arXiv:1708.05540v3 [math.NT] 23 Jan 2018

AUTOMORPHISMS OF EVEN UNIMODULAR LATTICES
AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS
EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN
Abstract. We characterize the irreducible polynomials that occur as a characteristic polynomial of an automorphism of an even unimodular lattice of
given signature, generalizing a theorem of Gross and McMullen. As part of
the proof, we give a general criterion in terms of Witt groups for a bilinear
form equipped with an action of a group G over a discretely valued field to
contain a unimodular G-stable lattice.

1. Introduction
1.1. Statement of the main result. Let r and s be non-negative integers, and
let Λ be an even unimodular lattice of signature (r, s). Such a lattice exists if and
only if r ≡ s mod 8, and it is uniquely determined by (r, s) if r and s are non-zero.
Let α ∈ SO(Λ) and denote by S its characteristic polynomial. Denote by m(S) be
the number of complex roots z of S with |z| > 1 (counted with multiplicity). Gross
and McMullen [10] show that if S has no linear factor, then S satisfies
(C1) S is reciprocal (i.e. tr+s S(1/t) = S(t)),
(C2) m(S) ≤ r, m(S) ≤ s and m(S) ≡ r ≡ s (mod 2),
r+s
(C3) |S(1)|, |S(−1)| and (−1) 2 S(1)S(−1) are squares.
They speculate that for a monic irreducible S ∈ Z[t] of degree r + s, the above
conditions may be sufficient for the existence of an even unimodular lattice Λ of
signature (r, s) and an α ∈ SO(Λ) with characteristic polynomial S. They show
that this is indeed so if |S(1)| = |S(−1)| = 1 (a different proof was given by the
first author in [3]). The main result of this paper confirms their speculation:
Theorem A. Let r, s be non-negative integers satisfying r ≡ s mod 8. Let P
be a monic irreducible polynomial, and let S be a power of P . Assume that S
has degree r + s, and that it satisfies (C1), (C2), and (C3). Then there exists an
even unimodular lattice Λ of signature (r, s) and an α ∈ SO(Λ) with characteristic
polynomial S.
Gross and McMullen have observed [10, Prop. 5.2] that the theorem does not
hold for S that have distinct irreducible factors. There are results by the first
author on reducible characteristic polynomials of definite even unimodular lattices
[1, 2], but in general it is not even clear what to conjecture.
As in [10, § 8] and [14, Thm 3.4], Theorem A together with the Torelli theorem
for K3 surfaces has the following immediate consequence.
Corollary. Let S ∈ Z[t] be a monic, irreducible, reciprocal polynomial of degree
22. Assume that S has precisely 1 root z ∈ C with |z| > 1, and assume that |S(1)|,
|S(−1)| and −S(1)S(−1) are squares. Then there exists a complex analytic K3
1

2

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

surface X and an α ∈ Aut X, such that the characteristic polynomial of α∗ on
H2 (X, Z) is S.

1.2. Strategy of proof. We sketch the proof of Theorem A, and refer to the main
body of the paper for the details. Assume for simplicity that S is irreducible.
Let E = Q[t]/(S) and let α ∈ E be the class of t. By condition (C1), the field E
comes with an involution σ characterized by σ(α) = α−1 . Let E0 ⊂ E be the fixed
field under σ. For every λ ∈ E0× we have a symmetric Q-bilinear form
bλ : E × E → Q, (x, y) 7→ trE/Q (λxσ(y)),
and α acts on (E, bλ ) by isometries. Condition (C2) guarantees that for suitable λ
the form bλ will have signature (r, s). It we can moreover choose λ in such a way
that bλ contains an α-stable even unimodular lattice, then the theorem follows.
Gross and McMullen show that if |S(1)| = |S(−1)| = 1, then for suitable λ the
lattice Λ can be taken to be a fractional OE -ideal. In general, however, an α-stable
lattice Λ will only be a module over the order Z[α±1 ] ⊂ OE , severely complicating
the situation at places where Z[α±1 ] fails to be maximal.
We take a somewhat different approach. We first show that for every p there
are λ ∈ (Qp ⊗ E0 )× for which there exists a unimodular α-stable Zp -lattice Λp in
(Qp ⊗ E, bλ ). This is done by showing that under condition (C3) we can make the
obstruction class in an ‘equivariant Witt group’ over Fp vanish, see § 1.3 below.
A careful analysis at the prime 2 shows that one can moreover arrange for the
Z2 -lattice Λ2 to be even.
Thus, we can locally solve the problem. To finish the proof, it suffices to show
that there exists a global λ satisfying the local conditions (at finite and infinite
places). This is the case if and only if a certain local-global obstruction class in
Z/2Z vanishes. It appears to be hard to compute the individual contributions to
this obstruction directly, but we observe that the obstruction class can be realized
as the difference of two obstruction classes coming from global objects, and hence
that it must vanish. See § 10 for more details.
1.3. Local obstructions in equivariant Witt groups. Let K be a field and G a
group. We call a G-bilinear form a finite-dimensional K-linear representation V of
G equipped with a non-degenerate G-invariant symmetric bilinear form V ×V → K.
We say V is neutral if there exists a G-stable subspace X ⊂ V with X = X ⊥ . The
equivariant Witt group WG (K) is the quotient of the Grothendieck group of Gbilinear forms by the subgroup generated by the classes of neutral forms. If the
group G is trivial, then WG (K) coincides with the usual Witt group W (K). In
§ 3 we develop the basic properties of these equivariant Witt groups, in the slightly
more general (and more natural) context of ǫ-symmetric bilinear forms over a ring
with involution.
Now let K be the fraction field of a discrete valuation ring OK with uniformizer
π and residue field k. We call an OK -lattice Λ in a K-bilinear form V almost
unimodular if
πΛ∨ ⊂ Λ ⊂ Λ∨ ,
If V is a G-bilinear form over K and if Λ ⊂ V is almost unimodular and G-stable,
then the quotient Λ∨ /Λ equipped with the form
Λ∨ b π −1 OK π
Λ∨
−→
×
−→ k
Λ
Λ
OK

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

3

is a G-bilinear form over k.
We call a G-bilinear form V bounded if V contains a G-stable OK -lattice, or
equivalently, if the closure of the image of G in O(V ) is compact. We denote by
WGb (K) the subgroup of WG (K) generated by the bounded forms.
Theorem B. Let K be the fraction field of a discrete valuation ring OK with
residue field k, and fix a uniformizer π of OK . Let G be a group. Then
(i) every bounded G-bilinear form V contains an almost unimodular G-stable
lattice Λ,
(ii) the class of [Λ∨ /Λ] in WG (k) only depends on the class of V in WG (K),
(iii) the map ∂ : WGb (K) → WG (k) given by [V ] 7→ [Λ∨ /Λ] is a homomorphism,
(iv) a G-bilinear form V contains a G-stable unimodular OK -lattice if and only
if V is bounded and ∂[V ] = 0 in WG (k).
As in our treatment of the equivariant Witt groups, we show this in a slightly
more general context, see Theorem 4.3. This theorem can be seen as an equivariant
version of a theorem of Springer [20] (but see Remark 4.12), or of the theory of
discriminant forms of Nikulin [15]. The result is without doubt well-known to the
experts, but for lack of proper reference we include a complete proof in sections 3
and 4. See also [19], [23], and [22] where similar ideas are used.
In case the residue field k is finite and G is the infinite cyclic group, then the
group WG (k) and the map ∂ can be made reasonably explicit. We use this in the
proof of Theorem A to show (using the notation of § 1.2) that there is no local
obstruction to finding a λ ∈ E0× and a unimodular Λ ⊂ (E, bλ ), stable under α.
See Propositions 7.1 and 7.2.
If K = Q2 , then we use the spinor norm to refine the theorem into a necessary and sufficient condition for a G-bilinear form to contain a G-invariant even
unimodular Z2 -lattice; see Theorem 8.1, and its application in Proposition 9.1.
The full strength of Theorem B is not needed for the application in Theorem A,
and one could make do with a few ad hoc computations in the spirit of the proof
of Theorem B. However, we have included it since it helps keeping the argument
organized, and since we believe Theorem B may be a useful tool in working with
‘G-lattices’, playing a role similar to Nikulin’s theory for lattices without group
action.
Acknowledgements. We want to thank Asher Auel, Simon Brandhorst, Curt McMullen, Jean-Pierre Serre and Xun Yu for enlightening discussions and comments
on an earlier draft. The second author is supported by a grant of the Netherlands
Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

2. Conventions
The determinant of a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form is det b ∈ K × /(K × )2
is the determinant of any Gram matrix of b. The discrimimant disc b ∈ K × /(K × )2
is defined as
disc b := (−1)

n(n−1)
2

det b,

where n is the dimension of V . The discriminant of a hyperbolic form is trivial.

