A CHAIN RULE FORMULA FOR HIGHER DERIVATIONS
AND INVERSES OF POLYNOMIAL MAPS

arXiv:1611.01940v1 [math.AC] 7 Nov 2016

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT
Abstract. The multidimensional chain rule formula for analytic functions
and its generalisation to higher derivatives perfectly work in the algebraic
setting in characteristic zero. In positive characteristic one runs into problems due to denominators in these formulas.
In this article we show a direct analog of these formulas using higher
derivations which are defined in any characteristic. We also use these formulas to show how higher derivations to different coordinate systems are
related to each other.
Finally, we apply this to polynomial automorphisms in arbitrary characteristic and obtain a formula for the inverse of such a polynomial automorphism.

1. Introduction
In analysis there is the well-known chain rule formula for differentiable functions
f : U ⊆ Rn → Rm and g : V ⊆ Rm → Rl stating that the total derivative
Da (g ◦ f ) of g ◦ f at a point a ∈ U is the composition of the total derivatives
Df (a) (g) and Da (f ), i.e.
Da (g ◦ f ) = Df (a) (g) ◦ Da (f ).
In terms of the partial derivatives this is
Ja (g ◦ f ) = Jf (a) (g) · Ja (f ),
where

 ∂f1

∂x1 (a)


Ja (f ) = 

..
.

∂fm
∂x1 (a)

∂f1
∂x2 (a)

···

..
.

∂fm
∂x2 (a)


∂f1
∂xn (a)
..
.

···

∂fm
∂xn (a)




is the Jacobian matrix of f at a ∈ U .
In the one-dimensional case, di Bruno [2] generalized this chain rule to higher
derivatives giving the formula
(1)
 ′ b1  ′′ b2
 (j) bj
P
X
f (x)
f (x)
f (x)
j!
( bi )
dj
(g
◦
f
)(x)
=
g
(f
(x))
.
·
·
·
j
b1 !···bj !
1!
2!
j!
dx
b1P
,...,bj ∈N
ibi =j

Date: 7th Nov, 2016.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 12H05, 13N15, 14R15.
Key words and phrases. Higher derivations, chain rule, polynomial automorphisms.
1

2

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

This formula was generalized also to arbitrary dimensions in [3, Formula B].
Using the usual multiindex notation as well as D α = ( ∂x∂ 1 )α1 ◦ · · · ◦ ( ∂x∂n )αn for
α = (α1 , . . . , αn ) ∈ Nn the formula reads
(2)
X
X
α! λ
D α (g ◦ f )(x) =
Pγ1 (λ1 , f1 ; x) · · · Pγm (λm , fm ; x)
λ! D (g)(f (x))
λ∈Nm
1≤|λ|≤|α|

γ1+...+γm =α

where for Bγ = {β ∈ Nn | 0 < β ≤ γ}, µ ∈ N and v : U → R one defines
Y  D β (v)(x) ρβ
X
µ!
Q
.
Pγ (µ, v; x) :=
β!
P
β∈Bγ ρβ !
(ρβ )β∈Bγ : ρβ =µ
P
ρβ β=γ

β∈Bγ

These analytic formulas can be translated directly to the algebraic setting over
any field of characteristic zero:
Let K be a field of characteristic zero, and let f : U → Am
K and g : V →
l
n
AK be morphisms of algebraic varieties where U ⊆ AK and V ⊆ Am
K are
Zariski-open subsets. Then Ja (g ◦ f ) = Jf (a) (g) · Ja (f ), and also Formula (2)
holds. Whilest the chain rule for the Jacobian matrices also holds in positive
characteristic, Faà di Bruno’s formula and Formula (2) can only be transfered
to positive characterstic p when p is bigger than the highest derivation order,
since otherwise one would divide by p.
As it will be shown in this article, this problem can be circumvented by using
iterative higher derivations, as it is already done for the one-dimensional case
in [9, Prop. 7.2]. Roughly speaking, an iterative higher derivation is a family
1 n
∂ for a given derivation
of maps θ (n) for all n ∈ N resembling the family n!
 

∂, but defined also in positive characteristic. Formally replacing all
(n)

1
n!

∂
∂xj

n

by symbols θj , Formula (2) turns into a formula with integer coefficients,
and hence makes sense in any characteristic. Indeed we will show in Section
3 that this analog holds in positive characteristics (cf. Thm. 3.1), generalising
the one-dimensional case of the formula in [9, Prop. 7.2]. We will also give a
presentation of the formula which is much easier to remember than the one
above.
The chain rule formula given in Thm. 3.1 will be used in Section 4 to express
the higher derivations with respect to one coordinate system s1 , . . . , sn in terms
of the higher derivations with respect to another coordinate system t1 , . . . , tn ,
and leads to a criterion for extending higher derivations to ring extensions.
In Cor. 4.6, we apply this to the case of an extension of polynomial rings
K[x1 , . . . , xn ] ⊇ K[f1 , . . . , fn ] whose Jacobian matrix is invertible, to obtain
a unique extension of the higher derivations with respect to f1 , . . . , fn to the
polynomial ring K[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Actually, we get this extendability for any commutative ring K by the fact that invertibility of the Jacobian matrix implies
étaleness of the extension K[x1 , . . . , xn ] ⊇ K[f1 , . . . , fn ] (cf. Prop. 4.8). This
gives a much shorter proof of [5, Thm. 2.13].
Further on in Section 5, we apply our results to the case of polynomial endomorphisms and polynomial automorphisms. In particular, we give a formula for

