QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF
QUADRICS

arXiv:1710.09692v1 [] 26 Oct 2017

STEPHEN SCULLY

Abstract. Let p and q be anisotropic quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2 over a field F .
In a recent article, we formulated a conjecture describing the general constraints which
the dimensions of p and q impose on the isotropy index of q after scalar extension to
the function field of p. This can be viewed as a generalization of Hoffmann’s Separation
Theorem which simultaneously incorporates and refines some well-known classical results
on the Witt kernels of function fields of quadrics. Using algebro-geometric methods, it
was shown that large parts of this conjecture hold in the case where the characteristic of
F is not 2. In the present article, we prove similar (in fact, slightly stronger) results in
the case where F has characteristic 2 and q is a so-called quasilinear form. In contrast to
the situation where char(F ) 6= 2, the methods used to treat this case are purely algebraic.

1. Introduction
Let F be a field, let p and q be a pair of anisotropic quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2
over F , and let F (p) be the function field of the integral projective F -quadric defined by
the vanishing of p. The problem of understanding the isotropy behaviour of q after scalar
extension to the field F (p) is one which lies at the heart of many of the central problems
in the algebraic theory of quadratic forms. Let i0 (qF (p) ) denote the isotropy index (i.e.,
the maximal dimension of a totally isotropic subspace) of q extended to F (p). In [Scu17],
we formulated following conjecture which aims to describe the general constraints which
the dimensions of p and q impose on the integer i0 (qF (p) ):
Conjecture 1.1. Let p and q be anisotropic quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2 over a
field F , and let s be the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 . Set
k = dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) ). Then k ≥ 0 and
dim(q) = a2s+1 + ǫ
for some non-negative integer a and integer −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k.
Remarks 1.2. (1) Note that we do not impose any assumption on the characteristic of F ,
and we permit p and q to be degenerate in the characteristic 2 case.
(2) The assertion is trivially true if k ≥ 2s − 1, so we are interested in the case where
k ≤ 2s − 2.
(3) If q is non-degenerate, then i0 (qF (p) ) is equal to the Witt index of qF (p), i.e., half the
dimension of its hyperbolic part. For degenerate forms, however, one has to distinguish
between the isotropy index and Witt index. The reader is warned that our notation
differs from [EKM08], where i0 is used to denote the Witt index.
(4) If q is non-degenerate, then the integer k is just the dimension of the anisotropic
part of qF (p) . If q is degenerate (in which case char(F ) = 2), this need not be true.
Nevertheless, it is easy to check that k ≥ 0 in all cases (see Lemma 3.2 below).
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 11E04, 14E05.
Key words and phrases. Quasilinear quadratic forms, function fields of quadrics, isotropy indices.
1

2

STEPHEN SCULLY

It is not hard to see that Conjecture 1.1 is optimal, to the extent that there can be no
further gaps in the possible values of dim(q) determined by i0 (qF (p) ) and dim(p) alone.
Simple examples are given in [Scu17, Ex. 1.5] and Example 4.5 below. From one point of
view, the rough content of the conjecture is the following: The more isotropic q becomes
over the field F (p), the closer dim(q) should be to being divisible by 2s+1 . This does not
capture the whole story, however; for example, when dim(q) ≤ 2s , the conjecture asserts
that q remains anisotropic over F (p), which is precisely the statement of the fundamental
Separation Theorem originally discovered by Hoffmann in [Hof95].
When char(F ) 6= 2, it was shown in [Scu17] that Conjecture 1.1 holds if any of the
following conditions are satisfied:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)

k < 2s−1 ;
2s+1 − 2 ≤ dim p ≤ 2s+1 ;
p is a Pfister neighbour;
dim p ≤ 16;
dim q ≤ 2s+2 + 2s−1 .

Perhaps most interesting here is the case where k = 0, which tells us that if q represents
an element in the kernel of the natural restriction homomorphism W (F ) → W (F (p))
on Witt groups, then dim(q) is divisible by 2s+1 . This new observation can be refined
rather further ([Scu16b]), and perhaps raises some questions concerning the structure of
the former kernel (about which very little is known in general).
The results of [Scu17] are proved using methods from the theory of algebraic cycles,
with the decisive tool being the action of Steenrod operations on the mod-2 Chow rings of
certain smooth projective varieties. While the same ideas should, in principle, permit to
produce analogous results in the case where char(F ) = 2 and p and q are non-degenerate,
the absence of the mod-2 Steenrod operations in this setting renders this approach impractical at the present time. In fact, we currently have no practical approach to Conjecture
1.1 or other problems of its ilk for non-degenerate forms in characteristic 2.1 The purpose of the present article is therefore to deal with a special class of degenerate forms
in characteristic 2 known as quasilinear quadratic forms. Recall here that a quasilinear
quadratic form over a field of characteristic 2 is one which is diagonalizable, i.e., isometric to a form of the shape a1 x21 + a2 x22 + · · · + an x2n , the ai being scalars in the field of
definition. In characteristic 2, the projective quadric defined by the vanishing of such a
form is totally singular, in the sense that it has no smooth points at all. Nevertheless,
it was shown by Hoffmann and Laghribi (see, e.g., [HL04], [HL06], [Hof04]) that many
aspects of the classical algebraic theory of quadratic forms can be extended to the study
of quasilinear quadratic forms in characteristic 2. This was elaborated upon in work of
Totaro ([Tot08]) and the author ([Scu16a, Scu16b, Scu16c]), where quasilinear analogues
of various non-trivial results of Karpenko, Merkurjev, Vishik and others on discrete invariants of quadratic forms in characteristic 6= 2 were studied, and proved in many cases.
The methods employed here are of a rather different and more direct nature, and it is
unclear to what extent they can be adapted to treat other cases. In fact, the quasilinear
case is the only case in characteristic 2 where some of these results are known.2
In the present work, we continue this theme by proving the following result towards the
characteristic 2 case of Conjecture 1.1:
1All recent advances in the characteristic 6= 2 which rely on the use of Steeenrod operations or algebraic

cobordism theory remain open for non-degenerate forms in characteristic 2.
2For example, the analogue of Karpenko’s theorem on the values of the first Witt index – see [Scu16b].