4

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

3. The equivariant Witt group
Let K be a field and A an (associative, unital) K-algebra. Let σ : A → A be an
involution. We will refer to the algebra with involution (A, σ) simply by A. Fix an
ǫ in {±1}.
Definition 3.1. An (A, ǫ)-bilinear form is a pair (V, b) consisting of an A-module
V of finite K-dimension and a non-degenerate K-bilinear form b : V × V → K
satisfying
(i) b(ax, y) = b(x, σ(a)y) for all a ∈ A and x, y ∈ V ,
(ii) b(x, y) = ǫb(y, x) for all x, y ∈ V .
We will sometimes suppress b and and denote an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form by V .
Example 3.2. In the proof of Theorem A only pairs (A, ǫ) of the following kind will
be considered. Let G be a group, A = K[G], and σ the involution of A satisfying
σ(g) = g −1 for all g ∈ G. In this case, an (A, +1)-bilinear form is the same as a
non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form b : V × V → K together with an action
̺ : G → O(V, b). We will also refer to such a triple (V, b, ̺) as a G-bilinear form.
Definition 3.3. Let V be an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form. If X ⊂ V is a sub-A-module, then
its orthogonal X ⊥ = {x ∈ V | b(x, V ) = 0} is also a sub-A-module. A lagrangian
is a sub-A-module X ⊂ V satisfying X = X ⊥ . We say that V is neutral if it has a
lagrangian. The group WAǫ (K) is defined as the quotient of the Grothendieck group
of (A, ǫ)-bilinear forms by the subgroup generated by the neutral forms.
If A = K[G] and ǫ = 1 then we will write WG (K) for WAǫ (K).
Remark 3.4. If A = K and ǫ = 1 then WAǫ (K) coincides with the usual Witt group
of bilinear forms W (K). Indeed, if X ⊂ V satisfies X = X ⊥ then V is isomorphic to
X ⊕ X ∨ equipped with the obvious bilinear form, and V is hyperbolic (or metabolic
in characteristic 2).
Remark 3.5. The decomposition V ∼
= X ⊕ X ∨ in the preceding remark is not
canonical, and in general, if X is a lagrangrian in an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form V then
the natural short exact sequence of A-modules
0 −→ X −→ V −→ X ∨ −→ 0
need not split.
If V = (V, b) is an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form, then we denote by V (−1) the scaled
(A, ǫ)-bilinear form (V, −b).
Lemma 3.6. V ⊕ V (−1) is neutral.
Proof. The submodule {(x, x) | x ∈ V } is a lagrangian.



Corollary 3.7. Every element of WAǫ (K) is of the form [V ] for some V .



⊥

Lemma 3.8. If X ⊂ V is a sub-A-module and satisfies X ⊂ X , then [V ] =
[X ⊥ /X] in WG (K).
Proof. The submodule {(x, x̄) | x ∈ X ⊥ } is a lagrangian in V (−1) ⊕ X ⊥ /X.
Proposition 3.9. [V ] = 0 in WAǫ (K) if and only if V is neutral.



UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

5

Proof. If V is neutral then [V ] = 0 by definition of WAǫ (K).
Conversely, assume that [V ] = 0. Then there exists a W and a neutral N such
that V ⊕ W ∼
= N ⊕ W . Adding a summand W (−1) we find that there exists a
neutral M such that V ⊕ M is neutral.
Let 2n be the dimension of V , and 2m the dimension of M . Let X ⊂ V ⊕ M ,
and Y ⊂ M be lagrangians. Consider the submodule
S := X ∩ (V × Y ) ⊂ V ⊕ M.
We have X + (V × Y ) ⊂ (X ∩ Y )⊥ , so that we find
dim X + dim(V × Y ) ≤ dim S + dim(X ∩ Y )⊥ .
Expressing everything in terms of n, m, dim S and dim(X ∩ Y ) gives
(n + m) + (2n + m) ≤ dim S + (2n + 2m − dim(X ∩ Y )),
and hence dim S − dim(X ∩ Y ) ≥ n. Now the subspace Z := πV (S) ⊂ V is a totally
isotropic sub-A-module. The kernel of the projection S → Z is X ∩ Y , so we have
dim Z = dim S − dim(X ∩ Y ) ≥ n,
and therefore Z is a lagrangian.



The following proposition is analogous to the diagonalizability of quadratic forms
over fields.
Proposition 3.10. The group WAǫ (K) is generated by the classes of (A, ǫ)-bilinear
forms (V, b) with V a simple A-module.
Proof. Let W ss ⊂ WAǫ (K) be the subgroup generated by the classes of forms on
simple A-modules. Let [V ] be an element of the complement WAǫ (K) \ W ss with
dimK V minimal.
Since V is not simple, it contains a proper submodule W . Consider the submodule X = W ∩ W ⊥ of V . Either X = {0} and then [V ] = [W ] + [W ⊥ ], or
X 6= {0} and then [V ] = [X ⊥ /X]. In both cases we obtain a contradiction with
the minimality of dim V .

Corollary 3.11. Every class in WAǫ (K) is represented by an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form
whose underlying A-module is semi-simple.

If M is a simple A-module, then we denote by WAǫ (K, M ) the subgroup of WAǫ (K)
generated by the classes of (A, ǫ)-bilinear forms (M, b).
Theorem 3.12. WAǫ (K) = ⊕M WAǫ (K, M ) where M ranges over the isomorphism
classes of simple A-modules.
Proof. By Proposition 3.10 the map ⊕M WAǫ (K, M ) → WAǫ (K) is surjective. Let
([VM ])M be an element of the kernel. Then by Proposition 3.9 there is a lagrangian
X ⊂ ⊕M VM , and since HomA (M1 , M2 ) = 0 whenever M1 ∼
6 M2 we have that
=
X decomposes as X = ⊕M XM . For every M the submodule XM ⊂ VM is a
lagrangian, and we conclude that the map is injective.


6

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

4. Equivariant forms over discrete valuation rings
4.1. Statement of the result. Throughout this section, OK is a discrete valuation ring with field of fractions K, residue field k, and uniformizer π. Let (A, σ) be
an OK -algebra with involution and write AK and Ak for A ⊗OK K and A ⊗OK k
respectively. To lighten notation, we will write WAǫ (K) for WAǫ K (K) and similarly
WAǫ (k) for WAǫ k (k).
We will be particularly interested in the case A = OK [G] with ǫ = 1, in which
case we have WAǫ (K) = WG (K) and WAǫ (k) = WG (k).
Definition 4.1. An A-lattice in an (AK , ǫ)-bilinear form V is a sub-A-module Λ
which is finitely generated as an OK -module and satisfies KΛ = V . If Λ is an
A-lattice, then so is its dual
Λ∨ := {x ∈ V | b(x, Λ) ⊂ OK }.
We say that Λ is is almost unimodular if πΛ∨ ⊂ Λ ⊂ Λ∨ , and that it is unimodular
if Λ = Λ∨ .
If Λ is almost unimodular, then Λ∨ /Λ equipped with the pairing
b

