arXiv:1803.08620v1 [math.AC] 23 Mar 2018

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION
p-SUBGROUPS OF SYMMETRIC GROUPS
SOPHIE KRIZ

Abstract. We give a positive solution to Noether’s rationality
problem for certain index p subgroups of the p-Sylow subgoups of
symmetric groups.

1. Introduction
Let G be a finite group acting linearly on an affine space over C.
Emmy Noether [20] asked whether the quotient variety is always rational. A counterexample was found by Saltman [22] (see also Bogomolov
[2]), using an invariant called the unramified Brauer group. In a different form, this invariant was first discovered by Artin and Mumford [1]
who used it to give a different example of unirational varieties which are
not rational. (For a smooth projective variety over C, the unramified
Brauer group is isomorphic to the torsion in its third singular cohomology group.) Colliot-Thélène and Ojanguren [12] and Peyre [21] found
more examples of unirational non-rational varieties using a more general invariant called unramified cohomology. The question for which
groups G Noether’s problem has a positive solution is still widely open
except in some special cases. For abelian groups, a positive solution
was given by Fischer [13]. For groups of order pn , n ≤ 4, it was solved
positively by Chu and Kang [7]. It is proved in [17], Theorem 1.4,
that for p-Sylow subgroups of symmetric groups, Noether’s problem
also has a positive solution (see [5, 4]), and some other cases are also
known [19, 8, 9, 10, 11]. The most famous case of Noether’s problem
is G = An (the rationality of the discriminant variety). It is known to
be true for n ≤ 5 (the most interesting case is Maeda’s Theorem [19]
for n = 5), but is still open for n ≥ 6. It was proved by Bogomolov
and Petrov [6] that unramified cohomology is 0 in this case.
In this note, we consider Noether’s problem for a class of index p subgroups of p-Sylow subgroups of symmetric groups. For our purposes,
it is convenient to choose certain particular generators of those subgroups. A p-Sylow subgroup of the symmetric group Σn on {1, . . . , n}
has generators σi,s which cyclically permute p consecutive blocks of pi
1

2

SOPHIE KRIZ

consecutive numbers 1, . . . , n, starting with a number congruent to 1
−1
mod pi+1 . The group Hn,p is the index p subgroup generated by σ0,s σ0,s
′
and σi,s for i > 0. For more detail on these groups, see Section 2 below.
The group H8,3 is the 3-Sylow subgroup of the group of positions of
the corners of Rubik’s cube. Because of this, we call Hn,p the orientation p-subgroup of Σn .
The following is our main theorem.
Theorem 1. For a field F of characteristic 0 containing p’th roots of
unity, let Hn,p act on
F (x1 , . . . , xn )
by permuting the xi ’s. Then for every prime p ≥ 2, the field of fixed
points F (x1 , . . . , xn )Hn,p is rational over F .
Note that Hn,2 is a 2-Sylow subgroup of the alternating group An .
Therefore, one obtains as a corollary a simple proof of the result of
Bogomolov and Petrov [6]:
k
Theorem 2. ([6]) We have Hnr
(C(a1 , . . . , an )An , Z/ℓ) = 0.

For p = 2, there is an elementary proof of Theorem 1 based on
the fact by letting the commuting elements σ1,s act on the (twisted)
∗
torus corresponding to the lattice Dm
(dual to the root lattice of type
Dm algebraic groups), the quotient variety is birationally equivalent
to the product of an affine space with another such (twisted) torus
equivariantly with respect to the permutations σi,s for i > 1. This, in
turn, is basically due to the simple fact that Σ2 = Z/2. (See Comment
below the proof of Lemma 8 in Section 3 below.) Since this proof is
short and easy, we present it first in Section 3 below.
For p > 2, the proof of Theorem 1 is given in Section 4. It is based
on the following result (used in the proof of Lemma 11 in Section 4
below):
Lemma 3. If F contains p’th roots of unity, and on F (x1 , . . . , xp ),
Z/p acts by
(1)

x1 7→ x2 7→ . . . xp 7→ x1 ,

then F (x1 , . . . , xp )Z/p is rational over F (w) where w denotes the product
x1 · · · · · xp .
This Lemma is a corollary of the following result of Hajja:
Lemma 4. ([15], Lemma 2 (iv), p.244) Let p be an odd prime number,
k a field of characteristic not equal to p. Assume that k contains a

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

3

primitive p’th root of unity. If a ∈ k × , and σ acts on the rational
function field k(x1 , . . . , xp−1 ) by
σ : x1 7→ x2 7→ · · · 7→ xp−1 7→ a/(x1 . . . xp−1 ),

then the fixed field k(x1 , . . . , xp−1 )hσi is rational over k.

