ideals p of O with a generator π such that π ≡ a (mod bO) and π > 0 in all
real completions of k.
The proof follows the same general strategy as the proof of Dirichlet’s Theorem in [BMS] see Theorem A.10 in the Appendix on Number Theory. First, we will quickly review some basic
facts from global class field theory (cf., for example, [CF], Ch. VII) and fix some notations. Let Jk
denote the group of ideles of k with the natural topology; as usual, we identify k× with the (discrete)
subgroup of principal ideles in Jk . Then for every open subgroup U ⊂ Jk of finite index containing
k× there exists a finite abelian Galois extension L/k and a continuous surjective homomorphism
αL/k : Jk → Gal(L/k) (known as the norm residue map) such that
• U = Ker αL/k = NL/k (JL )k× ;

• for every nonarchimedean v ∈ V k which is unramified in L we let FrL/k (v) denote the Frobenius automorphism of L/k at v (i.e., the Frobenius automorphism FrL/k (w|v) associated to
some (equivalently, any) extension w|v) and let i(v) ∈ Jk be an idele with the components

1 , v ′ 6= v
,
i(v)v′ =
πv , v ′ = v
where πv ∈ kv is a uniformizer; then αL/k (i(v)) = FrL/k (v).

k , we define the following open subgroup of J :
For our fixed finite subset S ⊂ V k containing V∞
k
Y
Y
×
US :=
kv ×
Uv .
v∈S

v∈V k \S

Then the abelian extension of k corresponding to the subgroup US := US k× will be called the
Hilbert S-class field of k and denoted K throughout the rest of the paper.
Next, we will introduce the idelic S-analogs of ray groups. Let b be a nonzero ideal of O = Ok,S
with the prime factorization
(6)

b = pn1 1 · · · pnt t ,

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

9

let vi = vpi be the valuation in V k \ S associated with pi , and let V (b) = {v1 , . . . , vt }. We then
define an open subgroup
Y
RS (b) =
Rv
v∈V k

where the open subgroups Rv ⊆ kv× are defined as follows. For v real, we let Rv be the subgroup
of positive elements, letting Rv = kv× for all other v ∈ S, and setting Rv = Uv for all v ∈
/ S ∪ V (b).
It remains to define Rv for v = vi ∈ V (b), in which case we set it to be the congruence subgroup
(n )
Uvi i of Uvi modulo p̂nvii . We then let K(b) denote the abelian extension of k corresponding to
RS (b) := RS (b)k× (“ray class field”). (Obviously, K(b) contains K for any nonzero ideal b of O.)
Furthermore, given c ∈ k × , we let jb (c) denote an idele with the following components:

c , v ∈ V (b),
jb (c)v =
1 , v∈
/ V (b).

Then θb : k× → Gal(K(b)/k) defined by c 7→ αK(b)/k (jb (c))−1 is a group homomorphism.
The following lemma summarizes some simple properties of these definitions.
Lemma 3.4. Let b ⊂ O be a nonzero ideal.

(a) If a nonzero c ∈ O is relatively prime to b (i.e. cO + b = O) then θb (c) restricts to the Hilbert
S-class field K trivially.

(b) If nonzero c1 , c2 ∈ O are both relatively prime to b then c1 ≡ c2 (mod b) is equivalent to
(7)

prb (jb (c1 )RS (b)) = prb (jb (c2 )RS (b))

where prb : Jk →

Y

kv× is the natural projection.

v∈V (b)

Proof. (a): Since c is relatively prime to b, we have jb (c) ∈ US . So, using the functoriality properties
of the norm residue map, we obtain
θb (c)|K = αK(b)/k (jb (c))−1 |K = αK/k (jb (c))−1 = idK
because jb (c) ∈ US ⊂ US = Ker αK/k , as required.

(b): As above, let (6) be the prime factorization of b, let vi = vpi ∈ V k \ S be the valuation
associated with pi . Then for any c1 , c2 ∈ O, the congruence c1 ≡ c2 (mod b) is equivalent to
c1 ≡ c2 (mod p̂nvii ) for all i = 1, . . . , t.

(8)

On the other hand, for any v ∈ Vfk and any u1 , u2 ∈ Uv , the congruence u1 ≡ u2 (mod p̂nv ) for n ≥ 1
is equivalent to
u1 Uv(n) = u2 Uv(n) ,
(n)

where Uv is the congruence subgroup of Uv modulo p̂nv . Thus, for (nonzero) c1 , c2 ∈ O prime to
b, the conditions (7) and (8) are equivalent, and our assertion follows.

We will now establish a result needed for the proof of Theorem 3.3 and its refinements.
Proposition 3.5. Let b be a nonzero ideal of O, let a ∈ O be relatively prime to b, and let F be a
finite Galois extension of Q that contains K(b). Assume that a rational prime p is unramified in F

10

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

and there exists an extension w of the p-adic valuation vp to F such that FrF/Q (w|vp )|K(b) = θb (a).
If the restriction v of w to k does not belong to S ∪ V (b) then:
(a) kv = Qp ;
(b) the prime ideal p = pv of O corresponding to v is principal with a generator π satisfying
π ≡ a (mod b) and π > 0 in every real completion of k.

(We note since v is unramified in F which contains K(b), we in fact automatically have that
v∈
/ V (b).)

Proof. (a): Since the Frobenius Fr(w|vp ) generates Gal(Fw /Qp ), our claim immediately follows
from the fact that it acts trivially on k.
(b): According to (a), the local degree [kv : Qp ] is 1, hence the residual degree f (v|vp ) is also 1,
and therefore
Fr(w|v) = Fr(w|vp )f (v|vp ) = Fr(w|vp ).
Thus,
αK(b)/k (i(v)) = Fr(w|v)|K(b) = θb (a) = αK(b)/k (jb (a))−1 ,
and therefore
i(v)jb (a) ∈ Ker αK(b)/K = RS (b) = RS (b)k× .
So, we can write
(9)
Then

i(v)jb (a) = rπ with r ∈ RS (b), π ∈ k× .

π = i(v)(jb (a)r−1 ).
Since a is prime to b, the idele jb (a) ∈ US , and then jb (a)r−1 ∈ US . For any v ′ ∈ V k \ (S ∪ {v}), the
v ′ -component of i(v) is trivial, so we obtain that π ∈ Uv′ . On the other hand, the v-component of
i(v) is a uniformizer πv of kv implying that π is also a uniformizer. Thus, p = πO is precisely the
prime ideal associated with v. For any real v ′ , the v ′ -components of i(v) and jb (a) are trivial, so π
equals the inverse of the v ′ -component of r, hence positive in kv′ . Finally, it follows from (9) that
prb (jb (a)) = prb (jb (π)r),
so π ≡ a (mod b) by Lemma 3.4(b), as required.