Λ∨ /Λ × Λ∨ /Λ −→

π −1 OK π
−→ k
OK

is an (Ak , ǫ)-bilinear form.
Definition 4.2. We say that an (AK , ǫ)-bilinear form is bounded if it contains an
A-lattice. We denote by WAǫ,b (K) the subgroup of WAǫ (K) generated by the classes
of bounded forms.
In this section we prove the following theorem, which for A = OK [G] and ǫ = 1
coincides with Theorem B.
Theorem 4.3.
(i) Every bounded (AK , ǫ)-bilinear form contains an almost unimodular Alattice Λ,
(ii) the class of Λ∨ /Λ in WAǫ (k) only depends on the class of V in WAǫ (K),
(iii) the map ∂ : WAǫ,b (K) → WAǫ (k) given by [V ] 7→ Λ∨ /Λ is a homomorphism,
(iv) V contains a unimodular A-lattice if and only if V is bounded and ∂[V ] = 0
in WAǫ (k).
We follow closely the proof of [17, § 6.1], which treats the case A = OK , ǫ = 1.
4.2. Torsion forms and proof of Theorem 4.3.
Definition 4.4. An (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form M is a pair (M, b) consisting of
(i) an A-module M of finite finite length over OK ,
(ii) a non-degenerate OK -bilinear map b : M ×M → K/OK satisfying b(x, y) =
ǫb(y, x) and b(ax, y) = b(x, σ(a)y) for all x, y ∈ M and a ∈ A.
A lagrangian in M is a sub-A-module X ⊂ M with X = X ⊥ . We say that M is
neutral if M has a lagrangian.
If V is an (AK , ǫ)-bilinear form and Λ ⊂ V an A-lattice satisfying Λ ⊂ Λ∨ ,
then M := Λ∨ /Λ is naturally an (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form (sometimes called the
discriminant form of Λ). The A-lattices Λ′ satisfying
Λ ⊂ Λ′ ⊂ Λ′∨ ⊂ Λ∨

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

7

are in bijection with the totally isotropic sub-A-modules M ′ ⊂ M , and Λ′ is almost
unimodular (resp. unimodular) if and only πM ′⊥ ⊂ M ′ (resp. M ′ is a lagrangian).
Proposition 4.5. Let M be an (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form. Then every maximal
totally isotropic sub-A-module U ⊂ M satisfies πU ⊥ ⊂ U .
Proof. Let U ⊂ M be a maximal totally isotropic submodule. Let t be the largest
integer such that π t−1 U ⊥ /U 6= 0. Assume t ≥ 2 and set V := π t−1 U ⊥ + U . Then
V is a sub-A-module, and we claim that it is totally isotropic. Indeed, if x ∈ U ⊥
and y ∈ U then
b(π t−1 x + y, π t−1 x + y) = b(π t x, π t−2 x) = 0,
since π t x ∈ U . This is a contradiction with the maximality of U .



Corollary 4.6. Let V be an (AK , ǫ)-bilinear form. Then any maximal A-lattice in
V is almost unimodular.

Corollary 4.7. Let V be a bounded (A, ǫ)-bilinear form over K. Then V has an
almost unimodular A-lattice.

We denote by W TAǫ (OK ) the Witt group of (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion forms, defined
as the quotient of the Grothendieck group of (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion forms by the
subgroup generated by the classes of the neutral forms.
If V is an Ak -bilinear form, then the composition
π −1

V × V −→ k −→

K
OK

makes V into an (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form over OK . This defines a homomorphism
WAǫ (k) → W TAǫ (OK ).
Proposition 4.8. The map WAǫ (k) → W TAǫ (OK ) is an isomorphism.
Proof. For A = OK = Zp , this is [17, 5.1.5]. The argument carries over to our
setting, we repeat it for the convenience of the reader.
For a non-zero finite length OK -module M , we call the smallest integer t such
that π t M = 0 but π t−1 M 6= 0 the exponent of M .
Let M be a (A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form of exponent t ≥ 2. Then U := π t−1 M is
totally isotropic, and the (A, ǫ)-bilinear form M ′ := U ⊥ /U has exponent < t and
we have [M ] = [M ′ ] in W TA (OK ). Repeating this process, we find a canonical
(A, ǫ)-bilinear torsion form M † of exponent 1 (i.e. killed by π).
Note that (M ⊕ N )† = M † ⊕ N † . Also, if M is neutral with lagrangian X ⊂ M
then
U⊥
X ∩ U⊥
⊂
= M′
X ′ :=
X∩U
U
is lagrangian, since
(X ∩ U ⊥ )⊥ ∩ U ⊥ = (X + U ) ∩ U ⊥ = (X ∩ U ⊥ ) + U
and hence X ′ is its own orthogonal in U ⊥ /U . This shows that M 7→ M † induces a
two-sided inverse to WAǫ (k) → W TA (OK ).

∨
Lemma 4.9. If Λ0 and Λ1 are A-lattices in V satisfying Λ0 ⊂ Λ∨
0 and Λ1 ⊂ Λ1 ,
∨
∨
ǫ
then [Λ0 /Λ0 ] = [Λ1 /Λ1 ] in W TA (OK ).

8

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

Proof. Passing to the intersection, we may without loss of generality assume Λ0 ⊂
Λ1 . Let M = Λ∨
0 /Λ1 . Then the image U of Λ0 in M is totally isotropic, and
/Λ
.
The same argument as in the proof of 3.8 shows that [M ] =
U ⊥ /U ∼
= Λ∨
1
1
∨
[U ⊥ /U ] and hence [Λ∨

0 /Λ0 ] = [Λ1 /Λ1 ] in W TA (OK ).
Let b : V × V → K be a non-degenerate bilinear form. For a sub-OK -module L
of V (not necessarily a lattice) we define
L∨ := {x ∈ V | b(x, L) ⊂ OK }.
The main properties of the dual of a lattice carry over to this generality:
Lemma 4.10. For all sub-OK -modules L, M of a bilinear form V we have
(i) if L is a sub-K-vector space, then L∨ = L⊥ ,
(ii) (L∨ )∨ = L,
(iii) (L + M )∨ = L∨ ∩ M ∨ ,
(iv) (L ∩ M )∨ = L∨ + M ∨ .
Proof. For (i), note that b(x, λy) ∈ OK for all λ ∈ K implies b(x, y) = 0.
The second assertion is clear if L is a sub-K-vector space, or an OK -lattice. For
a general L, note that there exist unique sub-K-vector spaces V0 and V1 such that
V0 ⊂ L ⊂ V1 and L/V0 is a lattice in V1 /V0 . The dual L∨ satisfies V1⊥ ⊂ L∨ ⊂ V0⊥ ,
with L∨ /V1⊥ the dual lattice of L/V0 under the perfect pairing
V1 /V0 × V0⊥ /V1⊥ → K
induced by b. Consequently, the double dual of L coincides with L.
The third assertion is immediate, and the final one follows from the third using
the double dual statement in (ii).

Lemma 4.11. If V is a neutral AK -bilinear form, and if Λ ⊂ V is an A-lattice
satisfying Λ ⊂ Λ∨ , then Λ∨ /Λ is a neutral torsion A-bilinear form.
Proof. Let X ⊂ V be a lagrangian, and set
Λ∨
X ∩ Λ∨
⊂
.
U :=
X ∩Λ
Λ
Then using the Lemma 4.10, we see that U ⊥ ⊂ Λ∨ /Λ satisfies
U⊥ =

X ∩ Λ∨
(X ⊥ + Λ) ∩ Λ∨
=
= U,
(X ⊥ + Λ) ∩ Λ
X∩Λ

and we conclude that U is a lagrangian in Λ∨ /Λ.



We are now ready to prove the main result of this section.
Proof of Theorem 4.3. Part (i) is Corollary 4.7. By Lemmas 4.9 and 4.11 the map
[V ] 7→ [Λ∨ /Λ] is a well-defined homomorphism. Composing with the inverse of the
isomorphism of Proposition 4.8 we obtain (ii) and (iii). Assertion (iv) then follows
from Proposition 3.9.