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

3

the inverse of an automorphism of a polynomial ring using higher derivatives,
analogous to the one given for characteristic zero in [11, Prop. 3.1.4(ii)].
2. Basic notation
All rings are assumed to be commutative with unit and different from {0}. The
set of natural numbers N contains 0. Throughout the paper, K will denote a
field of arbitrary characteristic.
2.1. Multi-index notation and evaluation maps. As we will be dealing
with multi-indices, we introduce the usual multi-index notation.
For α = (α1 , . . . , αd ) ∈ Nd and β = (β1 , . . . , βd ) ∈ Nd we write
• |α| = α1 + α2 + . . . + αd ,
• α!= α1 !α2 ! · · · αd !, 
αd
α1 α2
• α
β = β1 β2 · · · βd ,
• α ≤ β if and only if αi ≤ βi for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n},
• α < β if and only if α ≤ β, but not equal,
• sums α + β and differences α − β are componentwise,
• 0 = (0, . . . , 0),
• r α = r1α1 r2α2 · · · rdαd where r = (r1 , . . . , rd ) is a tuple of elements in a
ring.
We will often replace indeterminants by other expressions/values. We will write
H|T1 =a1 ,...,Td =ad

or

H|T =a

for short, for evaluating a function H depending on indeterminants T1 , . . . , Td
at (a1 , . . . , ad ), i.e. replacing the Ti by ai .
2.2. Higher derivations. In the introduction we already mentioned that we
need a collection of maps in positive characteristic which resembles the family
1 n
n! ∂ n∈N . These families and some generalization will be introduce here. See
also [6, Sect. 27] for univariate higher derivations and [7, Sect. 3] for a more
general notion of higher derivations. d-variate iterative higher derivations are
treated in more detail in [4].
Definition 2.1. A d-variate higher derivation on a ring R is a ring homomorphism θ : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]] such that θ(r)|T =0 = r for all r ∈ R. For
all α = (α1 , . . . , αd ) ∈ Nd , we get induced additive maps θ (α) : R → R given
by mapping r ∈ R to the coefficient of T α = T1α1 · · · Tdαd in θ(r). Hence for all
r ∈ R one has
X
θ(r) =
θ (α) (r)T α .
α∈Nd

A d-variate higher derivation θ is called a d-variate iterative higher derivation if for all α, β ∈ Nd one has


α + β (α+β)
(α)
(β)
θ ◦θ =
θ
.
α
Remark 2.2. As it is easily seen, a d-variate higher derivation can equivalently
be defined by a collection of additive maps (θ (α) : R → R)α∈Nd such that

4

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

(i) θ (0) = idR , P
(ii) θ (γ) (rs) = α+β=γ θ (α) (r)θ (β) (s) for all r, s ∈ R, γ ∈ Nd ,
P
and θ : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]], r 7→ α∈Nd θ (α) (r)T α .
In the univariate (=1-variate) case, this is exactly the usual definition of a
higher derivation.
Lemma 2.3. Let θ1 , . . . , θd be d univariate higher derivations on a ring R, and
let T1 , . . . , Td be indeterminates. Then the map
X
(α )
(α )
θ : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]], r 7→
(θ1 1 ◦ · · · ◦ θd d )(r)T1α1 · · · Tdαd
α1 ,...,αd ∈N

is a d-variate higher derivation, and the higher derivations θ1 , . . . , θd are determined by θ.
Proof. The map θ is just the composition of ring homomorphisms
θ

θd−1 [[Td ]]

θd−2 [[Td−1 ,Td ]]

d
R −→
R[[Td ]] −−−−−−→ R[[Td−1 , Td ]] −−−−−−−−−→ R[[Td−2 , Td−1 , Td ]]

θ1 [[T2 ,...,Td ]]

→ . . . → R[[T2 , . . . , Td ]] −−−−−−−−→

R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]]

where θd−1 [[Td ]] denotes the Td -linear extension of the higher derivation θd−1 :
R → R[[Td−1 ]], and θd−2 [[Td−1 , Td ]] denotes the Td−1 -linear and Td -linear extension of the higher derivation θd−2 : R → R[[Td−2 ]] etc. Also by definition,
(0)
(0)
θ(r)|T =0 = (θ1 ◦ · · · ◦ θd )(r) = r for all r ∈ R. Hence, θ is a higher derivation.
(m)
Since the coefficient of Tim in θ(r) is by definition just θi (r), the homomorphism θ determines the higher derivations θ1 , . . . , θd .
Actually, one can also obtain θi by composing θ with the evaluation homomorphism sending Tj to 0 for j 6= i.