P roof of T heorem 3.3. Set b = bO and σ = θb (a) ∈ Gal(K(b)/k). Let F be the Galois closure
of K(b) over Q, and let τ ∈ Gal(F/Q) be such that τ |K(b) = σ. Applying Chebotarev’s Density
Theorem (see [CF, Ch. VII, 2.4] or [BMS, A.6]), we find infinitely many rational primes p > 2 for
which the p-adic valuation vp is unramified in F , does not lie below any valuations in S ∪ V (b),
and has an extension w to F such that FrF/Q (w|vp ) = τ . Let v = w|k, and let p = pv be the
corresponding prime ideal of O. Since p > 2, part (a) of Proposition 3.5 implies that p is Q-split.
Furthermore, part (b) of it asserts that p has a generator π such that π ≡ a (mod b) and π > 0 in
every real completion of k, as required.

Remark. Dong Quan Ngoc Nguyen pointed out to us that Theorem 3.3, hence the essential part
of Dirichlet’s Theorem from [BMS] (in particular, (A.11)), was known already to Hasse [H, Satz
13]. In the current paper, however, we use the approach described in [BMS] to establish the key
Theorem 3.7; the outline of the constructions from [BMS] as well as the technical Lemma 3.4 and
Proposition 3.5 are included for this purpose. We note that in contrast to the argument in [BMS],

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

11

our proofs of Theorems 3.3 and 3.7 involve the application of Chebotarev’s Density Theorem to
noncommutative Galois extension.
We will now prove a statement from Galois theory that we will need in the next subsection.
Lemma 3.6. Let F/Q be a finite Galois extension, and let κ be an integer for which F ∩ Qab ⊆
Q(ζκ ). Then F (ζκ ) ∩ Qab = Q(ζκ ).
Proof. We need to show that
(10)

[F (ζκ ) : F (ζκ ) ∩ Qab ] = [F (ζκ ) : Q(ζκ )].

Let
G = Gal(F (ζκ )/Q) and H = Gal(F/Q).
Then the left-hand side of (10) is equal to the order of the commutator subgroup [G, G], while the
right-hand side equals
[F : F ∩ Q(ζκ )] = [F : F ∩ Qab ] = |[H, H]|.
Now, the restriction gives an injective group homomorphism
ψ : G → H × Gal(Q(ζκ )/Q).
Since the restriction G → H is surjective, we obtain that ψ implements an isomorphism between
[G, G] and [H, H] × {1}. Thus, [G, G] and [H, H] have the same order, and (10) follows.

3. Key statement. In this subsection we will establish another number-theoretic statement
which plays a crucial role in the proof of Theorem 1.1. To formulate it, we need to introduce some
additional notations. As above, let µ = |µ(k)| be the number of roots of unity in k, let K be the
Hilbert S-class field of k, and let K̃ be the Galois closure of K over Q. Suppose we are given two
finite sets P and Q of rational primes. Let
Y
µ′ = µ ·
p,
p∈P

pick an integer λ ≥ 1 which is divisible by µ and for which K̃ ∩ Qab ⊆ Q(ζλ ), and set
Y
q.
λ′ = λ ·
q∈Q

Theorem 3.7. Let u ∈ O× be a unit of infinite order such that u ∈
/ µ(k)p (k× )p for every prime
p ∈ P , and let q be a Q-split prime of O which is relatively prime to λ′ . Then there exist infinitely
many principal Q-split primes p = πO of O with a generator π such that
(1) for each p ∈ P , the p-primary component of φ(p)/µ divides the p-primary component of
the order of u (mod p);
(2) π(mod q2 ) generates (O/q2 )× ;
(3) gcd(φ(p), λ′ ) = λ.

12

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 3.3, we will derive the required assertion by applying Chebotarev’s Density Theorem to a specific automorphism of an appropriate finite Galois extension.
Let K(q2 ) be the abelian extension K(b) of k introduced in subsection 3.2 for the ideal b = q2 .
Set


√
′
L1 = K(q2 )(ζλ′ ), L2 = k ζµ′ , µ u , L = L1 L2 and ℓ = L1 ∩ L2 .
Then
(11)

Gal(L/k) = { σ = (σ1 , σ2 ) ∈ Gal(L1 /k) × Gal(L2 /k) | σ1 |ℓ = σ2 |ℓ }.

So, to construct σ ∈ Gal(L/k) that we will need in the argument it is enough to construct appropriate σi ∈ Gal(Li /k) for i = 1, 2 that have the same restriction to ℓ.
Lemma 3.8. The restriction maps define the following isomorphisms:
(1) Gal(L1 /K) ≃ Gal(K(q2 )/K) × Gal(K(ζλ′ )/K);
Y
Gal(Q(ζqλ )/Q(ζλ )).
(2) Gal(K(ζλ′ )/K(ζλ )) ≃ Gal(Q(ζλ′ )/Q(ζλ )) ≃
q∈Q

Proof. (1): We need to show that K(q2 ) ∩ K(ζλ ) = K. But the Galois extensions K(q2 )/K and
K(ζλ )/K are respectively totally and unramified at the extensions of vq to K (since q is prime to
λ), so the required fact is immediate.
(2): Since K(ζλ′ ) = K(ζλ ) · Q(ζλ′ ), we only need to show that
(12)

K(ζλ ) ∩ Q(ζλ′ ) = Q(ζλ ).

We have
K(ζλ ) ∩ Q(ζλ′ ) ⊆ K̃(ζλ ) ∩ Qab = Q(ζλ )

by Lemma 3.6. This proves one inclusion in (12); the other inclusion is obvious.



Since q is Q-split, the group (O/q2 )× is cyclic (Lemma 3.1(a)), and we pick c ∈ O so that c
(mod q2 ) is a generator of this group. We then set
σ1′ = θq2 (c) ∈ Gal(K(q2 )/K)
in the notations of subsection 3.2 (cf. Lemma 3.4(a)). Next, for q ∈ Q, we let q e(q) be the q-primary
component of λ. Then using the isomorphism from Lemma 3.8(2), we can find σ1′′ ∈ Gal(K(ζλ′ )/K)
such that
(13)

σ1′′ (ζλ ) = ζλ but σ1′′ (ζqe(q)+1 ) 6= ζqe(q)+1 for all q ∈ Q.