Remark 4.12. If V = (V, b) is an (A, ǫ)-bilinear form over K, then so is V (π) :=
(V, πb). We obtain a map


WAǫ (K) → WAǫ (k) × WAǫ (k), [V ] 7→ ∂[V ], ∂[V (π)] .

If K is complete, A = OK and ǫ = 1, then this is precisely the isomorphism
W (K) → W (k) × W (k) of Springer [20].

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

9

In general, however, the map fails to be an isomorphism. For example, if G
is a p-group and K = Qp , then under the isotypical decomposition of Theorem
3.12 the group WG (Qp ) can have many non-trivial components (corresponding
to the irreducible symmetrically self-dual representations of G over Qp ), whereas
WG (Fp ) = W (Fp ).
For an explicit example, take p = 2, and G = Z/2Z acting on the hyperbolic
plane H over Q2 by interchanging the two isotropic lines. Then [H] is a non-zero
element in the kernel of WG (Q2 ) → WG (F2 ) × WG (F2 ).
Remark 4.13. Let M be a bounded simple AK -module and Λ ⊂ M an A-lattice.
Let M 1 , . . . M n be the (distinct) simple Ak -modules that occur as quotient in a
Jodan-Hölder filtration of Λ/πΛ. Then under the decomposition of Theorem 3.12
the map ∂ restricts to a map
WAǫ (K, M ) −→

n
M

WAǫ (k, M i ).

i=1

Moreover, one can use the theory of Morita equivalence of [13, § I.9] to compute
the groups WAǫ (k, M i ) in terms of the usual Witt groups W (k). Especially when
k is finite, this gives quite a bit of control over the map ∂ : WAǫ (K) → WAǫ (k), and
makes it plausible that Theorem 4.3 will find applications beyond its use in the
proof of Theorem A.
4.3. Sketch of a CAT(0)-proof. Since it may be of independent interest, we
briefly sketch a different, more geometric proof of Theorem B, based on ideas of
Goldman-Iwahori [9] and Bruhat-Tits [5, 6]. The argument does not seem to generalize to the more general setting of Theorem 4.3.
Let V be a finite-dimensional vector space over a discretely valued field K. A
valuation on V is a map α : V → R ∪ {∞} satisfying
(i) α(x) = ∞ if and only if x = 0,
(ii) α(ax) = v(a) + α(x) for all a ∈ K, x ∈ V ,
(iii) α(x + y) ≥ inf{α(x), α(y)} for all x, y ∈ V .
If α is a valuation on V , then

α∨ (ξ) := inf v(ξ(x)) − α(x)
x∈V

∨

defines a valuation on V . If b : V × V → K is a bilinear form, then we say that α
is reflexive if α = α∨ under the identification V ∼
= V ∨ defined by b.
Let B(V, b) be the set of all reflexive valuations on (V, b). A metric on B(V, b) is
given by
d(α, β) := sup |β(x) − α(x)|.
x∈V

Using the results of [9] and [5, § 1] one can show that the metric space B(V, b) is
a CAT(0)-space. In particular, it is complete and uniquely geodesic. The group
O(V, b) acts isometrically on B(V, b), and if the residue characteristic is different
from 2, then one can identify B(V, b) with the spherical Bruhat-Tits building of
SO(V, b), see [6, Thm. 2.12].
Let L(V, b) be the set of almost unimodular lattices in V . We have O(V, b)equivariant maps
B(V, b) → L(V, b), α 7→ Λα := {x ∈ V | α(x) ≥ 0}

10

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

and

L(V, b) → B(V, b), Λ 7→ αΛ := x 7→ inf{v(π n ) | π n x ∈ Λ} .
The first map is semi-continuous is the following sense: every α ∈ B(V, b) has an
open neighbourhood U so that for all β ∈ U we have Λβ ⊂ Λα . The first map is a
section of the second: for all almost unimodular lattices Λ we have ΛαΛ = Λ.
Sketch of alternative proof of Theorem B. We only give the proof of the hardest
part: the independence of Λ of [Λ∨ /Λ] ∈ WG (k). Let (V, b, ̺) be a G-bilinear form
over K, and let Λ0 and Λ1 be almost unimodular G-lattices in V . If Λ0 and Λ1 are
∨
comparable (Λ0 ⊂ Λ1 or Λ1 ⊂ Λ0 ), then it is easy to see that [Λ∨
0 /Λ0 ] = [Λ1 /Λ1 ]
in WG (k).
Otherwise, since B(V, b) is CAT(0), there exists a unique geodesic
α : [0, 1] → B(V, b), t 7→ αt
such that α0 = αΛ0 and α1 = αΛ1 . By unicity, we have that αt is fixed by G for all t,
and hence that Λαt is an almost unimodular G-lattice for all t. By semi-continuity
(and compactness of [0,1]), we find a finite sequence of almost unimodular G-lattices

(Λti )i with Λt0 = Λ0 , Λt1 = Λ1 , and with Λti and Λti+1 comparable for all i.
In similar spirit, the existence of almost unimodular G-lattices (Corollary 4.7)
can be deduced from the Bruhat-Tits fixed point theorem on B(V, b).
5. One-dimensional hermitian forms and the twisting group µ(E, σ)
The remainder of this paper is about Z-bilinear forms, that is, symmetric bilinear
forms (V, b) equipped with an action ̺ : Z → O(V, b) of the infinite cyclic group Z.
We beginning by recalling the ‘hermitian’ construction of Z-bilinear forms, and
describe the local-global obstruction that will play a crucial role in the proof of
Theorem A. All material in this section is well-known.
5.1. Hermitian construction of Z-bilinear forms. Let K be a field of characteristic different from 2, let E0 be an étale K-algebra, and let E be an étale
E0 -algebra that is free of rank 2 over E0 . Let σ denote the canonical involution of
E, fixing E0 . Every λ ∈ E0× defines a symmetric bilinear form
bλ : E × E → K, (x, y) 7→ trE/K (λxσ(y))
×

If α ∈ E satisfies ασ(α) = 1, then multiplication by α is an isometry of (E, bλ ),
and the homomorphism
̺α : Z → O(E, bλ ), 1 7→ α
makes (E, bλ , ̺α ) into a Z-bilinear form.
5.2. The twisting group. Consider the group
µ(E, σ) :=

E0×
.
{zσ(z) | z ∈ E × }

Up to E-linear isometry, the pair (E, bλ ) only depends on the class of λ in µ(E, σ).
Note that µ(E, σ) is trivial if E = E0 × E0 .
Lemma 5.1. Let T be the group scheme over K defined by the short exact sequence
Nm

1 −→ T −→ ResE/K Gm,E −→ ResE0 /K Gm,E0 −→ 1.
Then µ(E, σ) = H1 (K, T ).

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

11

Proof. This follows from the long exact sequence of cohomology together with
Hilbert 90.

Remark 5.2. The group scheme T acts by isometries on the ‘standard’ form
b1 : E × E → K, (x, y) 7→ trE/K (xσ(y)),
and bλ is the twist of b1 by the class in H1 (K, T ) = µ(E, σ) determined by λ.
We can express µ(E, σ) in terms of Brauer groups of E and E0 :
Lemma 5.3. There is an exact sequence
β

1 −→ µ(E, σ) −→ Br E0 −→ Br E,
where the map Br E0 → Br E is the base change map.
Proof. This follows from Hilbert 90 and the long exact sequence of cohomology
induced by the short exact sequence
1 −→ ResE0 /K Gm,E0 −→ ResE/K Gm,E −→ T −→ 1
of group schemes over K, where the last map sends z to σ(z)/z.



5.3. Hasse-Witt invariants of a hermitian form. The Hasse-Witt invariant
ǫ(bλ ) ∈ Br K is determined by the Hasse-Witt invariant ǫ(b) and by the twisting
cocycle λ ∈ µ(E, σ), as follows.
Proposition 5.4 ([7, Thm. 4.3]). For every λ ∈ E0× we have
ǫ(bλ ) = ǫ(b1 ) + NmE0 /K β(λ)
in Br K.