Example 2.4.
(i) For any field K and R := K[t1 , . . . , td ], the higher
derivation θti : R → R[[T ]] (i ∈ {1, . . . d}) given by θti (ti ) := ti + T and
θti (tj ) = tj if j 6= i is called the (iterative) higher derivation with
(n)
respect to ti . The K-linear maps θti can explicitly be described as
 
αi α1 α2
(n) α1 α2
αd 
θti t1 t2 · · · td =
t t · · · tαi i −n · · · tαd d .
n 1 2
(1)

Hence, the first map θti is nothing else than the usual partial deriva n
(n)
1
∂
.
tion ∂t∂ i , and in characteristic zero, the θti equal n!
∂ti
(ii) Also for R := K[[t1 , . . . , td ]] the iterative higher derivations θti : R →
R[[T ]] (i ∈ {1, . . . d}) given by θti (ti ) := ti + T and θti (tj ) = tj and
continuous extension are well-defined.
(iii) By Lemma 2.3, the higher derivations θi give rise to a d-variate higher
derivation on R := K[t1 , . . . , td ] and R := K[[t1 , . . . , td ]] which will be
denoted by θt where t is the tuple (t1 , . . . , td ). More detailed, θt : R →
R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]] is given by
θt (ti ) = ti + Ti

for i = 1, . . . , d.

This higher derivation is even an iterative higher derivation which follows from the following remark.

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

5

Remark 2.5. Let θ1 , . . . , θd : R → R[[T ]] be univariate higher derivations, and
θ : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]] the d-variate higher derivation composed of them as in
Lemma 2.3. Then θ is an iterative higher derivation if and only if the θi are
(n)
(m)
iterative higher derivations which pairwise commute, i.e. such that θi ◦ θj =
(m)

(n)

θj ◦ θi for all n, m ∈ N, and i, j ∈ {1, . . . , d}. The easy proof can be found
in [4, Satz 4.1.7].
In [4],
it is also shown that the condition for being iterative θ (α) ◦ θ (β) =
α+β  (α+β)
for all α, β ∈ Nd can be expressed equivalently by requiring that
α θ
the diagram
R

θ

/ R[[T ]]

T 7→U

/ R[[U ]]

θ[[U ]]

θ



T 7→T +U



/ R[[T , U ]]
R[[T ]]
commutes. Here, U = (U1 , . . . , Ud ) denotes another d-tuple of indeterminates,
and as in the proof of Lemma 2.3, θ[[U ]] : R[[U ]] → R[[T , U ]] denotes the
U -linear extension of θ.

We will also be concerned with higher derivations on other rings. To obtain
those we will make use of the following lemma which is given in [6, Thm. 27.2]
for the univariate case and in [7, Prop. 3.7] in general. However, the proof for
the univariate case easily generalizes to the multivariate case.
Lemma 2.6. Let S/R be an étale extension, and ψ : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]] a
d-variate higher derivation. Then
(i) ψ uniquely extends to a d-variate higher derivation on S. In particular,
this applies to localizations and to separable field extensions.
(ii) If ψ is iterative, then its unique extension is iterative, too.
Definition 2.7. Let R be an étale extension of the polynomial ring K[t1 , . . . , td ],
and t = (t1 , . . . , td ). Then the unique extension of the d-variate iterative higher
derivation θt above to a d-variate iterative higher derivation on R will also be
denoted by θt : R → R[[T1 , . . . , Td ]].
Definition 2.8. Let R be an étale extension of the polynomial ring K[t1 , . . . , td ],
and θt the higher derivation with respect to t = (t1 , . . . , td ) on R. Then for any
n-tuple f = (f1 , . . . , fn ) of elements of R we denote the Jacobian matrix of f
with respect to t by
  ∂f1 ∂f1
 (1)
∂f1 
(1)
(1)
· · · ∂t
θt1 (f1 ) θt2 (f1 ) · · · θtn (f1 )
∂t1
∂t2
n

  ..

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
J(f , t) := 
= .
.
. .
.
.
.
(1)

(1)

θt1 (fn ) θt2 (fn ) · · ·

(1)

θtn (fn )

∂fn
∂t1

∂fn
∂t2

···

∂fn
∂tn

3. Chain rule formula
We are now prepared to state and to proof the chain rule formula.
Theorem 3.1 (Chain rule). Let U ⊆ AnK and V ⊆ Am
K be Zariski-open subsets,
l be morphisms of algebraic varieties
and let f : U → Am
and
g
:
V
→
A
K
K

6

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

given by tuples of rational functions f = (f1 (x1 , . . . , xn ), . . . , fm (x1 , . . . , xn ))
and g = (g1 (y1 , . . . , ym ), . . . , gl (y1 , . . . , ym )), respectively. Further, let θx be the
n-variate higher derivation on Γ(U, OU ) ⊆ K(x1 , . . . , xn ) and θy the m-variate
higher derivation on Γ(V, OV ) ⊆ K(y1 , . . . , ym ) defined as in Def. 2.7. Then
we have1
θx (g ◦ f ) = (θy (g)|y=f )|T =θx (f )−f
=

X

(µ)

θy (g)|y=f ·

µ∈Nm

m
Y



j=1

µj

 X (ν)

θx (fj )T ν 

ν∈Nn
ν>0

Proof. θx (g ◦ f ) is the image of g = (g1 , . . . , gl ) via the ring homomorphism
y7→f

θ

x
K(y1 , . . . , ym ) −−−→ K(x1 , . . . , xn ) −→
K(x1 , . . . , xn )[[T1 , . . . , Tn ]],

and (θy (g)|y=f )|T =θx (f )−f is its image via the ring homomorphism
θy

K(y1 , . . . , ym )

−→

K(y1 , . . . , ym )[[T1 , . . . , Tm ]]

y7→f

−−−→

K(x1 , . . . , xn )[[T1 , . . . , Tm ]]

T 7→θx (f )−f

−−−−−−−−→ K(x1 , . . . , xn )[[T1 , . . . , Tn ]].
Hence, it is sufficient to show that both homomorphisms are the same which
amounts to say that the images of each yj are the same. But yj maps to θx (fj )
under the first homomorphism, and yj maps to
(θy (yj )|y=f )|T =θx (f )−f = ((yj + Tj )|y=f ) |T =θx (f )−f = fj + (θx (fj )− fj ) = θx (fj )
via the second homomorphism. Hence, the claim follows.



