arXiv:1412.2224v2 [math.AC] 5 Feb 2017

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES
DANIEL MAX HOFFMANN†

Abstract. We describe a general method for expanding a truncated G-iterative
Hasse-Schmidt derivation, where G is an algebraic group. We give examples
of algebraic groups for which our method works.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Basic notions about F -derivations
2.1. HS-derivations
2.2. Iterative HS-derivations
2.3. Commutative HS-derivations
3. Canonical G-bases and the Integrability
4. New examples of groups with canonical G-bases
4.1. Unipotent groups of dimension two
4.2. Canonical G-bases for commutative and connected groups
4.3. Possible generalisations
References

1
2
2
4
7
9
12
12
20
22
22

1. Introduction
Our motivation for this paper is [14] and [3], where some nice model-theoretic properties are obtained for fields equipped with HS-derivations satisfying the standard
iterativity rule. Analyzing the reasoning in [14] and [3], we deduce that one of the
most important properties of an iterative Hasse-Schmidt derivation is Matsumura’s
strong integrability (a notion from [4], see: Definition 2.15). Thus we are especially
interested in it.
Briefly, strong integrability means that a truncated iterative HS-derivation can be
expanded to a not-truncated one, satisfying the same iterativity conditions. We
prove (Theorem 3.8) that the existence of a canonical basis (Definition 3.6) implies
strong integrability for an arbitrary iterativity condition. However, the converse is
not true in general (see Remark 3.9), which is related to the problem of the existence of canonical basis in a given field.
Finding a canonical basis is not an easy task. Hideyuki Matsumura in [4] proved the
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 13N15; Secondary 14L15, 20G15.
Key words and phrases. Hasse-Schmidt derivations, separably closed fields, algebraic groups,
group scheme actions.
† SDG. Part of this work was conducted during author’s internship at the Warsaw Center of
Mathematics and Computer Science. Partially supported by NCN grant 2016/20/T/ST1/00482
and NCN grant 2015/19/B/ST1/01150.
1

2

D. HOFFMANN

existence of canonical basis for Ga (the standard iterativity). Afterwards Andrzej
Tyc in [9] did the same for Gm and one dimensional formal groups over algebraically
closed fields. Martin Ziegler showed existence of canonical bases for powers of Ga
proving the quantifier elimination for the theory of separably closed fields in [14]
and [13] (see Example 3.7). Before this paper only products of Ga and Gm were
considered. We cover the case of commutative, connected, unipotent groups of dimension 2 over an algebraically closed field. That leads us to Theorem 4.17, stating
that, over an algebraically closed field, linear algebraic groups that are connected
and commutative have canonical basis if unipotent elements form a subgroup of
dimension ≤ 2. This theorem includes all the previous results (mentioned above).
Piotr Kowalski and I in [2] are treating iterative HS-derivations in much more abstract way. Many proofs from [2] would be obvious if canonical bases exist for the
HS-derivations considered there (a similar sentence was noted at the end of Section
2. in [3]). Moreover, Section 6. in [2] suggests possible generalisations for the
notion of canonical basis.
I thank my advisor, Piotr Kowalski, for his invaluable contribution. I am also
grateful to the referee for a very useful report.
2. Basic notions about F -derivations
2.1. HS-derivations. All the rings considered in this paper are commutative and
with unity. Fix a field k of the characteristic p > 0, e ∈ N>0 and m ∈ N>0 ∪ {∞}.
Let R be any k-algebra. In this subsection we recall some definitions and well-known
facts about HS-derivations.
Definition 2.1. We say that D = (Di : R → R)i∈Ne is an e-dimensional HSderivation over k if the map
X
D : R → RJX̄K,
r 7→
Di (r)X̄ i ,
i∈Ne

where X̄ i = X1i1 · . . . · Xeie for i = (i1 , . . . , ie ), is a k-algebra homomorphism and
D0 = idR .
m

m

m

m

We introduce R[v̄] := R[X̄]/(X1p , . . . , Xep ), so vi = Xi + (X1p , . . . , Xep ) and
v̄ = (v1 , . . . , ve ) (for m = ∞ we set vi = Xi , R[v̄] = RJX̄K). After composing D
with the natural mapping R[X̄] → R[v̄] we obtain a truncation of D, denoted by
D[m] = (Di : R → R)i∈[pm ]e . This lead us to the following:
Definition 2.2. A collection D = (Di : R → R)i∈[pm ]e is called an m-truncated
e-dimensional HS-derivation over k if the map
X
Di (r)v̄ i ,
D : R → R[v̄],
r 7→
i∈[pm ]e

where v̄ i = v1i1 · . . . · veie for i = (i1 , . . . , ie ), is a k-algebra homomorphism and
D0 = idR .
Clearly, any ∞-truncated HS-derivation is just an HS-derivation. We have seen
that it is easy to obtain from an HS-derivation an m-truncated one. For a field
R = K the converse is also true.

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

3

Theorem 2.3. Let R be a smooth k-algebra, D = (Di : R → R)i∈[pm ]e an mtruncated e-dimensional HS-derivation over k. There exists an e-dimensional HSderivation D′ = (Di′ : R → R)i∈Ne over k such that for every i ∈ [pm ]e we have
Di′ = Di .
Proof. We recursively construct D′ as was done at [4, p. 236], but using the following diagram
n
ϕ
/ R[X]/(X p , . . . , Xepn )
RO ❯ ❯
1
O
❯ ❯
❯ ❯
π
❯ ❯*
n+1
n+1
p
/ R[X]/(X
k
, . . . , Xep )
1
n
P
n

Di (x)X̄ i + (X1p , . . . , Xep ) and π is the quotient map.
where ϕ(x) :=
i∈[pn ]e

Remark 2.4. Theorem 2.3 is a generalisation of [4, Thm. 6.]. Note that the best
possible situation is for a k-algebra R which is étale over k. In such a case there
exists a unique expansion of every m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation.

By [5, Thm. 26.9], separability implies smoothness, so Theorem 2.3 works in particular for a separable fields extension k ⊆ K. Because so far we do not demand
anything from k we can take k = Fp , hence the assumption about a separable
extension k ⊆ K is negligible in the following way:
Corollary 2.5. Every m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation on a field K has
an extension to an e-dimensional HS-derivation.
We call an m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation D on R integrable if there
exists e-dimensional HS-derivation D′ on R such that Di′ = Di for every i ∈ [pm ]e .
Corollary 2.5 says that truncated HS-derivations on a field are always integrable,
but it is not true for arbitrary rings [4, Example 3.]. Moreover, the described
situation dramatically changes after adding some iterativity conditions. Before
considering iterative HS-derivations, we state more well-known facts about general
HS-derivations, which will be needed in the sequel.
f

Lemma 2.6. Assume that R −
→ S is a homomorphism of k-algebras. Let D be an
m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation on R over k.
i) If S is smooth over R, then there exists an m-truncated e-dimensional HSderivation D′ on S over k such that for every i1 , . . . , ie < pm
(1)

′
f.
f D(i1 ,...,ie ) = D(i
1 ,...,ie )

ii) If S is unramified over R, then there exists at most one m-truncated edimensional HS-derivation D′ on S over k such that for every i1 , . . . , ie <
pm
′
f.
f D(i1 ,...,ie ) = D(i
1 ,...,ie )
Proof. The lemma just reformulates [2, Prop. 3.3].



Fact 2.7. For every m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation and every x ∈ R the
following holds
(
D( i1 ,..., ie ) (x)p if p|i1 , . . . , ie
p
p
D(i1 ,...,ie ) (xp ) =
0
otherwise.

4

D. HOFFMANN

Proof. It follows from the definition (see e.g. [6, Lemma 1.1]).



2.2. Iterative HS-derivations. In this subsection we deal with iterative HSderivations. The main purpose is to provide basic properties. Let F (v̄, w̄) =
e
(F1 (v̄, w̄), . . . , Fe (v̄, w̄)) ∈ k[v̄, w̄] (still k[v̄, w̄] = kJX̄, Ȳ K for m = ∞) and let D
be an m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation on R over k. Sometimes we need
to distinguish between D : R → R[v̄] and D : R → R[w̄], therefore they will be
denoted by Dv̄ and Dw̄ respectively.
Definition 2.8. We call D F -iterative if the following diagram commutes
R

Dv̄

Dw̄ [v̄]

Dv̄


R[v̄]

/ R[v̄]

evF


/ R[v̄, w̄]

P
P
Dw̄ (ri )v̄ i . We will write shortly F -derivation for an
where Dw̄ [v̄]( ri v̄ i ) :=
i

i

F -iterative m-truncated e-dimensional HS-derivation over k.