5.4. Twisting group of local and global fields. If E is a local or global field,
then the group µ(E, σ) can easily be made explicit using the standard descriptions
of Brauer groups of local and global fields.
Lemma 5.5. Assume that E is a local field. Then we have a natural commutative
diagram
1
µ(E, σ)
Br E0
Br E
1
0

Z/2Z

inv

inv

θ
1/2

Q/Z

2

Q/Z

0

in which the vertical map θ : µ(E, σ) → Z/2Z is an isomorphism.
Proof. If E is non-archimedean then the two maps inv are isomorphisms, and the
lemma follows from Lemma 5.3. If E is archimedean, then necessarily E = C and
E0 = R, and again the lemma follows from Lemma 5.3.

Remark 5.6. We will use explicit descriptions of θ in the following cases:
(i) if (E, E0 ) = (C, R) then θ(λ) = sgn(λ),
(ii) if E/E0 is an unramified extension of non-archimedean local fields, then
θ(λ) = vE0 (λ) mod 2,
(iii) if E/E0 is a ramified extension of non-archimedean local fields of odd
residue characteristic, and if πE is a uniformizer of E then πE0 := Nm πE
×
n
is a uniformizer of E0 and θ is given by mapping λπE
with λ ∈ OE
to
0
0
×
× 2 ∼
the class of λ in ℓ /(ℓ ) = Z/2Z, where ℓ is the residue field of OE0 .

12

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

Theorem 5.7 (Local-global obstruction). Assume that E is a global field. Let S
be the set of places w of E0 for which
Ew := E ⊗E0 E0,w
is a field. Then the sequence
1 −→ µ(E, σ) −→

M

P

θw

µ(Ew , σ) −→ Z/2Z −→ 0

w∈S

is exact.
Proof. Class field theory gives a short exact sequence
P
M
inv
1 −→ Br E0 −→
Br E0,w −→ Q/Z −→ 0,
w

and a similar sequence for E. These two sequences sit in a commutative diagram

  L
 L
Q/Z
1
Br E0,w
Br E0,w ⊕
1
Br E0
w∈S

w6∈S

2

1

Br E

 L

w∈S


  L
Br E0,w × Br E0,w
Br Ew ⊕

Q/Z

1

w6∈S

The kernels of the vertical maps give an exact sequence
P
M
θw
1 −→ µ(E, σ) −→
µ(Ew , σ) −→ Z/2Z
w∈S

and the rightmost map is surjective since S is non-empty.



6. Lattices in one-dimensional hermitian forms
Let K be a discrete valuation field with residue field k, maximal ideal mK and
uniformizing element πK . Let E be a finite separable field extension of K, and let
σ be a non-trivial involution of E over K. Denote by E0 the fixed field of σ, and by
ℓ the residue field of E. Let λ ∈ E0× , and consider the associated K-bilinear form
bλ on E defined in § 5.1. In this section we study lattices in (E, bλ ), and the image
of a Z-bilinear form (E, bλ , ̺α ) under WZ (K) → WZ (k).
6.1. Almost unimodular OE -lattices. We construct an OE -lattice Λ in (E, bλ )
satisfying πE Λ∨ ⊂ Λ ⊂ Λ∨ and explicitly determine the k-bilinear form
(1)

−1
OK πK
Λ∨
Λ∨ b πK
−→
×
−→ k
Λ
Λ
OK

on the ℓ-module Λ∨ /Λ.
Denote the valuation of the different ideal DE/K by δ, so that DE/K = mδE .
−n−δ−vE (λ)

Lemma 6.1. For every n, the dual of mnE with respect to bλ is mE

.

mm
E

Proof. The dual is an OE -module and hence it equals
where m is the smallest
integer such that bλ (mnE , mm
)
⊂
O
.
By
[18,
§
III.3,
Prop.
7]
we have bλ (mnE , mm
E
E
E) ⊂
n+m
−δ
OE if and only if λmE
⊂ mE , hence m = −δ − n − vE (λ).

Corollary 6.2. If vE (λ)+ δ = −2n, then the OK -lattice Λ := mnE in the K-bilinear
form (E, bλ ) satisfies Λ∨ = Λ.


UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

13

Denote the maximal unramified extension of K in E by L. We have OL /mL = ℓ.
Proposition 6.3. If vE (λ) + δ = 1 − 2n, then
(i) the OK -lattice Λ := mnE satisfies πE Λ∨ = Λ
(ii) the element

n−1
n−1
u := trE/L λπK πE
σ(πE
)

is a σ-invariant unit in OL
(iii) the induced k-bilinear form on the one-dimensional ℓ-vector space Λ∨ /Λ is
isomorphic with the form

ℓ × ℓ → k, (x, y) 7→ trℓ/k ū · xσ(y) .

Proof. The first assertion follows from Lemma 6.1. For the second, note that u is
σ-invariant by construction. Observe that
n−1
n−1
λπK πE
σ(πE
) ∈ λπK m2n−2
⊂ λm2n−1
= m−δ
E
E
E

so that u ∈ OL by [18, § III.3, Prop. 7]. That u is a unit, will follow from the third
assertion, which we now prove.
Let ξ, η be elements of Λ∨ /Λ. We will compute their pairing in k under
Λ∨
π −1 OK πK
Λ∨
×
−→
−→ k.
Λ
Λ
OK
n−1
n−1
We have Λ∨ /Λ = mE
/mnE ∼
and
= ℓ and we can find x, y ∈ OL with ξ = xπE
n−1
η = yπE . Using the linearity and transitivity properties of the trace, we find

n−1
n−1
n−1
n−1
πK bλ (xπE
, yπE
) = trE/K πK λxπE
σ(yπE
)

n−1
n−1
= trL/K trE/L λπK πE
σ(πE
)xσ(y)

= trL/K uxσ(y) .

It follows that trL/K (uxσ(y)) ∈ OK and that ξ and η pair to trL/K (uxσ(y)) mod
mK in k.
Since the pairing on Λ∨ /Λ is perfect, and since L/K is unramified, we conclude
that u must be a unit in OL and that the induced pairing on Λ∨ /Λ is as described
in the third assertion.


6.2. Image of a hermitian form under the map WZb (K) → WZ (k). Fix an
element α ∈ E × with ασ(α) = 1 and α 6= ±1. For every λ in E0× we have a
Z-bilinear form (E, bλ , ̺α ) over K. Since α is a unit in OE , this Z-bilinear form is
bounded. Every sub-OE -module Λ ⊂ E is stable under the action of ̺α (Z) = αZ ,
so we can use Corollary 6.2 and Proposition 6.3 to say something about the image
of [E, bλ , ̺α ] under the map ∂ : WZb (K) → WZ (k) of Theorem B.
Proposition 6.4 (Unramified case). If E/E0 is unramified, then there exists a
λ ∈ µ(E, σ) such that ∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = 0 in WZ (k).
Proof. Since E/E0 is unramified, there exists a λ ∈ E0× such that vE (λ) + δ is even,
and by Corollary 6.2 there is an OE -module Λ ⊂ E with Λ∨ = Λ. This module is
stable under α, hence ∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = [Λ∨ /Λ] = 0.

Lemma 6.5. If E/E0 is ramified, then ᾱ := α mod mE satisfies ᾱ ∈ {±1}.
Proof. We have σℓ = id and ᾱσℓ (ᾱ) = 1.



