Analogs of Jacobian conditions for subrings
arXiv:1601.01508v1 [math.AC] 7 Jan 2016

Piotr Jedrzejewicz,
Janusz Zieliński
֒
Abstract
We present a generalization of the Jacobian Conjecture for m polynomials in n variables: f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where k is a field
of characteristic zero and m ∈ {1, . . . , n}. We express the generalized
Jacobian condition in terms of irreducible and square-free elements of
the subalgebra k[f1 , . . . , fm ]. We also discuss obtained properties in
a more general setting – for subrings of unique factorization domains.

Introduction
The Jacobian Conjecture asserts that if k is a ﬁeld of characteristic zero
and polynomials f1 , . . . , fn ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] satisfy the Jacobian condition
(1)

jac(f1 , . . . , fn ) ∈ k \ {0}

(where jac denotes the Jacobian determinant), then k[f1 , . . . , fn ] = k[x1 , . . . ,
xn ]. In terms of endomorphisms of the polynomial algebra k[x1 , . . . , xn ]: if
a k-endomorphism ϕ satisﬁes the Jacobian condition
(2)

jac(ϕ(x1 ), . . . , ϕ(xn )) ∈ k \ {0},

then ϕ is an automorphism. For more information on the Jacobian Conjecture we refer the reader to van den Essen’s book [7].
In Section 1 we present and discuss the following generalization of the Jacobian Conjecture, denoted by JC(m, n, k), where k is a ﬁeld of characteristic
zero, n is a positive integer, m ∈ {1, . . . , n} and jac denotes the Jacobian
determinant with respect to given variables:
Keywords: Jacobian Conjecture, irreducible element, square-free element.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 13F20, Secondary 14R15, 13N15.

1

”For arbitrary polynomials f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], if
(3)


m
gcd jacfx1i ,...,f
,
1
6
i
<
.
.
.
<
i
6
n
∈ k \ {0},
1
m
,...,xim
1

then k[f1 , . . . , fm ] is a ring of constants of some k-derivation of
k[x1 , . . . , xn ].”
This conjecture can be expressed in terms of polynomial homomorphisms
(and algebraic closedness) in the following way:
”For every k-homomorphism ϕ : k[x1 , . . . , xn ] → k[x1 , . . . , xm ], if

1 ),...,ϕ(xm )
gcd jacxϕ(x
, 1 6 i1 < . . . < im 6 n ∈ k \ {0},
i1 ,...,xim
then Im ϕ is algebraically closed in k[x1 , . . . , xn ].”
One of the authors obtained in [12] a characterization of endomorphisms
satisfying the Jacobian condition (2), where k is a ﬁeld of characteristic
zero, as mapping irreducible polynomials to square-free ones. De Bondt
and Yan proved in [4] that mapping square-free polynomials to square-free
ones is also equivalent to (2). We can express it in terms of polynomials
f1 = ϕ(x1 ), . . . , fn = ϕ(xn ): condition (1) holds if and only if all irreducible
(resp. all square-free) elements of the ring k[f1 , . . . , fn ] are square-free in the
ring k[x1 , . . . , xn ]. In Theorem 2.4 we generalize this fact for m polynomials
f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where m ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Namely, the generalized
Jacobian condition (3) is equivalent to each of the following ones:
(4)

Irr k[f1 , . . . , fm ] ⊂ Sqf k[x1 , . . . , xn ],
Sqf k[f1 , . . . , fm ] ⊂ Sqf k[x1 , . . . , xn ],

where Irr and Sqf denote the sets of irreducible and square-free elements of
the respective ring. This fact is a consequence of a multidimensional generalization of Freudenburg’s lemma ([8]) obtained in Theorem 2.3. A presentation of succeding generalizations of this lemma can be found in the
Intoduction to [13].
The above conjecture motivates us in Section 2 to consider the following
properties for a subring R of a unique factorization domain A:
(5)

Irr R ⊂ Sqf A,

Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A.