We then define σ1 ∈ Gal(L1 /K) to the automorphism corresponding to the pair (σ1′ , σ1′′ ) in terms
of the isomorphism from Lemma 3.8(1) (in other words, the restrictions of σ1 to K(q2 ) and K(ζλ′ )
are σ1′ and σ1′′ , respectively).
µ′ /ν
√
√
√
−1
′
′
We fix a µ′ -th root µ u, and for ν|µ′ set ν u = µ u
(also denoted uν ). To construct
σ2 ∈ Gal(L2 /k), we need the following.
Lemma 3.9. Let σ0 ∈ Gal(ℓ/k). Then there exists σ2 ∈ Gal(L2 /k) such that
(1) σ2 |ℓ = σ0 ;

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

13

(2) for any p ∈ P , if pd(p) is the p-primary component of µ then
 −(d(p)+1) 
−(d(p)+1)
6= up
,
σ2 up

and consequently either σ2 (ζpd(p)+1 ) 6= ζpd(p)+1 or σ2 acts nontrivially on all pd(p)+1 -th roots
of u.

Proof. Since L1 /k is an abelian extension, we conclude from Corollary 2.6 that

√
(14)
ℓ ⊆ k µ u, ζµ′ ⊆ kab .
√
On the other hand, according to Proposition 2.1, none of the roots pµ u for p ∈ P lies in kab , and
the restriction maps yield an isomorphism

 √
Y




√
√
√
′
Gal k pµ u, ζµ′ /k µ u, ζµ′ .
Gal k µ u, ζµ′ /k µ u, ζµ′ →
p∈P




√
√
′
such that
It follows that for each p ∈ P we can find τp ∈ Gal k µ u, ζµ′ /k µ u, ζµ′


 −(d(p)+1) 
−(d(q)+1)
−(d(q)+1)
−(d(p)+1)
for all q ∈ P \ {p}.
= uq
and τp uq
= ζ p · up
τp up

Now, let σ̃0 be any extension of σ0 to L2 . For p ∈ P , define



 1 , σ̃0 up−(d(p)+1) = up−(d(p)+1)


χ(p) =
 0 , σ̃0 up−(d(p)+1) 6= up−(d(p)+1)
Set

σ2 = σ̃0 ·

Y

τpχ(p) .

p∈P

In view of (14), all τp ’s act trivially on ℓ, so σ2 |ℓ = σ̃0 |ℓ = σ0 and (1) holds. Furthermore, the
choice of the τp ’s and the χ(p)’s implies that (2) also holds.

Continuing the proof of Theorem 3.7, we now use σ1 ∈ Gal(L1 /k) constructed above, set σ0 =
σ1 |ℓ, and using Lemma 3.9 construct σ2 ∈ Gal(L2 /k) with the properties described therein. In
particular, part (1) of this lemma in conjunction with (11) implies that the pair (σ1 , σ2 ) corresponds
to an automorphism σ ∈ Gal(L/k). As in the proof of Theorem 3.3, we let F denote the Galois
closure of L over Q, and let σ̃ ∈ Gal(F/Q) be such that σ̃|L = σ. By Chebotarev’s Density Theorem,
there exist infinitely many rational primes p > 2 that are relatively prime to λ′ · µ′ and for which
the p-adic valuation vp is unramified in F , does not lie below any valuation in S ∪ {vq }, and has
an extension w to F such that FrF/Q (w|vp ) = σ̃. Let v = w|k, and let p = pv be the corresponding
prime ideal of O. As in the proof of Theorem 3.3, we see that p is Q-split. Furthermore, since
σ|K(q2 ) = θq2 (c), we conclude that p has a generator π such that π ≡ c (mod q2 ) (cf. Proposition
3.5(b)). Then by construction π (mod q2 ) generates (O/q2 )× , verifying condition (2) of Theorem
3.7.
To verify condition (1), we fix p ∈ P and consider two cases. First, suppose σ(ζpd(p)+1 ) 6= ζpd(p)+1 .
Since p is prime to p, this means that the residue field O/p does not contain an element of order
pd(p)+1 (although, since µ is prime to p, it does contain an element of order µ, hence of order
pd(p) ). So, in this case φ(p)/µ is prime to p, and there is nothing to prove. Now, suppose that

14

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

σ(ζpd(p)+1 ) = ζpd(p)+1 . Then by construction σ acts nontrivially on every pd(p)+1 -th root of u, and
d(p)+1

− u has no roots in kvp . Again, since p is prime to p, we see
therefore the polynomial X p
from Hensel’s lemma that u (mod p) is not a pd(p)+1 -th power in the residue field. It follows that
the p-primary component of the order of u (mod p) is not less than the p-primary component of
φ(p)/pd(p) , and (1) follows.
Finally, by construction σ acts trivially on ζλ but nontrivially on ζqλ for any q ∈ Q. Since p is
prime to λ′ , we see that the residue field O/p contains an element of order λ, but does not contain
an element of order qλ for any q ∈ Q. This means that λ | φ(p) but φ(p)/λ is relatively prime to
each q ∈ Q, which is equivalent to condition (3) of Theorem 3.7.

4. Proof of Theorem 1.1
First, we will introduce some additional notations needed to convert the task of factoring a given
matrix A ∈ SL2 (O) as a product of elementary matrices into the task of reducing the first row of
A to (1, 0). Let
R(O) = {(a, b) ∈ O2 | aO + bO = O}
(note that R(O) is precisely the set of all first rows of matrices A ∈ SL2 (O)). For λ ∈ O, one defines
two permutations, e+ (λ) and e− (λ), of R(O) given respectively by
(a, b) 7→ (a, b + λa) and (a, b) 7→ (a + λb, b).