Remark 3.2. From the equation above, one can extract the formulas for the
(λ)
θx (g ◦ f ) for any 0 < λ ∈ Nn by collecting all terms contributing to T λ . We
get the same formulas as in [3], since the computation is merely the same. In
detail we obtain:
(λ)

θx (g◦f ) =

X

(µ)

θy (g)|y=f

0<|µ|≤|λ|

X

Pν 1 (λ1 , f1 )·Pν 2 (λ2 , f2 ) · · · Pν m (λm , fm ),
ν 1 +...+ν m =λ

where for Bν = {β ∈ Nn |0 < P
β ≤ ν} and P
Rν,l = {(ρβ )β∈Bν ∈ N#Bν |
ρβ = l,
ρβ β = ν}:
β∈Bν

Pν (l, h) =

X

(ρβ )∈Rν,l

β∈Bν

l!

Q

β∈Bν

ρβ !

Y 

β∈Bν

ρβ
(β)
θx (h)
.

Be aware that for all (ρβ ) ∈ Rν,l the fraction Q l! ρβ ! is a multinomial coefβ∈Bν
ficient and hence an integer. So its residue modulo the characteristic p is well
defined.
1Here and in the following, application of a higher derivation to a vector is meant componentwise, e.g. θx (f ) = (θx (f1 ), . . . , θx (fn )).

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

7

In the one-dimensional case (m = n = 1) one obtains the formula already
present in [9, Prop. 7.2] which is the direct analog to the Taylor expansion
approach to Faà di Bruno’s formula in the case of real functions.
Considering only the first derivatives, one ends up with the well-known formula
for the Jacobian matrices:
J(g ◦ f ) = J(g)|y=f (x) · J(f ).
4. Coordinate change
In this section we focus on the higher derivations themselves.
Let F be a field extension of K of transcendence degree n. Hence every transcendence basis consists of n elements, and we have seen in Example 2.4(iii)
and Def. 2.7 that any separating transcendence basis t1 , . . . , tn gives rise to a
n-variate higher derivation θt on F . If s1 , . . . , sn is another separating transcendence basis with higher derivation θs on F , the question is how both higher
derivations are related to each other, and in particular, how one can get θs in
terms of θt .
Theorem 4.1. Let F be a field extension of K of transcendence degree n and
let t1 , . . . , tn as well as s1 , . . . , sn be two separating transcendence bases of F .2
Then the higher derivation with respect to s = (s1 , . . . , sn ) can be expressed in
terms of the higher derivation with respect to t = (t1 , . . . , tn ) and the values
(ν)
θs (tj ). More precisely, for any g ∈ F one has
θs (g) = θt (g)|T =θs (t)−t
(3)

=

X

µ∈Nn

(µ)
θt (g)

·

n
Y

j=1

X

(ν)
θs (tj )T ν

0<ν∈Nn

!µj

.

Proof. The proof is merely the same as for Theorem 3.1. The composition
θ

T 7→θs (t)−t

t
F −→
F [[T ]] −−−−−−−→ F [[T ]]

is a ring homomorphism whose composition with the evaluation map T 7→ 0
is the identity on F , i.e. it is a n-variate higher derivation. By Lemma 2.6, it
equals θs if and only if their restrictions to K(t1 , . . . , tn ) agree. But for every
i ∈ {1, . . . , n} one has
θt (ti )|T =θs (t)−t = (ti + Ti )|T =θs (t)−t = ti + θs (ti ) − ti = θs (ti ).

Exploring Identity (3), we get as the coefficient of Tj the identity
(4)

(ej )

θs

(g) = θs(1)
(g) =
j

n
X

(1)

(ti ),
θti (g)θs(1)
j

i=1

where ej = (0, . . . , 1, . . . , 0) is the j-th unit vector.
2We assume here that F has separating transcendence bases. This is guaranteed for example in the case that K is perfect and F is a finitely generated field extension of K.

8

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT
(1)

In particular, by replacing g by sl for l = 1, . . . , n and using θsj (sl ) = δjl , we
obtain the well-known formula for Jacobian matrices:
Lemma 4.2. Let F be a field extension of K of transcendence degree n, and
let s1 , . . . , sn as well as t1 , . . . , tn be two separating transcendence bases. Then

 (1)
(1)
(1)
θs1 (t1 ) θs2 (t1 ) · · · θsn (t1 )

.. 
..
J(t, s) =  ...
.
. 
(1)

(1)

(1)

θsn (tn )

θs1 (tn ) θs2 (tn ) · · ·

is invertible with inverse matrix J(s, t).