14

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

Proposition 6.6 (Ramified with odd residue characteristic). Assume that E/E0
is ramified, and that the residue characteristic is odd. Let χ : Z → k × be the
character that maps 1 to ᾱ. Then for each of the two classes γ ∈ W (k) with
dim γ ≡ [ℓ : k] mod 2 there is a unique λ ∈ µ(E, σ) such that
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = γ
in W (k) = WZ (k, χ) ⊂ WZ (k).
Here WZ (k, χ) denotes the subgroup of WZ (k) generated by the Z-bilinear forms
of the form (k, b, χ). It is one of the components in the decomposition of Theorem
3.12.
Proof of Proposition 6.6. Since the residue characteristic is odd, the quadratic extension E/E0 is tamely ramified and DE/E0 = mE . The transitivity formula
DE/K = DE0 /K DE/E0 implies
vE (λ) + δ = 2vE0 (λ) + 2vE0 (DE0 /K ) + 1
and hence vE (λ) + δ is odd and Proposition 6.3 applies. Since σℓ = id, we see that
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] can be represented by the bilinear form
b̄ : ℓ × ℓ → k, (x, y) 7→ trℓ/k (ūxy)
on which Z acts via χ. The group W (k) has four elements, distinguished by their
dimension in Z/2Z and determinant in k × /(k × )2 . For the form b̄ we have
dim b̄

=

[ℓ : k] ∈ Z/2Z,

det b̄

=

−(−1)[ℓ:k] Nm(ū) ∈ k × /(k × )2 .

Since the norm map ℓ× → k × is surjective, we see that by changing λ by a unit in
×
OE
, we can reach both classes in W (k) of dimension [ℓ : k].

0
Proposition 6.7 (Even residue characteristic). Assume that the residue characteristic is even. Then for all λ ∈ µ(E, σ) we have
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = [ℓ : k]δ
in WZ (k, 1) = W (k) = Z/2Z.
Note that this is consistent with Proposition 6.4: if E/E0 is unramified, then
[ℓ : k] is even and hence ∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = 0 in WZ (k).
Proof of Proposition 6.7. Note that vE (λ) is even. If δ is even, then Corollary
6.2 implies that ∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = 0. If δ is odd, then Proposition 6.3 shows that
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] can be represented by a bilinear form of dimension [ℓ : k].

6.3. Relation to the characteristic polynomial.
Lemma 6.8. Assume that E/E0 is ramified. Let S be the characteristic polynomial
of α over K. Then vK (S(1)) + vK (S(−1)) ≡ [ℓ : k]δ mod 2. If moreover k has odd
characteristic, then either
(i) ᾱ = 1 and vK (S(1)) ≡ [ℓ : k] mod 2, or
(ii) ᾱ = −1 then vK (S(−1)) ≡ [ℓ : k] mod 2.

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

15

Proof. The transitivity formula for the different shows δ ≡ vE (DE/E0 ) mod 2, and
hence δ ≡ vE (σ(α) − α) mod 2. Since α and σ(α) are mutually inverse units, we
have
vE (1 − α) + vE (1 + α) = vE (1 − α2 ) = vE (σ(α) − α) ≡ δ mod 2
Since all the roots of S have the same valuation, we find
vK (S(±1)) = [E : K]

vE (1 ∓ α)
= [ℓ : k]vE (1 ∓ α),
e(E : K)

where e(E : K) denotes the ramification index. Comparing the above expressions
yields vK (S(1)) + vK (S(−1)) ≡ [ℓ : k]δ mod 2.
Now if the residue characteristic is odd then δ ≡ 1 mod 2. If moreover ᾱ = 1,
then 1 + α is a unit and vK (S(−1)) = 0, and similarly, if ᾱ = −1, then 1 − α is a
unit and vK (S(1)) = 0.

7. Unimodular lattices in Z-bilinear forms over local fields
Let K be a non-archimedean local field, E0 an étale K-algebra, and E an étale
E0 -algebra which is free of rank 2 over E0 . Denote by σ the involution of E fixing
E0 . Let α ∈ E × satisfy ασ(α) = 1 and α 6= σ(α), and denote by S be the
characteristic polynomial of α over K.
Proposition 7.1. Assume that the characteristic of k is odd, that S(1) and S(−1)
are non-zero, and that vK (S(1)) and vK (S(−1)) are even. Then there exists a
λ ∈ µ(E, σ) and a unimodular OK -lattice Λ ⊂ (E, bλ ) stable under α.
Q
Proof. The algebra E0 decomposes as a product of fields E0 = w∈S E0,w , indexed
by a finite set S. For every w ∈ S, the algebra Ew := E ⊗E0 E0,w is a quadratic
E0,w -algebra of exactly one of the following types:
(sp) Ew = E0,w × E0,w
(un) Ew is an unramified quadratic extension of E0,w
(+) Ew is a ramified quadratic extension of E0,w , and the image ᾱv of α in the
residue field ℓw of Ew is 1
(-) Ew is a ramified quadratic extension of E0,w , and the image ᾱv of α in the
residue field ℓw of Ew is −1
This gives a partition S = Ssp ∪ SunQ∪ S+ ∪ S− .
×
such that
Now choose λ = (λw )w in E0× = w E0,w
(i) for
P every w ∈ Sun we have ∂[Ew , bλw , α] = 0
(ii)
∂[Ew , bλw , α] = 0 in W (k) = W (k, χ+ ) ⊂ WZ (k)
Pw∈S+
(iii)
w∈S− ∂[Ew , bλw , α] = 0 in W (k) = W (k, χ− ) ⊂ WZ (k)
where χ±1 denotes the character Z → k × , 1 7→ ±1. Such λ = (λw ) indeed exists.
For (i) this follows from Propostion 6.4. For (ii) and (iii) note that by Lemma 6.8
and the condition on S(±1) we have
X
X
[ℓw : k] ≡
[ℓw : k] ≡ 0 (mod 2).
w∈S+

w∈S−

Hence it follows from Proposition 6.6 that we can choose (λw )w∈S± as required.
Since (Ew , bλw , α) is neutral for all w ∈ Ssp , we conclude that
X
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] =
∂[Ew , bλw , ̺αw ] = 0
w∈S

16

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

in WZ (k), and Theorem B gives us that (E, bλ , ̺α ) contains a unimodular Z-stable
lattice.

Proposition 7.2. Assume that the characteristic of k is even, that S(1) and S(−1)
are non-zero, and that vK (S(1)) + vK (S(−1)) is even. Then for every λ ∈ µ(E, σ)
there exists a unimodular OK -lattice Λ ⊂ (E, bλ ) stable under α.
Q
Proof. The algebra E0 decomposes as a product of fields E0 = w∈S E0,w . For
every w ∈ S, the algebra Ew := E ⊗E0 E0,w is a quadratic E0,w -algebra of exactly
one of the following types:
(sp) Ew = E0,w × E0,w
(un) Ew is an unramified quadratic extension of E0,w
(±) Ew is a ramified quadratic extension of E0,w
This gives a partition S = Ssp ∪ Sun ∪ S± .
Q
×
. We have [Ew , bλw , ̺αw ] = 0
Let λ = (λw )w be an element of E0× = w E0,w
for w ∈ Ssp and by Proposition 6.7 we also have ∂[Ew , bλw , ̺αw ] = 0 for w ∈ Sun .
Using Proposition 6.7 once more at the ramified places, we find
X
X
∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] =
∂[Ew , bλw , ̺αw ] =
[ℓw : k]δw
w∈S±

w∈S±

in Z/2Z = W (k) ⊂ WZ (k). Lemma 6.8 then shows that ∂[E, bλ , ̺α ] = 0, and
hence by Theorem B we conclude that (E, bλ , ̺α ) contains a unimodular Z-stable
lattice.

8. An intermezzo on 2-adic lattices
By itself, Theorem B does not say anything about the existence of a G-stable
even unimodular lattice in a G-bilinear form over Q2 . The aim of this section is to
establish the following criterion, which will be used in the proof of Theorem A.
Theorem 8.1. Let G be a group and (V, b, ̺) be a G-bilinear form over Q2 . Assume
that ̺(G) ⊂ SO(V, b). Then V contains a G-stable even unimodular lattice if and
only if the following three conditions hold
(i) (V, b, ̺) contains a G-stable unimodular lattice,
(ii) (V, b) contains an even unimodular lattice,
(iii) for every g ∈ G we have v2 (δ(̺(g))) = 0 in Z/2Z.
× 2
Here δ : SO(V, b) → Q×
2 /(Q2 ) denotes the spinor norm. We will recall its
definition in § 8.2.