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

3

Theorem 1.3. Assume, in the situation of Conjecture 1.1, that char(F ) = 2 and q is
quasilinear. Then, the statement of the conjecture holds in the following cases:
(1) k ≤ 2s−1 .
(2) 2s+1 − 2s−2 − 3 ≤ dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 .
(3) p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour.
(4) dim(p) ≤ 8.
(5) 2N ≤ dim(q) ≤ 2N + 2s+1 for some non-negative integer N .
(6) dim(q) ≤ 2s+2 + 2s+1 .
The reader will note that the results proved here are very similar (in fact, slightly
stronger) than those proved in characteristic 6= 2 using completely different methods
([Scu17]). The proofs for the first three cases are given in §5 below, and for the last
three in §6. In all cases, the basic tool is [Scu16c, Thm. 6.6], which seems to have many
interesting applications to the study of quasilinear quadratic forms (see [Scu16c, §6]).
Before proceeding, we make the following important remark:
Remark 1.4. Suppose that char(F ) = 2. If, in the situation of Conjecture 1.1, q is quasilinear, then we can assume that p is quasilinear as well. Indeed, if p is not quasilinear,
then the quadric {p = 0} is generically smooth, and so the extendion F (p)/F is separably
generated. By [Hof04, Prop. 5.3], it follows that q remains anisotropic over F (p), and so
the statement of the conjecture holds trivially. When we speak of the quasilinear case of
Conjecture 1.1, we shall therefore mean the case where both p and q are quasilinear.
Conventions. All quadratic forms considered in this paper are finite-dimensional. Nondegeneracy and regularity of quadratic forms are defined as in [EKM08, pp. 42-43].
2. Recollections on quasilinear quadratic forms
For the rest of the paper, we fix an arbitrary field F of characteristic 2. Let ϕ be
a quasilinear quadratic form over F . The F -vector space on which ϕ is defined will be
denoted Vϕ . Given a field extension L/F , we write ϕL for the unique quasilinear quadratic
form on Vϕ ⊗F L which restricts to ϕ on Vϕ . If ψ is another quasilinear quadratic form
over F , then we say that ψ is a subform of (resp. is isomorphic to) ϕ if there exists an
injective (resp. bijective) F -linear map f : Vψ → Vϕ such that ϕ f (v) = ψ(v) for all
v ∈ Vψ ; in this case, we write ψ ⊂ ϕ (resp. ψ ≃ ϕ). If ψ ≃ aψ for some a ∈ F ∗ , then we
say that ψ and ϕ are similar. The orthogonal sum ψ ⊥ ϕ and tensor product ψ ⊗ ϕ are
defined in the obvious way. We say that ϕ is divisible by ψ if it is isomorphic to the tensor
product of ψ and another quasilinear quadratic form over F . If a1 , . . . , an ∈ F , then we
write ha1 , . . . , an i for the quasilinear quadratic form a1 x21 + · · · + an x2n on the F -vector
space F ⊕n . Every quasilinear quadratic form over F is isomorphic to one of this type.
From now on, the terms “quasilinear quadratic form” and “form” will be used interchangeably. For the reader’s convenience, we now quickly review some basic concepts and
results which will be needed in the main part of the paper. Detailed introductions to
the theory of quasilinear quadratic forms may be found in [Hof04] and [Scu16b], and the
unfamiliar reader is referred to these articles for further information.
2.A. Isotropic decomposition. Let ϕ be as above, and let W ⊂ Vϕ be the set of all
isotropic vectors in Vϕ , i.e., the set of all vectors v ∈ Vϕ such that ϕ(v) = 0. Since ϕ is
quasilinear, W is an F -linear subspace of Vϕ . Its dimension is the precisely the isotropy
index i0 (ϕ) described in §1. The restriction of ϕ to the quotient space Vϕ /W is called the
anisotropic part of ϕ, and is denoted ϕan . Note that we have
dim(ϕan ) = dim(ϕ) − i0 (ϕ)

4

STEPHEN SCULLY

(as opposed to the more familiar formula dim(ϕan ) = dim(ϕ) − 2i0 (ϕ) from the theory of
non-degenerate quadratic forms).
2.B. The representation theorem. We write D(ϕ) for the set {ϕ(v) | v ∈ Vϕ } of all
elements of F which are represented by ϕ. In this setting, the Cassels-Pfister representation
theorem ([EKM08, Thm. 17.12]) can be restated as follows:
Proposition 2.1 (see [Hof04, Prop. 2.6]). Let ψ and ϕ be quasilinear quadratic forms
over F . Then ψan ⊂ ϕan if and only if D(ψ) ⊂ D(ϕ). In particular, ψan ≃ ϕan if and
only if D(ψ) = D(ϕ).
2.C. Quasi-Pfister forms and quasi-Pfister neighbours. Let n N
be a positive integer.
We say that ϕ is an n-fold quasi-Pfister form if ϕ ≃ hha1 , . . . , an ii := ni=1 h1, ai i for some
a1 , . . . , an ∈ F . In this case, we have dim(ϕ) = 2n . For completeness, a 0-fold quasi-Pfister
form is a 1-dimensional form isomorphic to h1i. We say that ϕ is a quasi-Pfister neighbour
if ϕ is similar to a subform of a quasi-Pfister form π with dim(π) < 2dim(ϕ).
2.D. The norm form and norm degree. If ϕ is non-zero, then the norm field of
ϕ, denoted N (ϕ), is the smallest subfield of F containing the set {ab | a, b ∈ D(ϕ)}.
Explicitly, if ϕ ≃ ha0 , a1 , . . . , an i with a0 6= 0, then N (ϕ) = F 2 (a0 ai | 1 ≤ i ≤ n). In
particular, N (ϕ) is a finite extension of F 2 . The degree of this extension is called the
norm degree of ϕ, and is denoted ndeg(ϕ).
Clearly ndeg(ϕ) is a power of 2, and we write

lndeg(ϕ) for the integer log2 ndeg(ϕ) . Up to isometry, there exists a unique anisotropic
quasilinear quadratic form ϕnor over F such that D(ϕnor ) = N (ϕ) (existence is clear;
uniqueness holds by Proposition 2.1). The form ϕnor is called the norm form of ϕ, and
it is easy to see that ϕnor is in fact a quasi-Pfister form of dimension 2lndeg(ϕ) . If ϕ is
anisotropic, then it is similar to a subform of ϕnor by Proposition 2.1. In fact, in this case,
an anisotropic quasi-Pfister form over F contains a subform similar to ϕ if and only if it
contains a subform isomorphic to ϕnor . This readily implies the following basic result:
Lemma 2.2 (see [Scu16b, Cor. 3.11]). Let ϕ be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic form
of dimension ≥ 1 over F , and let s ≥ −1 be the unique integer such that 2s < dim(ϕ) ≤
2s+1 . Then lndeg(ϕ) ≥ s+1, and equality holds if and only if ϕ is a quasi-Pfister neighbour.
2.E. Similarity factors. We write G(ϕ)∗ for the set {a ∈ F ∗ | aϕ ≃ ϕ} of all similarity
factors of ϕ. The basic result on similarity factors in the quasilinear setting is the following:
Proposition 2.3 (see [Hof04, Lem. 6.3]). Let ϕ be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic
form over F and let a ∈ F \ F 2 . Then the following are equivalent:
(1) a ∈ G(ϕ)∗ .
(2) aD(ϕ) ⊂ D(ϕ).
(3) ϕ is divisible by hhaii.
.
(4) i0 (ϕF (√a) ) = dim(ϕ)
2
2.F. Function fields of quasilinear quadrics. We say that ϕ is split if dim(ϕan ) ≤ 1.
If ϕ is not split, then the projective F -quadric {ϕ = 0} is integral (see [Hof04, Lem. 7.1]),
and we write F (ϕ) for its function field. In this case, we also write F [ϕ] for the function
field of the affine F -quadric of the same equation. Clearly F [ϕ] is F -isomorphic to a
degree-1 purely transcendental extension of F (ϕ). Explicitly, if ϕ ≃ ha0 , a1 , . . . , an i with
a0 6= 0, then we have an F -isomorphism

q
−1
2
2
a0 (a1 X1 + · · · + an Xn ) ,
F [ϕ] ≃ F (X)