This implies Lemma 3 by setting k = F (w) (considered as a subfield
of F (x1 , . . . , xp )), a = w.
For example for p = 3, consider the cubic equation
x3 + bx2 + cx + w = 0.
If we denote by D the discriminant
D = 18bcw − 4b3 w + b2 c2 − 4c3 − 27w 2,
√
Lemma 3 says that F (b, c, w)( D) is rational over F (w). To make
the proof of Theorem 1 self-contained, we give a proof of Lemma 3 in
Section 4 below.
We also note that there is an easy analogue of Theorem 1 for a larger
group. Consider the homomorphism
φ : Σn ≀ Z/p → Z/p

given on the normal subgroup (Z/p)n by adding the coordinates of
each element, and trivial on the subgroup Σn which acts on (Z/p)n by
permutation of factors. Explicitly, representing an element of Σn ≀ Z/p
as a tuple (a1 , . . . , an ; τ ) where ai ∈ Z/p, τ ∈ Σn , we put
φ(a1 , . . . , an ; τ ) :=

n
X

ai .

i=1

Let Kn,p = Ker(φ). Then Hnp,p is a p-Sylow subgroup of Kn,p .
Theorem 5. For all n and p, the field C(x1 , . . . , xnp )Kn,p where Kn,p
acts by permutation of variables is rational.
Acknowledgement: I am thankful to Professor M.C.Kang for helpful
advice on this paper.
2. Conventions and notation
The main purpose of this section is to explain in detail the construction of the groups Gn,p , Hn,p , and our notation for the generators.

4

SOPHIE KRIZ

Lemma 6. A p-Sylow subgroup Gn,p ⊂ Σn (the group of all permutations on {1, . . . , n}) is generated by permutations σi,s consisting of the
cycles
(s − 1)pi+1 + j 7→ (s − 1)pi+1 + pi + j 7→ · · · 7→ (s − 1)pi+1 + (p − 1)pi + j

7 (s − 1)pi+1 + j
→
for 1 ≤ j ≤ pi . (The remaining elements are fixed.) The parameters
i, s range over integers satisfying
n
(2)
1 ≤ s ≤ ⌊ i+1 ⌋, 0 ≤ i ≤ ⌊logp (n)⌋ − 1.
p

Proof. It is well known that for n = ℓ0 + ℓ1 p + · · · + ℓm pm , where
0 ≤ ℓi ≤ p − 1 are integers and we have m = ⌊logp (n)⌋ (this implies
ℓm > 0), a p-Sylow subgroup of Σn is isomorphic to
m−1
Y
i=0

(Z/p ≀ · · · ≀ Z/p)ℓi+1 .
{z
}
|
i+1

Now, by definition, the generators
(3)

σm−k,1 , . . . , σm−k,pk−1 , k = 1, . . . , m

generate a group isomorphic to Gpm ,p and commute with all the other
generators. We will show that
(4)
Gpm ,p ∼
= Z/p ≀ · · · ≀ Z/p .
|
{z
}
m

Therefore, we obtain an isomorphism
Gn,p ∼
= (Z/p ≀ · · · ≀ Z/p) × Gn−pm ,p ,
|
{z
}
m

by sending the generators (3) to the generators of the first factor, and
the remaining generators by
σm−k,s 7→ σm−k,s−pk−1 ,

for s > pk−1 . Then our statement follows by induction on n.
To show (4), recall that for a permutation group G on ℓ elements
and any group H, the wreath product G ≀ H is defined as the semidirect
product G ⋉ (H ℓ ) where the action of G on H ℓ is by permutation of
factors. We can prove (4) by induction on m. The statement is obvious
for m = 1. Now by definition, the generators
(5)

σm−k,1 , . . . , σm−k,pk−1 , k = 2, . . . , m

generate a group isomorphic to
(6)

(Gpm−1 ,p )p .

