O’Dorney

RESEARCH

Rings of small rank over a Dedekind domain and
their ideals
arXiv:1508.02777v3 [math.NT] 17 Aug 2015

Evan M O’Dorney
Correspondence:
emo916math@gmail.com
119 Shelterwood Lane, 94506
Danville, CA, USA
Full list of author information is
available at the end of the article

Abstract
The aim of this paper is to find and prove generalizations of some of the beautiful
integral parametrizations in Bhargava’s theory of higher composition laws to the
case where the base ring Z is replaced by an arbitrary Dedekind domain R.
Specifically, we parametrize quadratic, cubic, and quartic algebras over R as well
as ideal classes in quadratic algebras, getting a description of the multiplication
law on ideals that extends Bhargava’s famous reinterpretation of Gauss
composition of binary quadratic forms. We expect that our results will shed light
on the statistical properties of number field extensions of degrees 2, 3, and 4.
Keywords: Dedekind domain; ring extension; Gauss composition; Bhargavology
AMS Subject Classification: Primary 13F05; 11E20; 11R11; 11R16; secondary
11E16; 13B02; 13A15; 11E76

1 Introduction
The mathematics that we will discuss has its roots in the investigations of classical
number theorists—notably Fermat, Lagrange, Legendre, and Gauss (see [1], Ch. I)—
who were interested in what integers are represented by expressions such as x2 +ky 2 ,
for fixed k. It became increasingly clear that in order to answer one such question,
one had to understand the general behavior of expressions of the form
ax2 + bxy + cy 2 .
These expressions are now called binary quadratic forms. It was Gauss who first
discovered that, once one identifies forms that are related by a coordinate change
x 7→ px + qy, y 7→ rx + sy (where ps − qr = 1), the forms whose discriminant
D = b2 − 4ac has a fixed value and which are primitive, that is, gcd(a, b, c) = 1, can
be naturally given the structure of an abelian group, which has the property that
if forms φ1 , φ2 represent the numbers n1 , n2 , then their product φ1 ∗ φ2 represents
n1 n2 . This group law ∗ is commonly called Gauss composition.
Gauss’s construction of the product of two forms was quite ad hoc. Since Gauss’s
time, mathematicians have discovered various reinterpretations of the composition
law on binary quadratic forms, notably:
• Dirichlet, who discovered an algorithm simplifying the understanding and
computation of the product of two forms, which we will touch on in greater
detail (see Example 5.9).
• Dedekind, who by introducing the now-standard notion of an ideal, transformed Gauss composition into the simple operation of multiplying two ideals
√
in a quadratic ring of the form Z[(D + D)/2];

O’Dorney

Page 2 of 39

• Bhargava, who in 2004 astounded the mathematical community by deriving
Gauss composition from simple operations on a 2 × 2 × 2 cube [2].
In abstraction, Bhargava’s reinterpretation is somewhat intermediate between
Dirichlet’s and Dedekind’s: it shares the integer-based concreteness of Gauss’s original investigations, yet it also corresponds to natural constructions in the realm of
ideals. One of the highlights of Bhargava’s method is that it extends to give group
structures on objects beyond binary quadratic forms, hence the title of his paper
series, “Higher composition laws.” It also sheds light on previously inaccessible conjectures about Gauss composition, such as an estimate for the number of forms of
bounded discriminant whose third power is the identity [3].
A second thread that will be woven into this thesis is the study of finite ring
extensions of Z, often with a view toward finite field extensions of Q. Quadratic rings
(that is, those having a Z-basis with just two elements) are simply and classically
parametrized by a single integer invariant, the discriminant. For cubic rings, Delone
and Faddeev prove a simple lemma (as one of many tools for studying irrationalities
of degree 3 and 4 over Q) parametrizing them by binary cubic forms ([4], pp. 101ff).
A similar classification for quartic and higher rings proved elusive until Bhargava,
using techniques inspired by representation theory, was able to parametrize quartic
and quintic rings together with their cubic and sextic resolvent rings, respectively,
and thereby compute the asymptotic number of quartic and quintic rings and fields
with bounded discriminant [5, 6, 7, 8]. The analytic virtue of Bhargava’s method
is to map algebraic objects such as rings and ideals to lattice points in bounded
regions of Rn , where asymptotic counting is much easier. (Curiously enough, the
ring parametrizations seem to reach a natural barrier at degree 5, in contrast to the
classical theory of solving equations by radicals where degree 4 is the limit.)
Bhargava published these results over the integers Z. Since then, experts have
wondered whether his techniques apply over more general classes of rings; by far
the most ambitious extensions of this sort are Wood’s classifications of quartic
algebras [9] and ideals in certain n-ic algebras [10] over an arbitrary base scheme
S. In this paper, all results are proved over an arbitrary Dedekind domain R. The
use of a Dedekind domain has the advantage of remaining relevant to the original
application (counting number fields and related structures) while introducing some
new generality.
We will focus on two parametrizations that are representative of Bhargava’s algebraic techniques in general. The first is the famous reinterpretation of Gauss
composition in terms of 2 × 2 × 2 boxes. Following [2], call a triple (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of
ideals of a quadratic ring S balanced if I1 I2 I3 ⊆ S and N (I1 )N (I2 )N (I3 ) = 1, and
call two balanced triples equivalent if Ii = γi Ii0 for some scalars γi ∈ S ⊗Z Q having
product 1. (If S is Dedekind, as is the most common application, then the balanced
triples of equivalence classes correspond to triples of ideal classes having product
1.) Then:
Theorem 1.1 ([2], Theorem 11) There is a canonical bijection between
• pairs (S, (I1 , I2 , I3 )) where S is an oriented quadratic ring of nonzero discriminant over Z and (I1 , I2 , I3 ) is an equivalence class of balanced triples of ideals
of S;

O’Dorney

Page 3 of 39

• trilinear maps β : Z2 ⊗ Z2 ⊗ Z2 → Z, up to SL2 Z-changes of coordinates in
each of the three inputs (subject to a certain nondegeneracy condition).
Our parametrization is analogous, with one crucial difference. Whereas over Z, the
only two-dimensional lattice is Z2 , over a Dedekind domain R there are as many as
there are ideal classes, and any such lattice can serve as the R-module structure of a
quadratic algebra or an ideal thereof. Using a definition of balanced and equivalent
essentially identical to Bhargava’s (see Definition 5.1), we prove:
Theorem 1.2 (see Theorem 5.3) Let R be a Dedekind domain. There is a canonical bijection between
• pairs (S, (I1 , I2 , I3 )) where S is an oriented quadratic algebra over R and
(I1 , I2 , I3 ) is an equivalence class of balanced triples of ideals of S;
• quadruples (a, (M1 , M2 , M3 ), θ, β) where a is an ideal class of R, Mi are lattices of rank 2 over R (up to isomorphism), θ : Λ2 M1 ⊗ Λ2 M2 ⊗ Λ2 M3 → a3
is an isomorphism, and β : M1 ⊗ M2 ⊗ M3 → a is a trilinear map whose three
partial duals βi : Mj ⊗ Mk → aMi∗ ({i, j, k} = {1, 2, 3}) have image a full-rank
sublattice.
Under this bijection, we get identifications Λ2 S ∼
= a and Ii ∼
= Mi .
In particular R may have characteristic 2, the frequent factors of 1/2 in Bhargava’s
exposition notwithstanding, and by weakening the nondegeneracy condition, we are
able to include balanced triples in degenerate rings.
The second main result of our paper is the parametrization of quartic rings (with
the quadratic and cubic parametrizations as preliminary cases). A key insight is to
parametrize not merely the quartic rings themselves, but the quartic rings together
with their cubic resolvent rings, a notion arising from the resolvent cubic used in
the classical solution of the quartic by radicals.
Theorem 1.3 ([5], Theorem 1 and Corollary 5) There is a canonical bijection
between
• isomorphism classes of pairs (Q, C) where Q is a quartic ring (over Z) and
C is a cubic resolvent ring of Q;
• quadratic maps φ : Z3 → Z2 , up to linear changes of coordinates on both the
input and the output.
Any quartic ring Q has a cubic resolvent, and if Q is Dedekind, the resolvent is
unique.
Our analogue is as follows:
Theorem 1.4 (see Theorems 8.3 and 8.7 and Corollary 8.6) Let R be a Dedekind
domain. There is a canonical bijection between
• isomorphism classes of pairs (Q, C) where Q is a quartic ring (over Z) and
C is a cubic resolvent ring of Q;
• quadruples (L, M, θ, φ) where L and M are lattices of ranks 3 and 2 over R
respectively, θ : Λ2 M → Λ3 L is an isomorphism, and φ : L → M is a quadratic
map.

O’Dorney

Page 4 of 39

Under this bijection, we get identifications Q/R ∼
= L and C/R ∼
= M.
Any quartic ring Q has a cubic resolvent, and if Q is Dedekind, the resolvent is
unique.
1.1 Outline
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In section 2, we set up basic
definitions concerning projective modules over a Dedekind domain. In sections 3 and
4, respectively, we generalize to Dedekind base rings two classical parametrizations,
namely of quadratic algebras over Z and of their ideals. In section 5, we prove
Bhargava’s parametrization of balanced ideal triples (itself a generalization of Gauss
composition) over a Dedekind domain. In section 6, we work out in detail a specific
example—unramified extensions of Zp —that allows us to explore the notion of
balanced ideal triple in depth. In sections 7 and 8, we tackle cubic and quartic
algebras respectively, and in section 9, we discuss results that would be useful when
using the preceding theory to parametrize and count quartic field extensions.

2 Modules and algebras over a Dedekind domain
A Dedekind domain is an integral domain that is Noetherian, integrally closed, and
has the property that every nonzero prime ideal is maximal. The standard examples
of Dedekind domains are the ring of algebraic integers OK in any finite extension
K of Q; in addition, any field and any principal ideal domain (PID), such as the
ring C[x] of polynomials in one variable, is Dedekind. In this section, we summarize
properties of Dedekind domains that we will find useful; for more details, see [11],
pp. 9–18.
The salient properties of Dedekind domains were discovered through efforts to
generalize prime factorization to rings beyond Z; in particular, every nonzero ideal
a in a Dedekind domain R is expressible as a product pa1 1 · · · pann of primes, unique
up to ordering. Our motivation for using Dedekind domains stems from two other
related properties. Recall that a fractional ideal or simply an ideal of R is a finitely
generated nonzero R-submodule of the fraction field K of R, or equivalently, a set
of the form aa where a ⊆ R is a nonzero ideal and a ∈ K × . (The term “ideal” will
from now on mean “(nonzero) fractional ideal”; if we wish to speak of ideals in the
ring-theoretic sense, we will use a phrasing such as “ideal a ⊆ R.”) The first useful
property is that any fractional ideal a ⊆ K has an inverse a−1 such that aa−1 = R.
This allows us to form the group I(R) of nonzero fractional ideals and quotient
by the group K × /R× of principal ideals to obtain the familiar ideal class group,
traditionally denoted Pic R. (For the ring of integers in a number field, the class
group is always finite; for a general Dedekind domain this may fail, e.g. for the ring
C[x, y]/(y 2 − (x − a1 )(x − a2 )(x − a3 )) of functions on a punctured elliptic curve.)
The second property that we will find very useful is that finitely generated modules over a Dedekind domain are classified by a simple theorem generalizing the
classification of finitely generated abelian groups. For our purposes it suffices to
discuss torsion-free modules, which we will call lattices.
Definition 2.1 Let R be a Dedekind domain and K its field of fractions. A lattice
over R is a finitely generated, torsion-free R-module M . If M is a lattice, we will

O’Dorney

Page 5 of 39

denote by the subscript MK its K-span M ⊗R K (except when M is denoted by
a symbol containing a subscript, in which case a superscript will be used). The
dimension of MK over K is called the rank of the lattice M .
A lattice of rank 1 is a nonzero finitely generated submodule of K, i.e. an ideal;
thus isomorphism classes of rank-1 lattices are parametrized by the class group
Pic R. The situation for general lattices is not too different.
Theorem 2.2 (see [11], Lemma 1.5, Theorem 1.6, and the intervening Remark) A
lattice M over R is classified up to isomorphism by two invariants: its rank m and
its top exterior power Λm M . Equivalently, every lattice is a direct sum a1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ am
of nonzero ideals, and two such direct sums a1 ⊕· · ·⊕am , b1 ⊕· · ·⊕bn are isomorphic
if and only if m = n and the products a1 · · · am and b1 · · · bn belong to the same ideal
class.
In this paper we will frequently be performing multilinear operations on lattices.
Using Theorem 2.2, it is easy to show that these operations behave much more
“tamely” than for modules over general rings. Specifically, for two lattices M =
a1 u1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ am um and N = b1 v1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ bn vn , we can form the following lattices:
• the tensor product
M

M ⊗N =

ai bj (ui ⊗ vj );

1≤i≤m
1≤j≤n

• the symmetric powers
M

Symk M =

ai1 · · · aik (ui1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ uik )

1≤i1 ≤···≤ik ≤m

and the exterior powers
Λk M =

M

ai1 · · · aik (ui1 ∧ · · · ∧ uik )

1≤i1 <···<ik ≤m


of ranks n+k−1
and
k
• the dual lattice

n
k



respectively;

M ∗ = Hom(M, R) =

M

∗
a−1
i ui ;

1≤i≤m

• and the space of homomorphisms
Hom(M, N ) ∼
= M∗ ⊗ N =

M

∗
a−1
i bj (ui ⊗ vj ).