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

5

where X = (X1 , . . . , Xn ) is an n-tuple of algebraically independent variables over F . The
form ϕ is evidently isotropic after scalar extension to F (ϕ) (or F [ϕ]).
2.G. The Knebusch splitting tower. We adapt an important construction of Knebusch
(see [EKM08, §25]) to the quasilinear setting: Let F0 = F , ϕ0 = ϕan , and inductively define
• Fr = Fr−1 (ϕr−1 ) (provided ϕr−1 is not split), and
• ϕr = (ϕFr )an (provided Fr is defined).
Since the dimensions of the ϕr become progressively smaller, this is a finite process, terminating at the first integer h(ϕ) for which ϕh(ϕ) is split; h(ϕ) is called the height of ϕ,
and the tower of fields F = F0 ⊂ F1 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Fh(ϕ) is called the Knebusch splitting tower
of ϕ. This construction can be used to characterize quasi-Pfister neighbours as follows:
Lemma 2.4 (see [HL04, §8] or [Scu16b, Cor. 3.11]). Let ϕ be an anisotropic quasilinear
quadratic form of dimension ≥ 2 over F . Then ϕ is a quasi-Pfister neighbour if and only
if ϕ1 is similar to a quasi-Pfister form.
If ϕ is not split, then for each 1 ≤ r ≤ h(ϕ), we set ir (ϕ) = i0 (ϕFr ) − i0 (ϕFr−1 ); ir (ϕ)
is called the r-th higher isotropy index of ϕ. If ϕ is anisotropic and s is the unique nonnegative integer such that 2s < dim(ϕ) ≤ 2s+1 , then it is known that i1 (ϕ) ≤ dim(ϕ) − 2s
(see [HL06, Lem. 4.1] or Theorem 2.8 below). If equality holds here, then we say that ϕ
has maximal splitting. By Lemma 2.4, anisotropic quasi-Pfister neighbours have maximal
splitting. The converse is not true, but we have the following assertion, the analogue of
which is still open for non-degenerate quadratic forms (even in characteristic 6= 2):
Theorem 2.5 (see [Scu16a, Thm. 9.6]). Let ϕ be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic
form of dimension ≥ 2 over F and let s be the unique non-negative integer such that
2s < dim(ϕ) ≤ 2s+1 . If ϕ has maximal splitting and dim(ϕ) > 2s + 2s−2 , then ϕ is a
quasi-Pfister neighbour.
Finally, we will need to recall the evolution of the norm degree of a given form as one
runs over its Knebusch splitting tower:
Lemma 2.6 (see [Hof04, Lem. 7.12]). Let ϕ be a non-split quasilinear quadratic form
over F . Then lndeg(ϕ1 ) = lndeg(ϕ) − 1.
2.H. Divisibility indices. If ϕ is non-zero, then the divisibility index of ϕ is defined as
the largest integer d0 (ϕ) such that ϕ is divisible by an anisotropic quasi-Pfister form of
dimension 2d0 (ϕ) . We will need the following lemma, which is analogous to a well-known
fact from the non-degenerate theory (cf. [Kah08, Cor. 2.1.11]):
Lemma 2.7. Let ϕ and σ be quasilinear quadratic forms over F . If ϕ is divisible by σ,
then d0 ((ϕ)an ) ≥ d0 (σ).
Proof. Let π be an anisotropic quasi-Pfister form which divides σ. Then π also divides ϕ,
and hence ϕan by [Hof04, Prop. 4.19].

If ϕ is not split, then for each 1 ≤ r ≤ h(ϕ), we set dr (ϕ) = d0 (ϕr ); dr (ϕ) is called the rth higher divisibility index of ϕ. The fundamental result concerning the higher divisibility
indices of quasilinear quadratic forms is the first part of the following theorem:
Theorem 2.8 (see [Scu16b, Thm. 6.1]). Let ϕ be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic
form of dimension ≥ 2 over F and let 1 ≤ r ≤ h(ϕ). Then
(1) ir (ϕ) ≤ 2dr (ϕ) .
(2) If ϕr−1 is not similar to a quasi-Pfister form, then ir (ϕ) is divisible by 2dr−1 (ϕ) .

6

STEPHEN SCULLY

Remark 2.9. Theorem 2.8 effectively determines all possible values of the Knebusch splitting pattern for quasilinear quadratic forms – see [Scu16b, §6]. In particular, it includes
the quasilinear analogue of Karpenko’s theorem on the possible values of i1 (−) ([Kar03]).
Note that the problem of determining the possible values of the Knebusch splitting pattern
for non-degenerate quadratic forms is wide open (even in characteristic 6= 2).
3. The invariant d(−)
Our approach to the quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 will be based on a certain
procedure which permits to lower not only the value of dim(p), but also the value of k.
In this section, we state and prove a technical lemma which will be needed to meet the
second purpose. In order to improve the readability of what follows, it will be convenient
to introduce notation which allows us to explicitly express the integer k as a function of
the pair (p, q). With this in mind, we make the following definition:
Definition 3.1. Given a quadratic form ϕ over a field (of any characteristic), we set
d(ϕ) = dim(ϕ) − 2i0 (ϕ).
Observe that if ϕ is non-degenerate (or even regular), then d(ϕ) is nothing else but the
dimension of the anisotropic part of ϕ. In general, however, this need not be the case.
For example, if ϕ is quasilinear, then the statement only holds in the trivial case where
ϕ is already anisotropic. In fact, d(−) can take negative values for sufficiently degenerate
forms. We do, however, have the following basic observation:
Lemma 3.2. If ψ and ϕ are anisotropic quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2 over a field
K, then d(ϕK(ψ) ) ≥ 0.
. By [EKM08, Prop. 7.29 and Prop. 7.31], we
Proof. The claim is that i0 (ϕK(ψ) ) ≤ dim(ϕ)
2
′
have an orthogonal decomposition ϕ ≃ ϕ ⊥ ϕ′′ in which ϕ′ is non-degenerate and ϕ′′ is
quasilinear (if char(K) 6= 2, this means that ϕ′′ = 0). Moreover, it follows from [EKM08,
Lem. 8.10] that
dim(ϕ′ )
+ i0 (ϕ′′K(ψ) ).
i0 (ϕK(ψ) ) ≤
2
The problem is therefore reduced to the case where ϕ is quasilinear. If ψ is also quasilinear,
then a proof of the needed claim can be found in [Scu16b, Lem. 2.31 (1)]. If ψ is not
quasilinear, then K(ψ)/K is a separably generated extension (i.e., the quadric defined by
the vanishing of ψ is generically smooth). In particular, we have i0 (ϕK(ψ) ) = 0 by [Hof04,
Prop. 5.3], and so the statement holds trivially in this case.

Remark 3.3. Note that, in the statement of Conjecture 1.1, the integer k is nothing else
but d(qF (p) ). The lemma therefore confirms that k ≥ 0.
We now specialize to the quasilinear setting. As alluded to in the proof of Lemma 3.2,
anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms remain anisotropic under separably generated field
extensions ([Hof04, Prop. 5.3]). In particular, we have:
Lemma 3.4. Let ϕ be a quasilinear quadratic form over F . If L is a separably generated
field extension of F , then d(ϕL ) = d(ϕ).
For later use, we will also need to observe the following interaction between d(−) and
the divisibility index invariant d0 (−) (see §2.H above):
Lemma 3.5. Let ϕ and ψ be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2
over F . Then d(ϕF (ψ) ) is divisible by 2d0 (ϕ) .