Example 2.9. For m = ∞ and e = 1 we can take F = Ga = X + Y . It encodes
the classical iterativity rule


i+j
Di ◦ Dj =
Di+j .
i
An example of a Ga -derivation is the following collection of functions on k[X]:

k
0, if n > k
X

k

αi X i = P
Dn

αi ni X i−n , if n ≤ k,
i=0

i=n

where n ∈ N. For the formal group law F = Gm = X + Y + XY above formulas
are more complicated (see [1, Example 3.6]).
Example 2.10. For every formal group law F (X̄, Ȳ ) ∈ (kJX̄, Ȳ K)e we have canonical F -derivation
DF := evF (X̄,Ȳ ) : kJX̄K → kJX̄KJȲ K.
Compare with [2, Example 3.25].
Example 2.11. For actions of finite group schemes, which underlying Hopf algebra is defined on k[v̄], we have a natural correspondence with the truncated F derivations for an appropriate F (see Section 3. in [2]). Therefore we are especially
interested in group scheme actions of k-group schemes of the form g = Spec k[v̄] on
the scheme Spec R. By [2, Remark 3.9], such a group scheme action corresponds
to an F -derivation on R, where F is the Hopf algebra comultiplication given by g.
Assume that R is a k-algebra with an F -derivation D. The pair (R, D) will be
called an F -ring. If K is a field and (K, D) is an F -ring, then (K, D) will be called
an F -field. Let (R, D) be an F -ring, similarly (S, D′ ). A morphism of k-algebras
f : R → S is an F -morphism if for every i, f Di = Di′ f . Moreover, if such f is
injective, R is F -subring of S (similarly F -subfield for F -fields).

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

5

Example 2.12. Let G be an algebraic group over k, we denote by OG the local
ring of G at the identity (it is a regular local ring) and by x̄ = (x1 , . . . , xe ) a choice
of its local parameters. For F = Ĝ we have F (x̄, Ȳ ) ∈ OG JȲ K, so (OG , DF |OG ) is
an F -subring of (kJX̄K, DF ). Hence k(G) is equipped with a natural Ĝ-derivation,
which will be denoted by DG and called canonical G-derivation. It depends on
the choice of local parameters, but we prefer the adjective “canonical”. For more
details check [2, Example 3.27].
For an F -ring (R, D) and i ∈ [pm ]e we introduce Ci := ker Di , and two more sets:
CR := C(1,0...,0) ∩ . . . ∩ C(0,...,0,1)
and
abs
CR
:=

\

Ci

(the ring of constants),

(the ring of absolute constants).

i6=0
abs
Both, CR and CR
, are subrings of R (see Remark 3.1).
f

Lemma 2.13. Assume that R −
→ S is a homomorphism of k-algebras. Let D be
an F -derivation on R.
i) If S is étale (smooth and unramified) over R, then there exists a unique
F -derivation D′ on S such that for every i1 , . . . , ie < pm
′
f D(i1 ,...,ie ) = D(i
f.
1 ,...,ie )

ii) If S is unramified over R, then there exists at most one F -derivation D′ on
S such that for every i1 , . . . , ie < pm
′
f.
f D(i1 ,...,ie ) = D(i
1 ,...,ie )

Proof. Compare to [2, Prop. 3.18]. Part ii) is, by Lemma 2.6.ii), true even without
the iterativity assumption. For the proof of part i), it is enough to show that
an HS-derivation D′ from Lemma 2.6 is F -iterative, i.e. the following diagram is
commutative
S

D′v̄

D′w̄ [v]

D′v̄


S[v]

/ S[v]

evF


/ S[v, w]

It is similar to the proof of [5, Theorem 27.2] and we leave it to the reader.



Let F (v̄, w̄) ∈ (k[v̄, w̄])e , m′ ≤ m and let v¯′ , w̄′ denote the m′ -truncated variables
m′
m′
m′
m′
(k[v¯′ , w̄′ ] = k[X̄, Ȳ ]/(X1p , . . . , Xep , Y1p , . . . , Yep )). By F [m′ ] we denote the
m′ -truncation of F which is equal to ev(v¯′ ,w̄′ ) F (v̄, w̄) (the image of F in the ring of
e
truncated polynomials k[v¯′ , w̄′ ] ). If D is F -iterative, then D[m′ ] is F [m′ ]-iterative
as well (for the notion of D[m], check the first lines after Definition 2.1).
Example 2.14. For every m ∈ N>0 we get a Ĝ[m]-field structure on k(G) - just
consider DG [m].
Definition 2.15. Let F (X̄, Ȳ ) ∈ (kJX̄, Ȳ K)e and let D be an F [m]-derivation on
a k-algebra R. We call D strongly integrable if there exists an F -derivation D′ on
R such that D′ [m] = D.

6

D. HOFFMANN

In the next few facts we give simple properties of F -derivations on a k-algebra R.
Those facts were intended for a formal group law F , but it is enough to demand that
F (v̄, w̄) ∈ (k[v̄, w̄])e , F (v̄, 0̄) = v̄ and F (0̄, w̄) = w̄. However, we do not consider
F -derivations in the case when F is not a formal group law, even the existence for
such (non-trivial) derivations is not clear in general.
Fact 2.16. For every i and j there exists r(Dj′ )0<|j′ |<|i+j| , a k-linear combination
of Dj′ , where 0 < |j′ | < |i + j|, such that

 

ie + je
i1 + j1
Di+j + r(Dj′ )0<|j′ |<|i+j| .
...
Dj Di =
ie
i1
Proof. It is clear for i = 0 or j = 0, so assume that both i and j differ from 0. Since
F (v̄, 0) = v̄, F (0, w̄) = w̄, we have F (v̄, w̄) = (v1 + w1 + S1 , . . . , ve + we + Se ) for
some S1 , . . . , Se belonging to the ideal (vi wj )i,j≤e . Therefore for every r ∈ R
X
D(j1 ,...,je ) D(i1 ,...,ie ) (r)v1i1 · . . . · veie · w1j1 · . . . · weje =
j1 ,...,je ,i1 ,...,ie

X

D(k1 ,...,ke ) (r)(v1 + w1 + S1 )k1 · . . . · (ve + we + Se )ke .

k1 ,...,ke

We are interested in the coefficients at A := v1i1 · . . . · veie · w1j1 · . . . · weje on the right
side of the above equation. First of all, note that vi + wi + Si , i 6 e, is an element
of the maximal ideal (v1 , . . . , ve , w1 , . . . , we ), hence it is of the form
α1 v1 + . . . + αe ve + β1 w1 + . . . + βe we ,
for some α1 , . . . , αe , β1 , . . . , βe ∈ k[v̄, w̄]. Each component of the above sum has
total degree at least 1, so the total degree of each summand of (vi + wi + Si )ki is
at least ki . Therefore the total degree of
(v1 + w1 + S1 )k1 · . . . · (ve + we + Se )ke
it at least equal to k1 + . . . + ke . On the other hand, the total degree of A is equal
to |i + j|. After comparing degrees, we see that if k1 + . . . + ke > |i + j| then there
is no chance to find a component of
D(k1 ,...,ke ) (r)(v1 + w1 + S1 )k1 · . . . · (ve + we + Se )ke
equal to A multiplied by some element of R.
Let k1 + . . . + ke = |i + j|. Since S1 , . . . , Se ∈ (vi wj )i,j≤e , each summand of Si ,
i 6 e, has total degree at least 2. The only component of
D(k1 ,...,ke ) (r)(v1 + w1 + S1 )k1 · . . . · (ve + we + Se )ke
for which the total degree will be equal |i + j| “omits” S1 , . . . , Se . Therefore we are
looking for the coefficient of
D(k1 ,...,ke ) (r)(v1 + w1 )k1 · . . . · (ve + we )ke ,
which is divisible by A.



Fact 2.17. Assume that also D′ is an F -derivation on R. If for all l ≤ e and i < m
′
′
we have D(0,...,0, pi ,0,...,0) = D(0,...,0,
pi ,0,...,0) then D = D .
l-th place

l-th place

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

7

′
Proof. Induction on |j|. Clearly, D(0,...,0) = idR = D(0,...,0)
. Take j = (j1 , . . . , je ) 6=
′
′
(0, . . . , 0) and assume that Dj′ = Dj′ for every j such that |j′ | < |j|. Without loss
of generality, we set j1 6= 0. Let j1 = γ0 + γ1 p + . . . + γs ps , where γ0 , . . . , γs < p
and γs 6= 0. Fact 2.16 implies that

D(ps ,0,...,0) D(j1 −ps ,j2 ,...,je ) = γs Dj + r(Dj′ )0<|j′ |<|j| ,
′
′
′
′
D(p
s ,0,...,0) D(j −ps ,j ,...,j ) = γs Dj + r(Dj′ )0<|j′ |<|j| .
1
2
e

A k-linear combination r(Dj′ )0<|j′ |<|j| is unique for F (what can be deduced from
the proof of Fact 2.16), hence, by the inductive assumption, it is equal to r(Dj′′ )0<|j′ |<|j| .
Moreover, it follows from the inductive assumption that
′
′
D(ps ,0,...,0) D(j1 −ps ,j2 ,...,je ) = D(p
s ,0,...,0) D(j −ps ,j ,...,j ) ,
1
2
e

so Dj = Dj′ .