Exploring Identity (3) even more, we get
Theorem 4.3. Let F be a field extension of K of transcendence degree n,
and let s1 , . . . , sn as well as t1 , . . . , tn be two separating transcendence bases.
(µ)
Then for all µ ∈ Nn \ {0} the higher derivative θt (si ) can be computed as a
(λ)
polynomial in all θs (tj ) with 0 < |λ| ≤ |µ|, 1 ≤ j ≤ n and in det(J(t, s))−1
with integer
coefficients. Furthermore, the degree in det(J(t, s))−1 is bounded

n+m
by n+1 .
Proof. We do induction on m := |µ|.
We have already seen in the previous lemma that J(s, t) = J(t, s)−1 , and since
by Cramer’s rule the coefficients of the inverse are given by det(J(t, s))−1 times
a polynomial in the coefficients of J(t, s), the claim follows for m = |µ| = 1.
For showing the claim for m > 1, we use Formula (3) for g = si for i ∈
{1, . . . , n}:
µj

n
X
Y
X (µ)


(ν)
θs (tj )T ν  .
si + Ti =
θt (si ) ·

µ∈Nn

j=1

ν∈Nn
ν>0

Restricting to the total degree m, i.e. to the terms with monomials T λ where
|λ| = m, we get
!µj
n
n
X
X
Y
X
X (µ)
(µ)
Qi (µ, λ)T λ ,
θ
(s
)
·
(t
)T
θs(1)
+
θt (si ) ·
0=
i
j
l
t
l
µ∈Nn
|µ|=m

j=1

µ∈Nn
0<|µ|<m

l=1

λ∈Nn
|λ|=m

(ν)

for appropriate Qi (µ, λ) which are polynomials in θs (tj ) (0 < |ν| ≤ m, 1 ≤
µj
Pn (1)
Q
, then
j ≤ n). Let cλ,µ denote the coefficient of T λ in nj=1
l=1 θsl (tj )Tl
the last equality is equivalent to

(5)



(µ)
(cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im · θt (si )

µ∈Im




= −


X

µ′ ∈Nn
0<|µ′ |<m

(µ′ )

θt




(si ) · Qi (µ′ , λ)


,
λ∈Im

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

9

(µ′ )

where Im = {ν ∈ Nn | |ν| = m}. Since by induction all θt (si ) are poly(λ)
nomials in θs (tj ) (0 < |λ| ≤ |µ′ |) and in det(J(t, s))−1 , it suffices to show
that the matrix (cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im is invertible and that its determinant is a power
of det(J(t, s)).
Now, let V be the K-vector space generated by T1 , . . . , Tn and consider the
P
(1)
endomorphism ϕ : V → V, Tj 7→ nl=1 θsl (tj )Tl . Then the transpose of J(t, s)
is just the matrix representing ϕ with respect to the basis (T1 , . . . , Tn ). By
construction (cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im is nothing else then the matrix representing the m-th
symmetric power of ϕ with respect to the basis {T µ | µ ∈ Im }. Hence, by
Lemma 4.4 below, we have
det ((cλ,µ )λ,µ ) = det (J(t, s))B(n,m)

with B(n, m) = n+m−1
as in the lemma.
n
For getting the bound on the degree with respect to det(J(t, s))−1 , we use
(µ)
Equation (5) to see that for µ with |µ| = m the degree of θt (si ) with respect
−1
to det(J(t, s)) is at most by B(n, m) larger than the maximum of the degrees
P
(µ′ )
n+k−1
of all θt (si ) with |µ′ | < m. Hence, the degree is at most m
=
k=1
n

n+m

n+1 .

Lemma 4.4. Let V be a vector space over K of finite dimension n, and ϕ :
V → V an endomorphism. Let Sm (ϕ) : Sm (V ) → Sm (V ) be the induced
endomorphism on the m-th symmetric power of V . Then the determinant of
Sm (ϕ) is given by
det (Sm (ϕ)) = det(ϕ)B(n,m)

.
where B(n, m) = n+m−1
n

Although this seems to be well known, we couldn’t find a proof of this fact in
the literature. Hence, we give one here.
Proof. Since determinants are invariant under extension of scalars, we can assume that K is algebraically closed, and we can choose a Jordan basis b1 , . . . , bn
for ϕ with eigenvalues λ1 , . . . , λn . Hence, det(ϕ) = λ1 λ2 · · · λn .
A basis of the m-th symmetric
power is given by {bµ1 1 · · · bµnn | µ ∈ Im }
Pn
n
where Im = {µ ∈ N |
i=1 µi = m}. If we order the basis lexicographically the matrix representing Sm (ϕ) is again triangular with diagonal entries
{λµ1 1 · · · λµnn | µ ∈ Im }. Hence,
Y µ
λ1 1 · · · λµnn .
(6)
det (Sm (ϕ)) =
µ∈Im

As the last expression is symmetricQ
in λ1 , . . . , λn , it is some power of det(ϕ) =
λ1 λ2 · · · λn . As the total degree of µ∈Im λµ1 1 · · · λµnn is m · #Im and the total
=
degree of det(ϕ) = λ1 λ2 · · · λn is n, the desired power is m
n ·#Im . Finally #Im


n+m−1
m n+m−1
B(n,m)
, and hence det (Sm (ϕ)) = det(ϕ)
for B(n, m) = n
=
m
m
n+m−1
n+m−1
=
.