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

5

Now for an element (α1 , . . . , αp ) ∈ (Gpm−1 ,p )p presented in the generators (5), we have
−1
σm−1,1 · (α1 , . . . , αp ) · σm−1,1
= (αp , α1 . . . , αp−1 ).

Additionally, for i, j ∈ {0, . . . , p−1}, (α1 , . . . , αp ), (β1 , . . . , βp ) ∈ Gpm−1 ,p ,
we clearly have
j
i
σm−1,1
· (α1 , . . . , αp ) = σm−1,1
· (β1 , . . . , βp )

if and only if i = j and (α1 , . . . , αp ) = (β1 , . . . , βp ), thus gving an
isomorphism
Gpm ,p ∼
= Z/p ≀ Gpm−1 ,p .
If (4) is true with m replaced by m−1, then by the induction hypothesis,
Gpm−1 ,p is isomorphic to
(Z/p ≀ · · · ≀ Z/p),
|
{z
}
m−1

thus giving our statement.



Example: Let n = 1 + 22 + 23 = 13, p = 2. Then
0 ≤ i ≤ 2 = ⌊log2 (13)⌋ − 1.
⌋. For i = 1, we have 1 ≤ s ≤
For i = 0, we have 1 ≤ s ≤ 6 = ⌊ 13
2
⌋,
and
for
i
=
2,
we
have
1
≤
s ≤ 1 = ⌊ 13
⌋. Hence, there are
3 = ⌊ 13
4
8
6 + 3 + 1 = 10 generators of the form σi,s . For example, for σ0,1 , there
is only j = 1, and the only cycle is
1 7→ 2 7→ 1.
The generators of G13,2 can be visualised as follows.

6

SOPHIE KRIZ

σ0,1
σ0,2
σ0,3
σ0,4
σ0,5
σ0,6
σ1,1
σ1,2
σ1,3
σ2,1

Here σ0,1 , σ0,2 , σ0,3 , σ0,4 , σ1,1 , σ1,2 , σ2,1 generate a copy of Z/2≀Z/2≀Z/2
and σ0,5 , σ0,6 , σ1,3 generate a copy of Z/2 ≀ Z/2.
Now consider the normal subgroup Hn,p ⊂ Gn,p generated by all the
−1
n
′
elements σ0,s σ0,s
′ where 1 ≤ s, s ≤ ⌊ ⌋, and σi,s where (2) holds and
p
i ≥ 1.
n

Lemma 7. Letting G⌊n/p⌋,p act on (Z/p)⌊ p ⌋ by permutation of factors,
the group Hn,p is isomorphic to a semidirect product of G⌊ np ⌋,p with
n

the subgroup of (Z/p)⌊ p ⌋ of elements whose coordinates add up to 0.
Additionally, Hn,p is an index p subgroup of Gn,p .
Proof. The subgroup A of Gn,p generated by σ0,i is a normal subgroup isomorphic to (Z/p)⌊n/p⌋ . Further, the quotient is isomorphic
to G⌊n/p⌋,p (acting, instead of on single elements, on p-tuples of consecutive elements of {1, . . . , p⌊n/p⌋}, each starting with a number 1
mod p). Thus, the short exact sequence
1 → A ⊳ Gn,p → G⌊n/p⌋,p → 1
splits, and hence is a semidirect product. Now define a homomorphism
h : A = (Z/p)⌊n/p⌋ → Z/p by adding the coordinates (in the category of
abelian groups, this is the “codiagonal”). If we denote, for α ∈ G⌊n/p⌋,p
and q ∈ A, by q α the image of q under the automorphism of A given
by α, then we have
h(q α ) = h(q).