Lemma 2.18. Let (K, D) be an F -field and let ∂1 , . . . , ∂pe be all different elements
of {D(i0 ,...,ie ) | i0 , . . . , ie < p}. Take any x1 , . . . , xn ∈ K. Elements x1 ,. . . , xn are
linearly dependent over CK if and only if the rank of the matrix ∂i (xj ) i≤pe ,j≤n is
smaller than n.
Proof. The proof of [2, Proposition 3.20] works well for the above, more general
lemma.

Corollary 2.19. For every F -field extension K ⊆ L, K and CL are linearly disjoint
over CK .
Definition 2.20. We call an F -field (K, D) strict if CK = K p .
Remark 2.21. Let K ⊆ L be an F -field extension. If K is strict, then K ⊆ L is
separable.
Proof. By Corollary 2.19, K and Lp ⊆ CL are linearly disjoint over K p = CK , so
by [5, Theorem 26.4] L is separable over K.

Lemma 2.22. For any F -field (K, D) we have [K : CK ] 6 pe .
Proof. It follows from Lemma 2.18.



2.3. Commutative HS-derivations. In this subsection we deal with formulas for
(p)
Di (the p-th composition) in the case of an F -derivation D = (Di )i∈[pm ]e for a
commutative F (i.e. F (v̄, w̄) = F (w̄, v̄)). The main idea follows Section 3.3. in [1],
but improves the reasoning of [1, Proposition 3.11] and [1, Remark 3.12.(4)]. The
idea to focus on the ring of symmetric polynomials comes from Piotr Kowalski. We
assume only that F (v̄, w̄) ∈ (k[v̄, w̄])e is commutative and that (R, D) is an F -ring.
Obviously:
Fact 2.23. We have the following
Dj ◦ Di = Di ◦ Dj .
For every N ≥ 1 we introduce the following k-algebra homomorphism
EN : R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 ] → R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N ],
EN = Dv̄N [v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 ],

8

D. HOFFMANN

where v̄1 , . . . , v̄N are e-tuples of m-truncated variables and
 X

i −1
=
Dv̄N [v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 ]
αi1 ,...,iN −1 v̄1i1 · . . . · v̄NN−1
i1 ,...,iN −1

=

X

iN
DiN (αi1 ,...,iN −1 )v̄1i1 · . . . · v̄N
.

i1 ,...,iN

For N ≥ 1 we define inductively
F1 (v̄1 ) := v̄1 ,

FN +1 (v̄1 , . . . , v̄N +1 ) := FN v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 , F (v̄N , v̄N +1 ) .

Lemma 2.24. For every N ≥ 1 the following diagram commutes
EN ◦...◦E1
/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N ]
R ❏❏
❏❏
♠6
❏❏
♠♠♠
♠
♠
❏
♠
E1 ❏$
♠♠♠ evFN
R[v̄1 ]

Proof. It is clear for N = 1, so assume for the induction step that the last diagram
is commutative. Consider
R

EN −1 ◦...◦E1

E1


R[v̄1 ]

EN

/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 ]

EN +1

EN

evFN


/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N ]
ev(v̄

/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N ]

/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N +1 ]
)

1 ,...,v̄N −1 ,F (v̄N ,v̄N +1

Left part is commutative by the inductive assumption. For commutativity of the
right side, just apply the functor
R → R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄N −1 ]
to the diagram from the F -iterativity definition and change v̄, w̄ to v̄N , v̄N +1 .
Finally
 ◦ evF = evF
ev
N +1 .
N
v̄1 ,...,v̄N −1 ,F (v̄N ,v̄N +1 )



Note that the following composition of mappings
E

E

Ep

2
1
R[v̄1 , v̄2 ] → . . . −−→ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]
R[v̄1 ] −−→
R −−→

is a k-algebra homomorphism such that im(Ep ◦ . . . ◦ E1 ) is, by Fact 2.23, a subset
of the ring of symmetric polynomials in v̄1 , . . . , v̄p , i.e.: elements of R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]
invariant under the action of Sp ,
σ : v̄i = (vi,1 , . . . , vi,e ) 7→ v̄σ(i) = (vσ(i),1 , . . . , vσ(i),e ),
for σ ∈ Sp and i ≤ p. In other words the map Ep ◦ . . . ◦ E1 factors as in following
the diagram
❴❱❱❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴/ R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]Sp
R❱
❱❱❱❱
❱❱❱❱
❱❱❱❱
⊆
Ep ◦...◦E1 ❱❱❱*

R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES
1

9

1

p
For ϕ : R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]Sp → R[v̄1p ], given by by vi,j 7→ v1,j
, where i ≤ p and j ≤ e,
also the map ϕ factors as in the following diagram

R[v̄1 , . . . , v̄p ]Sp ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ ❴/ R[v̄1 ]
❱❱❱❱
❱❱❱❱
❱❱
⊆
ϕ ❱❱❱❱❱
❱❱❱*
1
R[v̄1p ]
Therefore ϕ : im(Ep ◦ . . . ◦ E1 ) → R[v̄1 ], defined is a well-defined k-algebra homomorphism.
For any N ≥ 1 we define inductively the “multiplication by N map”:
[1]F := v̄,
[N + 1]F := F (v̄, [N ]F ).
For example [2]F = F (v̄, v̄).
Corollary 2.25. For any r ∈ R we have
X (p)
X

Di (r)v̄ i = ev[p]F (v̄1/p )
Di (r)v̄ i .
i

i

Proof. By Lemma 2.24 we know that

Ep ◦ . . . ◦ E1 (r) = evFp ◦E1 (r),
so
X

(p)

Di (r)v̄1i = ϕ ◦ Ep ◦ . . . ◦ E1 (r) = ϕ ◦ evFp ◦E1 (r) = ev[p]F (v̄1/p )
1

i

X
i


Di (r)v̄1i .

The first equality is similar to [1, Lemma 3.7], the last follows from definitions of
[p]F , Fp and ϕ. For example let p = 2:
ϕ ◦ evF2 (v̄1 ,v̄2 ) = evF2 (v̄1/p ,v̄1/p ) = ev[2]F (v̄1/p ) .
1

1

1


3. Canonical G-bases and the Integrability
The results of this section focus on proving the integrability for a field equipped with
an iterative HS-derivation and endowed with a p-basis of a special kind. For the
notion of p-independence, p-basis and their basic properties, the reader is referred
to [5, p. 202.]. Recall that k is a perfect field. Assume that G is an algebraic group
over k of dimension e (perhaps not commutative). We will write G[m]-derivation,
G[m]-ring, G[m]-field, . . . instead of Ĝ[m]-derivation, Ĝ[m]-ring, Ĝ[m]-field, . . .
Let (K, D) be a G[m]-field. For every s ∈ {0, . . . , m − 1} we introduce
Fs :=

s
\

C(pj ,0,...,0) ∩ C(0,pj ,0,...,0) ∩ . . . ∩ C(0,...,0,pj ) ,

F−1 := K.

j=0

Remark 3.1. Sets Fs are, due to Fact 2.17, subfields of K. In fact Fs is equal to
the field of constants of order s (the absolute constants of D[s + 1]).
For the clarity of the following proofs, we note an obvious fact:

10

D. HOFFMANN
1

Fact 3.2. Let L ⊆ L′ be an extension of fields. If y ∈ L p \L ⊆ L′ , then [L(y) :
L] = p.
Lemma 3.3. Let z1 , . . . , ze ∈ K form a p-basis of (or equivalently, by Lemma 2.22,
“are p-independent in”) K over CK = F0 . For every s ∈ {0, . . . , m − 1} we have
s

s

Fs−1 = Fs (z1p , . . . , zep ).