1≤i≤m
1≤j≤n

A particular composition of three of these constructions is of especial relevance to
the present thesis:

O’Dorney

Page 6 of 39

Definition 2.3 If M and N are lattices (or, more generally, M is a lattice and N
is any R-module), then a degree-k map φ : M → N is an element of (Symk M ∗ )⊗N .
A map to a lattice N of rank 1 is called a form.
In terms of decompositions M = a1 u1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ am um and N = b1 v1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ bn vn ,
a degree-k map can be written in the form

φ(x1 u1 + · · · + xm um ) =

n
X

X

ai1 ,...,im ,j · xi11 · · · ximm vj ,

j=1 i1 +···+im =k
m
where the coefficients ai1 ,...,im ,j belong to the ideals a1−i1 · · · a−i
m bj needed to make
each term’s value belong to N . For example, over R = Z, a quadratic map from Z2
to Z is a quadratic expression

φ(x, y) = ax2 + bxy + cy 2
in the coordinates x, y ∈ (Z2 )∗ on Z2 . Two caveats about this notion are in order:
• Although such a degree-k map indeed yields a function from M to N (evaluated by replacing every functional in M ∗ appearing in the map by its value
on the given element of M ), it need not be unambiguously determined by this
function if R is finite. For instance, if R = F2 is the field with two elements,
the cubic map from F22 to F2 defined by φ(x, y) = xy(x + y) vanishes on each
of the four elements of F22 , though it is not the zero map.
• Also, one must not confuse (Symk M ∗ ) ⊗ N with the space (Symk M )∗ ⊗ N of
symmetric k-ary multilinear functions from M to N . Although both lattices

have rank n m+k−1
and there is a natural map from one to the other (defined
k
by evaluating a multilinear function on the diagonal), this map is not in
general an isomorphism. For instance, the quadratic forms φ : Z2 → Z arising
from a symmetric bilinear form λ((x1 , y1 ), (x2 , y2 )) = ax1 x2 +b(x1 y2 +x2 y1 )+
cy1 y2 are exactly those of the form φ(x, y) = ax2 + 2bxy + cy 2 , with middle
coefficient even.
The image φ(M ) of a degree-k map φ : M → N is the smallest sublattice N 0 ⊆ N
such that φ is a degree-k map from M to N 0 , i.e. lies in the image of the natural
injection (Symk M ∗ ) ⊗ N 0 ,→ (Symk M ∗ ) ⊗ N . It may be computed as follows: if
φ(x1 u1 + · · · + xm um ) =

X

xi11 · · · ximm · vi1 ,...,im ,

i1 +···+im =k

then φ(M ) is the R-span of all the 1-dimensional sublattices ai11 · · · aimm vi1 ,...,im in
N . (It is not the same as the span of the values of φ as a function on M .)
If L ⊆ M are two lattices of rank n, the index [M : L] is the ideal a such that
a · Λn L = Λn M.
Since Λn L and Λn M are of rank 1, this is well defined.

O’Dorney

Page 7 of 39

2.1 Algebras
An algebra of rank n over R is a lattice S of rank n equipped with a multiplication
operation giving it the structure of a (unital commutative associative) R-algebra.
Since R is integrally closed, the sublattice generated by 1 ∈ S must be primitive
(that is, the lattice it generates is maximal for its dimension, and therefore a direct
summand of S), implying that the quotient S/R is a lattice of rank n − 1 and we
have a noncanonical decomposition
S = R ⊕ S/R.

(1)

We will be concerned with algebras of ranks 2, 3, and 4, which we call quadratic,
cubic, and quartic algebras (or rings) respectively.
2.2 Orientations
When learning about Gauss composition over Z, one must sooner or later come to
a problem that vexed Legendre (see [1], p. 42): If one considers quadratic forms up
to GL2 Z-changes of variables, then a group structure does not emerge because the
conjugate forms ax2 ± bxy + cy 2 , which ought to be inverses, have been identified.
Gauss’s insight was to consider forms only up to “proper equivalence,” i.e. SL2 Z
coordinate changes. This is tantamount to considering quadratic forms not simply
on a rank-2 Z-lattice M , but on a rank-2 Z-lattice equipped with a distinguished
generator of its top exterior power Λ2 M . For general lattices over Dedekind domains,
whose top exterior powers need not belong to the principal ideal class, we make the
following definitions.
Definition 2.4 Let a be a fractional ideal of R. A rank-n lattice M is of type a
if its top exterior power Λn M is isomorphic to a; an orientation on M is then a
choice of isomorphism α : Λn M → a. The possible orientations on any lattice M are
of course in noncanonical bijection with the units R× . The easiest way to specify
an orientation on M is to choose a decomposition M = b1 u1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ bn un , where
the ideals bi are scaled to have product a, and then declare
α(y1 u1 ∧ · · · ∧ yn un ) = y1 · · · yn .
An orientation on a rank-n R-algebra S is the same as an orientation on the lattice
S, or equivalently on the lattice S/R, due to the isomorphism between Λn S and
Λn−1 S/R given by
1 ∧ v1 ∧ · · · ∧ vn−1 7→ ṽ1 ∧ · · · ∧ ṽn−1 .
(Here, and henceforth, we use a tilde to denote the image under the quotient map
by R, so that the customary bar can be reserved for conjugation involutions. This is
opposite to the usual convention where ṽ denotes a lift of v under a quotient map.)

O’Dorney

Page 8 of 39

3 Quadratic algebras
Before proceeding to Bhargava’s results, we lay down as groundwork two parametrizations that, over Z, were known classically. These are the parametrizations of
quadratic algebras and of ideal classes in quadratic algebras. The extension of these
to other base rings has been thought about extensively, with many different kinds
of results produced (see [12] and the references therein). Here, we prove versions
over a Dedekind domain that parallel our cubic and quartic results.
Let S be a quadratic algebra over R. Since S/R has rank 1, the decomposition
(1) simplifies to S = R ⊕ aξ for an (arbitrary) ideal a in the class of Λ2 S and some
formal generator ξ ∈ SK . The algebra is then determined by a and a multiplication
law ξ 2 = tξ − u, which allows us to describe the ring as R[aξ]/(a2 (ξ 2 − tξ + u)), a
subring of K[ξ]/(ξ 2 − tξ + u). Alternatively, we can associate to the ring its norm
map
NS/R : S → R,

x + yξ 7→ x2 + txy + uy 2 .

It is evident that this is just another way of packaging the same data, namely two
numbers t ∈ a−1 and u ∈ a−2 . The norm map is more readily freed from coordinates
than the multiplication table, yielding the following parametrization.
Lemma 3.1 Quadratic algebras over R are in canonical bijection with rank-2 Rlattices M equipped with a distinguished copy of R and a quadratic form φ : M → R
that acts as squaring on the distinguished copy of R.
Proof Given M and φ, the distinguished copy of R must be primitive (otherwise
φ would take values outside R), yielding a decomposition M = R ⊕ aξ. Write φ in
these coordinates as
φ(x + yξ) = x2 + txy + uy 2 ;
then the values t ∈ a−1 and u ∈ a−2 can be used to build a multiplication table
on M having the desired norm form (which is unique, as for any fixed coordinate
system, the norm form determines t and u, which determine the multiplication
table).

If there is a second copy of R on which NS/R restricts to the squaring map, it must
be generated by a unit of S with norm 1, multiplication by which induces an automorphism of the lattice with norm form. Hence we can eliminate the distinguished
copy of R and arrive at the following arguably prettier parametrization:
Theorem 3.2 Quadratic algebras over R are in canonical bijection with rank-2
R-lattices M equipped with a quadratic form φ : M → R attaining the value 1.
For our applications to Gauss composition it will also be helpful to have a
parametrization of oriented quadratic algebras. An orientation α : Λ2 R → a can
be specified by choosing an element ξ with α(1 ∧ ξ) = 1. Since ξ is unique up to
translation by a−1 , the parametrization is exceedingly simple.

O’Dorney

Page 9 of 39

Theorem 3.3 For each ideal a of R, there is a canonical bijection between oriented
quadratic algebras of type a and pairs (t, u), where t ∈ a−1 , u ∈ a−2 , up to the action
of a−1 via
s.(t, u) = (t + 2s, u + st + s2 )
One other fact that will occasionally be useful is that every quadratic algebra has
an involutory automorphism defined by x̄ = Tr x − x or, in a coordinate representation
S = R[aξ]/(a2 (ξ 2 − tξ + u)),
by ξ 7→ t − ξ. (The first of these characterizations shows that the automorphism is
well-defined, the second that it respects the ring structure.)
Example 3.4 When R = Q (or more generally any Dedekind domain in which 2
is a unit), then completing the square shows that oriented quadratic algebras are in
√
bijection with the forms x2 − ky 2 , k ∈ Q, each of which yields an algebra S = Q[ k]
√
oriented by α(1 ∧ k) = 1.
√
If we pass to unoriented extensions, then we identify Q[ k] with its rescalings
p
√
Q[f k] ∼
= Q[ f 2 k], f ∈ Q× . The resulting orbit space Q/(Q× )2 parametrizes
quadratic number fields, plus the two nondomains
√
Q[ 0] = Q[]/(2 )

√
and Q[ 1] ∼
= Q ⊕ Q.

Example 3.5 When R = Z, we can almost complete the square, putting a general
x2 + txy + uy 2 in the form
x2 −

D 2
y
4

or x2 + xy −

D−1 2
y .
4

Here D = t2 − 4u is the discriminant, the standard invariant used in [2] to
parametrize oriented quadratic rings. It takes on all values congruent to 0 or 1 mod
4. It also parametrizes unoriented quadratic rings, since each such ring has just
two orientations which are conjugate under the ring’s conjugation automorphism.
The rings of integers of number fields are then parametrized by the fundamental
discriminants which are not a square multiple of another discriminant, with the
exception of 0 and 1 which parametrize Z[]/2 and Z ⊕ Z respectively.
Example 3.6 For an example where discriminant-based parametrizations are inapplicable, consider the field R = F2 of two elements. Any nonzero quadratic form
attains the value 1, and there are three such, namely
x2 ,

xy,

and x2 + xy + y 2 .

They correspond to the three quadratic algebras over F2 , respectively F2 []/2 ,
F2 ⊕ F2 , and F4 .

O’Dorney

Page 10 of 39

4 Ideal classes of quadratic algebras
We can now parametrize ideal classes of quadratic algebras, in a way that partially
overlaps [12]. To be absolutely unambiguous, we make the following definition for
quadratic algebras that need not be domains:
Definition 4.1 Let S be a quadratic algebra over R. A fractional ideal (or just
an ideal ) of S is a finitely generated S-submodule of SK that spans SK over K.
Two fractional ideals are considered to belong to the same ideal class if one is a
×
scaling of the other by a scalar γ ∈ SK
. (This is clearly an equivalence relation.)
The ideal classes together with the operation induced by ideal multiplication form
the ideal class semigroup, and the invertible ideal classes form the ideal class group
Pic S.
The condition in bold means that, for instance, the submodule R ⊕ {0} ⊆ R ⊕ R is
not a fractional ideal. Of course, any ideal that is invertible automatically satisfies
it.
Theorem 4.2 (cf. [12], Corollary 4.2) For each ideal a of R, there is a bijection
between
• ideal classes of oriented quadratic rings of type a, and
• rank-2 lattices M equipped with a nonzero quadratic map φ : M → a−1 · Λ2 M .
In this bijection, the ideal classes that are invertible correspond exactly to the forms
that are primitive, that is, do not factor through any proper sublattice of a−1 · Λ2 M .
Proof Suppose first that we have a quadratic ring S = R⊕aξ, oriented by α(1∧ξ) =
1, and a fractional ideal I of R. Construct a map φ : I → a−1 · Λ2 I by
ω 7→ ω ∧ ξω.
Here ξω ∈ a−1 I so the wedge product lies in a−1 · Λ2 I, and we get a well-defined
×
quadratic map φ, scaling appropriately when I is scaled by an element of SK
. Note
that φ is nonzero because, after extending scalars to K, the element 1 ∈ IK = SK
is mapped to 1 ∧ ξ 6= 0.
It will be helpful to write this construction in coordinates. Let I" = b1#η1 ⊕ b2 η2 be
a b
, that is,
a decomposition into R-ideals, and let ξ act on I by the matrix
c d
ξη1 = aη1 + cη2

(2)

ξη2 = bη1 + dη2
where a, b, c, d belong to the relevant ideals: a, d ∈ a−1 , b ∈ a−1 b1 b−1
2 , and c ∈
a−1 b−1
b
.
Then
we
get
2
1
φ(xη1 + yη2 ) = (xη1 + yη2 ) ∧ (xξη1 + yξη2 )
= (xη1 + yη2 ) ∧ (axη1 + cxη2 + byη1 + dyη2 )
= (cx2 + (d − a)xy − by 2 )(η1 ∧ η2 ) ∈ a−1 b1 b2 (η1 ∧ η2 ) = a−1 Λ2 I.