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

7

Therefore, the homomorphism h extends uniquely to a homomorphism
e
h : Gn,p → Z/p which is trivial on the subgroup G⌊n/p⌋,p . The group
Hn,p is, by definition, the kernel of this homomorphism, which gives us
a diagram
1

1




1
/

Ker(h)
/

Ker(e
h)

G⌊n/p⌋,p
/

/

1

∼
=



1
/




A

Gn,p
/

/

G⌊n/p⌋,p
/

1

e
h

h



∼
=

Z/p

/



Z/p




1

1

The columns are exact and the middle row is exact, hence so is the top
row. Further, the middle row splits, and the composition of e
h with the
splitting is 0. Thus, the splitting lifts to the top row.

Comment: It follows from our proof of Lemma 6 that an element of
Gn,p can be uniquely written as a product (in any fixed order) of powers
r(i,s)
σi,s with r(i, s) ∈ {0, . . . , p − 1}, where i, s are as in (2). Therefore,
the group order of Gn,p is p to the power equal to the number of pairs
of integers (i, s) satisfying (2), which is easily checked (by an induction
mimicking that in the proof of Lemma 6) to be the maximum power
of p dividing n!. Similarly, it follows from our proof of Lemma 7 that
an element of the group Hn,p can be written uniquely as a product (in
r(i,s)
any fixed order) of powers σi,s with r(i, s) ∈ {0, . . . , p − 1}, where i, s
are as in (2) such that
⌊n/p⌋

X
s=1

r(0, s) ≡ 0 mod p.

This also shows that |Hn,p| = |Gn,p |/p.
3. The case p = 2.
In this section, we prove Theorem 1 for p = 2, and Theorem 2.

8

SOPHIE KRIZ

Proof of Theorem 1 for p = 2: When n is odd, the variable xn is fixed
by Hn,2, so we can replace F by F (xn ) and n by n−1. Thus, we may assume n = 2m is even. We have F (x1 , . . . , xn ) = F (z1 , . . . , zm , t1 , . . . , tm )
zi = x2i−1 + x2i
ti = x2i−1 − x2i

1 ≤ i ≤ m.
Let Jn ⊳Hn,2 be the subgroup generated by the pairs of elements σ0,s σ0,s′ ,
1 ≤ s, s′ ≤ m. Then
F (x1 , . . . , xn )Jn = F (z1 , . . . , zm , t21 , . . . , t2m−1 , t1 t2 · · · tm ).

The factor group Hn,2 /Jn is generated by σi,s where i ≥ 1 and formula
(2) holds. Hence, it is isomorphic to the 2-Sylow subgroup Gm,2 ⊆ Σm
by the isomorphism σi,s 7→ σi−1,s ∈ Gm,2 . The group Gm,2 acts on the
zi ’s and ti ’s by permutation. Therefore we have reduced the proof to
the following statement.

Lemma 8. Let F be a field of characteristic 0 and let a2 ∈ F (in other
words, a is a square root of an element of F ). Let E be the subfield of
(7)

F [a](t1 , . . . , tk , z1,1 , . . . , zk,1 , . . . , z1,ℓ , . . . , zk,ℓ )

generated by the (algebraically independent) elements
t1 · · · tk a, t21 , t22 , . . . , t2k−1 ,
z1,1 , z2,1 , . . . , zk,1 ,
..
.
z1,ℓ , z2,ℓ , . . . , zk,ℓ
and let Gk,2 act on E by restriction of an action of Σk on (7) where Σk
acts trivially on F [a], and acts by permuting the indexes i in the ti ’s
and the zi,j ’s for a fixed j. Then
E Gk,2
is rational over F [a].
Comment: The additional variables zi,j , and the element a, are introduced in order to enable a proof by induction.
Proof. Induction on k. If k = 1, E Gk,2 = E. If k > 1 is odd, Gk,2 =
Gk−1,2. Let F ′ = F (t2k , zk,1 , . . . , zk,ℓ ), a′ = tk a, t′i = ti for i < k, and zi,j
for i < k, j = 1, . . . , ℓ. (Note that F ′ [a′ ] is rational over F [a].) This
reduces the statement for k to the statement for k − 1. Thus, we may

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

9

assume k = 2m is even. Let Γk ⊳ Gk,2 be the subgroup generated by
the elements, σ0,s , 1 ≤ s ≤ k. Then
Gk,2 /Γk ∼
= Gm,2 .
We have
E Gk,2 = (E Γk )Gk,2 /Γk .
Further,
(8)
for

