Irreducibility conjecture for the resultant factor of a generic form

From papers

Let FF be a generic homogeneous form, and let RF\mathcal{R}_F denote the factor of the resultant appearing in Theorem. Irreducibility conjecture. The polynomial RF\mathcal{R}_F is irreducible. This conjecture would make the resultant criterion for hyperbolicity both necessary and sufficient, yielding a neater version of the theorem. The source notes that irreducibility, or at least square-freeness, holds in the examples considered but does not provide a general proof.

Progress summary

Open

The conjecture remains open: the relevant factor has behaved irreducibly in known examples, but no general proof or counterexample was found.

The conjecture asserts that the factor of the resultant associated with a generic homogeneous form is irreducible. If true, it would turn the stated resultant criterion for hyperbolicity into a necessary-and-sufficient criterion.

Known results

  • Irreducibility, or at least square-freeness, is verified in the examples treated by the source, but no general proof is provided.

Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture is unproved in general; only example-level irreducibility or square-freeness is recorded, with no verified counterexample found.

Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Papri Dey and Daniel Plaumann, “Testing hyperbolicity of real polynomials”, arXiv:1810.04055 (2018).

Solutions 1

Counterexample

The conjecture requires an omitted dimension hypothesis. It is false for binary forms, while in at least three variables the stronger assertion of generic absolute irreducibility holds in every degree.

Write

F(T,x)=j=1d(Trj),F(T,\mathbf x)=\prod_{j=1}^d(T-r_j),

put y=t2y=t_2, u=t1u=t_1, and set

R=F(u+iy,x)+F(uiy,x)2,I=F(u+iy,x)F(uiy,x)2i.R=\frac{F(u+iy,\mathbf x)+F(u-iy,\mathbf x)}2, \qquad I=\frac{F(u+iy,\mathbf x)-F(u-iy,\mathbf x)}{2i}.

With C=(d2)C=\binom d2, the universal resultant identity is

Resu(R,I)=(1)Cydj<k((rjrk)2+4y2).(1)\operatorname{Res}_u(R,I) = (-1)^C y^d \prod_{j<k} \left((r_j-r_k)^2+4y^2\right). \tag{1}

Indeed, for A=F(u+iy,x)A=F(u+iy,\mathbf x) and B=F(uiy,x)B=F(u-iy,\mathbf x),

Res(A,B)=(2i)dRes(R,I),\operatorname{Res}(A,B)=(-2i)^d\operatorname{Res}(R,I),

and evaluating BB at the roots u=rjiyu=r_j-iy of AA gives (1). For separable FF, this shows that the extracted exponent is p=dp=d, and the residual factor has degree d(d1)d(d-1).

Suppose first that n2n\ge2 and d2d\ge2. Consider the normalized homogeneous specialization

F(T,x1,x2)=Td+x1d1T+x1d1x2.F_*(T,x_1,x_2) = T^d+x_1^{d-1}T+x_1^{d-1}x_2.

Writing T=x1ZT=x_1Z and s=x2/x1s=x_2/x_1 gives

qs(Z)=Zd+Z+s.q_s(Z)=Z^d+Z+s.

This polynomial has Galois group SdS_d over C(s)\mathbb C(s): the cover

s=ZdZs=-Z^d-Z

is connected, its d1d-1 critical points satisfy

dZd1+1=0,dZ^{d-1}+1=0,

and their critical values (d1)Z/d-(d-1)Z/d are pairwise distinct. Thus its finite branch monodromies are transpositions generating a transitive group, which must be SdS_d.

The d(d1)d(d-1) ordered root differences rjrkr_j-r_k, jkj\ne k, are distinct. Coincidences sharing a first or last index force equal roots; reversed pairs would give 2(rjrk)=02(r_j-r_k)=0; coincidences involving four distinct indices are ruled out by applying a transposition. In the remaining three-index case, a relation

2rj=ri+rk2r_j=r_i+r_k

and its image under the transposition (ij)(ij) imply

3(rirj)=0,3(r_i-r_j)=0,

again impossible.

Hence SdS_d acts transitively on all roots

y=i(rjrk)2y=\frac{i(r_j-r_k)}2

of the residual factor. That factor is irreducible over C(x1,x2)[y]\mathbb C(x_1,x_2)[y]. Its nonzero constant leading coefficient in yy makes it primitive, so Gauss's lemma gives irreducibility in

C[x1,,xn,y].\mathbb C[x_1,\ldots,x_n,y].

For fixed n,dn,d, reducible homogeneous forms of a given degree form a Zariski-closed subset of projective coefficient space: they are the finite union of the images of projective multiplication maps. Since FF_* lies outside this subset, a generic normalized form has an absolutely irreducible residual factor for every n2n\ge2.

However, the original conjecture does not assume n2n\ge2. For n=1n=1 and d3d\ge3, the residual factor is a real homogeneous binary form of degree

d(d1)>2.d(d-1)>2.

Every such binary form factors over R\mathbb R into linear and quadratic factors, so it is always reducible. Explicitly, take

F(T,x)=T(Tx)(T3x).F(T,x)=T(T-x)(T-3x).

Formula (1) gives

Resu(R,I)=y3(x2+4y2)(4x2+4y2)(9x2+4y2),\operatorname{Res}_u(R,I) = -y^3 (x^2+4y^2) (4x^2+4y^2) (9x^2+4y^2),

whose residual factor is reducible.

Therefore the unrestricted conjecture is false, whereas the corrected hypothesis n2n\ge2 gives generic absolute irreducibility in every degree d2d\ge2.

0 endorsements
Shivam Patel ·