Auxiliary Fns Hal 072009
Auxiliary Fns Hal 072009
Auxiliary Fns Hal 072009
Michel Waldschmidt
Contents
1 Explicit functions 3
1.1 Liouville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Hermite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Padé approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Hypergeometric methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Interpolation methods 7
2.1 Weierstraß question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Integer–valued entire functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 Transcendence of eπ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Lagrange interpolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4 Interpolation determinants 28
4.1 Lehmer’s Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.2 Laurent’s interpolation determinants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1
Acknowledgement
The author is grateful to Paul Voutier for a number of clever remarks on a
preliminary version of this survey.
Abstract
We discuss the role of auxiliary functions in the development of transcendental
number theory.
Earlier auxiliary functions were completely explicit (§ 1). The earliest tran-
scendence proof is due to Liouville (§ 1.1), who produced the first explicit ex-
amples of transcendental numbers at a time where their existence was not yet
known; in his proof, the auxiliary function is just a polynomial in one variable.
Hermite’s proof of the transcendence of e (1873) is much more involved, the
auxiliary function he builds (§ 1.2) is the first example of the Padé approxi-
mants (§ 1.3), which can be viewed as a far reaching generalization of continued
fraction expansion [13, 14]. Hypergeometric functions (§ 1.4) are among the
best candidates for using Padé approximations techniques.
Another tool which plays the role of auxiliary functions is produced by in-
terpolation formulae (§ 2). They occurred in the theory after a question by
Weierstraß (§ 2.1) on the so-called exceptional set Sf of a transcendental func-
tion f , which is the set of algebraic numbers α such that f (α) is algebraic. The
answer to his question is that any set of algebraic numbers is the exceptional
set of some transcendental function f ; this shows that one should add further
conditions in order to get transcendence criteria. One way is to replace algebraic
number by rational integer: this gives rise to the study of integer–valued entire
functions (§ 2.2) with the works of G. Pólya (1915), A.O. Gel’fond (1929) and
many others. The connexion with transcendental number theory may not have
been clear until the solution by A.O. Gel’fond in 1929 of the question of the
transcendence of eπ , a special case of Hilbert’s seventh problem (§ 2.3). Along
these lines, recent developments are due to T. Rivoal, who renewed forgotten
rational interpolation formulae (1935) of R. Lagrange (§ 2.4).
The simple (but powerful) construction by Liouville was extended to several
variables by A. Thue (§ 3.1.1), who introduced the Dirichlet’s box principle (pi-
geonhole principle) (§ 3) into the topic of Diophantine approximation in the early
1900’s. In the 1920’s, Siegel (§ 3.1) developed this idea and applied it in 1932 to
transcendental number theory. This gave rise to the Gel’fond–Schneider method
(§ 3.1.2) which produces the Schneider–Lang Criterion in one (§ 3.1.3) or sev-
eral (§ 3.1.4) variables. Among many developments of this method are results
on modular functions (§ 3.1.6). Variants of the auxiliary functions produced
by Dirichlet’s Box Principle are universal auxiliary functions, which have small
Taylor coefficients at the origin (§ 3.2). Another approach, due to K. Mahler
(§ 3.3), involves auxiliary functions whose existence is deduced from linear al-
gebra instead of Thue–Siegel Lemma.
In 1991 M. Laurent introduced interpolation determinants (§ 4). Two years
2
later J.B. Bost used Arakhelov theory (§ 5) to prove slope inequalities, which
dispenses of the choice of bases.
1 Explicit functions
1.1 Liouville
The first examples of transcendental numbers were produced by Liouville [48]
in 1844. At that time, it was not yet known that transcendental numbers exist.
The idea of Liouville is to show that all algebraic real numbers α are badly
approximated by rational numbers. The simplest example is a rational number
α = a/b: for any rational number p/q 6= a/b, the inequality
a p
− ≥ 1
b q bq
holds. For an irrational real number x, on the contrary, for any ǫ > 0 there
exists a rational number p/q such that
p ǫ
0 < x − ≤ ·
q q
This yields an irrationality criterion, which is the basic tool for proving the
irrationality of specific numbers: a real number x is irrational if and only if
there exists a sequence (pn /qn )n≥0 of distinct rational numbers with
pn
lim qn x −
= 0.
n→∞ qn
This criterion is not too demanding: the quality of the approximation is not very
strong. Indeed for an given an irrational number x, it is known that there exist
much better rational approximations, since there exist infinitely many rational
numbers p/q for which
x − p ≤ 1 ·
q 2q 2
It is a remarkable fact that on the one hand there exist such sharp approxima-
tions, and on the other hand we are usually not able to produce (or at least to
show the existence of) much weaker rational approximations. Also in examples
like ζ(3), there is a single known explicit sequence of rational approximations
which arises from the irrationality proofs – of course, once the irrationality is
established, the existence of other much better approximations follows, but so
far no one is able to produce an explicit sequence of such approximations.
Liouville extended the irrationality criterion into a transcendence criterion.