O’Dorney

Page 11 of 39

(3)
(Now φ appears clearly as a tensor in Sym2 I ∗ ⊗ a−1 · Λ2 M .)
We now seek to reconstruct the ideal I from its associated quadratic form. Given
an ideal a, a lattice M = b1 η1 ⊕ b2 η2 , and a quadratic map φ(xη1 + yη2 ) = (px2 +
qxy + ry 2 )(η1 ∧ η2 ) to a−1 · Λ2 M , we may choose a = 0, b = −r, c = p, and
d = q to recover an action (2) of ξ on R yielding the form φ. By (3), this action is
unique up to adding a constant to a and d, which simply corresponds to a change
of basis ξ 7→ ξ + a. Next, by the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, the formal expression
ξ 2 −qξ+pr annihilates M , so M is a module over the ring S = R[aξ]/(a2 (ξ 2 −qξ+pr))
corresponding to the quadratic form x2 + qxy + pry 2 . The last step is to embed M
into SK , or equivalently, to identify MK with SK . For this, we divide into cases
based on the kind of ring that SK is, or equivalently the factorization type of the
polynomial f (x) = x2 − qx + pr over K.
• If f is irreducible, then SK is a field, and MK is an SK -vector space of dimension 1, isomorphic to SK .
• If f has two distinct roots, then SK ∼
= K ⊕ K. There are three different SK modules having dimension 2 as K-vector spaces: writing I1 and I2 for the two
copies of K within SK , we can describe them as I1 ⊕ I1 , I2 ⊕ I2 , and I1 ⊕ I2 .
But on the first two, every element of SK acts as a scalar. If MK were one of
these, then the quadratic form φ(ω) = ω ∧ ξω would be identically 0, which
is not allowed. So MK ∼
= I1 ⊕ I2 ∼
= SK .
• Finally, if f has a double root, then SK ≡ K[]/2 . There are two SK -modules
having dimension 2 as a K-vector space: K ⊕ K and SK . On K ⊕ K, SK
acts by scalars and we get a contradiction as before. So MK ∼
= SK .
This shows that there is always at least one embedding of M into SK . To show
there is at most one up to scaling, we need that every automorphism of SK as an
SK -module is given by multiplication by a unit. But this is trivial (the image of 1
determines everything else).
It will be convenient to have as well an explicit reconstruction of an ideal from
its associated quadratic form. First change coordinates on M such that p 6= 0. (If
r 6= 0, swap b1 η1 and b2 η2 ; if p = 0 but q 6= 0, translate η2 7→ η2 + tη1 for any
nonzero t ∈ b1 b−1
2 .) Then the ideal
I = b1 + b2

 
ξ
p

(4)

of the ring S = R[aξ]/(a2 (ξ 2 − qξ + pr)) corresponding to the norm form x2 + qxy +
pry 2 is readily seen to yield the correct quadratic form.
We now come to the equivalence between invertibility of ideals and primitivity
of forms. Suppose first that φ : M → a−1 · Λ2 M is imprimitive, that is, there is an
ideal a0 strictly containing a such that φ actually arises from a quadratic map φ0 :
M → a0−1 ·Λ2 M . Following through the (first) construction, we see that φ and φ0 give
the same ξ-action on I = M but embed it as a fractional ideal in two different rings,
0 ∼
S = R ⊕ aξ and S 0 = R ⊕ a0 ξ. We naturally have SK ∼
= SK
= K[ξ]/(ξ 2 − qξ + pr),
0
and S is a subring of S . Suppose I had an inverse J as an S-ideal. Then since I is
an S 0 -ideal, the product IJ = S must be an S 0 -ideal, which is a contradiction.

O’Dorney

Page 12 of 39

Conversely, suppose that φ is primitive and I has been constructed using (4).
Consider the conjugate ideal
ξ¯
q−ξ
I¯ = b1 + b2 = b1 + b2
p
p
and form the product



ξ
q−ξ
b1 + b2
b1 + b2
p
p
q
−
ξ
ξ
ξ ξ¯
+ b22 2
= b21 + b1 b2 + b1 b2
p
p
p
1
= (pb21 + qb1 b2 + rb22 + ξb1 b2 ).
p

I I¯ =

The first three terms in the parenthesis are all fractional ideals in K. The condition
that φ maps into a−1 · Λ2 I is exactly that these lie in a−1 b1 b2 , and the condition
of primitivity is that they do not all lie in any smaller ideal, that is, their sum is
a−1 b1 b2 . So
I I¯ =

a−1 b1 b2
b1 b2 −1
(a + Rξ) =
· S.
p
p

(5)

We conclude that
−1 ¯
2 −1 ¯
I −1 = ab−1
I
1 b2 pI = α(Λ I)

is an inverse for I.



Note that our proof of the invertibility-primitivity equivalence shows something
more: that any fractional ideal I of a quadratic algebra S is invertible when considered as an ideal of a certain larger ring S 0 , found by “canceling common factors”
in its associated quadratic form. The following relation is worth noting:
Corollary 4.3 If I is an ideal of a quadratic algebra S and S 0 = End I ⊆ SK is
its ring of endomorphisms, then
I I¯ =

α(Λ2 I)
· S0.
α(Λ2 S 0 )

Proof The ring S 0 is the one occurring in the proof that imprimitivity implies noninvertibility, provided that the ideal a0 is chosen to be as large as possible (i.e. equal
to (pb21 + qb1 b2 + rb22 )−1 ), so that I is actually invertible with respect to S 0 . This
S 0 must be the endomorphism ring End I, or else I would be an ideal of an even
larger quadratic ring. (We here need that End I is finitely generated and hence a
×
quadratic ring. This is obvious, as it is contained in x−1 I for any x ∈ SK
∩ I.)
0
2 0
Viewing α, by restriction, as an orientation on S , we have α(Λ S ) = a0 and the
formula is reduced to that for I −1 above.


O’Dorney

Page 13 of 39

Example 4.4 If R = Z (or more generally any PID), then the situation simplifies
to a = Z and M = Z2 , and we recover a bijection between ideal classes and binary
quadratic forms. But the theorem also requires us, when changing coordinates on M ,
to change coordinates on Λ2 M appropriately; that is, ideal classes are in bijection
with GL2 (Z)-orbits of binary quadratic forms φ : Z2 → Z, not under the natural
action but under the twisted action
"
a
c

# !
1
b
. φ (x, y) =
· φ(ax + cy, bx + dy).
ad − bc
d

(Compare [1], p. 142 and [12], Theorem 1.2.)
For an example not commonly encountered in the literature, take the order S =
Z[5i] in the domain Z[i]. Its ideal classes correspond simply to GL2 (Z)-orbits of
quadratic forms px2 + qxy + ry 2 having discriminant q 2 − 4pr = −100. Using the
standard theory of “reduction” of quadratic forms developed by Lagrange (see [1],
pp. 26ff.), we may limit our search to the bounded domain where |q| ≤ r ≤ p and
find that there are precisely three, with three corresponding ideal classes:
φ1 (x, y) = x2 + 25y 2
2

! S = Z[5i]
2

φ2 (x, y) = 2x + 2xy + 13y ! A = Zh5, 1 + ii
φ3 (x, y) = 5x2 + 5y 2

! B = Z[i].

The first two ideals, which correspond to primitive forms, are invertible (indeed
A · iA = S); the third is not. In fact we can build a multiplication table for the ideal
class semigroup.
·
S
A
B

S
S
A
B

A
A
S
B

B
B
B
B

5 Ideal triples
We turn now to one of Bhargava’s most widely publicized contributions to mathematics, the reinterpretation of Gauss’s 200-year-old composition law on primitive
binary quadratic forms in terms of simple operations on a 2 × 2 × 2 box of integers.
In fact, Bhargava produced something rather more general: a bijection ([2], Theorem 1) that takes all 2 × 2 × 2 boxes satisfying a mild nondegeneracy condition, up
to the action of the group
(
Γ=

)
3

(M1 , M2 , M3 ) ∈ (GL2 Z) :

Y

det Mi = 1 ,

i

to triples of fractional ideals (I1 , I2 , I3 ) in a quadratic ring S that are balanced, that
is, satisfy the two conditions
(a) I1 I2 I3 ⊆ S;

O’Dorney

Page 14 of 39

(b) N (I1 )N (I2 )N (I3 ) = 1. Here N (I) is the norm of the ideal I, defined by the
formula N (I) = [A : I]/[A : S] for any Z-lattice A containing both S and I.
(This should not be confused with the ideal generated by the norms of the
elements of I. Even over Z, the two notions differ: 2 · Z[i] is an ideal of norm
2 in the ring Z[2i], but every element of 2 · Z[i] has norm divisible by 4.)
The ideals Ii are unique up to a scaling by constants γi ∈ SQ× of product 1.
Our task will be to generalize this result to an arbitrary Dedekind domain. First,
the definition of balanced extends straightforwardly, provided that we define the
norm of a fractional ideal I properly, as the index of I in S as an R-lattice. The
resulting notion of balanced is a special case of the definition used in [10]:
Definition 5.1 A triple of fractional ideals I1 , I2 , I3 of an R-algebra S is balanced
if
(a) I1 I2 I3 ⊆ S;
(b) the image of Λ2 I1 ⊗ Λ2 I2 ⊗ Λ2 I3 in (Λ2 SK )⊗3 is precisely (Λ2 S)⊗3 .
The objects that we will use on the other side of the bijection are, as one might
expect, not merely 8-tuples of elements from R, because the class group intrudes.
The appropriate notion is as follows:
Definition 5.2 Let a be an ideal class of R. A Bhargava box of type a over R
consists of the following data:
• three rank-2 lattices M1 , M2 , M3 ;
• an orientation isomorphism θ : Λ2 M1 ⊗ Λ2 M2 ⊗ Λ2 M3 → a3 ;
• a trilinear map β : M1 ⊗ M2 ⊗ M3 → a satisfying the following nondegeneracy
condition: each of the three partial duals βi : Mj ⊗ Mk → aMi∗ ({i, j, k} =
{1, 2, 3}) has image a full-rank sublattice.
If we choose a decomposition of each Mi into a direct sum bi1 ⊕ bi2 of ideals,
Q
then θ becomes an isomorphism from i,j bij to a3 (which we may take to be the
identity), while β is determined by eight coefficients
−1 −1
βijk ∈ b−1
1i b2j b3k a.

Thus we stress that, in spite of all the abstraction, our parameter space indeed still
consists of (equivalence classes of) 2 × 2 × 2 boxes of numbers lying in certain ideals
contained in K.
Theorem 5.3 (cf. [2], Theorem 1; [10], Theorem 1.4) For each ideal a of R, there
is a bijection between
• balanced triples (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of ideals in an oriented quadratic ring S of type a,
×
up to scaling by factors γ1 , γ2 , γ3 ∈ SK
with product 1;
• Bhargava boxes of type a.
Remark Two balanced ideal triples may be inequivalent for the purposes of this
bijection even if corresponding ideals belong to the same class (see Example 5.9(d)).
Consequently a Bhargava box cannot be described as corresponding to a balanced
triple of ideal classes.