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

7

Proof. Let ϕ ≃ π ⊗ σ, with π a quasi-Pfister form. We need to show that dim(π) divides
d(ϕF (ψ) ). There are two cases to consider:
Case 1. If πF (ψ) is isotropic, then (since π is a quasi-Pfister form) we have i0 (πF (ψ) ) =
dim(π)
2

(see [Hof04, Cor. 7.9]). In particular, we have

dim(ϕ)
dim(π)
dim(σ) =
.
2
2
By Lemma 3.2, it follows that d(ϕF (ψ) ) = 0, and so the statement holds trivially.
i0 (ϕF (ψ) ) ≥

Case 2. If πF (ψ) is anisotropic, then it is also a divisor of (ϕF (ψ) )an by [Hof04, Prop. 4.19].
Since
d(ϕF (ψ) ) = dim(ϕ) − 2i0 (ϕF (ψ) )

= 2dim (ϕF (ψ) )an − dim(ϕ),

(recall that dim(ηan ) = dim(η)−i0 (η) in the quasilinear setting) the claim again holds. 
Our goal now is to prove Lemma 3.8 below. We first make two simple observations:
Lemma 3.6. Let σ, τ and φ be quasilinear quadratic forms over F such that σ ⊂ τ ⊂ ϕ.
Let a = dim(τ ) − dim(σ) and b = dim(ϕ) − dim(τ ). Then
(1) d(σ) ≤ d(τ ) + a, and
(2) d(ϕ) ≤ d(τ ) + b.
Proof. (1) Since σ is a codimension-a subform of τ , i0 (σ) ≥ i0 (τ )−a (intersect the subspace
of all isotropic vectors in Vτ with the image of Vσ under the embedding σ ⊂ τ ). Thus:
d(σ) =
=
≤
=
=

dim(σ) − 2i0 (σ)
dim(τ ) − a − 2i0 (σ)
dim(τ ) − a − 2(i0 (τ ) − a)

dim(τ ) − 2i0 (τ ) + a
d(τ ) + a.

(2) Since τ is a subform of ϕ, we obviously have i0 (ϕ) ≥ i0 (τ ). Hence
d(ϕ) =
=
≤
=
=

dim(ϕ) − 2i0 (ϕ)
dim(τ ) + b − 2i0 (ϕ)
dim(τ ) + b − 2(i0 (τ ))

dim(τ ) − 2i0 (τ ) + b
d(τ ) + b,

as claimed.



Lemma 3.7. Let σ and ν be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms over F and let ϕ =
(σ ⊗ ν)an .
(1) If a ∈ D(σ) is non-zero, then aν ⊂ ϕ.
(2) If b ∈ D(ν) is non-zero, then bσ ⊂ ϕ.
Proof. By symmetry, it suffices to prove (1). But if a is a non-zero element of D(σ), then
D(aν) = aD(ν) ⊂ D(σ ⊗ ν) = D(ϕ),
so the claim follows from Proposition 2.1.



8

STEPHEN SCULLY

We can now prove the following:
Lemma 3.8. Let σ and ν be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms over F with dim(ν) ≥
2, let ϕ = (σ ⊗ ν)an and let l = dim(ϕ) − dim(σ). Then l ≥ 0, and there exists an integer
0 ≤ i ≤ l such that
(1) d(σF (ν) ) ≤ i, and
(2) d(ϕF (ν) ) ≤ l − i.
Proof. Multiplying ν by a scalar if necessary, we can assume that 1 ∈ D(ν). We can then
write ν ≃ h1, a1 , . . . , an i for some a1 , . . . , an ∈ F . Let X = (X1 , . . . , Xn ) be an
pn-tuple
of algebraically independent variables over F , and set K = F (X) and L = K( ν ′ (X)),
where ν ′ (X) = a1 X12 + · · · + an Xn2 . The field L is F -isomorphic to the function field F [ν]
of the affine quadric defined by the vanishing of ν (see §2.F above). Now, since 1 ∈ D(ν),
we have σ ⊂ ϕ by Lemma 3.7 (2). In particular, we have l ≥ 0. We now claim that there
exists a form τ over K such that σK ⊂ τ ⊂ ϕK and d(τL ) = 0. If true, this implies (via
Lemma 3.6) that
(1’) d(σL ) ≤ i, and
(2’) d(ϕL ) ≤ l − i
for some 0 ≤ i ≤ l. This is equivalent to the assertion of the lemma, since (a) L is F isomorphic to F [ν], (b) F [ν] is F -isomorphic to a degree-1 purely transcendental extension
of F (ν), and (c) d(−) is invariant under purely transcendental base change (Lemma 3.4).
It thus remains to prove the existence of the form τ . Let σK ⊂ τ ⊂ ϕK . By definition,
)
we have d(τL ) = 0 if and only if i0 (τL ) = dim(τ
2 . Now τ is anisotropic (because ϕK is),
p
and we have L = K( ν ′ (X)). Thus, by Proposition 2.3, our task is to show that τ
can be chosen so that ν ′ (X)D(τ ) ⊂ D(τ ). We do this as follows: Consider the set S of
all subforms η of ϕK which contain σK as a subform and which have the property that
ν ′ (X)D(η) ⊂ D(ϕK ). This set is non-empty, since it contains σK by the definition of ϕ.
We take τ to be an element of maximal dimension in S. It now remains to show that
ν ′ (X)D(τ ) ⊂ D(τ ) for this choice of τ . Suppose, for the sake of contradiction, that this is
not the case. Then there exists a ∈ D(τ ) such that ν ′ (X)a ∈
/ D(τ ). Let τ ′ = τ ⊥ hν ′ (X)ai.
′
We will show that τ ∈ S, thus contradicting the maximality of τ . Note first that since
ν ′ (X)a ∈
/ D(τ ), τ ′ is anisotropic. Moreover, since ν ′ (X)a ∈ D(ϕK ), we have
D(τ ′ ) = D(τ ) + K 2 ν ′ (X)a ⊂ D(ϕK ),
so that τ ′ ⊂ ϕK by Proposition 2.1. Now τ ′ obviously contains σK as a subform (since τ
does), and so the final step is to check that ν ′ (X)D(τ ′ ) ⊂ D(ϕK ). But
ν ′ (X)D(τ ′ ) = ν ′ (X)D(τ ) + K 2 ν ′ (X)2 a
= ν ′ (X)D(τ ) + K 2 a,
and since both ν ′ (X)D(τ ) and K 2 a lie in D(ϕK ) (the former since τ ∈ S, and the latter
because a ∈ D(τ )), the claim is proved.