[Fs−1 : Fs ] = pe ,

Proof. Being a p-basis for K over F0 , due to K p ⊆ F0 , means that K = F0 (z1 , . . . , ze )
and that [F0 (z1 , . . . , ze ) : F0 ] = pe . Notice that, by Lemma 3.31 from [2] and Lemma
2.22,
s
s
[Fs (z1p , . . . , zep ) : Fs ] ≤ [Fs−1 : Fs ] ≤ pe .
s

s

It is enough to show that [Fs (z1p , . . . , zep ) : Fs ] = pe . We know that {z1i1 · . . . ·
s
s
zeie | 0 ≤ i1 , . . . , ie < p} is F0 -linearly independent, thus {z1i1 p · . . . · zeie p | 0 ≤
s
i1 , . . . , ie < p} is F0p -linearly independent. Consider
s

(K p , D[s + 1]|K ps ) ⊆ (Fs−1 , D[s + 1]|Fs−1 ).
ps

By [2, Lemma 3.31], it is an extension of G[1]Fr -fields. Therefore, by Corollary
s
2.19, K p is linearly disjoint from constants of D[s + 1]|Fs−1 over constants of D[s +
s
s
s
1]|K ps . So F0p -linear independence of {z1i1 p · . . . · zeie p | 0 ≤ i1 , . . . , ie < p} implies
s
ps

it Fs -linear independence. Hence [Fs (z1 , . . . , zep ) : Fs ] = pe .
Remark 3.4. The equality
[Fs−1 : Fs ] = pe ,
where s ∈ {0, . . . , m − 1}, does not depend on the choice of a p-basis. Therefore it
is true if [K : CK ] = pe .
Proposition 3.5. Let z1 , . . . , ze ∈ K form a p-basis of (or equivalently “are pabs
independent in”) K over CK = F0 . Then there exists a subset B0 ⊆ CK
= Fm−1 ,
for which B := B0 ∪ {z1 , . . . , ze } is a p-basis for K over k.
m

m

Proof. In particular, Lemma 3.3 implies that the set {z1p , . . . zep } is p-independent
over k in Fm−1 . Let B ′ be a p-basis B ′ of the field Fm−1 over k of the form
m
m
B ′ = B0 ∪· {z1p , . . . , zep }. We will show that B := B0 ∪ {z1 , . . . , ze } is a p-basis of
m
m
K over k. Since for s = m, B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , zep } = B ′ is, as above, a p-basis for
Fm−1 over k, it is enough to show the following induction step
s

s

if B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , zep } is p-basis for Fs−1 over k,
s−1
s−1
then B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , zep } is p-basis for Fs−2 over k,
where s descends from m to 1.
Firstly, we argue for the p-independence of B0 in Fs−2 . For any n ∈ N and pairwise
distinct x1 , . . . , xn ∈ B0 , by Lemma 3.3, we have
s

s

p
p
p
p
] = pn+e ,
[Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−1
] = [Fs−1
(z1p , . . . , zep , x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−1

using Lemma 3.3 again, we get
s

s

p
p
p
p
]
pn+e = [Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
] · [Fs−1
(z1p , . . . , zep ) : Fs−1
p
p
= [Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
] · pe .

Elements x1 , . . . , xn were choosen arbitrary, so indeed B0 is p-independent over k
in Fs−2 .

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES
s−1

We will show now the p-independence of B0 ∪ {z1p
n ∈ N, pairwise distinct x1 , . . . , xn ∈ B0 ,
s−1

p
[Fs−2
(z1p
s−1

p
= [Fs−2
(z1p

s−1

, . . . , zep

s−1

, . . . , zep

p
p
p
, x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn )] · [Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
].
s−1

s−1

} in Fs−2 . For any

p
, x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
]=

To show the p-independence of B0 ∪ {z1p
to prove
p
[Fs−2
(z1p

s−1

, . . . , zep

11

s−1

, . . . , zep

s−1

, . . . , zep

} over k in Fs−2 we need only

p
, x1 , . . . , xn ) : Fs−2
(x1 , . . . , xn )] = pe .

By Fact 3.2 it reduces to show that for each i ≤ e we have
s−1

zip

s−1

s−1

p
p
6∈ Fs−2
(zi+1
, . . . , zep

s

, x1 , . . . , xn )
s−1

s−1

p
p
p
(clearly zip ∈ Fs−2
). It holds due to Lemma 3.3 and Fs−2
(zi+1
, . . . , zep
s−1
ps−1
Fs−1 (zi+1 , . . . , zep ).
Finally, we see that
s−1

Fs−2 = Fs−1 (z1p
=
=
=

s−1

, . . . , zep

, x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆

)

s−1
s
s−1
s
p
Fs−1
(B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , zep })(z1p , . . . , z p )
s−1
s
s−1
s
p
Fs−1
(z1p , . . . , zep )(B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , z p })
s−1
s−1
p
Fs−2
(B0 ∪ {z1p , . . . , z p }),

and that ends proof of the induction, after last step we obtain that B0 ∪ {z1 , . . . ze }
is a p-basis for F1−2 = K over k.

In the spirit of [2, definition 6.1] we introduce the following term:
Definition 3.6. Let (K, D[m]) be a G[m]-field. A subset B ⊆ K is called a
canonical G-basis if
• |B| = e,
• B is p-independent in K over CK ,
• there is an embedding of G[m]-fields (k(G), DG [m]) → (K, D[m]) (see Example 2.12) such that B is the image of the set of canonical parameters of
G corresponding to the canonical G-derivation.
Example 3.7. Let us take G = Gea . By [5, Theorem 27.3] and Lemma 4.15 if
[K : CK ] = pe then (K, D[m]) has a canonical Gea -basis. This fact was used in
[14], to obtain the quantifier elimination for the theory of separably closed strict
Gea -fields, satisfying [K : CK ] = pe .
Theorem 3.8. Assume that a G[m]-field (K, D[m]) has a canonical G-basis, then
D[m] is strongly integrable.
Proof. Let B = {z1 , . . . , ze } be a canonical G-basis of (K, D[m]) and let X̄ be an
e-tuple of variables. By a choice of local parameters of G at the identity we get an
abs
embedding k(X̄) ⊆ k(G). Proposition 3.5 assures the existence of a set B0 ⊆ CK
′
such that B0 ∪ B is a p-basis of K over k. Let K := k(B0 ). Because B0 ∪ B
is algebraically independent over k, B0 is algebraically independent over k(B).
Moreover k(B) ∼
= k(X̄) ⊂ k(G) is an algebraic extension, thus B0 is algebraically
independent over k(G). Therefore K ′ and k(G) are linearly disjoint over k, so the

12

D. HOFFMANN

“multiplication” map µ : k(G) ⊗k K ′ → K is an injection, and therefore it extends
to µ̃ : (k(G) ⊗k K ′ )0 → K.
By [5, Theorem 26.8], K ′ (B) is purely transcendental over K ′ and K ′ (B) ⊆ K
is 0-étale. Hence we have K ′ (B) ∼
= K ′ (X̄) ∼
= (k(X̄) ⊗k K ′ )0 ⊆ (k(G) ⊗k K ′ )0
′
(k(G) ⊗k K is a domain as a subring of K). Therefore we have a natural mapping
K ′ (B) → (k(G) ⊗k K ′ )0 =: K ′ (G).
Note that the following diagram commutes

K ′ (B)

♣8
♣♣♣
♣
♣
♣♣

K ′ (G)
❑❑❑ µ̃
❑❑❑
❑❑❑
%/
⊆

K

The extension of fields K ′ (B) ⊆ K is smooth, and by [5, Theorem 26.9] it is also
separable. In particular, K ′ (G) is separable over K ′ (B). The algebraicity of the
extension k(B) ⊆ k(G) implies the algebraicity of the extension K ′ (B) ⊆ K ′ (G),
and that, due to [5, Theorem 26.1], means that K ′ (B) ⊆ K ′ (G) is 0-étale. Therefore
also µ̃ : K ′ (G) → K is 0-étale. We have the following tower of k-algebras
µ̃

k(G) ⊗k K ′ ⊆ (k(G) ⊗k K ′ )0 = K ′ (G) −
→ K,
µ

where both extensions are 0-étale. By [5, Theorem 26.7] k(G) ⊗k K ′ −
→ K is 0étale.
Now we are going to define a G-ring structure on R := k(G) ⊗k K ′ . For every
i ∈ Ne , v ∈ k(G) and w ∈ K ′ we define
Di′ (v ⊗ w) := DiG (v) ⊗ w.
µ

Note that for every i ∈ [pm ]e , we have µ ◦ Di′ = Di ◦ µ. Thus (R, D′ [m]) −
→ (K, D)
is a G[m]-morphism. By Lemma 2.13 for (R, D), there exists a unique G-derivation
D̃ on K. Since both D and D̃[m] extend D′ [m], by Lemma 2.13 for every i ∈ [pm ]e
we have Di = D̃i .

Remark 3.9. The converse to Theorem 3.8 is not true in general. First of all, we
need enough “space” to have a canonical G-basis, so we assumme
(2)

[K : CK ] = pe

for an integrable G[m]-field (K, D). For example Di = 0, for all i 6= 0, is integrable,
but [K : CK ] = 1 and there are not enough p-independent elements to form a Gbasis. Equality (2) in dimension e = 1 means that D1 6= 0 and such an assumption
is needed in [5, Theorem 27.3.(ii)] to obtain the existence of a one-element canonical
basis. Hence it is morally justified to assume (2) in the next Section, where we find
a canonical G-basis for a special algebraic group G. Perhaps there are no general
reasons for the converse theorem to hold and finding a canonical G-basis is the only
possibility for proving the existence of such a basis for a given algebraic group G.
4. New examples of groups with canonical G-bases
4.1. Unipotent groups of dimension two. In this subsection, we are going to
find a canonical G-basis for an algebraic group G of a special type. Firstly we
provide a well known fact about derivations, then define G and its group law. After
this we specify which tuples satisfy the canonical G-basis condition in this case and
prove the existence of such basis for a G[m]-field (K, D) satisfying [K : CK ] = pe .