2

In Theorem 3.4, under some additional assumptions, we express the second
condition in a kind of factoriality:
(6)

”For every x ∈ A, y ∈ Sqf A, if x2 y ∈ R \ {0}, then x, y ∈ R.”

We call a subring R satisfying condition (6) square-factorially closed in A. In
Theorem 3.6 we show that, under the same assumptions, square-factorially
closed subrings are root closed.

1

A generalization of the Jacobian Conjecture for m polynomials in n variables

Let k be a ﬁeld of characteristic zero. By k[x1 , . . . , xn ] we denote the
k-algebra of polynomials in n variables.
Recall from [11] the following notion of a ”diﬀerential gcd” for m polynomials f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], m ∈ {1, . . . , n}:

m
dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) = gcd jacxf1i ,...,f
,...,xim , 1 6 i1 < . . . < im 6 n ,
1

m
where jacfx1i ,...,f
,...,xim denotes the Jacobian determinant of f1 , . . . , fm with re1
spect to xi1 , . . . , xim . For m = n we have

dgcd(f1 , . . . , fn ) ∼ jac(f1 , . . . , fn ),
for m = 1 we have
dgcd(f ) ∼ gcd



∂f
∂f
,...,
∂x1
∂xn



,

where g ∼ h means that polynomials g and h are associated. We put
m
dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) = 0 if jacxf1i1,...,f
,...,xim = 0 for every i1 , . . . , im , that is, f1 ,
. . . , fm are algebraically dependent over k.
Let k be a ﬁeld and let A be a k-algebra. A k-linear map d : A → A such
that d(f g) = d(f )g + f d(g) for f, g ∈ A, is called a k-derivation of A. The
kernel of d is denoted by Ad and called the ring of constants of d. For more
information on derivations and their rings of constants we refer the reader to
Nowicki’s book [15].
Consider the following conjecture for m polynomials in n variables.
Conjecture JC(m, n, k). For arbitrary polynomials f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . ,
xn ], where k is a field of characteristic zero and m ∈ {1, . . . , n}, if
dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) ∈ k \ {0},
3

then k[f1 , . . . , fm ] is a ring of constants of some k-derivation of k[x1 , . . . , xn ].
Recall Nowicki’s characterization of rings of constants ([16], Theorem 5.4,
[15], Theorem 4.1.4, p. 47).
Theorem (Nowicki, 1994). Let A be a finitely generated k-domain, where
k is a field of characteristic zero. Let R be a k-subalgebra of A. The following
conditions are equivalent:
(i) R is a ring of constants of some k-derivation of A,
(ii) R is integrally closed in A and R0 ∩ A = R.
Let D be a family of k-derivations of a ﬁnitely generated k-domain A,
where k is a ﬁeld of characteristic zero. It follows from Nowicki’s Theorem
that the ring
\
AD =
Ad
d∈D

is a ring of constants of some single k-derivation of A ([16], Theorem 5.5,
[15], Theorem 4.1.5, p. 47).
Daigle observed ([6], 1.4) that condition (ii) of Nowicki’s Theorem can be
shortened to the following form:
(iii) R is algebraically closed in A.
Now we see for example that conjecture JC(2, 3, k) asserts that if polynomials f, g ∈ k[x, y, z] satisfy the condition

g
f, g
f, g
gcd jacf,
x, y , jacx, z , jacy, z ∈ k \ {0},

then k[f, g] is algebraically closed in k[x, y, z].

Let us note some basic observations according to conjecture JC(m, n, k).
Lemma 1.1. JC(m, n, k) implies the Jacobian Conjecture for m variables
over k.
Proof. Assume that JC(m, n, k) holds and consider polynomials f1 , . . . , fm ∈
m
k[x1 , . . . , xm ] such that jacfx11,...,f
,...,xm ∈ k \ {0}.
m
In k[x1 , . . . , xn ] we have dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) = jacfx11,...,f
,...,xm , so k[f1 , . . . , fm ] is
algebraically closed in k[x1 , . . . , xn ] by JC(m, n, k). Hence, k[f1 , . . . , fm ] is
algebraically closed in k[x1 , . . . , xm ]. And then k[f1 , . . . , fm ] = k[x1 , . . . , xm ],
because f1 , . . . , fm are algebraically independent over k.