m−1
n
We have seen in Lemma 2.6 that we can extend the higher derivation θt on
K[t1 , . . . , tn ] to a finite extension R if the extension is étale. In the following

10

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

we have another criterion when a tuple t = (t1 , . . . , tn ) of elements in R define
a higher derivation on R.
Theorem 4.5. Let F/K(s1 , . . . , sn ) be a separable algebraic extension and R ⊆
F a K-subalgebra such that θs : F → F [[T ]] restricts to a higher derivation on
R. Assume that t1 , . . . , tn ∈ R are such that the determinant of J(t, s) is
invertible in R. Then t1 , . . . , tn are algebraically independent over K and the
higher derivation with respect to t on K[t1 , . . . , tn ] can uniquely be extended to
an iterative higher derivation on R.
Proof. As F is a separable algebraic extension of K(s1 , . . . , sn ), the differentials ds1 , . . . , dsn form a F -basis of ΩF/K . As J(t, s) is invertible in F , also
dt1 , . . . , dtn form a F -basis of ΩF/K which means that F is separable algebraic
over K(t1 , . . . , tn ). Hence by Lemma 2.6, the higher derivation with respect to
t = (t1 , . . . , tn ) on K[t1 , . . . , tn ] can uniquely be extended to an iterative higher
derivation on F , and it remains to prove that R is stable under those.
(µ)
By Theorem 4.3, all θt (si ) lie in R, as they can be given as polynomials in
(λ)
θs (tj ) ∈ R and in det(J(t, s))−1 ∈ R. Finally, Theorem 4.1 with roles of t and
(µ)
s reversed, shows that indeed θt (g) is an element of R for every g ∈ R.

As a corollary, we get the following important case of polynomials which is
already present in [5, Thm. 2.13].
Corollary 4.6. Let x1 , . . . , xn be indeterminates, and f1 , . . . , fn ∈ K[x1 , . . . , xn ]
such that det(J(f , x)) ∈ K[x1 , . . . , xn ]× = K × . Then the higher derivation θf
on K[f1 , . . . , fn ] can uniquely be extended to K[x1 , . . . , xn ].
Remark 4.7. Theorem 2.13 in [5] states the unique existence of the extension
of θf to K[x1 , . . . , xn ] for any commutative ring K if additionally the following
properties are fulfilled.
(i) If K has characteristic pe (p prime) then for all L ≥ 0, i = 1, . . . , n and
N = e + ordp (L!) one has


 
X
X
N
N
αi α−Lei
(L) 
p
pN
p
α
pN
θ fi
aα (x1 , . . . , xn )f
=
aα (x1 , . . . , xn )
f
,
L
N
N
0≤α≤p −1

0≤α≤p −1

(L)

(ii) if L! is not a zero-divisor in K, then L! · θfi =
K′



∂
∂fi

L

, as well as

(iii) if φ : K →
is a homomorphism of commutative rings, then the
following diagram commutes.
K[x1 , . . . , xn ]


θf

θφ(f)

/ K[x1 , . . . , xn ][[T ]]


/ K ′ [x1 , . . . , xn ][[T ]]
K ′ [x1 , . . . , xn ]
where the vertical maps are the homomorphisms induced by φ.
Our approach leads to a much shorter proof of their theorem, and even shows
stronger statements which are given in the following proposition.

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

11

Proposition 4.8. For any commutative ring A and f1 , . . . , fn ∈ A[x1 , . . . , xn ]
such that det(J(f , x)) ∈ A[x1 , . . . , xn ]× the iterative higher derivation θf :
A[f1 , . . . , fn ] → A[f1 , . . . , fn ][[T ]] uniquely extends to a higher derivation on
A[x1 , . . . , xn ] (also called θf ). This extension fulfills the following properties:
(i) If A has characteristic pe (p prime) then for all L ≥ 0, i = 1, . . . , n,
and N ∈ N such that pN −e+1 > L, one has


 
X
X
N
N
αi α−Lei
(L) 
p
pN
p
α
pN
θ fi
aα (x1 , . . . , xn )f
=
aα (x1 , . . . , xn )
f
.
L
N
N
0≤α≤p −1

0≤α≤p −1

In particular, this holds for N = e + ordp (L!).
(ii) θf is an iterative higher derivation on A[x1 , . . . , xn ], in particular for
all L > 0,
 L
(L)
L! · θfi = ∂f∂ i .

(iii) If φ : A → A′ is a homomorphism of commutative rings, then the
following diagram commutes.
A[x1 , . . . , xn ]


θf

/ A[x1 , . . . , xn ][[T ]]


θφ(f )

/ A′ [x1 , . . . , xn ][[T ]]
A′ [x1 , . . . , xn ]
where the vertical maps are the homomorphisms induced by φ.