4. A refinement of the main conjecture in the quasilinear case
The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 is known to hold in the extreme case where
k = 0. In fact, rather more is true in this situation. Recall from §2.D above that to any
anisotropic quasilinear quadratic form p over F , we can associate an anisotropic quasiPfister form pnor
 which contains a subform similar to p. We write lndeg(p) for the integer
log2 dim(pnor ) . The following result is due (independently) to Hoffmann and Laghribi:

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

9

Proposition 4.1 (see [Lag04, Thm. 1.5], [Hof04, Thm. 7.7]). Let p and q be anisotropic
quasilinear quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2 over F . If i0 (qF (p) ) = dim(q)
2 , then q is
divisible by pnor . In particular dim(q) is divisible by 2lndeg(p) .
If s is the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 , then lndeg(p) ≥
s+1, with equality holding if and only if p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour (Lemma 2.2 above).
The integer lndeg(p) thus measures how far p is from being a quasi-Pfister neighbour. If
p is “generic”, for example, lndeg(p) takes its largest possible value of dim(p) − 1:
Example 4.2. Consider the form p = hX0 , X1 , . . . , Xn i over the rational function field
F (X0 , X1 , . . . , Xn ). Then lndeg(p) = n. Indeed, pnor is isomorphic to the (evidently
anisotropic) quasi-Pfister form hhX0 X1 , X0 X2 , . . . , X0 Xn ii in this case.
Motivated by Proposition 4.1, we consider the following modification of our problem:
Problem 4.3. Let p and q be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2
over F , and let k = dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) ). Is is true that
dim(q) = a2lndeg(p) + ǫ
for some non-negative integer a and integer −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k?
In view of the above discussion, a positive answer to this problem for the pair (p, q) immediately implies that Conjecture 1.1 holds for the same pair of forms. Unlike Conjecture
1.1, however, one can only expect a positive answer to Problem 4.3 in certain situations.
This is already clear from consideration of the case where q = p:
Lemma 4.4. The q = p case of Problem 4.3 has a positive answer if and only if p is a
quasi-Pfister neighbour.
Proof. Suppose first that dim(p) = a2lndeg(p) + ǫ for integers a ≥ 0 and −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k. Since
q = p, we have
k = dim(p) − 2i1 (p) < dim(p).
This implies that a ≥ 1, so that
dim(p) ≥ 2lndeg(p) − k > 2lndeg(p) − dim(p).
In other words, we have
dim(p) > 2lndeg(p)−1 .
By Lemma 2.2, this is exactly what it means for p to be a quasi-Pfister neighbour. Conversely, if p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour, then p has maximal splitting (see §2.G above).
The reader will readily observe that this simply means that dim(p) = 2lndeg(p) − k.

Nevertheless, we can still hope for a positive answer in many interesting cases. In
particular, our main result (Theorem 5.7) is that if 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s−1 , then Problem
4.3 has a positive answer as long as k ≤ 2s−1 . Taking Lemma 4.4 into account, we might
expect that this can be improved to k < 2s−1 + 2s−2 (but not further3) An improvement
which takes into account the precise value of dim(p) is given in Theorem 6.1 below.
We now give an example which shows that, in the quasilinear case, the statement of
Conjecture 1.1 is in some sense optimal. We work here with the norm degree invariant to
indicate that the same applies to all our results in the direction of Problem 4.3.
3When q = p, the inequality k < 2s−1 + 2s−2 implies that p is a Pfister neighbour (Theorem 2.5). This

need not hold, however, if k = 2s−1 + 2s−2 ; see [Hof04, Ex. 7.31].

10

STEPHEN SCULLY

Example 4.5. Let p be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic form of dimension ≥ 2 over
a field E of characteristic 2. Let ϕ be the anisotropic part of pnor over E(p). By [Hof04,
Cor. 4.10 and Cor. 7.9], ϕ is a quasi-Pfister form of dimension 2lndeg(p)−1 . Moreover, there
exists a subform τ ⊂ pnor such that ϕ ≃ τE(p) by [Hof04, Lemma 5.1].
Choose a non-negative integer a, a non-negative integer k < 2lndeg(p) and let ǫ = k − 2l
for some integer 0 ≤ l ≤ k/2. Note that we have ǫ + l ≥ 0. Let X = (X1 , . . . , Xa+ǫ+l ) be
an (a + ǫ + l)-tuple of algebraically independent variables over E and let F = E(X). Let
σ be a codimension-l subform of pnor which contains τ , and consider
q = (pnor )F ⊗ hX1 , . . . , Xa−1 i ⊥ Xa σF ⊥ hXa+1 , . . . , Xa+ǫ+l i.
Since F/E is a purely transcendental extension, (pnor )F is anisotropic. It is then clear that
q is also anisotropic. Note that we have dim(q) = a2lndeg(p) + ǫ. We claim that dim(q) −
2i0 (qF (p) ) = k (here we write F (p) for F (pF )). Recall that ϕ denotes the anisotropic
part of (pnor )E(p) . By construction, ϕ is also the anisotropic part of σE(p) . Indeed, since
τ ⊂ σ ⊂ pnor , Proposition 2.1 implies that
ϕ ≃ τE(p) ⊂ (σE(p) )an ⊂ (pnor E(p) )an = ϕ,
whence the claim. Now, the form
η = (ϕF (p) ⊗ hX1 , . . . , Xa i) ⊥ hXa+1 , . . . , Xa+ǫ+l i
is obviously anisotropic, and is therefore equal to (qF (p) )an by the preceding discussion. In
particular, we have
dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) ) = 2dim(η) − dim(q)
= 2(a2lndeg(p)−1 + ǫ + l) − (a2lndeg(p) + ǫ)
= ǫ + 2l
= k,
as desired. Observe now that because F is a purely transcendental extension of E, replacing p by pF neither changes lndeg(p) nor the fact that p is anisotropic ([Hof04, Prop.
5.3]). Moreover, the initial
pair (E, p) can be chosen so that lndeg(p) takes any prescribed

value ≥ log2 dim(p) . The example therefore shows that as far as the quasilinear case
of Conjecture 1.1 is concerned, the integers i0 (qF (p) ) and dim(p) cannot by themselves
determine any further gaps in the possible values of dim(q).
In what follows, we will mainly consider the statement formulated in Problem 4.3, as
opposed to the statement of Conjecture 1.1. Before proceeding to the proofs of our main
results, it will be useful to record the following trivial reformulation of the former:
Lemma 4.6. Problem 4.3 admits a positive answer if and only if there exists a nonnegative integer a such that
i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ a2lndeg(p)−1 ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ).
Proof. For any integer a, we have
−k ≤ dim(q) − a2ndeg(p) ≤ k
⇔ −dim(q) + 2i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ dim(q) − a2ndeg(p) ≤ dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) )
⇔

2i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ 2(dim(q) − a2ndeg(p)−1 ) ≤ 2(dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ))

⇔

i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ a2lndeg(p)−1 ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ),

whence the claim.



QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

11

Remarks 4.7. (1) By Lemma 2.6, the integer lndeg(p) − 1 appearing as the exponent of
the 2-power here is equal to lndeg(p1 ). We will use this fact in the sequel.
(2) It follows from [Hof04, Prop. 5.3] that the answer to Problem 4.3 is invariant under
replacing F with a separably generated (e.g., purely transcendental) extension of itself.
5. Main results
We are now ready to prove our main results towards the quasilinear case of Conjecture
1.1. Our approach rests on the following key result from [Scu16c]:
Theorem 5.1 ([Scu16c, Thm. 6.6]). Let ψ and ϕ be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic
forms of dimension ≥ 2 over F such that ϕF (ψ) is isotropic. Then, after possibly replacing
F with a purely transcendental extension of itself F , there exists an anisotropic quasilinear
quadratic form τ over F such that
(τ ⊗ ψ1 )an ⊂ (ϕF (ψ) )an

and

dim(τ ) ≥ i0 (ϕF (ψ) ).