4

Now, recall from [14] and [17] that a polynomial f ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] over
a ﬁeld k is called closed if the ring k[f ] is integrally closed in k[x1 , . . . , xn ].
When char k = 0, a polynomial f is closed if and only if k[f ] is a ring
of constants of some k-derivation of k[x1 , . . . , xn ] ([14], Theorem 2.1, [15],
Theorem 7.1.4, p. 80). Necessary and suﬃcient conditions for a polynomial
to be closed were collected and completed by Arzantsev and Petravchuk in [2],
Theorem 1. Ayad proved ([3], Proposition 14) that a polynomial f ∈ k[x, y],
where char k = 0, is closed if


∂f ∂f
gcd
∈ k \ {0}.
,
∂x ∂y
His proof can be generalized to n variables (it was noted in [10], Proposition
4.2), so we obtain the following fact.
Theorem (Ayad, 2002). JC(1, n, k) is true.
Remark 1.2. The reverse implication in JC(m, n, k) need not to be true if
m < n.
In this case n > 2. As an example we may consider a polynomial f1 =
∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] and, if m > 1, polynomials f2 = x3 , . . . , fm = xm+1 .

x21 x2

We have
dgcd(x21 x2 , x3 , . . . , xm+1 ) = gcd(2x1 x2 , x21 ) = x1 ,
so dgcd(x21 x2 , x3 , . . . , xm+1 ) 6∈ k \ {0}.
On the other hand, k[x21 x2 , x3 , . . . , xm+1 ] is algebraically closed in k[x1 ,
. . . , xn ] as a ring of constants of a family of derivations


∂
∂
∂
∂
x1
.
− 2x2
,
,...,
∂x1
∂x2 ∂xm+2
∂xn

2

Analogs of Jacobian conditions in terms of
irreducible and square-free elements

If R is a commutative ring with unity, then R∗ denotes the set of noninvertible elements of R. An element a ∈ R is called square-free if it cannot
be presented in the form a = b2 c, where b, c ∈ R and b 6∈ R∗ . By Irr R we
denote the set of irreducible elements of R and by Sqf R we denote the set
of square-free elements of R.

5

Let k be a ﬁeld of characteristic zero. Consider arbitrary polynomials
f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where m ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Let g ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] be an
irreducible polynomial.
The following lemma is a natural generalization of [12], Lemma 3.1. For
the proof it is enough to add the argument from the beginning of the proof
of [13], Proposition 3.4.a with Q = (g).
Lemma 2.1. For a given i ∈ {1, . . . , m} consider the following condition:
(∗)

there exist s1 , . . . , sm ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where g ∤ si , such that
g | s1 d(f1 ) + . . . + sm d(fm ) for every k-derivation d of k[x1 , . . . , xn ].