These permutations will be called elementary transformations of R(O). For (a, b), (c, d) ∈ R(O) we
n
will write (a, b) ⇒ (c, d) to indicate the fact that (c, d) can be obtained from (a, b) by a sequence
of n (equivalently, ≤ n) elementary transformations. For the convenience of further reference, we
will record some simple properties of this relation.
Lemma 4.1. Let (a, b) ∈ R(O).
n
n
(1a) If (c, d) ∈ R(O) and (a, b) ⇒ (c, d), then (c, d) ⇒ (a, b).
m

n

m+n

(1b) If (c, d), (e, f ) ∈ R(O) are such that (a, b) ⇒ (c, d) and (c, d) ⇒ (e, f ), then (a, b) ⇒ (e, f ).
1

(2a) If c ∈ O such that c ≡ a(mod bO), then (c, b) ∈ R(O), and (a, b) ⇒ (c, b).
1

(2b) If d ∈ O such that d ≡ b(mod aO), then (a, d) ∈ R(O), and (a, b) ⇒ (a, d).
n

(3a) If (a, b) ⇒ (1, 0) then any matrix A ∈ SL2 (O) with the first row (a, b) is a product of ≤ n + 1
elementary matrices.
n

(3b) If (a, b) ⇒ (0, 1) then any matrix A ∈ SL2 (O) with the second row (a, b) is a product of ≤ n + 1
elementary matrices.
2
(4a) If a ∈ O× then (a, b) ⇒ (0, 1).
2
(4b) If b ∈ O× then (a, b) ⇒ (1, 0).

Proof. For (1a), we observe that the inverse of an elementary transformation is again an elementary
transformation given by [e± (λ)]−1 = e± (−λ), so the required fact follows. Part (1b) is obvious.
n
(Note that (1) implies that the relation between (a, b) and (c, d) ∈ R(O) defined by (a, b) ⇒ (c, d)
for some n ∈ N is an equivalence relation.)
In (2a), we have c = a + λb with λ ∈ O. Then

cO + bO = aO + bO = O,

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

15

so (c, a) ∈ R(O), and e+ (λ) takes (a, b) to (c, b). The argument for (2b) is similar.

(3a) Suppose A ∈ SL2 (O) has the first row (a, b). Then for λ ∈ O, the first row of the product
AE12 (λ) is (a, b + λa) = e+ (λ)(a, b), and similarly the first row of AE21 (λ) is e− (λ)(a, b). So, the
n
fact that (a, b) ⇒ (1, 0) implies that there exists a matrix U ∈ SL2 (O) which is a product of n
elementary matrices and is such that AU has the first row (1, 0). This means that AU = E21 (z) for
some z ∈ O, and then A = E21 (z)U −1 is a product of ≤ n + 1 elementary matrices. The argument
for (3b) is similar.



Part (4a) follows since e− −a e+ a−1 (1 − b) (a, b) = (0, 1). The proof of (4b) is similar.

Remark. All assertions of Lemma 4.1 are valid over any commutative ring O.

Corollary 4.2. Let q be a principal Q-split prime ideal of O with generator q, and let z ∈ O be
such that z(mod q2 ) generates (O/q2 )× . Given an element of R(O) of the form (b, q n ) with n ≥ 2,
1
and an integer t0 , there exists an integer t ≥ t0 such that (b, q n ) ⇒ (z t , q n ).
Proof. By Lemma 3.1(b), the element z(mod qn ) generates (O/qn )× . Since b is prime to q, one can
find t ∈ Z such that b ≡ z t (mod qn ). Adding to t a suitable multiple of φ(qn ) if necessary, we can
assume that t ≥ t0 . Our assertion then follows from Lemma 4.1(2a).


Lemma 4.3. Suppose we are given (a, b) ∈ R(O), a finite subset T ⊆ Vfk , and an integer n 6= 0.
1

Then there exists α ∈ Ok and r ∈ O× such that V (α) ∩ T = ∅, and (a, b) ⇒ (αr n , b).

k we let m denote the maximal ideal of
Proof. Let hk be the class number of k. If for each v ∈ S \V∞
v
Ok corresponding to v, then the ideal (mv )hk is principal, and its generator πv satisfies v(πv ) = hk
k;
and w(πv ) = 0 for all w ∈ Vfk \ {v}. Let R be the subgroup of k× generated by πv for v ∈ S \ V∞
note that R ⊂ O× . We can pick r ∈ R so that a′ := ar −n ∈ Ok . We note that since a and b are
relatively prime in O, we have V (a′ ) ∩ V (b) ⊂ S.
Now, it follows from the strong approximation theorem that there exists γ ∈ Ok such that
k,
v(γb) ≥ 0 and v(γb) ≡ 0(mod nhk ) for all v ∈ S \ V∞
and v(γb) = 0 for all v ∈ V (a′ ) \ S.

k . Set
Then, in particular, we can find s ∈ R so that v(γbs−1 ) = 0 for all v ∈ S \ V∞

By construction,
(15)

γ ′ := γs−1 ∈ O and b′ := γ ′ b ∈ Ok .

k
v(b′ ) = 0 for all v ∈ V (a′ ) ∪ (S \ V∞
),

implying that V (a′ ) ∩ V (b′ ) = ∅, which means that a′ and b′ are relatively prime in Ok .
Again, by the strong approximation theorem we can find t ∈ Ok such that
v(t) = 0 for v ∈ T ∩ V (a′ ) and v(t) > 0 for v ∈ T \ V (a′ ).

Set α = a′ + tb′ ∈ Ok . Then for v ∈ T ∩ V (a′ ) we have v(a′ ) > 0 and v(tb′ ) = 0 (in view of (15)),
while for v ∈ T \ V (a′ ) we have v(a′ ) = 0 and v(tb′ ) > 0. In either case,
v(α) = v(a′ + tb′ ) = 0 for all v ∈ T,

i.e. V (α) ∩ T = ∅. On the other hand,

a + r n tγ ′ b = r n (a′ + tb′ ) = r n α,

16

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY
1

which means that (a, b) → (αr n , b), as required.