As shown in [Scu16c, §6], Theorem 5.1 has many applications in the theory of quasilinear
quadratic forms. The present article represents another demonstration of its range. First,
we observe that it immediately implies the following:
Proposition 5.2. Problem 4.3 has a positive answer if p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour. In
particular, the quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour.
Proof. Let s be the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 . Since p is
a quasi-Pfister neighbour, we have lndeg(ϕ) = s + 1. If qF (p) is anisotropic then conjecture
holds trivially, so let us suppose otherwise. By Theorem 5.1 and Remark 4.7 (2), we may
then assume that there exists an anisotropic form τ over F (p) such that dim(τ ) = i0 (qF (p) )
and (τ ⊗ p1 )an ⊂ (qF (p) )an . On the other hand, τ is similar to a subform of (τ ⊗ p1 )an by
Lemma 3.7 (2). We therefore have inequalities


dim(τ ) ≤ dim (τ ⊗ p1 )an ≤ dim (qF (p) )an ,

or, in other words,


i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ dim (τ ⊗ p1 )an ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ).

Now, since p is a quasi-Pfister neighbour, p1 is similar to an s-fold Pfister form (Lemma 2.4
above). By [Hof04,
Prop. 4.19], it follows that (τ ⊗ p1 )an is divisible by p1 . In particular,

dim (τ ⊗ p1 )an is divisible by 2s . Thus, by the preceding discussion, there exists a positive
integer a such that
i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ a2s ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ).
By Lemma 4.6 and the fact that lndeg(p) = s + 1, this is exactly what we wanted.



Now, while the general case seems to be more complicated, Theorem 5.1 at least permits
us to set up an inductive approach to Problem 4.3. The basic step is the following lemma:
Lemma 5.3. Let ψ be an anisotropic quasilinear quadratic form of dimension ≥ 2 over
a field L of characteristic 2, let 0 < m < 2lndeg(ψ)−2 , and let m′ be the largest integer
strictly less than m which is divisible by 2d1 (ψ) . If Problem 4.3 has a positive answer when
F = L(ψ), p = ψ1 and k ≤ m′ , then it also has a positive answer when F = L, p = ψ and
k ≤ m.
Remark 5.4. We remind the reader that d1 (ψ) denotes the largest integer r such that ψ1
is divisible by an anisotropic r-fold quasi-Pfister form (see §2.H above).

12

STEPHEN SCULLY

Proof. To simplify the notation, let L1 = L(ψ). We make the stated assumption regarding
Problem 4.3 in the case where F = L1 and p = ψ1 . Let q be an anisotropic quasilinear
quadratic form of dimension ≥ 2 over L such that k = d(qL1 ) ≤ m. Our aim is to show
that dim(q) = a2lndeg(p) +ǫ for some integers a ≥ 0 and −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k. In view of Proposition
4.1, we can assume that k > 0. If qL1 is anisotropic, then the statement holds trivially.
If not, then Theorem 5.1 and Remark 4.7 (2) allow us to assume that there exists an
anisotropic form τ over L1 such that dim(τ ) = i0 (qL1 ) and (τ ⊗ ψ1 )an ⊂ (qL1 )an . Now, by
Lemma 4.6 and Remark 4.7 (1), proving our assertion amounts to showing that
i0 (qL1 ) ≤ a2lndeg(ψ1 ) ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qL1 )
for some non-negative integer a, or, equivalently, that
dim(τ ) ≤ a2lndeg(ψ1 ) ≤ dim((qL1 )an )

(5.1)

for some non-negative integer a. We will work with the latter formulation. Let ϕ =
(τ ⊗ ψ1 )an and let l = dim(ϕ) − dim(τ ). By Lemma 3.8, we have that
(1) d(τL1 (ψ1 ) ) ≤ i, and
(2) d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) ≤ l − i
for some integer 0 ≤ i ≤ l (recall here that l ≥ 0 because τ is similar to a subform of ϕ).
We now have three cases to consider:
Case 1. If i = 0, then Proposition 4.1 tells us that dim(τ ) is divisible by 2lndeg(ψ1 ) . Thus,
(5.1) certainly holds for some positive integer a in this case.
Case 2. If i = l, then Proposition 4.1 tells us that dim(ϕ) is divisible by 2lndeg(ψ1 ) . Since
dim(τ ) ≤ dim(ϕ) ≤ dim((qL1 )an ),
(5.1) also holds for some positive integer a in this case.
Case 3. Suppose now that 0 < i < l. We claim that d(τL1 (ψ1 ) ) and d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) are both
≤ m′ (recall that m′ is the largest integer < m which is divisible by 2d1 (ψ) ). First, we have
l =
≤
=
=

dim(ϕ) − dim(τ )
dim((qL1 )an ) − i0 (qL1 )
dim(q) − 2i0 (qL1 )
k

In particular, since i > 0, we have that d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) < l ≤ k ≤ m. On the other hand
d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) is divisible by 2d0 (ϕ) by Lemma 3.5. Since d0 (ϕ) ≥ d0 (ψ1 ) = d1 (ψ) (Lemma
2.7), we conclude that d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) is divisible by 2d1 (ψ) , and is therefore ≤ m′ . This
argument also proves the claim about d(τL1 (ψ1 ) ) = i. Indeed, if i > m′ , then l − i < 2d1 (ψ)
by the definition of m′ and the fact that l ≤ m. Since d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) = l − i is divisible by
2d1 (ψ) , this implies that l − i = 0, contradicting our assumption. Now, since d(τL1 (ψ1 ) ) and
d(ϕL1 (ψ1 ) ) are both ≤ m′ , we can invoke our initial hypothesis to get that
dim(τ ) = b2lndeg(ψ1 ) + ǫ1

and

dim(ϕ) = c2lndeg(ψ1 ) + ǫ2

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

13

for some non-negative integers b, c and some integers −i ≤ ǫ1 ≤ i and i − l ≤ ǫ2 ≤ l − i. If
ǫ1 ≤ 0, then
dim(τ ) ≤
≤
≤
=
≤

b2lndeg(ψ1 )
dim(τ ) + i
dim(τ ) + l
dim(ϕ)
dim((qL1 )an ),

and so (5.1) holds with a = b. Similarly, if ǫ2 ≥ 0, then one immediately checks that (5.1)
holds with a = c. Finally, suppose that ǫ1 > 0 and ǫ2 < 0. Since dim(ϕ) ≥ dim(τ ), we
then have that c > b. In particular,
2lndeg(ψ1 ) ≤ (c − b)2lndeg(ψ1 )

= dim(ϕ) − dim(τ ) + (ǫ1 − ǫ2 )

≤ l + i + (l − i)
= 2l.
This is impossible, however. Indeed, we noted above that l ≤ m, and since m < 2lndeg(ψ)−2 ,
we have (using Lemma 2.6) that
2l < 2lndeg(ψ)−1 = 2lndeg(ψ1 ) .
We conclude that this case cannot occur, and so the lemma is proved.



Recall from [Scu16b, §2.K] that the quasi-Pfister height of a quasilinear quadratic form
ϕ is defined as the smallest non-negative integer hqp (ϕ) such that ϕhqp (ϕ) is similar to a
quasi-Pfister form. The previous lemma now implies:
Proposition 5.5. Problem 4.3 has a positive answer in the case where k < dim(phqp (p) ).
Proof. Let r = hqp (p). We argue by induction on r. If r ≤ 1, then p is a quasi-Pfister
neighbour (Lemma 2.4) and the statement holds by Proposition 5.2. Assume now that
r ≥ 2. Then lndeg(p) ≥ lndeg(pr ) + 2 by Lemma 2.6. In particular, since pr is a quasiPfister form, we have
k < dim(pr ) = 2lndeg(pr ) ≤ 2lndeg(p)−2 .
In particular, by applying Lemma 5.3 in the case where L = F and ψ = p, we can achieve
a reduction in r without changing the assumption on k (the exchange p → p1 does not
change dim(phqp (p) )). The result follows.