8.1. Classification. We start by recalling some results on the classification of unimodular lattices over Z2 .
Proposition 8.2. Let (V, b) be a bilinear form over Q2 and let Λ1 and Λ2 be
unimodular lattices in V . If Λ1 and Λ2 are either both even, or both odd, then there
exists a g ∈ O(V, b) such that gΛ1 = Λ2 .
Proof. Follows from [16, Thm. 93.29].



Denote by H and N the module Z2 ⊕ Z2 equipped with the bilinear forms given
in terms of Gram matrices by




0 1
2 −1
bH :=
, bN :=
.
1 0
−1 2

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

17

Proposition 8.3. Every even unimodular Z2 -lattice is either of the form H n or
of the form N ⊕ H n−1 .
Proof. See [4, Prop. 5.2] or [12, Satz 15.6]
We have disc H n = 1 and disc(N ⊕ H n−1 ) = −3 in


× 2
Z×
2 /(Z2 ) .

× 2
Corollary 8.4. For every n > 0 and d ∈ {1, −3} ⊂ Q×
2 /(Q2 ) there is a unique ǫ ∈
{±1} = (Br Q2 )[2] such that the unique bilinear form V over Q2 of dimension 2n,
discriminant d and Hasse-Witt invariant ǫ contains an even unimodular lattice. 

8.2. The spinor norm. If (V, b) is a bilinear form over a field K of characteristic
different from 2, then the short exact sequence
1 −→ {±1} −→ Spin(V, b) −→ SO(V, b) −→ 1
induces a morphism
δ : SO(V, b) → H1 (K, {±1}) = K × /(K × )2
called the spinor norm.
Theorem 8.5 (Zassenhaus formula). Let K be a field of characteristic different
from 2. Let (V, b) be a bilinear form of dimension n over K, let α ∈ SO(V ). Let
V0 ⊂ V be the generalized (−1)-eigenspace and V1 its orthogonal complement. Then
δ(α) = det(b|V0 ) · det( 1+α
2 , V1 )
in K × /(K × )2 .
Proof. See [24] or [8, Thm. C.5.7].



Proposition 8.6. Let (V, b) be a bilinear form over Q2 . Assume that α ∈ SO(V, b)
stabilizes an even unimodular Z2 -lattice Λ ⊂ V . Then v2 (δ(α)) ≡ 0 mod 2.
Proof. Since Λ is even and unimodular, the quadratic form q(x) := b(x, x)/2 on the
Z2 -module Λ is non-degenerate (or regular), and the short exact sequence of the
spin cover (over Q2 ) extends to a short exact sequence
1 −→ µ2 −→ Spin(Λ) −→ SO(Λ) −→ 1
of group schemes over Spec Z2 , exact in the fppf topology, see [8, § C.4]. It follows
× 2
that δ(α) ∈ Z×
2 /(Z2 ) for all α ∈ SO(Λ), as we had to show. See [11, Lemma 4.3]
for an alternative proof.

8.3. Existence of invariant even unimodular lattices. We are now ready to
prove our criterion.
Proof of Theorem 8.1. It is clear that (i) and (ii) are necessary, and Proposition 8.6
shows that also (iii) is necessary. So we are left with showing that (i)–(iii) imply
the existence of a G-stable even unimodular lattice.
This follows from a more or less straightforward calculation, based on [4, § 5].
We give the argument in case disc b = 1. The case disc b = −3 is similar (and will
not be used in the proof of Theorem A).
Let Λ0 be a G-stable unimodular lattice. If Λ0 is even, then we are done. If not,
then by Propositions 8.2 and 8.3, we may assume without loss of generality that
Λ0 = H n−1 ⊕ U,

18

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

where U is the rank 2 module Z2 ⊕ Z2 equipped with the odd unimodular form


1 0
bU :=
.
0 −1
If (e, f ) denotes the standard basis of U , then Q2 ⊗Λ0 contains the even unimodular
lattices
e−f
i,
Λ1 = H n−1 ⊕ he + f,
2
and
e+f
Λ2 = H n−1 ⊕ he − f,
i,
2
of discriminant 1.
Note that the lattice
Λ := {x ∈ Λ0 | b(x, x) ∈ 2Z2 } = H n−1 ⊕ he + f, e − f i
is preserved by SO(Λ0 ). There are precisely three unimodular lattices containing
Λ: the odd lattice Λ0 , and the even lattices Λ1 and Λ2 . It follows that the group
SO(Λ0 ) acts on the set {Λ1 , Λ2 }.
By [11, Lemma 4.4] the action on this two-element set is given by the homomorphism
SO(Λ0 ) → Z/2Z, α 7→ v2 (δ(α)) mod 2,
which shows that under the hypothesis of the theorem, Λ1 and Λ2 are indeed Gstable. (The argument in loc. cit. works for n > 1. For n = 1, a direct computation
shows that for every α ∈ SO(Λ0 ) we have αΛ1 = Λ1 and v2 (δ(α)) ≡ 0).

Remark 8.7. It is likely that a result similar to Theorem 8.1 holds over unramified
extensions of Q2 . However, if K is a ramified extension of Q2 , then the classification
of unimodular OK -lattices becomes more complicated (see [16, § 93]), and it is not
clear if one should expect such a simple criterion.
9. Even unimodular lattices in Z-bilinear forms over Q2
Using Theorem 8.1, we can now refine Proposition 7.2 to obtain the existence of
an invariant even unimodular lattice.
As in § 7, let E0 be an étale Q2 -algebra of rank n, let E be an étale E0 -algebra,
free of rank 2 over E0 . Denote by σ the involution of E fixing E0 . Let α ∈ E ×
satisfy ασ(α) = 1, and denote by S the characteristic polynomial of α over Q2 .
Proposition 9.1. Assume that S(1) and S(−1) are non-zero, that v2 (S(1)) and
× 2
v2 (S(−1)) are even, and that the class of (−1)n S(1)S(−1) in Q×
2 /(Q2 ) lies in
{1, −3}. Then there exists a λ ∈ µ(E, σ) and an even unimodular Z2 -lattice Λ ⊂
(E, bλ ) stable under α.
Proof. We will use Theorem 8.1. By Proposition 7.2, for every λ ∈ µ(E, σ) the
Z-bilinear form (E, bλ , ̺α ) over Q2 satisfies (i). Also, by the Zassenhaus formula,
the condition on v2 (S(−1)) guarantees that it satisfies (iii).
× 2
By [10, Prop. A.3] the bilinear form (E, bλ ) has discriminant 1 or −3 in Q×
2 /(Q2 ) .
n
If E = E0 × E0 . Then (E, bλ ) is isomorphic to the hyperbolic form H ⊗ Q2 , and
hence contains an even unimodular lattice H n and satisfies (ii). If E ∼
6 E0 × E0 .
=
then by Proposition 5.4 the map
µ(E, σ) → (Br Q2 )[2], λ 7→ ǫ(E, bλ )

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

19

is surjective, and hence by Corollary 8.4 may choose λ such that (E, bλ , ̺α ) contains
an even unimodular lattice, hence satisfies (ii). We conclude that for suitable λ, the
Z-bilinear form (E, bλ , ̺α ) over Q2 satisfies (i)–(iii) in Theorem 8.1, and therefore
contains an even unimodular invariant lattice.