a) Then g | dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) if and only if condition (∗) holds for some
i ∈ {1, . . . , m}.
b) If, for a given i ∈ {1, . . . , m}, condition (∗) holds, then fi is algebraic
over the field k( f1 , . . . , fi−1 , fi+1 , . . . , fm ).
Note the following consequence of Lemma 2.1 and [12], Lemma 3.2.b
(where the polynomial w can be obtained as irreducible).
Corollary 2.2. If g | dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ), then g | w(f1 , . . . , fm ) for some
irreducible polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ].
The following theorem is a multidimensional generalization of Freudenburg’s lemma ([8]).
Theorem 2.3. Let k be a field of characteristic zero, let f1 , . . . , fm ∈ k[x1 ,
. . . , xn ] be arbitrary polynomials, where m ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and let g ∈ k[x1 , . . . ,
xn ] be an irreducible polynomial. The following conditions are equivalent:
(i) g | dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ),
(ii) g 2 | w(f1 , . . . , fm ) for some irreducible polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ],
(iii) g 2 | w(f1 , . . . , fm ) for some square-free polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ].
Proof. Implication (ii) ⇒ (i) was already proved in the proof of [12], Theorem
4.1, (ii) ⇒ (i). Implication (ii) ⇒ (iii) is trivial.
(i) ⇒ (ii) We combine the arguments from proofs of [12], Theorem 4.1,
(i) ⇒ (ii) and [13], Theorem 3.6 (⇒). Assume that g | dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ).
By Corollary 2.2, g | w(f1 , . . . , fm ) for some irreducible polynomial w ∈
m−1 ,f
k[x1 , . . . , xm ]. We proceed like in [12], using a derivation d(f ) = jacfx1j,...,f
,...,xjm
1
for arbitrary j1 < . . . < jm , instead of dn , and applying Lemma 2.1 instead
of [12], Lemma 3.1.
6

(iii) ⇒ (ii) We apply the proof of [4], Theorem 2.1, 3) ⇒ 2). Assume
that g 2 | w(f1, . . . , fm ) for some square-free polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ],
so w(f1 , . . . , fm ) = g 2 h, where h ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Then there exist polynomials w1 , w2 ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ] such that w = w1 w2 , w1 is irreducible and
g | w1 (f1 , . . . , fm ). Then we proceed like in [4].
As a consequence of Theorem 2.3 we obtain the following generalization
of [12], Theorem 5.1 and [4], Corollary 2.2.
Theorem 2.4. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where k is a field of characteristic
zero. Assume that f1 , . . . , fm ∈ A are algebraically independent over k, where
m ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Put R = k[f1 , . . . , fm ]. Then the following conditions are
equivalent:
(i) dgcd(f1 , . . . , fm ) ∈ k \ {0},
(ii) Irr R ⊂ Sqf A,
(iii) Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A.
The above theorem allows us call conditions (ii) and (iii) analogs of the
Jacobian condition (i) for a subring R.
Remark 2.5. Conditions (ii) and (iii) of Theorem 2.4 can be expressed in the
following way, respetively:
(ii) for every irreducible polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ] the polynomial w(f1 ,
. . . , fm ) is square-free,
(iii) for every square-free polynomial w ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xm ] the polynomial w(f1 ,
. . . , fm ) is square-free.

3

Square-factorially closed subrings

We will present some basic observations concerning conditions (ii) and
(iii) from Theorem 2.4 for a subring R of an arbitrary unique factorization
domain A. Conjecture JC(m, n, k) motivates us to state the following open
question.
A general question. Let R be a subring of a domain A such that
Irr R ⊂ Sqf A or
When R is algebraically closed in A?

7

Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A.