Proof. Since the Jacobian matrix J(f , x) is invertible in S = A[x1 , . . . , xn ], the
extension R = A[f1 , . . . , fn ] ֒→ S = A[x1 , . . . , xn ] = R[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(f1 , . . . , fn )
is standard smooth with ΩS/R = 0 (see [10, Tag 00T7]), and hence étale. Therefore by Lemma 2.6, the higher derivation θf on R = A[f1 , . . . , fn ] uniquely
extends to S = A[x1 , . . . , xn ] and the extension is again iterative. It remains to
verify properties (i) and (iii) given above.
N
For showing Part (i), we recognize that in characteristic pe one has θf (gp ) =
N−e+1

N−e+1

(j)

, . . . , Tnp
]], and hence θfi (xp ) = 0 for
θf (g)p ∈ (S[[T ]])p ⊆ S[[T1p
all 0 < j < pN −e+1 . Applying the Leibniz rule and the definition of θf on
R = A[f1 , . . . , fn ], we obtain the claimed equation. As pordp (L!)+1 > L for every
L > 0, this holds for N = e + ordp (L!).
Part (iii) is clear by uniqueness of the extended θf .

N

N

N

5. Inversion formula for polynomial automorphisms
In this section, we will use the previous to compute the inverse map of a polynomial automorphism.
So from now on let A[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a polynomial ring in n variables over the
commutative ring A and F : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] → A[x1 , . . . , xn ] an endomorphism
given by the polynomials fj (x1 , . . . , xn ) := F (xj ) ∈ A[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Further, we

12

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

assume that the Jacobian matrix
 ∂f1

∂x1


J(f , x) =  ...

∂fn
∂x1

∂f1
∂x2

..

···

.

∂fn
∂x2

···

∂f1 
∂xn

.. 
. 

∂fn
∂xn

is invertible over A[x1 , . . . , xn ], i.e. that det(J(f , x)) ∈ A[x1 , . . . , xn ]× .
By Corollary 4.6 resp. Proposition 4.8, in this case the higher derivation θf
which a priori is only defined on A[f1 , . . . , fn ] can be extended uniquely to a
higher derivation on A[x1 , . . . , xn ].
After the affine transformation fi 7→ fi −fi (0, . . . , 0) we can furthermore assume
that fi ≡ 0 modulo the ideal (x1 , . . . , xn ). In this case F can be extended continuously to an endomorphism F : A[[x1 , . . . , xn ]] → A[[x1 , . . . , xn ]]. Moreover, by
the formal inverse function theorem (see [11, Thm. 1.1.2]), this endomorphism
is even an automorphism as J(f , x) is invertible.
Theorem 5.1. The inverse G of the automorphism F : A[[x1 , . . . , xn ]] →
A[[x1 , . . . , xn ]] is given by
X (µ)
G(h) = (θf (h)|x=0 )T =x =
θf (h)|x=0 xµ for all h ∈ A[[x1 , . . . , xn ]],
µ∈Nn

where θf : A[[x]] → A[[x]][[T ]] is the continuous extension of θf above.
Proof. As the evaluation homomorphisms and θf are ring homomorphisms, G
is a ring homomorphism. Hence, we only have to show that the formula above
gives a formal inverse. By definition,
G(F (xi )) = G(fi ) = (θf (fi )|x=0 ) |T =x = ((fi + Ti )|x=0 ) |T =x = Ti |T =x = xi
where we used that fi (0, . . . , 0) = 0. Therefore, G ◦ F = idA[[x1 ,...,xn ]] , showing
the claim.

Remark 5.2.
(i) In [8], Nousiainen and Sweedler have given a formula for the inverse
which reads in our notation as
X (α)
G(h) =
θf (h)(x − f )α .
α∈Nn

The advantage of our formula is that it gives the inverse directly as
power series which enables us to state and prove Thm. 5.3 below.
(ii) When A is a Q-algebra, our formula is exactly the same as the formula
given in [11, Thm. 3.1.1]. However, the invertibility criterion given
in [11, Prop. 3.1.4(i)] does not hold in positive characteristic. E.g. in
k
positive characteristic p, there are elements h for which θ (p ) (h) might
be non-zero, although θ (n) (h) = 0 for some n < pk . However, the
analog of [11, Prop. 3.1.4(ii)] holds which is stated in the next theorem.

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

13

Theorem 5.3. Let F : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] → A[x1 , . . . , xn ] be as above. Put d :=
deg(F ) := max{deg(fi ) | i = 1, . . . , n} and N := dn−1 . If F is an automorphism, then its inverse is given by
X (λ)
θf (h)|x=0 · xλ .
G : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] → A[x1 , . . . , xn ], h(x1 , . . . , xn ) 7→
λ∈Nn
|λ|≤N

Proof. If F is an automorphism, its inverse has to be the restriction of the
formal inverse G of Theorem 5.1. Furthermore, by [1, Cor. 1.4], the degree of
the inverse is at most N .