E Γk = F [a](u1 u2 · · · um a, u21 , u22 , . . . , u2m−1 ,
v1 , v2 , . . . , vm , w1,j , w2,j , . . . , wm,j ,
s1,j , s2,j , . . . , sm,j | j = 1, . . . , ℓ)

u1 = t1 t2 , u2 = t3 t4 , . . . , um = t2m−1 t2m ,
v1 = t21 + t22 , v2 = t23 + t24 , . . . , vm = t22m−1 + t22m ,
w1,j = z1,j + z2,j , w2,j = z3,j + z4,j , . . . , wm,j = z2m−1,j + z2m,j ,
s1,j = (z1,j − z2,j )(t21 − t22 ), . . . , sm,j = (z2m−1,j − z2m,j )(t22m−1 − t22m ).
In fact, clearly we have ⊇ in (8). On the other hand, we see that the
field E is an extension of the right hand side of (8) of degree ≤ 2m .
(This is because we may use quadratic equations to solve for t22i−1 , t22i
using ui , vi , i = 1, . . . m, and then the zi,j ’s are recovered from linear
equations.) Thus, equality in (8) follows from Galois theory.
Setting
t′i = ui
′
zi,j
= wi,j
′
zi,j+n = si,j
′
zi,2n+1
= vi ,
i = 1, . . . , ℓ reduces the statement to the induction hypothesis with k
replaced by m.


Comment: The above proof came from the following idea: The Dk
lattice (which is the root lattice of the type Dk Lie algebra, but that
fact is of no consequence of us) consists of k-tuples of integers with
an even sum. Note that V = Spec((t1 · · · tk )−1 R) where R is the subring of k-tuples of integers whose sum is even. F [t1 , . . . , tk ] generated by t1 · · · tk , t21 , t22 , . . . , t2k−1 can be identified with the torus over
F corresponding to the dual lattice Dk∗ of Dk . The variety Va =
Spec((t1 · · · tk )−1 Ra ) where Ra is the subring of F [a][t1 , . . . , tk ] generated by t1 · · · tk a, t21 , t22 , . . . , t2k−1 is a principal homogeneous space of V .
The induction is based on the fact that taking the quotient of Va under

10

SOPHIE KRIZ

the action of the abelian group Γk generated by σ0,s , 1 ≤ s ≤ ⌊k/2⌋,
with the generators acting by permutation of coordinates (and trivially
on Spec(F [a])), is birationally equivalent to a product of an affine space
over F with a variety of the same kind with k replaced by ⌊k/2⌋. While
we are not primarily interested in the case when a ∈
/ F , considering
this case is forced by the induction in the case of numbers k other than
powers of 2.
Proof of Theorem 2: Let K be a function field over C and let R ⊂ K
be a DVR with field of fractions K. (Then we automatically have
C ⊆ R, since the valuation of any element of C× is infinitely divisible,
and hence is 0 in Z.) For any ℓ ∈ N, we have a residue homomorphism
(9)

∂R : H n (K, Z/ℓ) → H n−1 (kR , Z/ℓ)

where kR is the residue field of R. Colliot-Thélène and Ojanguren [12]
define unramified cohomology by
\
n
Hnr
(K, Z/ℓ) =
Ker(∂R ).
R

They prove that unramified cohomology of rational fields vanishes in
degrees ≥ 1.
For a finite extension L ⊇ K and a DVR S with fraction field L
containing R and residue field k ′ , we have a commutative diagram (see
[14], Section 8)
H n (K, Z/ℓ)

∂R

/

H n−1 (k, Z/ℓ)

res

e·res



H n (L, Z/ℓ)

∂S

/



H n−1 (k ′ , Z/ℓ)

where e is the ramification index and res is the restriction map. This
makes unramified cohomology functorial with respect to restriction:
(10)

n
n
res : Hnr
(K, Z/ℓ) → Hnr
(L, Z/ℓ).