Lemma 3.1. Let A be a unique factorization domain. Let R be a subring
of A such that R∗ = A∗ . Consider the following conditions:
(i) Irr R ⊂ Irr A,
(ii) Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A,
(iii) Irr R ⊂ Sqf A.
Then the following implications hold:
(i) ⇒ (ii) ⇒ (iii).
Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii)
Assume that Irr R ⊂ Irr A and consider an element a ∈ Sqf R. Let
a = q1 . . . qr , where q1 , . . . , qr ∈ Irr R are pairwise non-associated in R. Then,
by the assumption, q1 , . . . , qr ∈ Irr A. Moreover, since A∗ = R∗ , q1 , . . . , qr
are pairwise non-associated in A.
(ii) ⇒ (iii)
Assume that Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A and consider an element a ∈ Irr R. Suppose
that a = b2 c, where b ∈ R \ R∗ and c ∈ R. Then a = b · (bc), where
b, bc ∈ R \ R∗ , a contradiction. Hence, a ∈ Sqf R.
Recall that a subring R of a ring A is called factorially closed in A if the
following implication:
xy ∈ R \ {0} ⇒ x, y ∈ R
holds for every x, y ∈ A. The ring of constants of any locally nilpotent
derivation of a domain of characteristic zero is factorially closed. We refer the
reader to [6] and [9] for more information about locally nilpotent derivations.
Lemma 3.2. Let A be a unique factorization domain. Let R be a subring
of A such that R∗ = A∗ . The following conditions are equivalent:
(i) Irr R ⊂ Irr A,
(ii) R is factorially closed in A.
Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii)
Assume that Irr R ⊂ Irr A and consider elements x, y ∈ A such that
xy ∈ R \ {0}. Let xy = q1 . . . qr , where q1 , . . . , qr ∈ Irr R. Then q1 , . . . , qr ∈
Irr A, so without loss of generality we may assume that x = aq1 . . . qs and
y = bqs+1 . . . qr for some a, b ∈ A∗ . Since A∗ = R∗ , we infer that x, y ∈ R.
(ii) ⇒ (i)
Assume that condition (ii) holds and consider an element a ∈ Irr R. Let
a = bc, where b, c ∈ A. By the assumption, b, c ∈ R, so b ∈ R∗ or c ∈ R∗ .
Hence, b ∈ A∗ or c ∈ A∗ .
8

Note the following easy fact.
Lemma 3.3. Let A be a domain, let R be a subring of A. The following
conditions are equivalent:
(i) R0 ∩ A = R,
(ii) for every x ∈ R, y ∈ A, if xy ∈ R \ {0}, then y ∈ R.
Theorem 3.4. Let A be a unique factorization domain. Let R be a subring
of A such that R∗ = A∗ and R0 ∩ A = R. The following conditions are
equivalent:
(i) Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A,
(ii) for every x ∈ A, y ∈ Sqf A, if x2 y ∈ R \ {0}, then x, y ∈ R.
Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii)
Assume that Sqf R ⊂ Sqf A and consider x, y ∈ A such that y ∈ Sqf A
and x2 y ∈ R \ {0}. If x ∈ R, then x2 ∈ R, and hence y ∈ R by Lemma 3.3.
Now suppose that x 6∈ R and x is a minimal element (with respect to
a number of irreducible factors in A) with this property. In this case x 6∈ A∗ ,
so x2 y 6∈ Sqf A, and then x2 y 6∈ Sqf R. Hence, x2 y = z 2 t for some z, t ∈ R,
z 6∈ R∗ . We can present t in the form t = u2 v, where u, v ∈ A, v ∈ Sqf A. We
have u2 v ∈ R \ {0}, so u ∈ R by the minimality of x. We obtain x2 y = z 2 u2 v,
where y, v ∈ Sqf A, hence x = czu for some c ∈ A∗ . By the assumptions,
c ∈ R, so x ∈ R, a contradiction.
(ii) ⇒ (i)
Assume that condition (ii) holds. Consider an element r ∈ Sqf R. Suppose that r 6∈ Sqf A, so r = x2 y for some x, y ∈ A such that x 6∈ A∗ and
y ∈ Sqf A. Since x2 y ∈ R \ {0}, we obtain that x, y ∈ R. We have x 6∈ R∗ ,
so x2 y 6∈ Sqf R, a contradiction.
Definition 3.5. Let A be a UFD. A subring R of A such that the implication
x2 y ∈ R \ {0} ⇒ x, y ∈ R
holds for every x ∈ A, y ∈ Sqf A, will be called square-factorially closed in A.
Recall that a subring R of a ring A is called root closed in A if the
following implication:
xn ∈ R ⇒ x ∈ R
holds for every x ∈ A and n > 1. The properties of root closed subrings were
investigated in many papers, see [1] and [5] for example.
9

