The alternating-form symmetric-operator equality conjecture
The alternating-form symmetric-operator equality conjecture
Let be a non-degenerate alternating bilinear form on an -dimensional vector space over a field with characteristic not . Set
and let be a nilpotent linear subspace of with dimension . A maximal partially complete -singular flag is denoted by , and denotes the associated nilpotent subspace.
Alternating-form symmetric-operator equality conjecture. There exists a maximal partially complete -singular flag of such that
This is one of the two equality cases not covered by the proved results because is generally not stable under squares when is alternating; the conjecture asserts that the corresponding classification still holds.
Progress summary
A paper announced a proof under a large-field condition, but no verified proof has been found and the general problem remains open.
The conjecture says that every largest nilpotent family of operators symmetric for a non-degenerate alternating form has the standard flag-derived form. It is one of the two equality cases left unresolved in the cited treatment.
2018 conditional field-size claim
The paper announces that the remaining conjectures hold when the field is sufficiently large relative to the Witt index, with proofs promised in a subsequent article. The retrieved sources do not identify that article or provide a proof, so this remains an unverified claim rather than a resolution.
Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture has a conditional, unverified claimed resolution for sufficiently large fields; no verified proof was found here, and the unrestricted case remains open.
Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material
Primary source
Clément de Seguins Pazzis, “The structured Gerstenhaber problem (I)”, arXiv:1804.07938 (2018).
Solutions 1
Sign in to submit a solution.
The conjecture was solved in the subsequent paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.11355 under a mild cardinality assumption on the underlying field (with characteristic other than ). The question remains open only for finite fields with odd characteristic and small cardinality with respect to .