O’Dorney

Page 15 of 39

Proof The passage from ideals to the Bhargava box is simple and derived directly
from [2]. Given a balanced triple (I1 , I2 , I3 ) in a quadratic ring S with an orientation
α : Λ2 S → a, construct the trilinear map
β : I1 ⊗ I2 ⊗ I3 → a
x ⊗ y ⊗ z 7→ α(1 ∧ xyz).
This, together with the identification θ coming from condition (b) of Definition 5.1,
furnishes the desired Bhargava box. Since each Ii spans SK , the nondegeneracy is
not hard to check.
We seek to invert this process and reconstruct the ring S, the orientation α,
and the ideals Ii uniquely from the Bhargava box. We begin by reconstructing the
quadratic forms φi : Mi → a−1 ·Λ2 Mi corresponding to the ideals Ii . For this we first
use β to map M1 to Hom(M2 ⊗M3 , a), in other words Hom(M2 , aM3∗ ). We then take
the determinant, which lands us in Hom(Λ2 M2 , Λ2 (aM3∗ )) ∼
= a2 · Λ2 M2∗ ⊗ Λ2 M3∗ ,
which can be identified via −θ (note the sign change) with a−1 Λ2 M1 . We thus get a
quadratic form φ01 : M1 → a−1 Λ2 M1 . We claim that if the Bhargava box arose from
a triple of ideals, then this is the natural form φ1 : x 7→ x∧ξx on I1 . For convenience
we will extend scalars and prove the equality as one of forms on M1K ∼
= SK . To deal
with φ01 , we must analyze
β(x) = (y 7→ (z 7→ α(1 ∧ xyz))) ∈ Hom(M2K , M3K∗ ).
∗
Now whereas M2K is naturally identifiable with SK , to deal with M3K∗ ∼
we
= SK
have to bring in the symmetric pairing α(1 ∧ ••) : SK ⊗K SK → K, which one easily
∗
checks is nondegenerate and thus identifies SK
with SK . So we have transformed
β(x) to the element

β 0 (x) = (y 7→ xy) ∈ HomK (SK , SK ).
We then take the determinant det β 0 (x), which is simply the norm N (x) ∈ K ∼
=
2
2
HomK (Λ SK , Λ SK ). This is to be compared to
φ1 (x) = x ∧ ξx = N (x)(1 ∧ ξ) = α−1 (N (x)).
It then remains to check that we have performed the identifications properly, that
is, that the four isomorphisms
KO o

α

Λ2 (M1K ⊗SK M2K )
∧2 (x⊗y7→α(xy•))

α⊗α

Λ2 M1K ⊗ Λ2 M2K

−θ


/ Λ2 M3K∗

are compatible. In particular we discover that the pairing α(1 ∧ ••) is given in the
basis {1, ξ} by the matrix
"
0
1

1
Tr ξ

#

O’Dorney

Page 16 of 39

of determinant −1, explaining the compensatory minus sign that must be placed
on θ.
Q
Now write Mi = bi1 ηi1 ⊕ bi2 ηi2 where θ : i,j bij → a3 may be assumed to be the
identity map, and express β in these coordinates as

β


X

xijk η1i η2j η3k  =

i,j,k

X

aijk xijk .

i,j,k

It will be convenient to create the single-letter abbreviations a = a111 , b = a112 ,
c = a121 , continuing in lexicographic order to h = a222 . Then φ1 sends an element
xη11 + yη12 ∈ M1 to the determinant
"
ax + ey
− det
cx + gy

#
bx + f y
= (bc − ad)x2 + (bg + cf − ah − de)xy + (f g − eh)y 2 .
dx + hy

We claim that φ1 6= 0. If not, the linear maps from M2K to M3K∗ corresponding
to every element of M1K are singular. It is not hard to prove that a linear system
with dimension at most 2 of singular maps from K 2 to K 2 has either a common
kernel vector or images in a common line, and to deduce from this that the partial
dual M1K ⊗ M3K → M2K∗ or M1K ⊗ M2K → M3K∗ , respectively, is not surjective, a
contradiction.
Thus M1 can be equipped with the structure of a fractional ideal of some quadratic
ring, with a ξ-action given by the matrix
"
ah + de
bc − ad

eh − f g
bg + cf

#
(6)

where we have added a scalar matrix such that the trace ah + bg + cf + de, and
indeed the entire characteristic polynomial
F (x) = x2 −(ah+bg+cf +de)x+abgh+acf h+adeh+bcf g+bdeg+cdef −adf g−bceh,
(7)
is symmetric under permuting the roles of M1 , M2 , and M3 . In other words, we have
exhibited a single ring S = R[aξ]/a2 F (ξ) of which M1 , M2 , and M3 are modules,
under the ξ-action (6) and its symmetric cousins
"
ah + cf
be − af

ch − dg
bg + de

#

"
on M2 and

ah + bg
ce − ag

#
bh − df
on M3 .
cf + de

The next step is is the construction of the elements τijk that will serve as the products η1i η2j η3k of the ideal generators. Logically, it begins with a “voilà” (compare
[2], p. 235):

τijk =


−a

¯
− a2ijk aīj̄ k̄ − aijk ξ,

i + j + k odd,

a

a2ijk aīj̄ k̄

i + j + k even.

ījk aij̄k aij k̄

ījk aij̄k aij k̄

+

+ aijk ξ,

O’Dorney

Page 17 of 39

Here ī, j̄, k̄ are shorthand for 3 − i, etc., while ξ¯ denotes the Galois conjugate
Tr(ξ) − ξ. Bhargava apparently derived this formula (in the case R = Z) by solving
the natural system of quadratic equations that the τ ’s must satisfy (τa τd = τb τc and
so on). For our purposes it suffices to note that this formula is well-defined over any
Dedekind domain (in contrast to [2] where there is a denominator of 2) and yields
a trilinear map β̃ : M1 ⊗ M2 ⊗ M3 → S, defined by

β̃ 


X

xijk η1i η2j η3k  =

i,j,k

X

τijk xijk ,

i,j,k

with the property that following with the projection α(1 ∧ •) : S → a gives back β.
We claim that β̃, in addition to being R-trilinear, is S-trilinear under the newfound
S-actions on the Mi . This is a collection of calculations involving the action of ξ on
each factor, for instance
(ah + de)τa + (bc − ad)τe = ξτa
(where we have taken the liberty of labeling the τijk as τa , . . . , τh in the same manner
as the aijk ). This is routine, and all the other edges of the box can be dealt with
symmetrically. So, extending scalars to K, we get a map
β̃ : M1K ⊗SK M2K ⊗SK M3K → SK .
Since each Mi is isomorphic to a fractional ideal, each MiK is isomorphic to SK and
thus so is the left side. Also, it is easy to see that β̃ is surjective or else β would be
degenerate. So once two identifications ι1 : M1 → I1 , ι2 : M2 → I2 are chosen, the
third ι3 : M3 → I3 can be scaled such that β̃(x ⊗ y ⊗ z) = ι1 (x)ι2 (y)ι3 (z) and hence
β(x ⊗ y ⊗ z) = α(1 ∧ ι1 (x)ι2 (y)ι3 (z)) is as desired.
We have now constructed a triple (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of fractional ideals such that the map
α(1 ∧ • • •) : I1 ⊗ I2 ⊗ I3 → K coincides with β. Two verifications remain:
• That I1 I2 I3 ⊆ S. Since I1 I2 I3 is the R-span of the eight τijk , this is evident
from the construction of the τijk .
Q
Q
• That i Λ2 (Ii ) = i Λ2 (S), and more strongly that the diagram
Q
2
i Λ (Mi )

N

i ιi

θ

/

N

i

Λ2 (Ii )
α⊗3

' 
K

commutes. This is a verification similar to that which showed the correspondence of the forms φi . Indeed, if we had recovered a triple of ideals that
produced the correct β but the wrong θ, then the φ’s as computed from β and
the two θ’s would have to mismatch.
This concludes the proof that each Bhargava box corresponds to at least one balanced triple. We must also prove that two balanced triples (I1 , I2 , I3 ) and (I10 , I20 , I30 )
yielding the same Bhargava box must be equivalent; but here we are helped greatly

O’Dorney

Page 18 of 39

by the results that we have already proved. Namely, since the forms φi associated
to the ideals match, these ideals must lie in the same oriented quadratic ring S and
×
there must be scalars γi ∈ SK
such that Ii0 = γi Ii . We may normalize such that
γ2 = γ3 = 1. Then, for all x ∈ I1 , y ∈ I2 , z ∈ I3 ,
0 = β(xyz) − β(xyz) = α(1 ∧ xyz) − α(1 ∧ γ1 xyz) = α(1 ∧ (1 − γ1 )xyz).
In other words, we have (1 − γ1 )x ∈ K for every x ∈ I1 I2 I3 . Extending scalars, we
get the same for all x ∈ KI1 I2 I3 = SK which implies 1 − γ = 0.

5.1 Relation with the class group
Just as in the case R = Z, we can restrict to invertible ideals and get a new
description of the class group.
Theorem 5.4 (cf. [2], Theorem 1) Let a be an ideal of R, and let G be the set of
rank-2 lattices M equipped with a primitive quadratic form φ : M → a−1 · Λ2 M , up
to isomorphism. Then the relations
• φ1 ∗ φ2 ∗ φ3 = 1 for all (φ1 , φ2 , φ3 ) arising from a Bhargava box;
• φ = 1 if a−1 · Λ2 M is principal and φ attains a generator of it
give G the structure of a disjoint union of abelian groups. These are isomorphic to
the class groups of all quadratic extensions of R of type a under the bijection of
Theorem 4.2.
Proof It is easy to see that a triple (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of invertible ideals is balanced if and
only if I1 I2 I3 = S. The condition that φ attains a generator of a−1 · Λ2 M simply
says that φ matches the form corresponding to the entire ring S itself in Theorem
3.2. Now the theorem is reduced to the elementary fact that the structure of an
abelian group is determined by the triples of elements that sum to 0, together with
the identification of that 0-element (without which any 3-torsion element could take
its place).

After establishing the corresponding theorem in [2] establishing a group law on
quadratic forms, Bhargava proceeds to Theorem 2, which establishes a group law on
the 2×2×2 cubes themselves, or rather on the subset of those that are “projective,”
i.e. correspond to triples of invertible ideals. This structure is easily replicated in
our situation: it is only necessary to note that the product of two balanced triples
of invertible ideals is balanced. In fact, a stronger result holds.
Lemma 5.5 Let (I1 , I2 , I3 ) and (J1 , J2 , J3 ) be balanced triples of ideals of a
quadratic ring S, with each Ii invertible. Then the ideal triple (I1 J1 , I2 J2 , I3 J3 )
is also balanced.
Proof We clearly have
I1 J1 · I2 J2 · I3 J3 = (I1 I2 I3 )(J1 J2 J3 ) ⊆ S,

O’Dorney

Page 19 of 39

establishing (a) of Definition 5.1. For (b), the key is to use Corollary 4.3 to get a
handle on the exterior squares of the Ii Ji . We have End Ii = S; each Si = End Ji
is a quadratic ring with S ⊆ Si ⊆ SK . Then since
End Ji ⊆ End Ii Ji ⊆ End Ii−1 Ii Ji = End Ji ,
we see that End Ii Ji = Si as well. Then
α(Λ2 Ji )
α(Λ2 (Ii Ji ))
α(Λ2 Ii )α(Λ2 Ji )
Si = Ii Ji ·Ii Ji = Ii Ii ·Ji Ji = α(Λ2 Ii )S·
Si =
Si .
α(Si )
α(Si )
α(Si )
Intersecting with K, we get
α(Λ2 (Ii Ji )) = α(Λ2 Ii )α(Λ2 Ji ).
We can now multiply and get
Y
i

α(Λ2 (Ii Ji )) =

Y

α(Λ2 Ii ) ·

i

so (I1 J1 , I2 J2 , I3 J3 ) is balanced.

Y

α(Λ2 Ji ) = R,

i



Corollary 5.6 (cf. [2], Theorems 2 and 12) The Bhargava boxes which belong to
a fixed ring S (determined by the quadratic form (7)) and which are primitive (in
the sense of having all three associated quadratic forms primitive) naturally form a
group isomorphic to (Pic S)2 .
Corollary 5.7 The Bhargava boxes which belong to a fixed ring S naturally have
an action by (Pic S)2 .
It is natural to think about what happens when the datum θ is removed from the
Bhargava box. As one easily verifies, multiplying θ by a unit u ∈ R× is equivalent
to multiplying the orientation α of S by u−1 while keeping the same ideals Ii .
Accordingly, we have the following corollary, which we have chosen to state with a
representation-theoretic flavor:
Corollary 5.8 Balanced triples of ideals (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of types a1 , a2 , a3 in an (unoriented) quadratic extension S of type a, up to equivalence, are parametrized by
GL(M1 ) × GL(M2 ) × GL(M3 )-orbits of trilinear maps
β : M1 ⊗ M2 ⊗ M3 → a,
where Mi is the module R ⊕ ai , satisfying the nondegeneracy condition of Definition
5.2.
These orbits do not have a group structure. Indeed, the identifications cause a
box and its inverse, under the group law of Corollary 5.6, to become identified.