Recall that we let µ denote the number of roots of unity in k.
Lemma 4.4. Let (a, b) ∈ R(O) be such that a = α · r µ for some α ∈ Ok and r ∈ O× where V (α) is
disjoint from S ∪ V (µ). Then there exist a′ ∈ O and infinitely many Q-split prime principal ideals
3
q of O with a generator q such that for any m ≡ 1(mod φ(a′ O)) we have (a, b) ⇒ (a′ , q µm ).
Proof. The argument below is adapted from the proof of Lemma 3 in [CK1]. It relies on the
properties of the power residue symbol (in particular, the power reciprocity law) described in the
Appendix on Number Theory in [BMS]. We will work with all v ∈ V k (and not only v ∈ V k \ S),
so to each such v we associate a symbol (“modulus”) mv . For v ∈ Vfk we will identify mv with the
corresponding maximal ideal of Ok (obviously, pv = mv O for v ∈ V k \ S); the valuation ideal and
the group of units in the valuation ring Ov (or Omv ) in the completion kv will be denoted m̂v and
Uv respectively. For any divisor ν|µ, we let


∗, ∗
mv ν
be the (bi-multiplicative,
skew-symmetric)
power residue symbol of degree ν on kv× (cf. [BMS, p.


x, y
= 1 if one of the elements x, y is a ν-th power in kv× (in particular, if v
85]). We recall that
mv ν
is either complex, or is real and one of the elements x, y is positive
 in kv ) or if v is nonarchimedean
x, y
= 1 for almost all v ∈ V k .
∈
/ V (ν) and x, y ∈ Uv . It follows that for any x, y ∈ k× , we have
mv ν
Furthermore, we have the reciprocity law:
Y  x, y 
(16)
= 1.
mv ν
k
v∈V

pe11

· · · penn

Now, let µ =
be a prime factorization of µ. For each i = 1, . . . , n, pick vi ∈ V (pi ).
According to [BMS, (A.17)], the values


x, y
for x, y ∈ Uvi
mvi pei
i

cover all pei i -th roots of unity. Thus, we can pick units ui , u′i ∈ Uvi for i = 1, . . . , n so that


ui , u′i
= ζpei ,
i
mvi pei
i

a primitive pei i -th root of unity. Then
(17)

ζµ :=


n 
Y
ui , u′
i

i=1

mvi

e

pi i

is a primitive µ-th root of unity. Furthermore, it follows from the Inverse Function Theorem or
Hensel’s Lemma that we can find an integer N > 0 such that
(18)

×
1 + m̂N
v ⊂ kv

µ

for all v ∈ V (µ).

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

17

We now write b = βtµ with β ∈ Ok and t ∈ O× . Since a, b are relatively prime in O, so are α, β,
hence V (α) ∩ V (β) ⊂ S. On the other hand, by our assumption V (α) is disjoint from S ∪ V (µ),
so we conclude that V (α) is disjoint from V (β) ∪ V (µ). Applying Theorem 3.3 to the ring Ok we
obtain that there exists β ′ ∈ Ok having the following properties:
(1)1
(2)1
(3)1
(4)1

b := β ′ Ok is a prime ideal of Ok and the corresponding valuation vb ∈
/ S ∪ V (µ);
′
β > 0 in every real completion of k;
β ′ ≡ β(mod αOk );
for each i = 1, . . . , n, we have
β ′ ≡ u′i (mod m̂vi ), and
β ′ ≡ 1(mod m̂v ) for all v ∈ V (pi ) \ {vi }.

Set b′ = β ′ tµ . It is a consequence of (3)1 that b ≡ b′ (mod aO), so by Lemma 4.1(2) we have
1
µ
(a, b) ⇒ (a, b′ ). Furthermore, it follows from (4)1 and (18) that β ′ /u′i ∈ kv×i , so




ui , β ′
ui , u′i
=
= ζ ei .
mvi pei
mvi pei pi
i

i

Since ζµ defined by (17) is a primitive µ-th root of unity, we can find an integer d > 0 such that



 Y

n  d
ui , β ′
α, β ′
α, β ′
d
·ζ =
·
.
(19)
1=
b µ µ
b µ
mvi pei
i=1

i

By construction, vb ∈
/ V (α) ∪ V (µ), so applying Theorem 3.3 one more time, we find α′ ∈ Ok
such that
(1)2 a := α′ Ok is a prime ideal of Ok and the corresponding valuation va ∈
/ S ∪ V (µ);
′
(2)2 α ≡ α(mod b);
(3)2 α′ ≡ udi (mod m̂N
vi ) for i = 1, . . . , n.
1

Set a′ = α′ r µ . Then a′ O= α′ Ois a prime ideal of O and a′ ≡ a(mod b′ O), so (a, b′ ) ⇒ (a′ , b′ ).
α′ , β ′
k (since β ′ > 0 in all real completions of
= 1 if either v ∈ V∞
Now, we note that
mv µ
k) or v ∈ Vfk \ (V (α′ ) ∪ V (β ′ ) ∪ V (µ)). Since the ideals a = α′ Ok and b = β ′ Ok are prime by
construction, we have V (α′ ) = {va } and V (β ′ ) = {vb }. Besides,
follows from (18) and (4)1 that
 ′ it
′
α
,
β
µ
for v ∈ V (pi ) \ {vi } we have β ′ ∈ kv× , and therefore again
= 1. Thus, the reciprocity law
mv µ
(16) for α′ , β ′ reduces to the relation

 ′ ′  ′ ′ Y
n  ′
α , β′
α ,β
α ,β
= 1.
·
·
(20)
a µ
b µ
mvi µ
i=1

It follows from (2)2 and (3)2 that
 ′ ′ 

 ′ ′  d ′
α ,β
ui , β
α, β ′
α ,β
=
=
and
for all i = 1, . . . , n.
b µ
b µ
mvi µ
b µ

18

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

Comparing now (19) with (20), we find that
 ′ ′   ′ ′ −1
β ,α
α ,β
= 1.
=
a µ
a µ
This implies (cf. [BMS, (A.16)]) that β ′ is a µ-th power modulo a, i.e. β ′ ≡ γ µ (mod a) for some
γ ∈ Ok . Clearly, the elements a′ = α′ r µ and γt are relatively prime in O, so applying Theorem
3.3 to this ring, we find infinitely many Q-split principal prime ideals q of O having a generator
q ≡ γt(mod a′ O). Then for any m ≡ 1(mod φ(a′ O)) we have
1

q µm ≡ q µ ≡ β ′ tµ ≡ b′ (mod a′ O),
3

so (a′ , b′ ) ⇒ (a′ , q µm ). Then by Lemma 4.1(1b), we have (a, b) ⇒ (a′ , q µm ), as required.