Now consider the norm (corestriction)
N : H n (L, Z/ℓ) → H n (K, Z/ℓ).
We have
N ◦ res = [L : K],

so we have proved the following

n
n
Lemma 9. If Hnr
(L, Z/ℓ) = 0, then [L : K] annihilates Hnr
(K, Z/ℓ).

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

11

Now consider K = E G where G is a finite group and E is a field of
rational functions where G acts on the variables by permutations. If a
group is annihilated by all primes, it is 0. Thus, we have proved
n
Lemma 10. If Hnr
(E Gp , Z/ℓ) = 0 for all p-Sylow subgroups of G, then
n
Hnr
(E G , Z/ℓ) = 0.

In the case when G = An , the assumption of Lemma 10 for p = 2
is verified by Theorem 1. The p-Sylow subgroup of An for p odd is
a p-Sylow subgroup Gn,p of Σn . In this case, it is well known that
C(x1 , . . . , xn )Gn,p is rational. (For a proof of this fact, see [17]. Briefly,
taking the Fischer [13] generators of the fixed field of C(x1 , . . . , xn )
under the abelian subgroup generated by σ0,s , the permutations σi,s
for i ≥ 1 act on them also by permutation, while generating Gm,p
for some m < n. This gives a proof by induction.) This verifies the
assumption of Lemma 10 for odd primes p, and hence concludes the
proof of Theorem 2.


4. The case p > 2.
In this section, we shall prove Theorem 1 for p > 2 and Theorem
5. We include a proof of Lemma 3, to make our proof of Theorem 1
self-contained.
Proof of Lemma 3: Denote the primitive pth root of unity in F by ζp .
We will work in the field
1

L = F (x1 , . . . , xp , w p ).
We have Z/p × Z/p = Z/p{g1 , g2 } acting on L where g1 acts by (1)
1
(and trivially on w p ) and g2 acts trivially on xi , i = 1, . . . , p and
(11)

1

1

g2 (w p ) = (ζp )−1 w p .

We have
K = LZ/p{g1 ,g2 } .
Let
x̄i =
Then

xi
1

wp

.
1

L = F (x¯1 , . . . , x¯p , w p )
and g1 acts by
x¯1 7→ x¯2 7→ . . . x¯p 7→ x¯1 ,

12

SOPHIE KRIZ

while
x¯1 · · · · · x¯p = 1.
We will use the method of Chu and Kang [7] to describe LZ/p{g1 } . Let
ui = 1 + ζpi x¯1 + ζp2i x̄i x¯2 + · · · + ζpi(p−1) x¯1 · · · · · x̄p−1 ,

i = 0, . . . , p − 1. Then

g1 (ui ) = ζp−i

ui
.
x¯1

Therefore,
1

−1 2 −1
−1 2 −1
−1 2
−1
LZ/p{g1 } = F (w p )(up0 u−p
1 , u0 u1 u2 , u1 u2 u3 , . . . , up−3 up−2 up−1 ).

Let
Note that
Therefore,

2
−1
vi = u−1
i ui+1 ui+2 , i = 0, . . . , p − 2.
p
1
2
vp−2
vp−3
· · · · · v0p−1 = u−p
0 u1 .
1

LZ/p{g1 } = F (w p )(v0 , . . . , vp−2)
where g2 acts by (11) and
1
v0 7→ v1 7→ · · · 7→ vp−2 7→
7 v0 .
→
v0 v1 · · · · · vp−2

Let

Then

z = 1 + v0 + v0 v1 + · · · + v0 · · · · · vp−2 .

1
v0 · · · · · vp−3
1 v0 v0 v1
,...,
)
LZ/p{g1 } = F (w p )( , ,
z z z
z
while g2 acts by (11) and
1
v0 v0 v1
7→ ,
7→ . . .
z
z z
1 v0 v0 v1
v0 · · · · · vp−3
v0 · · · · · vp−3
7→ 1 − ( +
+
+···+
) 7→
7→
z
z
z
z
z
1
Since Z/p{g2 } acts faithfully on F (w p ), by Theorem 1 of Hajja
Kang [16], there exist z¯1 , . . . , z̄p−1 ∈ LZ/p{g1 } such that

1
.
z
and

1

LZ/p{g1 } = F (w p )(z¯1 , z¯2 , . . . , z̄p−1 )
and
g2 (z¯i ) = z¯i .
Therefore,
K = F (w)(z¯1 , z¯2 , . . . , z̄p−1 ).


NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

13

Using Lemma 3, we now prove the following
Lemma 11. Let F be a field of characteristic 0 and let ζp ∈ F, ap ∈ F .
Let E = F (t1 · · · · · tk a, tp1 , tp2 , . . . , tpk−1 ) where Gk,p acts on t1 , . . . , tk by
permutation. Then
E Gk,p
is rational over F .
Proof. Induction on k. If k < p, E Gk,p = E. If k = mp + i where
m > 0, i = 1, . . . , p − 1, Gk,p = Gmp,p . Let
F ′ = F (tpmp+1 , . . . , tpmp+i ),

a′ = tmp+1 · · · · · tmp+i a, t′i = ti for i = 1, . . . , mp. This reduces us from k
to mp. Thus assume k = mp. Let Γk ⊳ Gk,p be the subgroup generated
by the p-cycles σ0,s . Then
Gk,p /Γk ∼
= Gm,p .
We have
E Gk,p = (E Γk )Gk,p /Γk .
For i = 1, . . . , m, apply Lemma 3 to
x1 = tp(i−1)p+1 , . . . , xp = tpip .
Let
By Lemma 3,

ui = t(i−1)p+1 · · · · · tip .

F (tp(i−1)p+1 , . . . , tpip )Z/p{σ0,i } = F (upi , zi,1 , . . . , zi,p−1 ).
Therefore,
E Γk = F (u1 u2 · · · · · um a,
up1 , up2 , . . . , upm−1 ,
z1,1 , . . . , z1,p−1 ,
..
.
Now Gm,p
on

zm,1 , . . . , zm,p−1 ).
acts on the zi,j ’s by permutation of the i index and faithfully

K = F (u1 u2 · · · · · um a, up1 , . . . , upm−1 ).
By Theorem 1 of [16],
′
′
E Γk = K(z1,1
, . . . , z1,p−1
,
..
.
′
′
zm,1 , . . . , zm,p−1
)

14

SOPHIE KRIZ

′
where Gm,p fixes the generators zi,j
. Thus, our statement follows from
the induction hypothesis with F replaced by
′
′
F (z1,1
, . . . , z1,p−1
,

..
.
′
′
zm,1 , . . . , zm,p−1
).

Proof of Theorem 1 for p > 2: Let n = mp + i where m > 0, i =
0, . . . , p − 1. Let
(12)

tj = x(j−1)p+1 + ζp−1x(j−1)p+2 + · · · + ζp1−p xjp , j = 1, . . . m.

Then the action of Hn,p on F (x1 , . . . , xn ) restricts to an action on the
subfield
L = F (t1 , t2 , . . . , tm )
where σ0,k acts by tk 7→ ζp tk , and tj 7→ tj for j 6= k, k = 1, . . . , m. The
generators σℓ,s for ℓ > 0 act by permutation on the tk ’s.
Additionally,
(13)

F (x1 , . . . , xmp+i ) = L(xj | j = 1, . . . , n, p ∤ j)

and the action of Hn,p on the generators on the right hand side of (13) is
affine over L. By Theorem 1 of Hajja and Kang [16], F (x1 , . . . , xn )Hn,p
is rational over LHn,p . Thus, we may restrict attention to the action of
Hn,p on L. In particular, without loss of generality, i = 0 and n = mp.
−1
Now if we denote by Jn ✁ Hn,p the subgroup generated by σ0,s σ0,s
′ then
F (t1 , t2 , . . . , tm )Jn = F (t1 · · · · · tm , tp1 , . . . , tpm−1 ).
We have Hn,p /Jn ∼
= Gm,p , so our statement follows from Lemma 11
with a = 1.