O’Dorney

Page 20 of 39

Example 5.9 When R = Z (or more generally any PID), we can simplify the
notation of a Bhargava box by taking each Mi = Z2 , so that θ is without loss of
∼
generality the standard orientation Λ2 (Z2 )⊗3 → Z, and β is expressible as a box
e
a

f
b

g
c

h
d

of integers. The three forms φi are then obtained by slicing β into two 2×2 matrices
and taking the determinant of a general linear combination as described in [2],
Section 2.1:
"
#
"
#!
a b
e f
φ1 (x, y) = − det x
+y
.
c d
g h
We can now derive a balanced triple of ideals from any box of eight integers
a, b, . . . , h, subject only to the very mild condition that no two opposite faces should
be linearly dependent. We recapitulate the boxes having the greatest significance
in [2] and in the theory of quadratic forms generally:
(a) The boxes
0

1
0

1

1

1

0

1

and
0
1

D/4

1
1

0

(D + 3)/4
1

(for D even and odd respectively), have as all three of their associated
quadratic forms x2 − (D/4)y 2 and x2 + xy − (D − 1)/4 · y 2 respectively,
the defining form of the ring S of discriminant D. They correspond to the
balanced triple (S, S, S). These are the “identity cubes” of [2], equation (3).
(b) The boxes
−b/2

a
0

a

1

0

(−b + 1)/2
1

and
−c

b/2
1

0

−c

(b + 1)/2
1

0

(for b even and odd respectively), have as two of their associated quadratic
forms the conjugates
ax2 + bxy + cy 2

and ax2 − bxy + cy 2

O’Dorney

Page 21 of 39

and as the third associated form the form x2 −(D/4)y 2 or x2 +xy−(D−3)/4·y 2
defining the ring S of discriminant D = b2 − 4ac. These boxes express the fact
that the triple
¯
(S, I, α(Λ2 I)−1 I)
is always balanced (compare Corollary 4.3). If gcd(a, b, c) = 1, we also get that
I and I¯ represent inverse classes in the class group and that, correspondingly,
ax2 + bxy + cy 2 and ax2 − bxy + cy 2 are inverse under Gauss’s composition
law on binary quadratic forms.
(c) The box
f

0
1

0
−h

g
0

d

has as associated quadratic forms
φ1 (x, y) = −dx2 + hxy + f gy 2
φ2 (x, y) = −gx2 + hxy + df y 2
φ3 (x, y) = −f x2 + hxy + dgy 2 .
As Bhargava notes ([2], p. 249), Dirichlet’s simplification of Gauss’s composition law was essentially to prove that any pair of primitive binary quadratic
forms of the same discriminant can be put in the form (φ1 , φ2 ), so that the
multiplication relation that we derive from this box,
φ1 ∗ φ2 = −f x2 − hxy + dgy 2 (or, equivalently, dgx2 + hxy − f y 2 ),
encapsulates the entire multiplication table for the class group.
(d) For some examples not found in the classical theory of primitive forms, we
consider the non-Dedekind domain S = Z[5i], whose ideal class semigroup
was computed above (Example 4.4). Let us find all balanced triples that may
be formed from the ideals
S = Z[5i],

A = Zh5, 1 + ii,

B = Z[i]

of S. We compute
α(Λ2 S) = Z,

α(Λ2 A) = Z,

α(Λ2 B) =

1
Z.
5

For each triple (I1 , I2 , I3 ) of ideal class representatives, finding all balanced
×
triples of ideals in these classes is equivalent to searching for all γ ∈ SK

O’Dorney

Page 22 of 39

satisfying γ · I1 I2 I3 ⊆ S which have the correct norm
hN (γ)i =

α(Λ2 I

1
2
2
1 ) · α(Λ I2 ) · α(Λ I3 )

(the right side is an ideal of Z, so N (γ) is hereby determined up to sign, and
as we are in a purely imaginary field, N (γ) > 0).
Using the class B zero or two times, we get four balanced triples
(S, S, S),

(S, A, iA),

(S, B, 5B),

and

(A, B, 5B),

each of which yields one Bhargava box. We get no balanced triples involving
the ideal class B just once; indeed, it is not hard to show in general that if
two ideals of a balanced triple are invertible, so is the third.
The most striking case is I1 = I2 = I3 = B, for here there are two multipliers
γ of norm 125 that send B 3 = Z[i] into Z[5i], namely 10 + 5i and 10 − 5i (we
could also multiply these by powers of i, but this does not change the ideal B).
The balanced triples (B, B, (10 + 5i)B) and (B, B, (10 − 5i)B are inequivalent
under scaling, although corresponding ideals belong to the same classes. Thus
we get two inequivalent Bhargava boxes with the same three associated forms,
namely
−1

2
1

2
−1

2

1
2

and
−1
−1

2

.

−2

−2

1
2

1

(e) The triply symmetric boxes
c

b
a

b
c

b

d
c

correspond to balanced triples of ideals that all lie in the same class; those that
are projective—that is, whose associated forms are primitive—correspond to
invertible ideal classes whose third power is the trivial class. This correspondence was used to prove estimates for the average size of the 3-torsion of class
groups in [3]. Our work suggests that similar methods may work for quadratic
extensions of rings besides Z.

6 Another example: p-adic rings
Example 6.1 It is instructive to look at the local rings R = Zp , where for simplicity we assume p ≥ 3. Thanks to the large supply of squares, the corresponding

O’Dorney

Page 23 of 39

field K = Qp has but five (unoriented) quadratic extensions, namely those obtained
by adjoining a square root of 0, 1, p, u, and pu where u is an arbitrary non-square
modulo p. The quadratic ring extensions S of R then break up into five classes
according to the corresponding extension SK of K. We will work out one represen√
tative case, namely the oriented ring extensions Sn = Zp [pn u] corresponding to
√
the unique unramified extension L = K[ u] of degree 2.
For any fractional ideal I of Sn , we can pick an element of I of minimal valuation
(recalling that L possesses a unique extension of the valuation on K) and scale it
√
to be 1. Then Sn ⊆ I ⊆ S0 , since S0 = Zp [ u] is the valuation ring, and it is easy
to see that the only possible ideals are the subrings S0 , S1 , . . . , Sn . In particular Sn
is the only invertible ideal class, and the class group Pic S is trivial.
We now enumerate the balanced triples that can be built out of these ideals. A
balanced triple is formed from two sorts of data: three ideal classes Si , Sj , Sk ; and
a scale factor γ such that γSi Sj Sk ⊆ S and
hN (γ)i =

1
α(Λ2 Si )α(Λ2 Sj )α(Λ2 Sk )

.

Computing
√
α(Λ2 Si ) = α(1 ∧ pi u) = pi−n ,
we get that N (γ) has valuation p3n−i−j−k and in particular (since L is unramified)

i + j + k ≡ n mod 2.

(8)

Write 3n−i−j −k = 2s. Then γ = ps γ 0 where γ 0 ∈ S0× . To avoid needless repetition
√
of arguments, we assume i ≤ j ≤ k, and then γSi Sj Sk = ps γ 0 Si . Let γ 0 = a + b u
where a, b ∈ Zp . Since ps γ 0 Si is clearly contained in S0 , the condition for it to lie in
Sn is that the irrational parts of its generators
√
√
ps γ 0 · 1 = ps a + ps b u and ps γ 0 · pi = pi+s bu + pi+s a u
are divisible by pn , that is,
vp (a) ≥ n − s − i

and vp (b) ≥ n − s.

Since a and b cannot both be divisible by p, we must have n − s − i ≤ 0, which can
also be written as a sort of triangle inequality:
(n − j) + (n − k) ≥ n − i.

(9)

If this holds, then the restrictions on γ 0 are now merely that pn−s |b, that is, γ 0 ∈ St×
where t = max{n − s, 0}. But if γ 0 is multiplied by a unit in Si× , then the corresponding balanced triple is merely changed to an equivalent one. So the balanced

O’Dorney

Page 24 of 39

triples are in bijection with the quotient St× /Si× . Since the index of Si× in S0× is
pi−1 (p + 1) (i ≥ 1), we have that there are precisely

Bijk =


i−t


p

i−1

p





i≥t>0
(p + 1)

1

i>t=0
i=t=0

classes of Bhargava boxes whose associated ideals are of the classes Si , Sj , Sk , or
equivalently, whose associated quadratic forms are
pn−i x2 − upn+i y 2 ,

pn−j x2 − upn+j y 2 ,

pn−k x2 − upn+k y 2 .

For beauty’s sake let us examine one other angle of looking at the balanced triples.
If we extend the notation Si (i ∈ Z) to denote the Zp -module generated by 1 and
√
pi u for every i ∈ Z, then Si is an ideal of the ring Sn exactly when −n ≤ i ≤ n. Of
√
course S−i = p−i u · Si so we get no further ideal classes. But the admissible values
of i, j, and k now range in the stella octangula (Figure 1) formed by reflecting the
graph of (9) over the three coordinate planes, as well as the diagonal planes i = j,
i = k, j = k. Indeed, the triples (i, j, k) such that some scaling of (Si , Sj , Sk ) is
balanced are exactly the points of the lattice defined by (8) lying within the stella
octangula. In such a case, one such balanced triple can be given by
(Si , Sj , ps Sk )

or

√
(Si , Sj , ps uSk )

according as (i, j, k) belongs to one or the other of the two tetrahedra making up
the stella octangula.

7 Cubic algebras
The second main division of our paper has as its goal the parametrization of quartic
algebras. We begin with cubic algebras, for there the parametrization is relatively
simple and will also furnish the desired ring structure on the cubic resolvents of
our quartic rings. The parametrization was done by Delone and Faddeev for cubic
domains over Z, by Gan, Gross, and Savin for cubic rings over Z, and by Deligne over
an arbitrary scheme ([9], p. 1074 and the references therein). Here we simply state
and prove the result over a Dedekind domain, taking advantage of the construction
in [5], section 3.9.
Theorem 7.1 (cf. [13], Theorem 1; [9], Theorem 2.1; [14], Proposition 5.1 and the
references therein) Let R be a Dedekind domain. There is a canonical bijection
between cubic algebras over R and pairs consisting of a rank-2 R-lattice M and a
cubic map φ : M → Λ2 M .
Proof Given the cubic ring C, we let M = C/R so a = Λ2 M ∼
= Λ3 C is an ideal
2
class. Consider the map φ̃ : C → a given by x 7→ 1 ∧ x ∧ x . This is a cubic map, and
if x is translated by an element a ∈ R, the map does not change. Hence it descends

O’Dorney

Page 25 of 39

to a cubic map φ : M → a. We will show that each possible φ corresponds to exactly
one ring C.
Fix a decomposition M = a1 ξ˜1 ⊕ a2 ξ˜2 of M into ideals. Any C can be written as
R ⊕ M = R · 1 ⊕ a1 ξ1 ⊕ a2 ξ2 as an R-module, where the lifts ξ1 and ξ2 are unique
up to adding elements of a−1
and a−1
respectively. Then the remaining structure
1
2
of C can be described by a multiplication table
ξ12 = ` + aξ1 + bξ2
ξ1 ξ2 = m + cξ1 + dξ2
ξ22 = n + eξ1 + f ξ2 .
It should be remarked that this is not literally a multiplication table for C, but
rather for the corresponding K-algebra CK = C ⊗R K, which does literally have
{1, ξ1 , ξ2 } as a K-basis. For C to be closed under this multiplication, the coefficients
−1
must belong to appropriate ideals (` ∈ a−2
1 , a ∈ a1 , etc.).
Note that the basis change ξ1 7→ ξ1 + t1 , ξ2 7→ ξ2 + t2 (ti ∈ a−1
i ) diminishes c and
d by t2 and t1 , respectively (as well as wreaking greater changes on the rest of the
multiplication table). Hence there is a unique choice of the lifts ξ1 and ξ2 such that
c = d = 0.
We now examine the other piece of data that we are given, the cubic map φ
describable in these coordinates as
φ(xξ˜1 + y ξ˜2 )
= 1 ∧ (xξ1 + yξ2 ) ∧ (xξ1 + yξ2 )2
= 1 ∧ (xξ1 + yξ2 ) ∧ ((` + aξ1 + bξ2 )x2 + mxy + (n + eξ1 + f ξ2 )y 2 ))
= (bx3 − ax2 y + f xy 2 − ey 3 )(1 ∧ ξ1 ∧ ξ2 ).
Thus, in our situation, specifying φ is equivalent to specifying the four coefficients a,
b, e, and f . It therefore suffices to prove that, for each quadruple of values a ∈ a−1
1 ,
−2
−1
b ∈ a−2
a
,
e
∈
a
a
,
f
∈
a
,
there
is
a
unique
choice
of
values
`,
m,
n,
completing
2
1 2
1
2
the multiplication table. The only conditions on the multiplication table that we
have not used are the associative laws (ξ12 )ξ2 = ξ1 (ξ1 ξ2 ) and ξ1 (ξ22 ) = (ξ1 ξ2 )ξ2 .
Expanding out these equations reveals the unique solution ` = −ae, m = −be,
n = −bf , which indeed belong to the correct ideals. So from the map φ we have
constructed a unique cubic ring C.

Example 7.2 Here we briefly summarize the most important examples over R =
Z, where the cubic map φ : M → Λ2 M reduces to a binary cubic form φ : Z2 → Z,
up to the twisted action of the group GL2 Z by
"

a
c

# !
1
b
· φ(ax + cy, bx + dy).
.φ (x, y) =
ad
−
bc
d

• The trivial ring Z[1 , 2 ]/(21 , 1 2 , 22 ) corresponds to the zero form 0.