10. Unimodular lattices in Z-bilinear forms over Q
Proof of Theorem A. Assume given integers r and s satisfying r ≡ s mod 8, a monic
irreducible P ∈ Z[t], and a power S = P N of degree r + s satisfying (C1), (C2), and
(C3). If P is linear then S = (t ± 1)r+s and the theorem holds for trivial reasons.
So from now on we assume that the degree of P is at least 2.
The number fields E0 and E. Note that (C1) implies that also P is reciprocal.
Consider the field F := Q[t]/(P ), and let α ∈ F be the image of t. Denote by σ the
involution of F that maps α to 1/α. Since deg P ≥ 2, this involution is non-trivial.
Denote by F0 the fixed field of σF . Choose a field extension E0 of F0 of degree
N , linearly disjoint from F . Then E := E0 ⊗F0 F is a field, and the characteristic
polynomial of α ∈ E is S. Denote by σ the canonical extension of σF to E.
In everything what follows, v will denote a place of Q and w a place of E0 . We
will write Ew for the quadratic E0,w -algebra E ⊗E0 E0,w .
Infinite places. Let w be an infinite place of E0 and denote by αw the image of α
×
in Ew
. Then one of the following three hold:
(i) E0,w = R, Ew = R × R, and αw = (β, 1/β) with β ∈ R× and |β| 6= 1,
(ii) E0,w = C, Ew = C × C, and αw = (β, 1/β) with β ∈ C× \ R× and |β| 6= 1,
(iii) E0,w = R, Ew = C, and |αw | = 1.
In the first and second case µ(Ew , σ) is trivial, and the bilinear form (Ew , bλ ) over
×
R has signature (1, 1) resp. (2, 2) for all λ ∈ E0,w
. In the third case µ(Ew , σ) = {±1}
and (Ew , bλ ) has signature (2, 0) for λ = 1 and (0, 2) for λ = −1.
As in the introduction to this paper, denote the number of roots z of S with
|z| > 1 by m = m(S). Define
d+ :=

r−m
,
2

d− :=

s−m
.
2

Condition (C2) guarantees that these are non-negative integers. Note that there
are exactly d+ + d− = (r + s − 2m)/2 infinite places of the third type in E0 . Choose
λ∞ = (λw )w|∞ in
Y
µ(Ew , σ)
µ(R ⊗ E, σ) =
w|∞

with d+ components 1 and d− components −1 at places w of the third type. Then
(R ⊗ E, bλ∞ ) has signature (r, s).
Finite places. For every prime number p choose λp = (λw )w|p in
Y
µ(Ew , σ)
µ(Qp ⊗ E, σ) =
w|p

such that the bilinear form (Qp ⊗ E, bλp ) over Qp contains an even unimodular
α-stable Zp -lattice. Condition (C3) and Propositions 7.1 and 9.1 guarantee that
this is possible. Note that for all but finitely many w we have λw = 1 in µ(Ew , σ).

20

EVA BAYER-FLUCKIGER AND LENNY TAELMAN

Comparison with a standard lattice. Let Λr,s be an even unimodular lattice of
signature (r, s). The congruence s ≡ r mod 8 implies disc Λr,s = 1. We claim that
for every place v of Q we have
(Qv ⊗ E, bλ ) ∼
= Qv ⊗ Λr,s ,
v

as bilinear forms over Qv . For the infinite place this is clear. For v = vp , note that
both forms contain an even unimodular lattice, and that by [10, Prop. A.3] they
× 2
have discrimimant 1 in Q×
p /(Qp ) . This implies that they must be isomorphic.
For p = 2 this follows from Proposition 8.3, and for p 6= 2 from [16, 92:1].
Local-gobal obstruction. For every place v of Q, we now have in Br Qv the following
three elements:
(i) ǫv (Qv ⊗ E, bλv ) = ǫv (Λr,s ),
(ii) ǫv (Qv ⊗ E,
Pb1 ),
(iii) β(λv ) := w|v NmE0,w /Qv βw (λw ),
where βw is the map µ(Ew , σ) → Br E0,w of Lemma 5.3. By Proposition 5.4 these
Brauer classes are related by
ǫv (Λr,s ) = ǫv (Qv ⊗ E, b1 ) + β(λv ).
Since Λr,s and b1 are global objects, we have
X
X
invv ǫv (Λr,s ) = 0,
invv ǫv (Qv ⊗ E, b1 ) = 0
v

v

in Q/Z, and therefore also

P

v

invv β(λv ) = 0. Using the commutative square

(Br E0,w )

invw

Q/Z
id

Nm

(Br Qv )

invv

Q/Z

P

we conclude that w θw (λw ) = 0. By Theorem 5.7 there exists a λ in µ(E, σ)
specialising to the chosen λw ’s. The bilinear form (E, bλ ) has signature (r, s), and
(Qp ⊗ E, bλ ) contains an α-stable even unimodular Zp -lattice Λp for all p. For all
but finitely many p we may take Λp = Zp ⊗ OE , and then
Λ := {x ∈ E | x ∈ Λp for all p}
is an α-stable even unimodular Z-lattice in (E, bλ ).



References
[1] Bayer-Fluckiger, E. — Definite unimodular lattices having an automorphism of given
characteristic polynomial. Comment. Math. Helv. 59 (1984), 509–538.
[2] Bayer-Fluckiger, E. — Réseaux unimodulaires. Sém. Théor. Nombres Bordeaux (2) 1
(1989), no. 1, 189–196.
[3] Bayer-Fluckiger, E. — Determinants of integral ideal lattices and automorphisms of given
characteristic polynomial. J. Algebra 257 (2002), 215–221.
[4] Belolipetsky, M & Gan, W.T. — The mass of unimodular lattices. J. Number Theory 114
(2005), no. 2, 221–237.
[5] Bruhat, F. & Tits, J. — Schémas en groupes et immeubles des groupes classiques sur un
corps local. Bull. Soc. Math. France 112 (1984), 259–301.
[6] Bruhat, F. & Tits, J. — Schémas en groupes et immeubles des groupes classiques sur un
corps local. II. Groupes unitaires. Bull. Soc. Math. France 115 (1987), 141–195.
[7] Brusamarello, R. & Chuard-Koulmann, P. & Morales, J. — Orthogonal groups containing a given maximal torus. J. Algebra 266 (2003), no. 1, 87–101.

UNIMODULAR LATTICES AND EQUIVARIANT WITT GROUPS

21

[8] Conrad, B. — Reductive group schemes, in Autour des schémas en groupes. Vol. I, 93–444,
Panor. Synthèses, 42/43, Soc. Math. France, Paris, 2014.
[9] Goldman, O. & Iwahori, N. — The space of p-adic norms. Acta Math. 109 (1963), 137–177.
[10] Gross, B.H. & McMullen, C.T. — Automorphisms of even unimodular lattices and unramified Salem numbers. J. Algebra 257 (2002), 265–290.
[11] Günther, A. & Nebe, G. — Automorphisms of doubly even self-dual binary codes. Bull.
Lond. Math. Soc. 41 (2009), no. 5, 769–778.
[12] Kneser, M. — Quadratische Formen. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002.
[13] Knus, M.-A. — Quadratic and Hermitian forms over rings. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, 294. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.
[14] McMullen, C.T. — Dynamics on K3 surfaces: Salem numbers and Siegel disks. J. Reine
Angew. Math. 545 (2002), 201–233.
[15] Nikulin, V.V. — Integer symmetric bilinear forms and some of their geometric applications.
Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 43 (1979), 111–177.
[16] O’Meara, O.T. — Introduction to quadratic forms. Third Corrected Printing. Die
Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 117. Springer-Verlag, New YorkHeidelberg, 1973.
[17] Scharlau, W. — Quadratic and Hermitian forms. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, 270. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
[18] Serre, J.P. — Corps locaux. Publications de l’Institut de Mathmatique de l’Université de
Nancago, VIII Actualités Sci. Indust., No. 1296. Hermann, Paris, 1962.
[19] Serre, J.P. — On the mod p reduction of orthogonal representations. Preprint (2017).
arXiv:1708.00046.
[20] Springer, T.A. — Quadratic forms over fields with a discrete valuation. I. Equivalence
classes of definite forms. Indag. Math. 17 (1955), 352–362.
[21] Springer, T.A. — On the equivalence of quadratic forms. Indag. Math. 21 (1959), 241–253.
[22] Stoltzfus, N.W. — Unraveling the integral knot concordance group. Mem. Amer. Math.
Soc. 12 (1977), no. 192.
[23] Thompson, J.G. — Bilinear forms in characteristic p and the Frobenius-Schur indicator, in
Group theory, Beijing 1984, 221–230, Lecture Notes in Math., 1185, Springer, Berlin, 1986.
[24] Zassenhaus, H. — On the spinor norm. Arch. Math. 13 (1962), 434–451.