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

13

Fact 4.1. Let L be a field, ∂ ∈ DerC (L), ker ∂ = C 6= L, ∂ (p) = 0, then
i) there exists an element z ∈ L such that ∂(z) = 1, and 1, z, z 2, . . . , z p−1
form a basis of L over C,
ii) ker ∂ (p−1) = im ∂.
Proof. The first item is contained in [5, Theorem 27.3]. The second item is in [13,
Lemma 3.], but for reader’s convenience, we include a short proof. The derivation ∂
is a C-linear map, after computing ∂ on 1, z, z 2, . . . , z p−1 we see that dimC ker ∂ = 1.
Therefore dimC im ∂ = p − 1, moreover dimC ker ∂ (p−1) ≤ p − 1. The condition
∂ (p) = 0 implies that im ∂ ⊆ ker ∂ (p−1) , but dimC ker ∂ (p−1) ≤ dimC im ∂.


(p−1)!
For i ≤ p let λi := (p−i)!i!
mod p, which is equal to the image of p1 pi in Fp .
Following the page 171. from [7], we define
pn
 
1
p
p
p
=
(X2 + Y2 ) − X2 − Y2
Hn (X2 , Y2 ) :=
p


n+1
n+1
n
n
1
∈ Fp [X2 , Y2 ],
− Y2p
(X2p + Y2p )p − X2p
=
p
Hn (X2 , Y2 ) =

p−1
X

n

(p−i)pn

λi X2ip Y2

.

i=1

Consider the extension of commutative algebraic groups
0 → Ga → G → Ga → 0,
where the group operation ∗ on G is given by
(X1 , X2 ) ∗ (Y1 , Y2 ) = F (X1 , X2 , Y1 , Y2 ) := (X1 + Y1 +

M
X

αn Hn (X2 , Y2 ), X2 + Y2 ),

n=0

for a fixed M ∈ N and αi ∈ k for i ≤ M . We are interested in the following
m-truncation
N
X
F [m](v1 , v2 , w1 , w2 ) = (v1 + w1 +
αn Hn (v2 , w2 ), v2 + w2 ),
n=0

where v1 , v2 , w1 and w2 are m-truncated variables and N := min{M, m − 1}.
Without loss of generality we will assume that N = m − 1. Let (K, D) be a G[m]field (i.e. (K, D) is a Ĝ[m]-field, but Ĝ = F̂ = F , so we consider just an F [m]-field),
such that [K : CK ] = p2 .
Lemma 4.2. We have the following
i) D(i,j) = D(i,0) D(0,j) = D(0,j) D(i,0) ,

2
D(i1 +i2 ,0) .
ii) D(i2 ,0) ◦ D(i1 ,0) = i1 i+i
1
N
n+1
P
iii) [p]F [m] (v1 , v2 ) = (−
αn v2p , 0),
n=0

(p)

iv) D(i,j) = 0 for every i, j ≤ pm−1 such that i 6= 0,
v) if j < m then
j

(p)
D(0,pj )

= −αj D(1,0) +

p
X

n=p

βn D(n,0) ,

14

D. HOFFMANN

for some βn ∈ k.
Proof. The first two items are easy. For the proof of third item it is sufficient to
prove inductively the following
[l]F (v1 , v2 ) = lv1 +

N
X

αn

n=0

 1 p
 pn

(l − l) v2p , lv2 .
p

The fourth and the fifth item use the third part and Corollary 2.25. Specifically,
one needs to show
X
(i0 + . . . + iN )! i0
(p)
D(0,j) =
α0 · . . . · αiNN D(i0 +...+iN ,0) ,
(−1)i0 +...+iN ·
i0 ! · . . . · iN !
N
i0 +i1 p+...+iN p =j

for every j ≤ pm−1 . We leave it to the reader.



Let us consider the canonical F -derivation from Example 2.10:
evF : kJX1 , X2 K → (kJX1 , X2 K)JY1 , Y2 K,
where
X1 7→ X1 + Y1 +

N
X

αn

n=0

p−1
X

n

(p−i)pn

λi X2ip Y2

,

i=1

X2 7→ X2 + Y2 .
As in Example 2.12, the above F -derivation could be considered as a G-derivation
on k(G) (because F = Ĝ). In this situation k(G) = k(X1 , X2 ), so we need to
find an embedding ϕ of (k(X1 , X2 ), DG [m]) in (K, D) such that for x = ϕ(X1 ) and
y = ϕ(X2 ) we have
i) [CK (x, y) : CK ] = p2 ,
p−1
pm
−1
N
P
P
P
n (p−i)pn
λi y ip v2
,
ii)
D(i,j) (x)v1i v2j = x + v1 +
αn
iii)

i,j=0
pm
−1
P
i,j=0

n=0

D(i,j) (y)v1i v2j

i=1

= y + v2 .

The conditions i), ii) and iii) above are equivalent to
D(1,0) (x) = 1,
D(pn ,0) (x) = 0,
D(1,0) (y) = 0,

D(0,1) (x) = α0 λ1 y p−1 ,

...,
n

D(0,pn ) (x) = αn λ1 y (p−1)p , . . .

, D(0,1) (y) = 1,

D(p,0) (y) = 0,

D(0,p) (y) = 0, . . .

(since D(1,0) (x) = 1, D(1,0) (y) = 0 and D(0,1) (y) = 1 imply, by Fact 3.2, that
[CK (x, y) : CK ] = p2 ). We are concerned now only with the terms of the form
D(pi ,0) and D(0,pj ) . It will turn out later that it is enough to consider such terms to
obtain expected G-basis. Recall that G is commutative, so each subset of constants
is preserved, i.e.:

D(i,j) C(i′ ,j ′ ) ⊆ C(i′ ,j ′ ) ,
for every i, j, i′ , j ′ < pm .
Recall also that [Fs−1 : Fs ] = p2 for every s ∈ {0, . . . , m − 1} (Remark 3.4).

Fact 4.3. There exists x, y ∈ K such that D(1,0) (x) = 1, D(1,0) (y) = 0 and
D(0,1) (y) = 1.

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

15

(p)

Proof. Note that D(1,0) ∈ DerC(1,0) (F−1 ) and D(1,0) = 0, so we can use Lemma 2.22
and obtain [F−1 : C(1,0) ] ≤ p (Lemma 2.22 works for iterative HS-derivations, but
(p)

by [5, Theorem 27.4], D(1,0) = 0 implies Ga -iterativity). Moreover, from Lemma
4.2,
(p)
D(0,1) |C(1,0) = −α0 D(1,0) |C(1,0) = 0,
so similarly [C(1,0) : F0 ] ≤ p. Since [F−1 : F0 ] = [K : CK ] = p2 , both D(1,0) ∈
DerC(1,0) (F−1 ) and D(0,1) |C(1,0) ∈ DerF0 (C(1,0) ) are non-zero, so they satisfy assumptions of Fact 4.1.i).

Lemma 4.4. Let n ≥ 0 and i, j < pn+1 , be such that (i, j) 6= (0, 0). Then we have
Fn ⊆ C(i,j) .
Proof. We argue inductively on l = i + j to show that D(i,j) |Fn = 0 for i, j < pn+1
such that (i, j) 6= (0, 0). For l = 1 it is clear. Assume that i, j < pn+1 , (i, j) 6= (0, 0)
and for every i′ + j ′ < i + j such that (i′ , j ′ ) 6= (0, 0) we have D(i′ ,j ′ ) |Fn = 0. If
i = γ0 + . . . + γr pr , j = β0 + . . . + βs ps , r, s ≤ n, 0 ≤ γ0 , . . . , γr , β0 , . . . , βs < p,
and γr , βs 6= 0, then from Fact 2.16
γr βs D(i,j) = D(i−pr ,j−ps ) ◦ D(pr ,ps ) − r(D(i′ ,j ′ ) )0<i′ +j ′ <i+j .
By Lemma 4.2 Fn ⊆ ker D(pr ,0) ⊆ ker D(pr ,ps ) .