O’Dorney

Page 26 of 39

• Rings which are not domains correspond to reducible forms (e.g. Z⊕Z⊕Z corresponds to xy(x + y)), and rings which have nontrivial nilpotents correspond
to forms with repeated roots.
• A monogenic ring Z[ξ]/(ξ 3 + aξ 2 + bξ + c) corresponds to a form x3 + ax2 y +
bxy 2 + cy 3 with leading coefficient 1. Accordingly a form which does not
represent the value 1 corresponds to a ring that is not monogenic; for instance,
the form 5x3 + 7y 3 (which attains only values ≡ 0, ±2 mod 7) corresponds
√
√
√
√
3
3
3
3
to the subring Z[ 52 · 7, 5 · 72 ] of the field Q[ 52 · 7] = Q[ 5 · 72 ], proving
that this ring (which is easily checked to be the full ring of integers in this
field) is not monogenic.
• If a form φ corresponds to a ring C, then the form n · φ corresponds to
the ring Z + nC whose generators are n times as large. Hence the content
ct(φ) = gcd(a, b, c, d) of a form φ(x, y) = ax3 + bx2 y + cxy 2 + dy 3 equals the
content of the corresponding ring C, which is defined as the largest integer n
such that C ∼
= Z + nC 0 for some cubic ring C 0 . The notion of content (which
is also not hard to define for cubic algebras over general Dedekind domains)
will reappear prominently in our discussion of quartic algebras (see section
8.2).

8 Quartic algebras
Our next task is to generalize Bhargava’s parametrization of quartic rings with a
cubic resolvent in [5], and in particular to formalize the notion of a cubic resolvent.
The concept was first developed as part of the theory of solving equations by radicals, in which it was noted that if a, b, c, and d are the unknown roots of a quartic,
then
ab + cd,

ac + bd,

and ad + bc

satisfy a cubic whose coefficients are explicit polynomials in those of the original
quartic. Likewise, if Q ⊇ Z is a quartic ring embeddable in a number field, the
useful resolvent map
x 7→ (σ1 (x)σ2 (x)+σ3 (x)σ4 (x), σ1 (x)σ3 (x)+σ2 (x)σ4 (x), σ1 (x)σ4 (x)+σ2 (x)σ3 (x))
lands in a cubic subring of C ⊕ C ⊕ C, where σ1 , . . . , σ4 are the four embeddings
Q ,→ C. The question then arises of what the proper notion of a resolvent map is
in case Q is not a domain. In section 2.1 of [5], Bhargava defines from scratch a
workable notion of Galois closure of a ring, providing a rank-24 algebra in which
the resolvent can be defined. Alternatively (section 3.9), Bhargava sketches a way
of axiomatizing the salient properties of a resolvent map. It is the second method
that we develop here.
Definition 8.1 (cf. [9], p. 1069) Let R be a Dedekind domain, and let Q be a
quartic algebra over R. A resolvent for Q consists of a rank-2 R-lattice M , an Rmodule morphism θ : Λ2 M → Λ3 (Q/R), and a quadratic map φ : Q/R → M such
that there is an identity of biquadratic maps
x ∧ y ∧ xy = θ(φ(x) ∧ φ(y))

(10)

O’Dorney

Page 27 of 39

from Q × Q to Λ3 (Q/R).
The resolvent (M, θ, φ) is called minimal if φ has full image, that is, φ(Q/R) = M .
It is called numerical if θ is an isomorphism.
Our minimal resolvent corresponds to the ring Rinv in Bhargava’s treatment ([5],
p. 1337), while our numerical resolvent corresponds to Bhargava’s resolvent. The
numerical resolvent is more suited to analytic applications, while the minimal resolvent has the advantage of being canonical (for nontrivial Q), as we prove below.
Example 8.2 For the prototypical example of a resolvent, take Q = R⊕4 and
C = R⊕3 , and let M = C/R. Let θ identify the standard orientations on these
lattices, and let φ be given by the roots
φ(a, b, c, d) = (ab + cd, ac + bd, ad + bc)
of the classical resolvent of the quartic (x − a)(x − b)(x − c)(x − d). It is easy to
check that this is a resolvent, which is both minimal and numerical. Many more
examples can be derived from this (see Example 8.10).
8.1 Resolvent to ring
Our first result is that the resolvent encapsulates the data of the ring:
Theorem 8.3 (cf. [5], Theorem 1 and Proposition 10; [9], Corollary 1.2) Let Q̃ and
M be R-lattices of ranks 3 and 2 respectively. Let θ : Λ2 M → Λ3 Q̃ be a morphism,
and let φ : Q̃ → M be a quadratic map. Then there is a unique quartic ring Q with
an isomorphism Q/R ∼
= Q̃ such that (M, θ, φ) is a resolvent for Q.
Proof Write Q̃ = a1 ξ˜1 ⊕ a2 ξ˜2 ⊕ a3 ξ˜3 as usual. The ring Q will of course be R ⊕
a1 ξ1 ⊕ a2 ξ2 ⊕ a3 ξ3 as an R-module, with a multiplication table
ξi ξj = c0ij +

3
X

ckij ξk

k=1
−1
k
where c0ij ∈ a−1
and ckij ∈ ai−1 a−1
i aj
j ak . The 18 coefficients cij are subject to the
expansion of the relation (10):

X
i

 




!
! 
X
X
X
X
xi ξ˜i ∧ 
yj ξ˜j  ∧ 
xi yj ckij ξ˜k  = θ φ
xi ξ˜i ∧ φ 
yj ξ˜j  .
j

i

i,j,k

j

(11)
Write
φ(x1 ξ1 + x2 ξ2 + x3 ξ3 ) =

X
1≤i≤j≤3

µij xi xj

O’Dorney

Page 28 of 39

−1
where µij ∈ a−1
i aj M . Then define
−1 −1 −1 −1
λij
k` = θ(µij ∧ µk` ) ∈ a1 a2 a3 ai aj ak a` .

We can now expand both sides of (11) as polynomials in the x’s and y’s times
ξ˜1 ∧ ξ˜2 ∧ ξ˜3 , getting
x1
x2
x3

y1
y2
y3

P
c1 x i y j
X X ij
Pi,j 2ij
λk` xi xj yk y` ,
i,j cij xi yj =
P
3
i≤j
k≤`
i,j cij xi yj

and equate coefficients of each biquadratic monomial xi xj yk y` . Due to the skewsymmetry of each side, all terms involving x2i yi2 or xi xj yi yj cancel, and the remaining 30 equations group into 15 matched pairs. They are summarized as follows,
where (i, j, k) denotes any permutation of (1, 2, 3) and  = ±1 its sign:
cjii = λii
ik
ckij = λjj
ii

(12)

cjij − ckik = λjk
ii
ciii − cjij − ckik = λij
ik .

At first glance it may seem that one can add a constant a to cjij and ckij , while
adding 2a to ciii , to derive a three-parameter family of solutions from a single one;
but this is merely the transformation induced by the change of lift ξi 7→ ξi + a for
ξ˜i . So there is essentially only one solution. (It could be normalized by taking e.g.
c112 = c223 = c331 = 0, although we do not use this normalization here, preferring to
save time later by keeping the indices 1, 2, and 3 in complete symmetry.)
The constant terms c0ij of the multiplication table are as yet undetermined. They
must be deduced from the associative law. There are several ways to compute each
c0ij , and to prove that they agree, along with all the other relations implied by
the associative law, is the final step in the construction of the quartic ring Q. Our
key tool is the Plücker relation relating the wedge products of four vectors in a
2-dimensional space:
(a ∧ b)(c ∧ d) + (a ∧ c)(d ∧ b) + (a ∧ d)(b ∧ c) = 0,
or, as we will use it,
0

0

0

0

0

0

cc
aa dd
aa bb
λaa
bb0 λdd0 + λcc0 λbb0 + λdd0 λcc0 = 0.

To give succinct names to these relations among the λ’s, note that aa0 , . . . , dd0 are
four of the six unordered pairs that can be formed from the symbols 1, 2, and 3,
and the relation is nontrivial only when these four pairs are distinct. Consequently
we denote it by Pl(ee0 , ff 0 ), where ee0 and ff 0 are the two pairs that do not appear
in it. Then Pl(ee0 , ff 0 ) as a polynomial in the λ’s is unique up to sign, and we will
never have occasion to fix a sign convention.

O’Dorney

Page 29 of 39

We are now ready to derive the associative law from the Plücker relations. Of
course this is a task that could be left to a computer, but since we will soon be
deriving the Plücker relations from the associative law, we find it advisable to
present the process at least in summary form. Here it is:
[(ξi ξi )ξj − (ξi ξj )ξi ]k = Pl(jk, kk)
[(ξi ξj )ξk − (ξi ξk )ξj ]i = Pl(ij, ik)
[(ξi ξj )ξi − (ξi ξi )ξj ]i

[(ξi ξi )ξj − (ξi ξj )ξi ]j

Pl(ij,kk)

[(ξi ξj )ξk − (ξj ξk )ξi ]k (13)

Pl(ik,jk)

Pl(jj,kk)

[(ξi ξi )ξk − (ξi ξk )ξi ]j

[(ξi ξj )ξj − (ξj ξj )ξi ]j

Pl(ik,jk)
Pl(ij,kk)

[(ξi ξj )ξk − (ξj ξk )ξi ]k

And here is the explanation:
• The notation [ω]i denotes the coefficient of ξi when ω is expressed in terms of
the basis {1, ξ1 , ξ2 , ξ3 }.
• Each of the first two equations is a direct calculation. For instance:
[(ξi ξi )ξj − (ξi ξj )ξi ]k
= [(c0ii + ciii ξi + cjii ξj + ckii ξk )ξj − (c0ij + ciij ξi + cjij ξj + ckij ξk )ξi ]k
= ciii ckij + cjii ckjj + ckii ckjk − ciij ckii − cjij ckij − ckij ckik
= (ciii − cjij − ckik )ckij + ckii (ckjk − ciij ) + cjii ckjj
jj
ii ik
ii jj
= (λij
ik λii − λij λjj + λik λij )

= Pl(jk, kk).
• The two lower diagrams show the instances of the associative law that produce
a summand of c0ii or c0ij , respectively. Each node in the diagrams yields a
formula for c0ii or c0ij (having no denominator, and consequently belonging
−1
to the correct ideal a−2
resp. a−1
i
i aj ); and where two nodes are joined by a
line, the difference between the two corresponding formulas is expressible as
a Plücker relation.
We have now proved all of the associative law except the constant terms; that is, we
now have that (xy)z − x(yz) ∈ R for all x, y, z ∈ Q. Attacking the constant terms
in the same manner as above leads to considerably heavier computations, which
could be performed by computer (compare [5], top of p. 1343). Alternatively, we
may use the following trick. Let i, j, k ∈ {1, 2, 3} be any indices, and let h ∈ {1, 2, 3}
be an index distinct from k. Then using the already-proved ξh -component of the
associative law,
ξi (ξj ξk ) − ξj (ξi ξk ) = [ξh (ξi (ξj ξk )) − ξh (ξj (ξi ξk ))]h
= [(ξh ξi )(ξj ξk ) − (ξh ξj )(ξi ξk )]h
= [((ξh ξi )ξj )ξk − ((ξh ξj )ξi )ξk ]h .
This last is necessarily zero, since it consists of the number (ξh ξi )ξj − (ξh ξj )ξi ∈ R
multiplied by ξk , and thus has no ξh -component.