The final ingredient that we need for the proof of Theorem 1.1 is the following lemma which uses
the notion of the level ℓp (u) of a unit u of infinite order with respect to a Q-split ideal p introduced
in §3.1.
Lemma 4.5. Let p be a principal Q-split ideal of O with a generator π, and let u ∈ O× be a unit of
infinite order. Set s = ℓp (u), and let λ and m be integers satisfying λ|φ(p) and m ≡ 0(modφ(ps )/λ).
Given an integer δ > 0 dividing λ and b ∈ O prime to π such that b is a δ-th power (mod p) while
ν := λ/δ divides the order of u(mod p), for any integer t ≥ s there exists an integer nt for which
1

(π t , bm ) ⇒ (π t , unt ).
Proof. Let p be the rational prime corresponding to p. Being a divisor of λ, the integer δ is relatively
prime to p. So, the fact that b is a δ-th power mod p implies that it is also a δ-th power mod ps . On
the other hand, it follows from our assumptions that λm = δνm is divisible by φ(ps ), and therefore
(bm )ν ≡ 1(mod ps ). But since ν is prime to p, the subgroup of elements in (O/ps )× of order dividing
ν is isomorphic to a subgroup of (O/p)× , hence cyclic. So, the fact that the order of u(mod p), and
consequently the order u(mod ps ), is divisible by ν implies that every element in (O/ps )× whose
order divides ν lies in the subgroup generated by u(mod ps ). Thus, bm ≡ uns (mod ps ) for some
integer ns . Since p is Q-split, we can apply Lemma 3.2 to conclude that for any t ≥ s there exists
1

an integer nt such that bm ≡ unt (mod pt ). Then (π t , bm ) ⇒ (π t , unt ) by Lemma 4.1(2).
We will call a unit u ∈ O× fundamental if it has infinite order and the cyclic group hui is a direct
factor of O× . Since the group O× is finitely generated (Dirichlet’s Unit Theorem, cf. [CF, §2.18])
it always contains a fundamental unit once it is infinite. We note that any fundamental unit has
the following property:
u∈
/ µ(k)p (k× )p for any prime p.

We are now in a position to give

Proof of Theorem 1.1. We return to the notations of §3.3: we let K denote the Hilbert S-class
field of k, let K̃ be its normal closure over Q, and pick an integer λ ≥ 1 which is divisible by µ
and for which K̃ ∩ Qab ⊂ Q(ζλ ). Furthermore, since O× is infinite by assumption, we can find a
fundamental unit u ∈ O× . By Lemma 4.1(3), it suffices to show that for any (a, b) ∈ R(O), we have
(21)

8

(a, b) ⇒ (1, 0).

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

19

k ) ∪ V (µ) and n = µ, we see that there exist α ∈ O
First, applying Lemma 4.3 with T = (S \ V∞
k
×
and r ∈ O such that
1

V (α) ∩ (S ∪ V (µ)) = ∅ and (a, b) ⇒ (αr µ , b).

Next, applying Lemma 4.4 to the last pair, we find a′ ∈ O and a Q-split principal prime ideal q
3
such that vq ∈
/ S ∪ V (λ) ∪ V (φ(a′ O)) and (αr µ , b) ⇒ (a′ , q µm ) for any m ≡ 1(mod φ(a′ O). Then
(22)

4

(a, b) ⇒ (a′ , q µm ) for any m ≡ 1(mod φ(a′ O)).

To proceed with the argument we will now specify m. We let P and Q denote the sets of prime
divisors of λ/µ and φ(a′ O), respectively, and define λ′ and µ′ as in §3.3; we note that by construction
q is relatively prime to λ′ . So, we can apply Theorem 3.7 which yields a Q-split principal prime
ideal p = πO so that vp ∈
/ V (φ(a′ O)) and conditions (1) - (3) are satisfied. Let s = ℓp (u) be the
p-level of u. Condition (3) implies that
gcd(φ(p)/λ, λ′ /λ) = 1 = gcd(φ(p)/λ, φ(a′ O))
since λ′ /λ is the product of all prime divisors of φ(a′ O). It follows that the numbers φ(ps )/λ and
φ(a′ O) are relatively prime, and therefore one can pick a positive integer m so that
m ≡ 0(mod φ(ps )/λ) and m ≡ 1(mod φ(a′ O)).
Fix this m for the rest of the proof.
Condition (2) of Theorem 3.7 enables us to apply Corollary 4.2 with z = π and t0 = s to find
1
t ≥ s so that (a′ , q µm ) ⇒ (π t , q µm ). Since P consists of all prime divisors of λ/µ, condition (1) of
Theorem 3.7 implies that λ/µ divides the order of u(mod p). Now, applying Lemma 4.5 with δ = µ
1
and b = q µ , we see that (π t , q µm ) ⇒ (π t , unt ) for some integer nt . Finally, since u is a unit, we
2
have (π t , unt ) ⇒ (1, 0). Combining these computations with (22), we obtain (21), completing the
proof.

Corollary 4.6. Assume that the group O× is infinite. Then for n ≥ 3, any matrix A ∈ SLn (O) is
a product of ≤ 21 (3n2 − n) + 4 elementary matrices.
Proof. Indeed, since the ring O is Dedekind, it is well-known and easy to show that any A ∈ SLn (O)
can be to a matrix in SL2 (O) by at most 21 (3n2 − n) − 5 (cf. [CK1, p. 683]). Now, our result
immediately follows from Theorem 1.1.

Proof of Corollary 1.2. Let
e+ : α 7→



1 α
0 1



and e− : α 7→



1 0
α 1



be the standard 1-parameter subgroups. Set U ± = e± (O). In view of Theorem 1.1, it is enough
to show that each of the subgroups U + and U − is contained in a product of finitely many cyclic
subgroups of SL2 (O). Let hk be the class number of k. Then there exists t ∈ O× such that v(t) = hk
k
/ S. Then O = Ok [1/t]. So, letting U0± = e± (Ok ) and
for all
 v ∈ S \V∞ and v(t) = 0 for all v ∈
t 0
, we will have the inclusion
h=
0 t−1
U ± ⊂ hhi U0± hhi.

20

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

On the other hand, if w1 , . . . , wn (where n = [k : Q]) is a Z-basis of Ok then U0± = he± (w1 )i · · · he± (wn )i,
hence
(23)
as required.