Using Thm. 4.3 and the previous formula for the inverse of a polynomial automorphism, one obtains an algorithm for computing the inverse.3 Any automorphism F : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] → A[x1 , . . . , xn ] can easily be decomposed into
an affine transformation and a polynomial automorphism sending (0, . . . , 0)
to (0, . . . , 0), and whose Jacobian matrix is congruent to the identity matrix
modulo the ideal (x1 , . . . , xn ). We therefore use as input of the algorithm the
transformed automorphism.
Algorithm:
INPUT: An automorphism F : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] → A[x1 , . . . , xn ], xi 7→ fi such that
fi (0, . . . , 0) = 0 for all i and that J(f , x)|x=0 = 1n .
OUTPUT: A tuple g1 , . . . , gn inducing an automorphism G : A[x1 , . . . , xn ] →
A[x1 , . . . , xn ], xi 7→ gi which is the inverse of F .
Algorithm:
1. Set d := deg(F) and N := dn−1 .
1, i = j
for i, j = 1, . . . , n and ej being the j-th
2. Set αi,ej :=
0, i 6= j
standard vector.
3. for l := 2 to N do
Compute for all λ ∈ Nn with |λ| = l and i = 1, . . . , n:


X
αi,λ := −
αi,ν · coeff. of xλ in f ν .
0<|ν|<l

4. Define for i = 1, . . . , n:

gi :=

X

αi,λ · xλ .

λ∈Nn
0<|λ|≤N

Proof. We prove that the algorithm really computes the inverse given in Theo(λ)
rem 5.3, hence that the αi,λ are equal to θf (xi )|x=0 . This is done by induction
(0)

on m = |λ|. Also be aware that θf (xi )|x=0 = xi |x=0 = 0, so that indeed the
sum for G(xi ) in Thm. 5.3 starts at |λ| = 1.
For m = 1, we have λ = ej for some j ∈ {1, . . . , n} and


∂xi
1, i = j
(ej )
|x=0 =
= αi,ej ,
θf (xi )|x=0 =
0, i 6= j
∂fj
3Although in Thm. 4.3 we have a base field, the formulas given there hold over any ring A.

14

ANDREAS MAURISCHAT

since by assumption J(x, f )|x=0 = (J(f , x)|x=0 )−1 = 1n .
Now let m > 1. By Equation (5) we have



(µ)
θf (xi )

µ∈Im

−1  X

·
= − (cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im


ν∈Nn

0<|ν|<m




(ν)
θf (xi ) · Qi (ν, λ)


,
λ∈Im

where Im = {µ′ ∈ Nn | |µ′ | = m}, Qi (ν, λ) is the coefficient of T λ in
Q
n
νj
j=1 (θx (fj ) − fj ) , and (cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im is the l-th symmetric power of the transpose of J(f , x). By reducing modulo (x1 , . . . , xn ) and recognizing that modulo
(x1 , . . . , xn ) the matrix (cλ,µ )λ,µ∈Im is the identity matrix, we get that
X
(λ)
αi,ν · Qi (ν, λ)|x=0 .
θf (xi )|x=0 = −
ν∈Nn
0<|ν|<m

As we have (θx (fj ) − fj ) |x=0 = (fj (x + T ) − fj (x)) |x=0 = fj (T ), the term
Q
Qi (ν, λ)|x=0 equals the coefficient of T λ in nj=1 fj (T )νj , hence the coefficient
of xλ in f ν .
(λ)
Therefore, αi,λ = θf (xi )|x=0 for |λ| = m.

Remark 5.4. If one naively computes the inverse G by the Ansatz
X
gi :=
αi,λ · xλ
λ∈Nn
0<|λ|≤N

and elaborating the conditions on the αi,λ using gi (f1 , . . . , fn ) = xi , one will
get exactly the equations in the algorithm:


X
αi,λ = −
αi,ν · coeff. of xλ in f ν .
0<|ν|<l

Hence, the formula for the inverse in Theorem 5.3 is not good for algorithmic
purposes, but only for theoretical purposes. In practice, the computation via
Gröbner bases given in [11, Thm. 3.2.1] is much faster.
References
[1] Hyman Bass, Edwin H. Connell, and David Wright. The Jacobian conjecture: reduction
of degree and formal expansion of the inverse. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 7(2):287–
330, 1982.
[2] Cavaliere Francesco Faà di Bruno. Note sur une nouvelle formule de calcul différentiel.
Quarterly J. Pure Appl. Math., 1:359–360, 1857.
[3] L. E. Fraenkel. Formulae for high derivatives of composite functions. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 83(2):159–165, 1978.
[4] Florian Heiderich. Picard-Vessiot-Theorie für lineare partielle Differentialgleichungen.
Master’s thesis, Heidelberg University, 2007.
[5] Shun-ichi Kimura and Shun-ichiro Okuda. Positive characteristic approach to weak kernel
conjecture. Hiroshima Math. J., 35(3):351–370, 2005.
[6] Hideyuki Matsumura. Commutative ring theory, volume 8 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, second edition, 1989.
Translated from the Japanese by M. Reid.

CHAIN RULE FORMULA AND POLYNOMIAL INVERSES

15

[7] Andreas Maurischat. Galois theory for iterative connections and nonreduced Galois
groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 362(10):5411–5453, 2010.
[8] Pekka Nousiainen and Moss E. Sweedler. Automorphisms of polynomial and power series
rings. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 29(1):93–97, 1983.
[9] Andreas Röscheisen. Iterative Connections and Abhyankar’s Conjecture. PhD thesis, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany, 2007.
[10] The Stacks Project Authors. Stacks Project. http://stacks.math.columbia.edu, 2016.
[11] Arno van den Essen. Polynomial automorphisms and the Jacobian conjecture, volume 190
of Progress in Mathematics. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2000.

Andreas Maurischat, Lehrstuhl A für Mathematik, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
E-mail address: andreas.maurischat@matha.rwth-aachen.de