O’Dorney

Page 30 of 39

8.2 Ring to resolvent
Conversely, we will now study all possible resolvents of a given quartic ring Q.
There is one case in which this problem takes a striking turn: the trivial ring
P
Q = R[a1 1 , a2 2 , a3 3 ]/ i,j (ai aj i j ) where all entries of the multiplication table are zero. Here φ can be an arbitrary map to a 1-dimensional sublattice of M , or
alternatively M and φ can be chosen arbitrarily while θ = 0. For all other quartic
rings, the family of resolvents is much smaller, as we will now prove.
Theorem 8.4 (cf. [5], Corollary 18)

Let Q be a nontrivial quartic R-algebra. Then

(a) Q has a unique minimal resolvent (M0 , θ0 , φ0 );
(b) we have θ0 (Λ2 M0 ) = c · Λ3 (Q/R), where c is the ideal (called the content of
Q) characterized by the following property: For each ideal a ⊆ R, there exists
a quartic R-algebra Q0 such that Q ∼
= R + aQ0 if and only if a|c;
(c) all other resolvents (M, θ, φ), up to isomorphism, are found by extending θ0
linearly to Λ2 M , where M is a lattice with [M : M0 ] | c, and taking φ = φ0 ;
(d) the numerical resolvents arise by taking [M : M0 ] = c in the preceding.
Proof Write Q = R ⊕ a1 ξ1 ⊕ a2 ξ2 ⊕ a3 ξ3 . The multiplication table can be encoded
in a family of ckij ’s, from which the fifteen values λij
k` are determined through (12).
ij
These λk` satisfy the fifteen Plücker relations by (13). It then remains to construct
−1
the target module M , the map θ, and the vectors µij ∈ a−1
i aj M such that their
pairwise exterior products µij ∧ µk` have, via θ, the specified value λij
k` .
The six µij are in complete symmetry at this point, and it will be convenient
to denote µij by µx , where x runs over {11, 12, 13, 22, 23, 33} or, if you prefer,
x
{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}. Likewise we write each λij
k` as λy or simply λxy .
We first tackle the problem over K. Let V be an abstract K-vector space of dimension 2. We construct vectors µ1 , . . . , µn whose exterior products are proportional to
the λ’s as follows. Some λxy is nonzero, without loss of generality λ12 . Let (µ1 , µ2 )
be a basis of V . Then, for 3 ≤ x ≤ 6, take
µx =

−λ2x µ1 + λ1x µ2
λ12

to give the products µ1 ∧ µx and µ2 ∧ µx the desired values. The λxy with 3 ≤ x <
y ≤ 6 have not been used, but their values were forced by the Plücker relations
anyway, so we have a system of µx such that
µx ∧ µy =

λxy
· µ1 ∧ µ2 .
λ12

Moreover, these are the only µx ∈ V with this property, up to GL(V )-transformations.
Now define a quadratic map φ0 : Q/R → V by
φ0 (x1 ξ1 + x2 ξ2 + x3 ξ3 ) =

X
i≤j

µij xi xj

O’Dorney

Page 31 of 39

and a linear map θ0 : Λ2 V → Λ3 (Q/R) ⊗R K by
θ0 (µ1 ∧ µ2 ) = λ12 (ξ1 ∧ ξ2 ∧ ξ3 ).
We have that (V, θ0 , φ0 ⊗ K) is the unique resolvent of the quartic K-algebra Q/K.
Resolvents for Q are now in bijection with lattices M ⊆ V such that
and θ0 (Λ2 M ) ⊆ Λ3 (Q/R).

M ⊇ φ0 (Q/R)

(14)

There is now clearly at most one minimal resolvent, gotten by taking M to be the
image M0 = φ(Q/R). We have

θ0 (Λ2 M0 ) = θ0 


X

ai aj ak a` · µij ∧ µk` 

i,j,k,`


=


X

 ξ1
λij
k` ai aj ak a`

∧ ξ2 ∧ ξ3 = cΛ3 (Q/R),

i,j,k,`

where
X

c=

−1 −1 −1
λij
k` ai aj ak a` a1 a2 a3 .

i,j,k,`
−1 −1 −1 −1
The ideal in which λij
k` is constrained to live is a1 a2 a3 ai aj ak a` ; so c ⊆ R and
there is a unique minimal resolvent, proving (a).
If a ⊇ c for some a ⊆ R, we can replace each of the three ai with aai without changing the validity of the λ-system. This means there is an extension ring
Q0 = R ⊕ aa1 ξ1 ⊕ aa2 ξ2 ⊕ aa3 ξ3 with the same multiplication table as Q, and
we see that Q0 = R + aQ. Conversely, given such a Q0 , we write its multiplication table with respect to the basis Q0 /R = aa1 ξ1 ⊕ aa2 ξ2 ⊕ aa3 ξ3 and get that
−1 −1 −1
−1
λij
a1 a2 a3 a−1
i aj ak a` , so c ⊆ a. This proves (b).
k` ∈ a
Finally, the relation θ0 (Λ2 M0 ) = cΛ3 (Q/R) allows us to rewrite (14) as

M ⊇ M0

and

Λ2 M ⊆ cΛ2 M0 .

Now (c) is obvious. A numerical resolvent occurs when θ0 (Λ2 M ) = Λ3 (Q/R), so
(d) is obvious as well.

Bhargava proved ([5], Corollary 4) that the number of (numerical) resolvents of a
quartic ring over Z is the sum of the divisors of its content. Likewise, we now have:
Corollary 8.5 If c 6= 0, then the numerical resolvents of Q are in noncanonical
bijection with the disjoint union
a
R⊇a⊇c

R/a.

O’Dorney

Page 32 of 39

Proof Here we simply have to count the superlattices M of index c over a fixed
lattice M0 . The classical argument over Z extends rather readily; for completeness,
we give the proof.
Note that we must have M ⊆ c−1 M0 , since M ∧ M0 ⊆ M ∧ M = c−1 Λ2 M0 . Pick
a decomposition c−1 M0 ∼
= d1 ⊕ d2 . Then consider the map π : M → d1 that is the
restriction of projection to the first factor. We have ker π = {0}×ad2 and im π = bd1
for some ideals a, b subject to the familiar behavior of top exterior powers in exact
sequences:
c−1 Λ2 M0 = Λ2 M = ad2 ∧ bd1 = abc−2 Λ2 M0 ,
that is, ab = c. Now if a and b are fixed, the lattice M is determined by a picking
a coset in d2 /ad2 to be the preimage of each point b ∈ im π; this is determined by
an R-module map
bd1 → d2 /ad2
or, since cd1 is necessarily in the kernel,
bd1 /cd1 → d2 /ad2 .
We can identify both the domain and the target of this map with R/a via the standard result that if a and b are ideals in a Dedekind domain R, then a/ab ∼
= R/b.
(Proof: Use the Chinese Remainder Theorem to find a ∈ a that has minimal
valuation with respect to each of the primes dividing b. Then a generates a/ab,
and a 7→ 1 is the desired isomorphism.) Then the desired parameter space is
HomR (R/a, R/a) ∼

= R/a. Letting a vary yields the claimed bijection.
In particular, we have the following.
Corollary 8.6 (cf. [5], Corollary 5) Every quartic algebra over a Dedekind domain
possesses at least one numerical resolvent.
8.3 The cubic ring structure of the resolvent
In contrast to the classical presentation, the resolvent maps we have constructed
take their values in modules, without any explicit connection to a cubic ring. In
fact, there is the structure of a cubic ring already latent in a resolvent:
Theorem 8.7 To any quartic ring Q and resolvent (M, θ, φ) thereof, one can
canonically associate a cubic ring C with an identification C/R ∼
= M.
Remark As stated, this theorem has no content, as one can take the trivial ring
structure on R ⊕ M . However, we will produce a ring structure generalizing the
classical notion of cubic resolvent. This C may be called a cubic resolvent of Q, the
maps θ and φ being suppressed.

O’Dorney

Page 33 of 39

Proof We use the following trick of multilinear algebra (compare [9], p. 1076). First
pick a decomposition Q/R = a1 ξ˜1 ⊕ a2 ξ˜2 ⊕ a3 ξ˜3 . Writing
φ(x1 ξ˜1 + x2 ξ˜2 + x3 ξ˜3 ) =

X

xi xj µij

−1
(µij ∈ a−1
i aj M ),

i≤j

consider the determinant


µ11

∆ = 4 det  12 µ12
1
2 µ13

1
2 µ12

µ22
1
2 µ23



1
2 µ13

1
2 µ23 

µ33

= 4µ11 µ22 µ33 + µ12 µ13 µ23 − µ11 µ223 − µ22 µ213 − µ33 µ212
3
−2 −2
∈ a−2
1 a2 a3 Sym M

(the two expressions are equal except when char K = 2, in which case the first
−2 −2
2
⊗−2
becomes purely motivational). Next, θ allows us to map a−2
.
1 a2 a3 to (Λ M )
The Λ2 M -valued pairing ∧ on M gives an identification of M with Λ2 M ⊗ M ∗ , so
we can transform
(Λ2 M )⊗−2 ⊗ Sym3 M ∼
= (Λ2 M )⊗−2 ⊗ Sym3 ((Λ2 M ) ⊗ M ∗ )
∼
= (Λ2 M )⊗−2 ⊗ (Λ2 M )⊗3 ⊗ Sym3 (M ∗ )
∼
= (Λ2 M ) ⊗ Sym3 (M ∗ ).
Thus ∆ yields a cubic map δ : M → Λ2 M , which by Theorem 7.1 is equivalent
to a cubic ring C with an identification C/R ∼
= M . That δ is independent of the
˜
˜
˜
chosen basis (ξ1 , ξ2 , ξ3 ) is a polynomial identity that follows from properties of the
determinant, at least when char K 6= 2.

Two theorems concerning this cubic ring structure we will state without proof,
since they are mere polynomial identities already implied by Bhargava’s work over
Z. The first may be used as an alternative to Theorem 7.1 to determine the multiplicative structure on C; as Bhargava notes, it works in all cases over Z except
when Q has nilpotents.
Theorem 8.8 (cf. [5], equation (30)) Let Q be a quartic ring, and let C be
the cubic ring whose structure is determined by the resolvent map data θ :
Λ2 (C/R) → Λ3 (Q/R) and φ : Q/R → C/R. For any element x ∈ Q and any lift
y ∈ C of the element φ(x) ∈ C/R, we have the equality
x ∧ x2 ∧ x3 = θ(y ∧ y 2 ).
We end this section with a theorem concerning discriminants, which until now
have been conspicuously absent from our discussion, in direct contrast to Bhargava’s presentation. Recall that the discriminant of a Z-algebra Q with a Z-basis

O’Dorney

Page 34 of 39

(ξ1 , . . . , ξn ) is defined as the determinant of the matrix [Tr(ξi ξj )]i,j . In like manner,
define the discriminant of a rank-n R-algebra Q to be the map
disc(Q) : x1 ∧ · · · ∧ xn 7→ det[Tr(xi xj )]i,j .
It is quadratic and thus can be viewed as an element of (Λn Q∗ )⊗2 , a rank-1 lattice
that is not in general isomorphic to R. The discriminants of a quartic ring and its
resolvents are “equal” in precisely the way one might hope:
Theorem 8.9 (cf. [5], Proposition 13)

Let Q, C, θ be as above. The morphism

(θ∗ )⊗2 : (Λ3 (Q/R)∗ )⊗2 →(Λ2 (C/R)∗ )⊗2
carries disc Q to disc C.
Example 8.10 Once again, we recapitulate the situation over Z. Here, once bases
Q/R = Zξ1 ⊕ Zξ2 ⊕ Zξ3 and C/R = Zη1 ⊕ Zη2 have been fixed so that θ is given
simply by η1 ∧ η2 7→ ξ1 ∧ ξ2 ∧ ξ3 , the remaining datum φ of a numerical resolvent
can be written as a pair of ternary quadratic forms, or, even more pictorially, as a
pair of symmetric matrices


a11

(A, B) =  12 a12
1
2 a13

1
2 a12

a22
1
2 a23

 

1
b11
2 a13
 1
1
,
2 a23   2 b12
1
a33
2 b13

1
2 b12

b22
1
2 b23



1
2 b13

1
.
2 b23 

b33

where aij , bij ∈ Z. The associated cubic ring is found by applying Theorem 7.1 to
the form 4 det(Ax + By). Some salient examples follow:
• First note that there is a resolvent map of C-algebras from Q0 = C⊕4 to
C0 = C⊕3 given by the roots of the equation-solver’s resolvent
(x, y, z, w) 7→ (xy + zw, xz + yw, xw + yz)
or, more accurately, by its reduction modulo C
φ0 : (x, y, z, 0) 7→ (xy − yz, xz − yz, 0),
supplemented of course by the standard identification
θ0 : Λ2 (C0 /C) → Λ3 (Q0 /C).
Accordingly, if we have a quartic Z-algebra Q ⊆ Q0 and a cubic Z-algebra C ⊆
C0 on which the restrictions of φ0 and θ0 are well-defined, then it automatically
follows that C/Z is a resolvent for Q with attached cubic ring structure C.
• As an example, consider the ring
Q = Z + p(Z ⊕ Z ⊕ Z ⊕ Z) = {(a, b, c, d) ∈ Z⊕4 : a ≡ b ≡ c ≡ d mod p}

O’Dorney

Page 35 of 39

of content p, for each prime p. The minimal resolvent of Q comes out to be
φ0 (Q/Z) = C 0 /Z, where
C 0 = Z + p2 · Z⊕3 .
But C 0 is not a numerical resolvent of Q: it has index p4 in Z⊕3 , while Q has
index p3 in Z⊕4 , so the restriction of θ0 cannot possibly be an isomorphism.
We must enlarge C 0 by a factor of p. Note that any subgroup C such that
Z + p2 · Z⊕3 ⊆ C ⊆ Z + p · Z⊕3
is a ring, since the product of two elements in p · Z⊕3 lies in p2 · Z⊕3 . So any
ring of the form
C = Z + p2 · Z⊕3 + hap, bp, 0i
is a numerical resolvent of Q. Letting [a : b] run over P1 (Z/pZ) yields the p + 1
numerical resolvents predicted by Theorem 8.4.
• Note that some of these resolvents are isomorphic under the automorphism
group of Q, which is simply S4 acting by permuting the coordinates. One
verifies that S4 acts through its quotient S3 , which in turn permutes the
three distinguished points 0, 1, ∞ on P1 (Z/pZ). Accordingly, if we are using
Theorem 8.3 to count quartic rings, the ring Q will appear not p + 1 times
but dp/6e + 1 times (1 time if p = 2 or p = 3). This is no contradiction with
Theorem 8.4, which gives the number of resolvents as maps out of the given
ring Q.