U ± ⊂ hhihe± (w1 )i · · · he± (wn )ihhi,



Remark. 1. Quantitatively, it follows from the proof of Theorem 1.1 that SL2 (O) = U − U + · · · U −
(nine factors), so since the right-hand side of (23) involves n + 2 cyclic subgroups, with hhi at both
ends, we obtain that SL2 (O) is a product of 9[k : Q] + 10 cyclic subgroups. Also, it follows from
[Vs] that SL2 (Z[1/p]) is a product of 11 cyclic subgroups.
k , then the proof of Corollary 1.2 yields a factorization of SL (O) as a finite
2. If S = V∞
2
product hγ1 i · · · hγd i of cyclic subgroups where all generators γi are elementary matrices, hence
k , the factorization we produce involves some diagonal
unipotent. On the contrary, when S 6= V∞
(semisimple) matrices. So, it is worth pointing out in the latter case there is no factorization with
k and let γ ∈ SL (O) be unipotent. Then there exists
all γi unipotent. Indeed, let v ∈ S \ V∞
2
N = N (γ) such that for any a = (aij ) ∈ hγi we have v(aij ) ≤ N (γ) for all i, j ∈ {1, 2}. It follows
that if SL2 (O) = hγ1 i · · · hγd i where all γi are unipotent, then there exists N0 such that for any
a = (aij ) ∈ SL2 (O) we have v(aij ) ≤ N0 for i, j ∈ {1, 2}, which is absurd.
5. Example
For a ring of S-integers O in a number field k such that the group of units O× is infinite, we
let ν(O) denote the smallest positive integer with the property that every matrix in SL2 (O) is a
product of ≤ ν(O) elementary matrices. So, the result of [Vs] implies that ν(Z[1/p]) ≤ 5 for any
prime p, and our Theorem 1.1 yields that ν(O) ≤ 9 for any O as above. It may be of some interest
to determine the exact value of ν(O) in some situations. In Example 2.1 on p. 289, Vsemirnov
claims that the matrix


5 12
M=
12 29
is not a product of four elementary matrices in SL2 (Z[1/p]) for any p ≡ 1(mod 29), and therefore
ν(Z[1/p]) = 5 in this case. However this example is faulty because for any prime p, in SL2 (Z[1/p])
we have

 
 
 2
5 12
1 0
1 2
M=
=
·
12 29
2 1
0 1
However, it turns out that the assertion that ν(Z[1/p]) = 5 is valid not only for p ≡ 1(mod 29) but
in fact for all p > 7. More precisely, we have the following.
Proposition 5.1. Let O = Z[1/p], where p is prime > 7. Then not every matrix in SL2 (O) is a
product of four elementary matrices.
In the remainder of this section, unless stated otherwise, we will work with congruences over the
ring O rather than Z, so the notation a ≡ b(mod n) means that elements a, b ∈ O are congruent
modulo the ideal nO. We begin the proof of the proposition with the following lemma.
Lemma 5.2. Let O = Z[1/p], where p is any prime, and let r be a positive integer satisfying
p ≡ 1(mod r). Then any matrix A ∈ SL2 (O) of the form


1 − pα
∗
, α, β ∈ Z
(24)
A=
∗
1 − pβ

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

21

which is a product of four elementary matrices, satisfies the congruence


0 1
A≡±
(mod r).
−1 0
Proof. We note right away that the required congruence is obvious for the diagonal entries, so we
only need to establish it for the off-diagonal ones. Since A is a product of four elementary matrices,
it admits one of the following presentations:
(25)

A = E12 (a)E21 (b)E12 (c)E21 (d),

or
(26)

A = E21 (a)E12 (b)E21 (c)E12 (d),

with a, b, c, d ∈ O.
First, suppose we have (25). Then reducing it modulo bO, we obtain the following congruence:


1 + d(a + c) a + c
A ≡ E12 (a + c)E21 (d) =
(mod b).
d
1
Looking back at (24) and comparing the (2, 2) entries, we obtain that 1 − pβ ≡ 1(mod b). It follows
that b ∈ O× , i.e. b = ±pγ for some integer γ. Similarly, one shows that c = ±pδ for some integer δ.
Next, we observe that the signs involved in b and c must be different. Indeed, otherwise we
would have


∗
∗
γ
δ
,
A = E12 (a)E21 (±p )E12 (±p )E21 (d) =
∗ 1 + pγ+δ
which is inconsistent with (24). Thus, A looks as follows:


∗
a(1 − pγ+δ ) ∓ pδ
γ
δ
A = E12 (a)E21 (±p )E12 (∓p )E21 (d) =
.
d(1 − pγ+δ ) ± pδ
∗

Consequently, the required congruences for the off-diagonal entries immediately follow from the
fact that p ≡ 1(mod r), proving the lemma in this case.
Now, suppose we have (26). Then
A−1 = E12 (−d)E21 (−c)E12 (−b)E21 (−a),

which means that A−1 has a presentation of the form (25). Since the required congruence in this
case has already been established, we conclude that


0 −1
−1
A ≡±
(mod r).
1 0
But then we have
A≡±
as required.



0 1
−1 0



(mod r),


To prove the proposition, we will consider two cases.
Case 1. p − 2 is composite. Write p − 2 = r1 · r2 , where r1 , r2 are positive integers > 1, and set
r = p − 1. Then
(27)

ri 6≡ ±1(mod r) for i = 1, 2.

22

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

√
Indeed, we can assume that r2 ≤ p − 2. If r2 ≡ ±1(modr)
√ then r2 ∓ 1 would be a nonzero integral
multiple of r, and therefore r ≤ r2 + 1, hence p − 2 ≤ p − 2. But this is impossible since p > 3.
Thus, r2 6≡ ±1(mod r). Since r1 · r2 ≡ −1(mod r), condition (27) follows.
Now, consider the matrix


1 − p r1 · p
A=
r2
1−p

One immediately checks that A ∈ SL2 (O). At the same time, A is of the form (24). Then Lemma
5.2 in conjunction with (27) implies that A is not a product of four elementary matrices.
Case 2. p and p − 2 are both primes. In this paragraph we will use congruences in Z. Clearly,
a prime > 3 can only be congruent to ±1(mod 6). Since p > 5 and p − 2 is also prime, in our
situation we must have p ≡ 1(mod 6). Furthermore, since p > 7, the congruence p ≡ 0 or 2(mod 5)
is impossible. Thus, in the case at hand we have
p ≡ 1, 13, or 19(mod 30).

p3

If p ≡ 13(mod 30) in Z, then
≡ 7 (mod 30), and therefore p3 − 2 is an integral multiple of 5.
Set r = p − 1 and s = (p3 − 2)/5, and consider the matrix


1 − p3
5p3
A=
s
1 − p3

Then A is a matrix in SL2 (O) having form (24). Note that 5p3 ≡ 5(mod r), which is different from
±1(mod r) since r > 6. Now, it follows from Lemma 5.2 that A is not a product of four elementary
matrices.
It remains to consider the case where p ≡ 1 or 19(mod 30). Consider the following matrix:


900 53 · 899
A=
,
17
900
and note that A ∈ SL2 (Z) and
−1

A

=



900 −53 · 899
−17
900



.