Proof of Theorem 5: Similarly as in our proof of Theorem 1 for p > 2,
by Theorem 1 of Hajja and Kang [16], we may again instead consider
the action of Kn,p on the subfield L = C(t1 , . . . , tn ) where the tj ’s
are defined by (12). Then Σn acts by permutation, and σ0,i acts by
ti 7→ ζp ti , tj 7→ tj for j 6= i. Thus, we must prove that

(14)

C(tp1 , tp2 , . . . , tpn−1 , t1 · · · · · tn )Σn

is rational. However, (14) is the field of rational functions on the generators
σn (t1 , . . . , tn ),
p
σi (t1 , . . . , tpn ), i = 1, . . . , n − 1

NOETHER’S PROBLEM FOR ORIENTATION p-SUBGROUPS

where σi are the elementary symmetric polynomials.

15



References
[1] M.Artin, D.Mumford: Some elementary examples of unirational varieties
which are not rational, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 25, (1972) 75-95
[2] F.Bogomolov: The Brauer group of quotient spaces of linear representations,
Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 51 (1987), no. 3, 485-516
[3] F.Bogomolov: Stable cohomology of groups and algebraic varieties, (Russian.
Russian summary) Mat. Sb. 183 (1992), no. 5, 3–28; translation in Russian
Acad. Sci. Sb. Math. 76 (1993), no. 1, 121
[4] F.Bogomolov, C.Böhning: Isoclinism and stable cohomology of wreath products, Birational geometry, rational curves, and arithmetic, 57-76, Springer,
New York, 2013
[5] F.Bogomolov, C.Böhning: Stable cohomology of alternating groups, Cent. Eur.
J. Math. 12 (2014), no. 2, 212-228
[6] F.Bogomolov, T.Petrov: Unramified cohomology of alternating groups, Cent.
Eur. J. Math. 9 (2011), no. 5, 936-948
[7] H.Chu, M.C.Kang: Rationality of p-group actions, J. Algebra 237 (2001), no.
2, 673-690
[8] H. Chu, S.J.Hu, M.C. Kang: Noether’s problem for dihedral 2-groups, ]em
Comment. Math. Helv. 79 (2004), no. 1, 147-159
[9] H.Chu, S.J.Hu, M.C. Kang, B.E. Kunyavskii: Noether’s problem and the unramified Brauer group for groups of order 64, Int. Math. Res. Not. (2010), no.
12, 2329-2366
[10] H.Chu, S.J.Hu, M.C. Kang, Y.G.Prokhorov: Noether’s problem for groups of
order 32, J. Algebra 320 (2008), no. 7, 3022-3035
[11] H.Chu, A.Hoshi, S.J.Hu, M.C.Kang: Noether’s problem for groups of order
243, J. Algebra 442 (2015), 233-259
[12] J.-L. Colliot-Thelène, M.Ojanguren: Variétés unirationnelles non rationelles:
au-delà de l’exemple d’Artin et Mumford, Invent. Math. 97 (1989) 141-158
[13] E.Fischer: Die Isomorphie der Invariantenkörper der endlichen Abel’schen
Gruppen linearer Transformationen, Nachr. von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Math.-Phys. Klasse 1, 77-80 (1915)
[14] S.Garibaldi, A.Merkurjev, J.P.Serre: Cohomological invariants in Galois cohomology, AMS, 2003
[15] M.Hajja: A note on monomial automorphisms, J. Algebra 85 (1983) 243-250
[16] M.Hajja, M.C.Kang: Some actions of symmetric groups, J. Algebra 177 (1995),
no. 2, 511-535
[17] M.C.Kang, B.Wang, J.Zhou: Invariants of wreath products and subgroups of
S6 , Kyoto J. Math. 55 (2015) 257-279.
[18] G.Lewis: The integral cohomology rings of groups of order p3 , Trans. Amer.
Math. Soc. 132 (1968) 501-529
[19] T.Maeda: Noether’s problem for A5 , J. Algebra 125 (1989), no. 2, 418-430
[20] E.Noether: Gleichungen mit vorgeschriebener Gruppe, Math. Ann. 78 (1917),
no. 1, 221-229

16

SOPHIE KRIZ

[21] E.Peyre: Unramified cohomology of degree 3 and Noether’s problem, Invent.
Math. 171, 191-225
[22] D.Saltman: Noether’s problem over an algebraically closed field, Invent. Math.
77 (1984), no. 1, 71-84