The idea now is to examine Problem 4.3 by repeatedly applying Lemma 5.3 over the
Knebusch splitting tower of p. In order to get something concrete out of this, however,
we require some non-trivial information concerning the possible evolution of p as we pass
over this tower. Fortunately, such information is available in the form of Theorems 2.5
and 2.8, and this leads us to the following observation:
Proposition 5.6. Let s be a positive integer and let 0 ≤ m < 2s . Suppose that Problem
4.3 has a positive answer whenever k < m. Then it also has a positive answer in the
situation where 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 and k ≤ min(m + dim(p) − 2s − 2s−2 , 2s − 1).
Proof. Suppose that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 and let k ≤ min(m + dim(p) − 2s − 2s−2 , 2s − 1).
By the discussion in §2.G, there exists an integer 0 < r < h(p) such that dim(pr ) = 2s .
If pr is a quasi-Pfister form, then dim(phqp (p) ) ≥ 2s . Since k < 2s , the statement follows

14

STEPHEN SCULLY

from Proposition 5.5 in this case. Suppose now that pr is not a quasi-Pfister form. Then
lndeg(pr ) ≥ s + 1. In particular, if 0 ≤ i < r, then we have
2lndeg(pi )−2 ≥ 2s+2−2 = 2s > k
(see Lemma 2.6). Thus, repeatedly applying Lemma 5.3 over the Knebusch splitting
tower (Fi ) of p (specifically, consider the sequence (F, p) → (F1 , p1 ) → (F2 , p2 ) → · · · →
(Fr−1 , pr−1 )), there exists a descending sequence of integers m1 > m2 > · · · > mr such
that
(1) m1 < k.
(2) For each 1 ≤ i ≤ r, mi is divisible by 2di (p) .
(3) If Problem 4.3 has a positive answer for the triple (Fr , pr , mr ), then it also has a
positive answer for the triple (F, p, k).
In view of our initial hypothesis, it now only remains to show that mr < m. Note first
that dj+1 (p) ≥ dj (p) for each 1 ≤ j < r (see Theorem 2.8). In particular, (2) implies that,
for each such j, mj − mj−1 is a positive integer divisible by 2dj (p) . Together with (1), we
therefore have
r−1
r−1
X
X
2dj (p) .
(mj − mj+1 ) < k −
mr = m1 −
j=1

We now invoke Theorem 2.8 (1), which tells us that
particular, we have
mr < k −

r−1
X

j=1

2dj (p)

≥ ij (p) for all j < r. In

ij (p)

j=1


= k − dim(p) − dim(pr−1 )

≤ m + dim(p) − 2s − 2s−2 − dim(p) + dim(pr−1 )
= m + dim(pr−1 ) − 2s − 2s−2
Thus, to complete the proof, it suffices to show that dim(pr−1 ) ≤ 2s + 2s−2 . To see that
this is indeed true, note first that pr−1 has maximal splitting (see §2.G above) by the very
definition of r. On the other hand, since pr is not similar to a quasi-Pfister form, pr−1
is not a quasi-Pfister neighbour by Lemma 2.4. The needed conclusion therefore follows
from Theorem 2.5.

An easy induction now yields our main result:
Theorem 5.7. Let p and q be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2
over F , let s be the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 , and let
k = dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) ). If k ≤ 2s−1 , then
dim(q) = a2lndeg(p) + ǫ
for some non-negative integer a and integer −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k. In particular, the quasilinear
case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when k ≤ 2s−1 .
Proof. We argue by induction on dim(p). If dim(p) ≤ 2, then the statement holds by
Proposition 4.1. Assume now that dim(p) ≥ 3. If lndeg(p) = s + 1, then p is a quasiPfister neighbour (Lemma 2.2) and we can invoke Proposition 5.2. We can therefore
assume that lndeg(p) ≥ s + 2 (again, see Lemma 2.2). In particular, we have
k ≤ 2s−1 < 2lndeg(p)−2 .

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

15

Thus, by Lemma 5.3, it suffices to prove the following: If ϕ is an anisotropic quasilinear
quadratic form over L = F (p), and k′ = dim(ϕ) − 2i0 (ϕL(p1 ) ) < 2s−1 , then dim(ϕ) =
b2lndeg(p1 ) + ǫ′ for some non-negative integer b and some integer −k′ ≤ ǫ′ ≤ k′ . Now, by
the discussion of §2.G, we have dim(p1 ) ≥ 2s . If this inequality is strict, then we are done
by the induction hypothesis. If dim(p1 ) = 2s , the induction hypothesis at least tells us
that the claim holds when k′ ≤ 2s−2 . But, by Proposition 5.6, the claim then holds when
k′ ≤ min(2s−2 + 1 + dim(p) − 2s−1 − 2s−3 , 2s−1 − 1)
= min(2s−2 + 1 + dim(2s ) − 2s−1 − 2s−3 , 2s−1 − 1)
= min(2s−1 + 2s−3 + 1, 2s−1 − 1)
= 2s−1 − 1,
and so the theorem is proved.



Feeding this back into Proposition 5.6 now gives the following additional result in the
direction of our conjecture:
Corollary 5.8. Let p and q be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms of dimension ≥ 2
over F , let s be the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 , and let
k = dim(q) − 2i0 (qF (p) ). If k ≤ min(dim(p) − 2s−1 − 2s−2 + 1, 2s − 1), then
dim(q) = a2lndeg(p) + ǫ
for some non-negative integer a and integer −k ≤ ǫ ≤ k. In particular, the quasilinear
case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when k ≤ min(dim(p) − 2s−1 − 2s−2 + 1, 2s − 1).
Proof. By Theorem 5.7, the result holds if k < 2s−1 + 1. Since
2s−1 + 1 + dim(p) − 2s − 2s−2 = dim(p) − 2s−1 − 2s−2 + 1,
the claim now follows from Proposition 5.6.



In particular, we get that the quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when dim(p) is
close enough to 2s+1 :
Corollary 5.9. The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when
2s+1 − 2s−2 − 3 ≤ dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 .
Proof. It is enough to show that the statement of the conjecture holds when k ≤ 2s − 2
(Remark 1.2 (2)). But if dim(p) ≥ 2s+1 − 2s−2 − 3, then
dim(p) − 2s−2 − 2s−2 + 1 ≥ 2s − 2,
and since lndeg(p) ≥ s + 1, the claim follows from Corollary 5.8.



Corollary 5.10. The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds when dim(p) ≤ 8.
Proof. The dimension condition of the previous corollary clearly holds if s ≤ 3.



6. Beyond the main result
The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 remains open in the situation where 2s−1 < k <
Corollaries 5.8, 5.9 and 5.10 give some partial results in this direction. In this last
section, we show that one can eliminate infinitely bad values of dim(q) without imposing
any assumption on k. More precisely, we prove the following:
2s .