Lemma 4.5. For each n ≥ −1 sets Fn and Fn ∩ C(pn+1 ,0) are subfields of K.
Proof. By Remark 3.1 Fn is a subfield. Using Lemma 4.4, we get that D(pn+1 ,0) |Fn ∈
Der(Fn ) and therefore ker D(pn+1 ,0) |Fn , equal to Fn ∩C(pn+1 ,0) , also is a subfield. 
4.1.1. Finding y.
Fact 4.6. There exists an element y ∈ K such that
i) D(1,0) (y) = 0 and D(0,1) (y) = 1,
ii) for every 0 < n < m we have D(pn ,0) (y) = D(0,pn ) (y) = 0.
Proof. For the proof of i) consider the element y ∈ K from Fact 4.3. For the proof
of ii) we will inductively correct y. Take the maximal 0 < l < m such that for every
0 < l′ < l
D(pl′ ,0) (y) = D(0,pl′ ) (y) = 0.
Assume that D(pl ,0) (y) 6= 0 or D(0,pl ) (y) 6= 0, otherwise we have nothing to do.
(p−1)

Let D(pl ,0) (y) 6= 0, clearly D(pl ,0) (y) ∈ Fl−1 , so D(pl ,0) (y) ∈ ker D(pl ,0) |Fl−1 equal,
due to Fact 4.1, to the image of D(pl ,0) |Fl−1 . There exists z ∈ Fl−1 such that
D(pl ,0) (y) = D(pl ,0) (z). We exchange y with y − z.
Now let D(pl ,0) (y) = 0 and D(0,pl ) (y) 6= 0. We have D(0,pl ) (y) ∈ Fl−1 ∩ C(pl ,0) and
(p−1)

as before D(0,pl ) (y) ∈ ker D(0,pl ) |Fl−1 ∩C
so it is enough to chceck that
4.2 and Lemma 4.4.

(pl ,0)

. Again, we would like to use Fact 4.1,

(p)
D(0,pl ) |Fl−1 ∩C l
(p ,0)

= 0, which follows from Lemma


For the rest of this subsection we fix y ∈ K as in the fact above.
Remark 4.7. If pq ≤ n < pq+1 and D(pq ,0) (a) = 0, then also D(n,0) (a) = 0.
Proof. It is a property of the standard iterativity rule.



16

D. HOFFMANN

The values of D(pn ,0) and D(0,pn ) (n < m) at the element y determine the value of
D(i,j) (for every (i, j)) at y, which we show below. Moreover, the proposition below
assures us that y fullfils the canonical G-basis conditions.
Proposition 4.8. We have the following
i) for all n > 0 D(n,0) (y) = 0,
ii) D(n,0) (y s ) = 0 for all n > 0 and 1 ≤ s ≤ p − 1,
iii) for all n > 1 D(0,n) (y) = 0,
iv) D(0,pn ) (y s ) = 0 for all n > 1 and 1 ≤ s ≤ p − 1,
v)


y if (i, j) = (0, 0),
D(i,j) (y) = 1 if (i, j) = (0, 1),


0 otherwise.

Proof. The item i) follows from Remark 4.7. The item ii) is a consequence of the
equality D(n,0) (y s ) = yD(n,0) (y s−1 ). Our iterativity rule forces (by Fact 2.16) that
(3)

D(0,j2 ) D(0,j1 ) =



j1 + j2
D(0,j1 +j2 ) + r(D(i,j) )0<i+j<j1 +j2 .
j1
i6=0

For the proof of item iii) we use the equation above in an induction argument. If
p = 2, then D(0,2) (y) = 0. For p > 2 we have
0 = D(0,1) D(0,1) (y) = 2D(0,2) (y) + r(D(0,j) D(i,0) )i6=0 (y) = 2D(0,2) (y).
Assume that n ≥ 2 and D(0,2) (y) = . . . = D(0,n) (y) = 0. Take n + 1 = γ0 + γ1 p +
. . . + γs ps , where γ0 , . . . , γs < p, γs 6= 0.
D(0,n+1−ps ) D(0,ps ) (y) = γs D(0,n+1) (y) + r(D(0,j) D(i,0) )i6=0 (y) = γs D(0,n+1) (y).
If s = 0, then the left-hand side of the last expression is equal to D(0,n) D(0,1) (y) = 0,
if s 6= 0 we proceed similarly due to the equation D(0,ps ) (y) = 0. The proof of the
item iv) uses the equation
D(0,l) (y s ) = yD(0,l) (y s−1 ) + D(0,l−1) (y s−1 )
and it is a simple induction on s. The item v) follows from Lemma 4.2.i).



4.1.2. Finding x.
Fact 4.9. There exists an element w ∈ K such that
i) D(1,0) (w) = 1 and D(0,1) (w) = 0,
ii) for every 0 < n < m we have D(pn ,0) (w) = D(0,pn ) (w) = 0.
∗(p)

∗
∗
6= 0.
:= D(0,1) |C(1,0) , note that D(0,1) = 0 and D(0,1)
Proof. We define D(0,1)
We start with an element x from the statement of Fact 4.3, for which we have
∗(p−1)
∗
. Hence there
D(0,1) (x) ∈ C(1,0) . Naturally D(0,1) (x) ∈ ker D(0,1) = im D(0,1)
exists an element z ∈ C(1,0) such that D(0,1) (x) = D(0,1) (z). Taking w = x − z give
us the first part. The second part follows as in the proof of Fact 4.6.


Lemma 4.10. There exists an element x ∈ K satisfying
i) D(1,0) (x) = 1, D(0,1) (x) = α0 y p−1 ,
n
ii) D(pn ,0) (x) = 0 and D(0,pn ) (x) = αn y (p−1)p for each 0 < n ≤ N ,
iii) D(pn ,0) (x) = D(0,pn ) (x) = 0 for each N < n < m.

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

17

Proof. The proof of item ii) is more complicated, but reasoning is similar to the
proof of the point i).
i) We start with x ∈ K from Fact 4.3. If α0 = 0, we proceed like in the proof of
Fact 4.6. Assume α0 6= 0, we need x′ ∈ C(1,0) such that D(0,1) (x + x′ ) = α0 y p−1 .
We have

D(1,0) α0 y p−1 − D(0,1) (x) = α0 D(1,0) (y p−1 ) = 0,
(p−1)

therefore α0 y p−1 − D(0,1) (x) ∈ ker D(1,0) ⊆ ker D(1,0) = im D(1,0) . So there exists
z ∈ K such that
1 (p)
α0 y p−1 − D(0,1) (x) = D(1,0) (z) = − D(0,1) (z).
α0
(p)

The last equality comes from Lemma 4.2, since D(0,1) = −α0 D(1,0) . Then we can
(p−1)

take x′ = − α10 D(0,1) (z), since:
D(1,0) x −
but


1 (p−1)
1 (p−1) 
D(0,1) (z) = 1 −
D(0,1) D(1,0) (z) ,
α0
α0



(p−1)
(p−1)
D(0,1) D(1,0) (z) = D(0,1) α0 y p−1 − D(0,1) (x)
=

(p−1)
α0 D(0,1) (y p−1 )

−

(4)

(p)
D(0,1) (x)

= α0 (p − 1)! + α0 D(1,0) (x) = α0 (p − 1)! + 1
and by Wilson’s theorem it is equal to 0.



ii) As in the proof of 4.6, we take the maximal 0 < l ≤ N such that for every
0 < l′ < l
l′

D(pl′ ,0) (x) = 0, D(0,pl′ ) (x) = αl′ y (p−1)p .
Case 1., D(pl ,0) (x) 6= 0.
Clearly, D(pl ,0) (x) ∈ C(pl′ ,0) for every 0 ≤ l′ < l. Moreover for every 0 ≤ l′ < l
D(0,pl′ ) D(pl ,0) (x) = D(pl ,0) D(0,pl′ ) (x)
= D(pl ,0) αl′ y

(p−1)pl

(5)
′



l′

= αl′ D(pl−l′ ,0) (y p−1 )p = 0,
by Proposition 4.8.ii) where the last equation follows. This means that D(pl ,0) (x) ∈
(p−1)

Fl−1 and furthermore D(pl ,0) (x) ∈ ker D(pl ,0) |Fl−1 = im D(pl ,0) |Fl−1 . Hence there
exists z ∈ Fl−1 such that D(pl ,0) (x) = D(pl ,0) (z) and we replace x with x − z.
l
Case 2., D(pl ,0) (x) = 0 and D(0,pl ) (x) 6= αl y (p−1)p .
If αl = 0 we argue similarly as many times before (compare also with the proof of
item iii)), so let αl 6= 0. The aim of this part is to find an element x′ ∈ Fl−1 ∩C(pl ,0)
such that
l
D(0,pl ) (x + x′ ) = αl y (p−1)p .
We introduce
W := C(0,1) ∩ C(pl ,0) ∩

\

1≤l′ <l

C(pl′ ,0) ∩ C(0,pl′ ) .

18

D. HOFFMANN

∗
∗
Note that the element w from Fact 4.9 satisfies w ∈ W \ ker D(1,0)
, where D(1,0)
:=
D(1,0) |W .
∗
∗
Claim. ker D(1,0)
⊆ im D(1,0)
.
∗
Proof of the claim. Note that W0 := W ∩ C(1,0) = Fl−1 ∩ C(pl ,0) = ker D(1,0)
is a
subfield of K (by Lemma 4.5). Using Lemma 4.4 we obtain that W is a vector
∗
space over W0 . Now take a ∈ W such that D(1,0)
(a) = 0, that means a ∈ W0 .
∗
∗
The element a · w belongs to W and moreover D(1,0)
(aw) = aD(1,0)
(w) = a, so
∗
a ∈ im D(1,0)
.