Theorem 3.6. Let A be a unique factorization domain. Let R be a subring
of A such that R∗ = A∗ and R0 ∩ A = R. If R is square-free closed in A,
then R is root closed in A.
Proof. Assume that R is square-free closed in A. Consider an element x ∈ A,
x 6= 0, such that xn ∈ R for some n > 1. Let n = 2r (2l + 1), where r, l > 0.
r
Observe ﬁrst that since (x2l+1 )2 ∈ R, then applying Theorem 3.4 we obtain
x2l+1 ∈ R.
m

m−1

Now, note that x can be presented in the form x = s20 s21
. . . s2m−1 sm ,
where s0 , . . . , sm ∈ Sqf A and m > 0. We will show by induction on m that
the following implication:
x2l+1 ∈ R ⇒ x ∈ R
holds for every x ∈ A, x 6= 0. Let m > 0 and assume that the above
m−1
m−2
implication holds for m − 1. Put t = s20 s21
. . . sm−1 , so x = t2 sm and
x2l+1 = (t2l+1 slm )2 sm . If x2l+1 ∈ R, then t2l+1 slm , sm ∈ R by Theorem 3.4, so
t2l+1 ∈ R by Lemma 3.3. Hence, t ∈ R by the induction assumption and,
ﬁnally, x ∈ R.
Acknowledgements. The authors would like to thank Prof. Holger Brenner
for valuable discussions on the matter of this paper.

References
[1] D.F. Anderson, Root closure in integral domains, J. Algebra 79 (1982),
51–59.
[2] I.V. Arzhantsev, A.P. Petravchuk, Closed polynomials and saturated subalgebras of polynomial algebras, Ukrainian Math. J. 59 (2007), 1783–1790.
[3] M. Ayad, Sur les polynômes f (X, Y ) tels que K[f ] est intégralement
fermé dans K[X, Y ], Acta Arith. 105 (2002), 9–28.
[4] M. de Bondt, D. Yan, Irreducibility properties of Keller maps,
arXiv:1304.0634.
[5] J.W. Brewer, D.L. Costa, K. McCrimmon, Seminormality and root closure in polynomial rings and algebraic curves, J. Algebra 58 (1979), 217–
226.

10

[6] D. Daigle, Locally nilpotent derivations, Lecture notes for the ”September
School” of Algebraic Geometry, Lukecin,
Poland, September 2003 (un֒
published), aix1.uottawa.ca/~ddaigle/.
[7] A. van den Essen, Polynomial automorphisms and the Jacobian Conjecture, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2000.
[8] G. Freudenburg, A note on the kernel of a locally nilpotent derivation,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 124 (1996), 27–29.
[9] G. Freudenburg, Algebraic theory of locally nilpotent derivations, Springer
Verlag, Berlin, 2006.
Positive characteristic analogs of closed polynomials,
[10] P. Jedrzejewicz,
֒
Cent. Eur. J. Math. 9 (2011), 50–56.
[11] P. Jedrzejewicz,
Jacobian conditions for p-bases, Comm. Algebra 40
֒
(2012), 2841–2852.
[12] P. Jedrzejewicz,
A characterization of Keller maps, J. Pure Appl. Alge֒
bra 217 (2013), 165–171.
[13] P. Jedrzejewicz,
A characterization of p-bases of rings of constants, Cent.
֒
Eur. J. Math. 11 (2013), 900–909.
[14] A. Nowicki, On the Jacobian equation J(f, g) = 0 for polynomials in
k[x, y], Nagoya Math. J. 109 (1988), 151–157.
[15] A. Nowicki, Polynomial derivations and their rings of constants, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, 1994, www.mat.umk.pl/~anow/.
[16] A. Nowicki, Rings and fields of constants for derivations in characteristic
zero, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 96 (1994), 47–55.
[17] A. Nowicki and M. Nagata, Rings of constants for k-derivations in
k[x1 , . . . , xn ], J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 28 (1988), 111–118.

11