9 Maximality
In order to convert his parametrization of quartic rings into one of quartic fields,
Bhargava needed a condition for a ring to be maximal, i.e. to be the full ring
of integers in a field. In like manner we discuss how to tell if a quartic ring Q
over a Dedekind domain R is maximal in its fraction ring QK using conditions on
a numerical resolvent. The first statement to make is that maximality is a local
condition, i.e. can be checked at each prime ideal.
Proposition 9.1 Let Q be a ring of finite rank n over R. Q is maximal if and
only if Qp = Q ⊗R Rp is maximal over Rp for all (nonzero) primes p ⊆ R.
Remark Here, Rp denotes the localization
Rp =

na
b

o
∈ K : a ∈ R, b ∈ R \ p

(not its completion as with the symbol Zp ).
Proof When Q is a domain, one can use the facts that Q is maximal if and only
if it is normal (integrally closed in its fraction field) and that normality is a local
property. A direct proof is also not difficult.

O’Dorney

Page 36 of 39

Suppose that Q is not maximal, so that there is a larger ring Q0 with QK =
The nonzero R-module Q0 /Q is pure torsion, so there is a prime p such that
(Q /Q)p = Q0p /Qp is nonzero, i.e. Qp embeds into the larger ring Q0p .
Suppose now that for some p, Qp embeds into a larger ring T . We construct an
extension ring Q0 of Q by the formula
Q0K .
0

Q0 = Q[p−1 ] ∩ T.
It is obvious that Q0 is a ring containing Q; it is not so obvious that it is a rank-n
ring, in other words, that it is finitely generated as an R-module. Let X be the
R-lattice generated by any K-basis x1 , . . . , xn of QK . Since Q and T are finitely
generated R- and Rp -modules respectively, we may divide the xi by sufficiently
divisible elements of R to assume Q ⊆ X and T ⊆ Rp X. Then
Q0 ⊆ X[p−1 ] ∩ Rp X.
Note that
(

)
X

Rp X =

ai xi : vp (ai ) ≥ 0

i

(
−1

X[p

)
X

]=

ai xi : vq (ai ) ≥ 0

∀q 6= p

i

(
X[p−1 ] ∩ Rp X =

)
X

ai xi : vq (ai ) ≥ 0

∀q

= X,

i

whence Q0 ⊆ X is finitely generated.
Finally we must show that Q0 6= Q. This is obvious by localization:
Q0p = (Q[p−1 ])p ∩ Tp = QK ∩ T = T 6= Qp .



The local rings Rp are DVR’s, and in particular are PID’s, so we can visualize a
localized numerical resolvent (Qp , Mp , θ, φ) in a simple way: Pick bases Qp /Rp =
Rp hξ˜1 , ξ˜2 , ξ˜3 i and Mp = Rp hη1 , η2 i such that θ(η1 ∧ η2 ) = ξ˜1 ∧ ξ˜2 ∧ ξ˜3 , and write φ
as a pair of matrices


a11
 1
(A, B) =  2 a12
1
2 a13

1
2 a12

a22
1
2 a23

 

1
b11
2 a13
 1
1
,
2 a23   2 b12
1
a33
2 b13

1
2 b12

b22
1
2 b23



1
2 b13

1
2 b23 

b33

where 1/2 is a purely formal symbol and aij , bij ∈ R are the coefficients of the
resolvent map
φ(x1 ξ˜1 + x2 ξ˜2 + x3 ξ˜3 ) =

X

(aij η1 + bij η2 )xi xj .

1≤i<j≤3

O’Dorney

Page 37 of 39

We will characterize maximality of Qp in terms of the aij and bij . The first simplification is applicable to rings of any rank.
Lemma 9.2 Let R be a DVR with maximal ideal p, and let Q be an R-algebra of
rank n. If Q is not maximal, then there exists k ≥ 1 and a basis x1 , x2 , . . . , xn = 1
of Q such that
Q0 = R p−1 x1 , . . . , p−1 xk , xk+1 , . . . , xn
is a ring.
Proof Let Q1 ) Q be a larger algebra. Since Q1 is a finitely generated submodule
S
of QK = i≥0 p−i Q, it is contained in some p−r Q. Pick r such that
Q1 ⊆ p−r Q but Q1 * p−r+1 Q.
Then Q0 = Q + pr−1 Q1 is a rank-n algebra such that
Q ( Q0 ⊆ p−1 Q.
Choose a basis x̃1 , . . . , x̃k for the R/pR-vector space pQ0 /pQ, and complete it to
a basis x̃1 , . . . , x̃n for Q/pQ. Since 1 ∈
/ pQ0 , we can arrange for x̃n = 1. Then by
Nakayama’s lemma, any lifts x1 , . . . , xn generate Q, and
p−1 x1 , . . . , p−1 xk , xk+1 , . . . , xn
generate Q0 .



Theorem 9.3 Let Q be a quartic algebra over a DVR R with maximal ideal p,
and let φ : Q/R → M , θ : Λ3 (Q/R) → Λ2 M be a resolvent. Then Q is non-maximal
if and only if, under some choice of bases, the matrices (A, B) representing φ satisfy
one of the following conditions:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

p2 divides a11 , and p divides a12 , a13 , and b11 .
p divides a11 , a12 , a22 , b11 , b12 , and b22 .
p2 divides a11 , a12 , and a22 , and p divides a13 and a23 .
p divides all aij .

Proof The basic strategy is to find a suitable extension of the resolvent map to the
ring Q0 in Lemma 9.2, examining the cases where k is 1, 2, and 3.
First assume that Q has content 1 (by which we mean that the content ideal ct(Q)
is the whole of R). Then k is 1 or 2 and Q0 also has content 1. Both Q and Q0 have
unique (minimal and numerical) resolvents (M, θ, φ) and (M 0 , θ0 , φ0 ), where (since
QK = Q0K ) we have M ⊆ M 0 ⊆ MK , and θ and φ are the restrictions of θ0 and φ0 .
Also, since Q has index pk in Q0 , M has index pk in M 0 .

O’Dorney

Page 38 of 39

If k = 1, then we can arrange our coordinates such that
Q/R = hξ˜1 , ξ˜2 , ξ˜3 i, Q0 /R = hπ −1 ξ˜1 , ξ˜2 , ξ˜3 i
M = hη1 , η2 i, M 0 = hη1 , πη2 i.
Now since φ0 : Q0 /R → M 0 is the extension of φ, its corresponding matrix (A0 , B 0 )
is given by a straightforward change of basis:


π −2 a11
 1 −1
0
0
(A , B ) =  2 π a12
1 −1
a13
2π

1 −1
a12
2π

a22
1
2 a23

 

1 −1
π −1 b11
a13
2π
  1
1
,
2 a23   2 b12
1
a33
2 b13



1
2 b12

πb22
1
2 πb23

1
2 b13

1
2 πb23 

πb33

The entries of this matrix (sans 1/2’s) must belong to R, giving the divisibilities
listed in case (a) above.
If k = 2, then the proof works similarly, except that M 0 takes one of the two forms
hπη1 , πη2 i and η1 , π 2 η2 . We leave it to the reader to write out the corresponding
matrices (A0 , B 0 ) and conclude cases (b) and (c) above, respectively.
We are left with the case that ct(Q) 6= 1, that is, there is a quartic ring Q0 with
Q = R + πQ0 . (A priori we might only have a ring Q00 with Q = R + π k Q00 , k ≥ 1;
but then Q0 = R + π k−1 has the aforementioned property.) Then we may select
bases for Q and Q0 in the form of Lemma 9.2, with k = 3. Since the resolvent is
no longer unique, we must take care in choosing the new target module M 0 of the
resolvent φ0 . Since φ is quadratic and Q0 /R = π −1 (Q/R), a natural candidate is
M 0 = π −2 M , but unfortunately this is too large: we have [M 0 : M ] = p4 but [Q0 /R :
Q/R] = p3 , so θ0 cannot possibly be an isomorphism. However, since ct(Q) 6= 1, we
have φ(Q/R) ( M , so picking a sublattice L ( M of index p containing φ(Q/R), we
get that M 0 = p−2 L yields a workable resolvent. Note that p−2 M ( M 0 ( p−1 M ,
so we can take a basis such that
M = hη1 , η2 i and M 0 = hπ −1 η1 , π −2 η2 i.
We then get


π −1 a11
 1 −1
0
0
(A , B ) =  2 π a12
1 −1
a13
2π
yielding condition (d).

1 −1
a12
2π
π −1 a22
1 −1
a23
2π

 

1 −1
a13
b11
2π
 1
1 −1
,
π
a


23
2
2 b12
1
−1
π a33
2 b13

1
2 b12

b22
1
2 b23



1
2 b13

1
,
2 b23 

b33


10 Conclusion
We have found the Dedekind domain to be a suitable base ring for generalizing the
integral parametrizations of algebras and their ideals by Bhargava and his forebears.
In each case, ideal decompositions a1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ an fill the role of Z-bases, and elements
of appropriate fractional ideals take the place of integers in the parameter spaces.
We have also shown that the notion of “balanced,” introduced by Bhargava to
describe the ideal triples parametrized by general nondegenerate 2 × 2 × 2 cubes,

O’Dorney

Page 39 of 39

has some beautiful properties and is worthy of further study. We expect that the
methods herein will extend to replicate the other parametrizations in Bhargava’s
“Higher Composition Laws” series and may shed light on the analytic properties of
number fields and orders of low degree over base fields other than Q.
Competing interests
I have no competing interests.
Acknowledgements
A previous version of this paper served as my senior thesis at Harvard College. I thank my thesis advisor, Benedict
Gross, for many helpful discussions and comments. I thank Melanie Wood for clarifications on the relationships
between my work and hers. I thank Arul Shankar for useful discussions, especially for informing me that he and
Wood had been interested in the question answered by Corollary 8.6. I thank Brian Conrad for the suggestion that I
work with Prof. Gross. Finally, I thank Ken Ono for suggesting RMS as a publication venue.
References
1. Cox, D.A.: Primes of the Form x2 + ny 2 : Fermat, Class Field Theory, and Complex Multiplication, 2nd edn.
Pure and Applied Mathematics (Hoboken), p. 356. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ (2013).
doi:10.1002/9781118400722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118400722
2. Bhargava, M.: Higher composition laws. I. A new view on Gauss composition, and quadratic generalizations.
Ann. of Math. (2) 159(1), 217–250 (2004). doi:10.4007/annals.2004.159.217
3. Bhargava, M., Varma, I.: The mean number of 3-torsion elements in the class groups and ideal groups of
quadratic orders. Unpublished (2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5875v1
4. Delone, B.N., Faddeev, D.K.: The Theory of Irrationalities of the Third Degree. Translations of Mathematical
Monographs, Vol. 10, p. 509. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1964)
5. Bhargava, M.: Higher composition laws. III. The parametrization of quartic rings. Ann. of Math. (2) 159(3),
1329–1360 (2004). doi:10.4007/annals.2004.159.1329
6. Bhargava, M.: The density of discriminants of quartic rings and fields. Ann. of Math. (2) 162(2), 1031–1063
(2005). doi:10.4007/annals.2005.162.1031
7. Bhargava, M.: Higher composition laws. IV. The parametrization of quintic rings. Ann. of Math. (2) 167(1),
53–94 (2008). doi:10.4007/annals.2008.167.53
8. Bhargava, M.: The density of discriminants of quintic rings and fields. Ann. of Math. (2) 172(3), 1559–1591
(2010). doi:10.4007/annals.2010.172.1559
9. Wood, M.M.: Parametrizing quartic algebras over an arbitrary base. Algebra Number Theory 5(8), 1069–1094
(2011). doi:10.2140/ant.2011.5.1069
10. Wood, M.M.: Parametrization of ideal classes in rings associated to binary forms. J. reine angew. Math. 689,
169–199 (2014). doi:10.1515/crelle-2012-0058
11. Milnor, J.: Introduction to Algebraic K-theory, p. 184. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.; University
of Tokyo Press, Tokyo (1971). Annals of Mathematics Studies, No. 72
12. Wood, M.M.: Gauss composition over an arbitrary base. Adv. Math. 226(2), 1756–1771 (2011).
doi:10.1016/j.aim.2010.08.018
13. Bhargava, M.: Higher composition laws. II. On cubic analogues of Gauss composition. Ann. of Math. (2)
159(2), 865–886 (2004). doi:10.4007/annals.2004.159.865
14. Poonen, B.: The moduli space of commutative algebras of finite rank. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 10(3),
817–836 (2008). doi:10.4171/JEMS/131
Figures

√
Figure 1 Stella octangula showing the range of ideal triples in Zp [pn u] that are balanced