It is not to hard to see that
l

αl y (p−1)p − D(0,pl ) (x) ∈ Fl−1 .
Moreover, since D(1,0) (y) = 0, we have
pl
l
l
D(pl ,0) (αl y (p−1)p ) = αl D(1,0) (y (p−1) )p = αl (p − 1) y p−2 D(1,0) (y) = 0.

We conclude that

l

αl y (p−1)p − D(0,pl ) (x) ∈ Fl−1 ∩ C(pl ,0) = W ∩ C(1,0) .
l

∗
∗
In other words αl y (p−1)p − D(0,pl ) (x) ∈ ker D(1,0)
⊆ im D(1,0)
, and there is z ∈ W
such that
l
αl y (p−1)p − D(0,pl ) (x) = D(1,0) (z).

From Lemma 4.2 we know that
l

(p)
D(0,pl )

= −αl D(1,0) +

p
X

βn D(n,0) ,

n=p

for some βn ∈ k. By Remark 4.7 for every p ≤ i ≤ pl D(i,0) |W = 0, conse(p)
(p−1)
quently D(1,0) (z) = − α1l D(0,pl ) (z). For x′ take − α1l D(0,pl ) (z), only an argument
(p−1)

for D(0,pl ) (z) ∈ C(1,0) is missing, and it is straightforward modification of the equation (4).
iii) It follows the proof of Fact 4.6, we need to check only that D(pl ,0) (x), D(0,pl ) (x) ∈
l−1
l−1
T
T
C(0,pl′ ) . Let
C(pl′ ,0) ∩
Fl−1 for l > N . Obviously, D(pl ,0) (x), D(0,pl ) (x) ∈
l′ =0

0 ≤ l′ ≤ N , then

l′

D(pl ,0) D(0,pl′ ) (x) = D(pl ,0) αl′ y (p−1)p
as in (5). Furthermore,



l′

= αl′ D(pl−l′ ,0) (y p−1 )p = 0,

l′

D(0,pl ) D(0,pl′ ) (x) = D(0,pl ) αl′ y (p−1)p

l′ =N +1



l′

= αl′ D(0,pl−l′ ) (y p−1 )p ,

so we are done if D(0,pl−l′ ) (y p−1 ) = 0, which is a part of Proposition 4.8.
We fix x ∈ K as in the above fact.
Lemma 4.11. We have the following
i) for all n > 1 D(n,0) (x) = 0,



ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

19

ii) for all n > 0
D(0,n) (x) =

(

l

αl λi y (p−i)p
0

if 0 ≤ l ≤ N, 1 ≤ i < p, n = ipl ,
otherwise.

Proof. The item i) for n ≥ p follows from Remark 4.7, and for 1 < n < p from
Lemma 4.2 and D(1,0) (x) = 1. To prove the item ii) we argue inductively. Note
that λ1 = 1, so for n = 1 it is clear. Assume that for every n′ < n our thesis is
true. Let n = γ0 + γ1 p + . . . + γs ps , where γ0 , . . . , γs < p and γs 6= 0.
Claim 1.
(6)

D(0,n−ps ) D(0,ps ) (x) = γs D(0,n) (x),

(7)

D(0,n−γs ps ) D(0,γs ps ) (x) = D(0,n) (x).

Proof of the claim 1. Both equations have similar proofs, so we consider only the
first one. We start with the equation (3) for j1 = ps and js = n − ps :
D(0,n−ps ) D(0,ps ) = γs D(0,n) + r(D(i,j) )0<i+j<n .
i6=0

Our aim is to show that D(i,j) (x) = 0 for 0 < i + j < n, i 6= 0. The component with
D(1,0) (i = 1 and j = 0) does not occur. To see this, we compare the sides of the
equation from the iterativity definition for our choosen iterativity rule, where on
the left-hand side we focus on D(0,n−ps ) D(0,ps ) . A non-zero component with D(1,0)
implies that n = ps+1 and this is impossible. Let us assume that i = 1 and j > 0.
Because of j < n, D(0,j) (x) is, due to the inductive assumption, equal to βy r for
some β ∈ k and r > 0, and then D(1,0) D(0,j) (x) = D(1,0) (βy r ) = 0. If i > 1, then
D(i,j) (x) = D(0,j) D(i,0) (x) = 0.

l

Claim 2. For every 0 ≤ l ≤ N and 0 < i < p we have D(0,ipl ) (x) = αl λi y (p−i)p .
Proof of the claim 2. It is quite an obvious induction, using claim 1.:
l
1
1
D(0,pl ) D(0,ipl ) (x) =
D(0,pl ) αl λi y (p−i)p
i+1
i+1
l
αl λi
αl λi
p−i pl
=
D(0,1) (y ) =
(p − i)y (p−i−1)p
i+1
i+1
l
= αl λi+1 y (p−i−1)p .

D(0,(1+i)pl ) (x) =


Now we are going to the proof of the main induction step. We will deal with
several cases. If s > N , then D(0,ps ) (x) = 0 and the equation (6) implies that
D(0,n) (x) = 0. We can assume that s ≤ N and n − γs ps 6= 0 (otherwise we apply
claim 2),
s
D(0,n) (x) = D(0,n−γs ps ) D(0,γs ps ) (x) = αs λγs D(0,n−γs ps ) (y p−γs )p .
s

Recall that for every a ∈ K the element ap belongs to Fs−1 , thus by Lemma 4.4
s
D(0,n−γs ps ) (ap ) = 0.

We show below that fixed element x satisfies the required properties.

20

D. HOFFMANN

Proposition 4.12.

x



1
D(i,j) (x) =
l

αl λi y (p−i)p



0

if (i, j) = (0, 0),
if (i, j) = (1, 0),
if (i, j) = (0, ipl ), 0 ≤ l ≤ N, 1 ≤ i < p,
otherwise.

Proof. By Lemma 4.2.i) we decompose D(i,j) into D(0,j) D(i,0) . For i ≥ p Remark
4.7 and D(pn ,0) (x) = 0, where 0 < n < m, ensure us that D(i,0) (x) = 0, thus also
D(i,j) (x) = 0. For 1 < i < p Remark 4.7.ii) used in an inductive argument give
D(i,0) (x) = 0. If i = 1, then D(i,j) (x) = D(j,0) (1). Hence D(i,j) (x) 6= 0 if and only
if j = 0. The case with i = 0 is exactly Lemma 4.11.

By propositions 4.8 and 4.12 the pair {x, y} is a canonical G-basis (see the beginning
of Section 4.1). Thus we end with the following:
Corollary 4.13. For G as defined above, any m ∈ N>0 and any G[m]-field (K, D[m])
such that [K : CK ] = p2 , there is a canonical G-basis in K.
4.2. Canonical G-bases for commutative and connected groups. In the previous subsection we showed the existence of a canonical G-basis for every G[m]-field
(K, D) such that [K : CK ] = pe , where G was very specific. Now we are going to
apply those results to a more general class of algebraic groups.
Definition 4.14. Let G be an algebraic group over k
(1) We call G integrable if for any m ∈ N>0 , every G[m]-derivation on a field
K such that [K : CK ] = pdim G is strongly integrable.
(2) If for any m ∈ N>0 , every G[m]-field K such that [K : CK ] = pdim G has a
canonical G-basis, we call G canonically integrable.
By Theorem 3.8 each canonically integrable algebraic group is integrable.
Lemma 4.15. Let G and H be algebraic groups over k. If both are canonically
integrable, then also G × H is canonically integrable.
Proof. Introduce A := G × H, e1 : dim G, e2 := dim H and let (K, D) be an
A[m]-field such that [K : CK ] = pe1 +e2 . We define
′
D′ := (D(j
1 ,...,je

1)

:= D(j1 ,...,je ,0, . . . , 0) )j1 ,...,je1 <pm ,
1
| {z }
e2 times

′′

D :=

′′
(D(j
e1 +1 ,...,je1 +e2 )

:= D(0, . . . , 0,je +1 ,...,je +e ) )je1 +1 ,...,je1 +e2 <pm .
1
2
| {z } 1
e1 times

From the A[m]-iterativity diagram (see Definition 2.8)it follows that
′′
′
D(j
D(j1 ,...,je1 +e2 ) = D(j
e
1 ,...,je )
1

1 +1 ,...,je1 +e2 )

,

D′ is G[m]-iterative and the second one, D′′ is H[m]-iterative.
Taking any p-basis of K over CK and using Remark 3.4 assures us that for every
abs
] = pm(e1 +e2 ) . For s < m we introduce
s < m [Fs−1 : Fs ] = pe1 +e2 . Thus [K : CK
Fs′ :=

s
\

C(pj ,0,...,0) ∩ . . . ∩ C(0,...,0,pj ,0, . . . , 0) ,
| {z }
j=0
e2 times

′
F−1
:= K,

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

Fs′′ :=

s
\

C(0, . . . , 0,pj ,0...,0) ∩ . . . ∩ C(0,...,0,pj ) ,
| {z }
j=0

21

′′
F−1
:= K.

e1 times

Consider the following tower of subfields

′
′
′
′
′′
K ⊇ F0′ ⊇ F1′ ⊇ . . . ⊇ Fm−1
⊇ Fm−1
∩ F0′′ ⊇ Fm−1
∩ F1′′ ⊇ . . . Fm−1
∩ Fm−1
.
abs
For every s < m, due to Lemma 2.22 and [K : CK
] = pm(e1 +e2 ) , we have
′
[Fs−1
: Fs′ ] = pe1 ,

′
′′
′
[Fm−1
∩ Fs−1
: Fm−1
∩ Fs′′ ] = pe2 .