It suffices to show that neither A nor A−1 can be written in the form


∗
c + a(1 + bc)
(28)
E12 (a)E21 (b)E12 (c)E21 (d) =
, with a, b, c, d ∈ O
b + d(1 + bc)
(1 + bc)
Set
t = b + d(1 + bc) and u = c + a(1 + bc).
Assume that either A or A−1 is written in the form (28). Then 1 + bc = 900, so
b, c ∈ {±pn , ±29pn , ±31pn , ±899pn | n ∈ N}.
On the other hand, we have the following congruences
t ≡ b(mod 30) and u ≡ c(mod 30).
Analyzing the above list of possibilities for b and c, we conclude that each of t and u is ≡
±pn (mod 30) for some integer n. Thus, if p ≡ 1(mod 30) then t, u ≡ ±1(mod 30), and if p ≡
19(mod 30) then t, u ≡ ±1, ±19(mod 30). Since 17 6≡ ±1, ±19(mod 30), we obtain a contradiction

BOUNDED GENERATION OF SL2 (OS )

23

in either case. (We observe that the argument in this last case is inspired by Vsemirnov’s argument
in his Example 2.1.)
Acknowledgements. The second author was supported by the Simons Foundation. The third author
gratefully acknowledges fruitful conversations with Maxim Vsemirnov. We thank Dong Quan Ngoc Nguyen
for his comments regarding Theorem 3.3.

References
[AT] E. Artin, J. Tate, Class Field Theory, AMS, 1967.
[CK1] D. Carter, G. Keller, Bounded Elementary Generation of SLn (O), Amer. J. Math. 105(1983), No. 3, 673-687.
[CK2] D. Carter, G. Keller, Elementary expressions for unimodular matrices, Commun. Alg. 12(1984), No. 4, 379-389.
[BMS] H. Bass, J. Milnor, J.-P. Serre, Solution of the congruence subgroup problem for SLn (n ≥ 3) and Sp2n (n ≥ 2),
Publ. math. I.H.É.S. 33(1967), 59-137.
[CF] J. W. S. Cassels, A. Fröhlich, Algebraic Number Theory, Thompson Book Company Inc., 1967.
[Co] P. M. Cohn, On the structure of the GL2 of a ring, Publ. math. I.H.É.S. 30(1966), 5-53.
[CW] G. Cooke, P.J. Weinberger, On the construction of division chains in algebraic number rings, with applications
to SL2 , Commun. Alg. 3(1975), No. 6, 481-524.
[ER] I. V. Erovenko, A. S. Rapinchuk, Bounded generation of S-arithmetic subgroups of isotropic orthogonal groups
over number fields, J. Number Theory 119(2006), No. 1, 28-48.
[GS] F.J. Grunewald, J. Schwermer, Free Non-abelian Quotients of SL2 Over Orders of Imaginary Quadratic Numberfields, J. Algebra 69(1981), 298-304.
[H] H. Hasse, Bericht über neuere Untersuchungen und Probleme aus der Theorie der algebraischen Zahlkörper I,
Jber. Deutsch. Math.-Verein. 35(1926), 1-55.
[HB] D.R. Heath-Brown, Artin’s conjecture for primitive roots, Quart. J. Math. Oxford (2), 37 (1986), 27-38.
[La] S. Lang, Algebra, Springer, 2002.
[LM] D. Loukanidis, V.K. Murty, Bounded generation for SLn (n ≥ 2) and Sp2n (n ≥ 1), preprint (1994).
[L1] B. Liehl, On the group SL2 over orders of arithmetic type., J. Reine Angew. Math. 323(1981), 153-171.
[L2] B. Liehl, Beschränkte Wortelänge in SL2 , Math. Z. 186(1984), 509-524.
[Lu] A. Lubotzky, Subgroup growth and congruence subgroups, Invent. Math. 119(1995), 267-295.
[MCKP] D.W. Morris, Bounded generation of SL(n, A) (after D. Carter, G. Keller and E. Paige), New York
J. Math. 13(2007), 383-421.
[M] V.K. Murty, Bounded and finite generation of arithmetic groups. (English summary), Number theory (Halifax,
NS, 1994), CMS Conf. Proc. 15, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, (1995), 249-261.
[MP] M.R. Murty, K.L. Petersen, The generalized Artin conjecture and arithmetic orbifolds, Groups and symmetries,
CRM Proceeding & Lecture Notes 47, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, (2009), 259-263.
[PR1] V.P. Platonov, A.S. Rapinchuk, Abstract properties of S-arithmetic groups and the congruence subgroup problem, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk. Ser. Mat. 56(1992), 483-508.
[PR2] V.P. Platonov, A.S. Rapinchuk, Algebraic Groups and Number Theory, Academy of Sciences, 1991.
[R] A.S. Rapinchuk, Representations of groups of finite width, Soviet Math. Dokl. 42(1991), 816-820.
[S1] J.-P. Serre, Le problème des groupes de congruence pour SL2 , Ann. Math., Second Series, 92(1970), No. 3,
489-527.
[S2] J.-P. Serre, Local Fields, Springer-Verlag, 1979.
[SW] Y. Shalom, G. Willis, Commensurated subgroups of arithmetic groups, totally disconnected groups and adelic
rigidity, Geom. Funct. Anal., 23(2013), No. 5, 1631-1683.
[T] O.I. Tavgen, Bounded generation of Chevalley groups over rings of algebraic S-integers, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR
Ser. Mat. 54(1990), No. 1, 97-122.
[Va] L.N. Vaserštein, The group SL2 over Dedekind rings of arithmetic type, Math. USSR- Sb. 18(1972), No. 2,
321-332.
[Vs] M. Vsemirnov, Short unitriangular factorizations of SL2 (Z[1/p]), Quart. J. Math., 65 (2014), 279-290.

24

A. MORGAN, A. RAPINCHUK, AND B. SURY

Department of Mathematics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4137, USA
E-mail address: avo2t@eservices.virginia.edu
E-mail address: asr3x@virginia.edu
Stat-Math Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, 8th Mile Mysore Road, Bangalore 560059, India
E-mail address: surybang@gmail.com