16

STEPHEN SCULLY

Theorem 6.1. The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds if
2N ≤ dim(q) ≤ 2N + 2s+1
for some positive integer N .
The proof is similar to that of Theorem 5.7, but we will now also use the fact that
Conjecture 1.1 is known to be true when dim(q) ≤ 2s . In other words, we will use (the
quasilinear case of) the Separation Theorem ([Hof95],[HL06]). The following lemma is a
trivial extension of the latter result:
Lemma 6.2. Let p and q be anisotropic quasilinear quadratic forms over dimension ≥ 2
over F and let s be the unique non-negative integer such that 2s < dim(p) ≤ 2s+1 . Then
i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ max(0, dim(q) − 2s ).
Proof. Let r = max(0, dim(q) − 2s ) and let ϕ be a codimension r subform of q. To prove
the lemma, it suffices to show that ϕF (p) is anisotropic (see Lemma 3.6 (1) above). But
dim(ϕ) ≤ 2s < dim(p), so this holds by the Separation Theorem ([HL06, Thm. 1.1]). 
As a consequence, we have:
Lemma 6.3. The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 holds if dim(q) ≤ 2s+1 + k.
Proof. It suffices to consider the case where dim(q) < 2s+1 − k. In this case, however, we
have
1
(dim(q) − k)
i0 (qF (p) ) =
2

1
>
2dim(q) − 2s+1
2
= dim(q) − 2s ,
so that i0 (qF (p) ) = 0 by Lemma 6.2. Since the statement of the conjecture holds vacuously
in this case, the lemma is proved.

We also need the following fact which follows from standard specialization arguments:
Lemma 6.4. To prove Conjecture 1.1, it suffices to treat the case where dim(p) = 2s + 1.
Proof. Let σ ⊂ p be a subform of dimension 2s + 1. We claim that the substitution p → σ
does not increase the value of k. In other words, we claim that i0 (qF (σ) ) ≥ i0 (qF (p) ). By
[Scu16a, Lem. 3.4], it suffices to show that there exists an F -place from F (p) to F (σ). Let
Xσ and Xp be the projective quadrics defined by σ and p, respectively. The inclusion σ ⊂ p
gives a regular embedding Xσ ֒→ Xp . The quadric Xp is then regular at the generic point
of Xσ . The existence of the desired F -place then follows from [Scu16a, Lem. A.4].

We are now ready to give the proof of Theorem 6.1;
Proof of Theorem 6.1. By Lemmas 6.4 and 6.3, we can assume that
(1) dim(p) = 2s + 1, and
(2) dim(q) > 2s+1 + k.
By (2), we then have that N ≥ s + 1. If dim(q) ≤ 2N + k, there is nothing to prove, so
suppose now that 2N + k < dim(q) ≤ 2N + 2s+1 . By Lemma 3.2 and the definition of k,
we then have that
2s ≤ 2N −1 < i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ 2N −1 + 2s .

QUASILINEAR QUADRATIC FORMS AND FUNCTION FIELDS OF QUADRICS

17

In particular, qF (p) is isotropic. Thus, by Theorem 5.1 and Remark 4.7 (2), we can
assume that there exists an anisotropic form τ over F (p) such that dim(τ ) = i0 (qF (p) ) and
(τ ⊗ p1 )an ⊂ (qF (p))an . Let ϕ = (τ ⊗ p1 )an . As in the proof of Lemma 5.3, we then have
i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ dim(ϕ) ≤ dim(q) − i0 (qF (p) ).
Since i0 (qF (p) ) ≤ 2N −1 + 2s , it follows from Lemma 4.6 that it will be sufficient to show
that dim(ϕ) ≥ 2N −1 +2s . Similar to the arguments of §5, the main point is to observe that
ϕ becomes isotropic to a considerable extent over the function field of τ . More precisely,
let L = F (p)(τ ). As dim(p) = 2s +1, we have dim(p1 ) = 2s . Since dim(τ ) = i0 (qF (p) ) > 2s ,
the Separation Theorem (see Lemma 6.2 above) implies that p1 remains anisotropic over
L. In particular, d (p1 )L = 2s . By Lemma 3.8, we therefore have that
d(ϕL ) ≤ dim(ϕ) − 2s − 2s = dim(ϕ) − 2s+1 .

Rearranging, we get
1
(dim(ϕ) − d(ϕL ))
2
1 s+1
(2 )
≥
2
= 2s .

i0 (ϕL ) =

Now, since dim(q) > 2N + k, we have
dim(τ ) = i0 (qF (p) ) =

1
1
(dim(q) − k) > (2N ) = 2N −1 .
2
2

By Lemma 6.2, it follows that
i0 (ϕL ) ≤ max(0, dim(ϕ) − 2N −1 ).
Since i0 (ϕL ) ≥ 2s , this implies that dim(ϕ) ≥ 2N −1 + 2s , as desired.



Corollary 6.5. The quasilinear case of Conjecture 1.1 is true when dim(q) ≤ 2s+2 + 2s+1 .
Proof. In this range, we can write dim(q) = 2N + a for some non-negative integer N and
some integer a ≤ 2s+1 .

Acknowledgements. The author gratefully acknowledges the support of a PIMS postdoctoral fellowship and NSERC discovery grant during the period in which this research
was carried out.
References
[EKM08] R. Elman, N. Karpenko, and A. Merkurjev. The algebraic and geometric theory
of quadratic forms. AMS Colloquium Publications 56, American Mathematical
Society, 2008.
[Hof95] D.W. Hoffmann. Isotropy of quadratic forms over the function field of a quadric.
Math. Z. 220 (1995), no. 3, 461–476.
, Diagonal forms of degree p in characteristic p, Algebraic and arith[Hof04]
metic theory of quadratic forms, Contemp. Math., 344, Amer. Math. Soc., 2004,
pp. 135–183.
[HL04] D.W. Hoffmann and A. Laghribi. Quadratic forms and Pfister neighbors in
characteristic 2. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 356 (2004), no. 10, 4019–4053.
[HL06] D.W. Hoffmann and A. Laghribi. Isotropy of quadratic forms over the function
field of a quadric in characteristic 2. J. Algebra, 295 (2006), no. 2, 362–386.

18

STEPHEN SCULLY

[Kah08] Bruno Kahn. Formes quadratiques sur un corps. Cours Spécialisés, 15. Société
Mathématique de France, Paris, 2008.
[Kar03] N.A. Karpenko. On the first Witt index of quadratic forms. Invent. Math., 153
(2003), no.2, 455–462.
[Lag04] A. Laghribi. Quasi-hyperbolicity of totally singular quadratic forms. Algebraic
and arithmetic theory of quadratic forms, 237–248, Contemp. Math., 344, Amer.
Math. Soc., 2004.
[Scu16a] S. Scully. On the splitting of quasilinear p-forms. J. Reine Angew. Math., 713
(2016), 49–83.
[Scu16b] S. Scully, Hoffmann’s conjecture for totally singular forms of prime degree, Algebra Number Theory 10 (2016), no. 5, 1091–1132.
[Scu16c] S. Scully. A bound for the index of a quadratic form after scalar extension to
the function field of a quadric. Preprint, 2016, arXiv:1607.07529v1.
[Scu17] S. Scully. Hyperbolicity and near hyperbolicity of quadratic forms over function
fields of quadrics. Preprint, 2017, arXiv:1609.07100v2.
[Tot08] B. Totaro. Birational geometry of quadrics in characteristic 2. J. Algebraic
Geom., 17 (2008), no. 3, 577–597.
Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton
AB T6G 2G1, Canada
E-mail address: stephenjscully@gmail.com