In particular
′
′
[Fm−1
: Fm−1
∩ F0′′ ] = pe2 ,
′
, D′′ ). Analogously,
so there exists a canonical H[m]-basis {β1 , . . . , βe2 } of (Fm−1
′′
′
there exists a canonical G[m]-basis {b1 , . . . , be1 } of (Fm−1 , D ). Elements β1 , . . . , βe2
′
′
are p-independent in Fm−1
over Fm−1
∩ F0′′ . By Corollary 2.19, they are also p′′
independent in K over F0 . Similarly for elements b1 , . . . , be1 , Corollary 2.19 implies
that they are p-independent in F0′′ over F0′′ ∩ F0′ . We have

[F0′′ : F0′′ ∩ F0′ ] ≤ pe1 ,
hence F0 (b1 , . . . , be1 ) = F0′′ (note that CK = F0 = F0′′ ∩ F0′ ). Now we have all the
ingredients to state that B := {b1 , . . . , be1 , β1 , . . . , βe2 } is a p-basis of K over CK .
Verification that B is also a canonical A-basis is not hard and left to the reader. 
We note the obvious fact:
Fact 4.16. Let G and H be isomorphic algebraic groups over k. If G is canonically
integrable, then also H is canonically integrable.
We can prove now the main theorem of this paper.
Theorem 4.17. Let G be a commutative and connected linear algebraic group over
an algebraically closed field k. If maximal unipotent subgroup of G has dimension
at most 2, then G is integrable.
Proof. Due to “Jordan decomposition” (last theorem on page 70. in [10]), G decomposes as GU × GS , where GU consists of unipotent elements and GS of semi-simple
elements. If the dimension of GU is equal to 2 we know by [7, Proposition 8., page
171.] that GU is isomorphic to the group defined at the beginning of the previous
subsection, so it is canonically integrable. If dim GU = 1, then by [8, Theorem
3.4.9.] it is isomorphic to Ga , so canonically integrable by [1, Proposition 4.5.]. We
focus now on the semi-simple part. By [8, Lemma 2.4.2.ii)], GS is diagonalizable,
and by [8, Corollary 3.2.7.ii)] it is a torus. Proposition 4.10 from [1] states that
also Gm is canonically integrable, so our group G is isomorphic to the product of
canonically integrable groups. Finally, we use Lemma 4.15, Fact 4.16 and Theorem
3.8.

In most cases of applications of the model theory to the differential algebra, we
are dealing with an algebraic group G over a field k, which is assumed only to be
perfect. One may wonder if Theorem 4.17 can be used for such G[m]-fields, i.e. for
models of G[m] − DCF ([2]). The answer is positive, because separable closure of
k, which is also algebraic closure, is contained in the absolute constants for models
of G[m] − DCF (for an argument check e.g. proof of [12, Theorem 10.]).

22

D. HOFFMANN

4.3. Possible generalisations. The desired generalisation is to drop, in the assumptions of Theorem 4.17, the condition for the dimension of the unipotent component of group G. Unfortunately, the ideas from the above proof do not work in
the case of unipotent groups of dimension higher than 2. There are several reasons
for that, which will be explained below.
First of all, we are using in Subsection 4.1 formulas for the group law of our group
G. Commutative, connected unipotent groups of dimension 2 are characterised
by [7, Proposition 8., page 171.], so the explicit formulas for the group law are
known. For the unipotent groups of dimension 3 or greater, the best known to the
author results coincide with [7, Theorem 1., page 176.] and [7, Theorem 2., page
177.]. It is unknown how the condition “being a subgroup” translates to the case of
iterative derivations, hence the last reference does not help in finding a canonical
basis. However, there is a hope to use [7, Theorem 1., page 176.]. We sketch this
idea and reveal difficulties in extending our technique to this context.
Assume that G is isogenous to Wn (the Witt group of dimension n). We should
give a modification of Lemma 2.6 from [1], from which we would conclude that G
is integrable if and only if Wn is integrable. If this can be done, then we need to
check whether Wn is integrable. Unluckily, the whole procedure from Subsection
4.1 can not be extended to show the existence of a canonical basis for Wn . Even in
the case p = 2 and n = 3, some issues appear. If we translate the group law of W3
(given by e.g. the formulas (a) and (b) in [11, p. 128]) for p = 2 into the conditions
for a canonical basis:
i) [CK (x, y, z) : CK ] = 23 ,
2m
−1
P
D(i,j,l) (x)v1i v2j v3l = x + v1 − yv2 + yzv3 + zv2 v3 − zv33 − z 3 v3 ,
ii)

iii)

iv)

i,j,l=0
2m
−1
P

i,j,l=0
2m
−1
P

i,j,l=0

D(i,j,l) (y)v1i v2j v3l = y + v2 − zv3 ,

D(i,j,l) (z)v1i v2j v3l = z + v3 ,

we can notice occurrence of equations of a new kind:
D(0,1,1) (x) = z.
Proofs from Subsection 4.1 involve only “one dimensional differential equations”
and the above equation is not of such a form. The “one dimensional differential
equations” appear, because after diminishing the dimension by 1, at the induction
step, we deal with one-dimensional subgroup, what is the case for two-dimensional
group G.
To summarize, generalisations of Theorem 4.17 to the higher dimensional unipotent component case need to involve new proofs. It is also possible that such a
generalisation can not be done without some additional assumptions, or even can
not be done at all.
References
[1] Daniel Hoffmann and Piotr Kowalski. Integrating Hasse-Schmidt derivations. Journal of Pure
and Applied Algebra, 219(4):875 – 896, 2015.
[2] Daniel Hoffmann and Piotr Kowalski. Existentially closed fields with G-derivations. Journal
of the London Mathematical Society, (3)93:590–618, 2016.

ON EXISTENCE OF CANONICAL G-BASES

23

[3] Piotr Kowalski. Geometric axioms for existentially closed Hasse fields. Annals of Pure and
Applied Logic, 135:286–302, 2005.
[4] Hideyuki Matsumura. Integrable derivations. Nagoya Math. J., 87:227–245, 1982.
[5] Hideyuki Matsumura. Commutative ring theory. Cambridge University Press, 1986.
[6] Ktaro Okugawa. Basic properties of differential fields of an arbitrary characteristic and the
picard-vessiot theory. J. Math. Kyoto Univ., 2(3):295–322, 1962.
[7] J.P. Serre. Algebraic Groups and Class Fields: Translation of the French Edition. Graduate
Texts in Mathematics Series. Springer-Verlag New York Incorporated, 1988.
[8] Tonny Albert Springer. Linear Algebraic Groups, 2nd edition. Birkhäuser, Basel, 1998.
[9] A. Tyc. On F -integrable actions of the restricted Lie algebra of a formal group F in characteristic p > 0. Nagoya Math. J., 115:125–137, 1989.
[10] William C. Waterhouse. Introduction to Affine Group Schemes. Springer-Verlag, 1979.
[11] Ernst Witt. Zyklische Körper und Algebren der Charakteristik p vom Grad pn . Struktur
diskret bewerteter perfekter Körper mit vollkommenem Restklassenkörper der Charakteristik
p. Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 176:126–140, 1937.
[12] Carol Wood. The model theory of differential fields of characteristic p 6= 0. Proceedings of the
American Mathematical Society, 40(2):577–584, 1973.
[13] Martin Ziegler. Canonical p-bases. Available on http://home.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de/
ziegler/preprints/canonical-p-bases.pdf.
[14] Martin Ziegler. Separably closed fields with Hasse derivations. Journal of Symbolic Logic,
68:311–318, 2003.
† Instytut Matematyczny, Uniwersytet Wroclawski, Wroclaw, Poland
E-mail address: daniel.hoffmann@math.uni.wroc.pl