The proof by Liouville involves the irreducible polynomial f ∈ Z[X] of the given
irrational algebraic number α. Since α is algebraic, there exists an irreducible
3
polynomial f ∈ Z[X] such that f (α) = 0. Let d be the degree of f . For p/q ∈ Q
the number q d f (p/q) is a non–zero rational integer, hence
1
|f (p/q)| ≥ ·
qd
On the other hand, it is easily seen that there exists a constant c(α) > 0,
depending only on α (and its irreducible polynomial f ), such that
p
|f (p/q)| ≤ c(α) α − .
q
An explicit value for a suitable c(α) is given for instance in Exercice 3.6 of [104].
Therefore
′
α − p ≥ c (α)
q qd
with c′ (α) = 1/c(α).
Let ξ be a real number such that, for any κ > 0, there exists a rational
number p/q with q ≥ 2 satisfying
p 1
0 < ξ − < ·
q qκ
for ℓ ∈ Z≥2 . Seven years later in [49] he refers to a letter from Goldbach to
Euler for numbers
X km
10m!
m≥1
where (km )m≥1 is a sequence of integers in the range {0, . . . , 9}. Next (p. 140
of [49]) he uses the same argument to prove the irrationality of
X 1
m≥1
ℓm2
whose transcendence was proved only in 1996 by Yu. V. Nesterenko [61, 63].
We consider below (§ 3.1.1) extensions of Liouville’s result by Thue, Siegel,
Roth and Schmidt.
4
1.2 Hermite
During his course at the École Polytechnique in 1815 (see [84]), Fourier gave a
simple proof for the irrationality of e, which can be found in many textbooks (for
instance Th. 47 Chap. 4 § 7 of Hardy and Wright [36]). The idea is to truncate
the Taylor expansion at the origin of the exponential function. In this proof, the
auxiliary function is the tail of the Taylor expansion of the exponential function
N
X zn
ez −
n=0
n!
5
Hermite’s construction is more general: he produces rational approximations to
the functions 1, eα1 x , . . . , eαm x , when α1 , . . . , αm are pairwise distinct complex
numbers. Let n0 , . . . , nm be rational integers, all ≥ 0. Set N = n0 + · · · + nm .
Hermite constructs explicitly polynomials B0 , B1 , . . . , Bm , with Bj of degree
N − nj , such that each of the functions
B0 (z)eαk z − Bk (z), (1 ≤ k ≤ m)
6
In the theory of Diophantine approximation, there are transference theo-
rems, initially due to Khintchine (see for instance [16, 44]). Similar transference
properties for Padé approximation have been considered by H. Jager [39] and
J. Coates [18, 19].
2 Interpolation methods
We discuss here another type of auxiliary function which occurred in works
related with a question of Weierstraß on the exceptional set of a transcendental
entire function. Recall that an entire function is a complex valued function
which is analytic in C. A function f is algebraic (over C(z)) if f is a solution of
a functional equation P (z, f (z)) = 0 for some non–zero polynomial P ∈ C[X, Y ].
An entire function is algebraic if and only if it is a polynomial. A function which
is not algebraic is called transcendental1 .
1 A polynomial whose coefficients are not all algebraic numbers is an algebraic function,
namely is algebraic over C(z), but is a transcendental element over Q(z). However, as soon
as a polynomial assumes algebraic values at infinitely many points (including derivatives), its
coefficients are algebraic. Therefore for the questions we consider it makes no difference to
consider algebraicity of functions over C or over Q.
7
2.1 Weierstraß question
Weierstraß (see [53]) initiated the question of investigating the set of algebraic
numbers where a given transcendental entire function f takes algebraic values.
Denote by Q the field of algebraic numbers (algebraic closure of Q in C).
For an entire function f , we define the exceptional set Sf of f as the set of
algebraic numbers α such that f (α) is algebraic:
Sf := α ∈ Q ; f (α) ∈ Q .
8
One may replace C by R: it means that one may take for the sets Eα,s dense
subsets of R, provided that one requires A to be a countable subset of R.
The proof is a construction of an interpolation series (see § 2.2) on a sequence
where each w occurs infinitely often. The coefficients of the interpolation series
are selected recursively to be sufficiently small (and nonzero), so that the sum
f of the series is a transcendental entire function.
This process yields uncountably many such functions. One may also require
that they are algebraically independent over C(z) together with their derivatives.
Further, at the same time, one may request each of these functions f to have a
small growth, meaning that f satisfies |f |R ≤ |g|R for all R ≥ 0, where g is a
given transcendental function with g(0) 6= 0.
A simple measure for the growth of an entire function f is the real valued
function R 7→ |f |R , where
|f |R = sup |f (z)|.
|z|=R
An entire function f has an order of growth ≤ ̺ if for all ǫ > 0 the inequality
|f |R ≤ exp R̺+ǫ
An example is the function 2z for which the lower bound is log 2. A stronger ver-
sion of the fact that 2z is the “smallest” entire transcendental function mapping
the positive integers to rational integers is the estimate
9
Define, for j ≥ 0,
Pj (z) = (z − α1 )(z − α2 ) · · · (z − αj ).
One gets an expansion
f (z) = A(z) + Pn (z)fn (z),
where
A = a0 + a1 P1 + · · · + an−1 Pn−1 ∈ C[z] and an = fn (αn+1 ) (n ≥ 0).
Conditions for such an expansion to be convergent as n → ∞ are known – see
for instance [32].
Such interpolation series give formulae for functions with given values at
the sequence of points αn ; when some of the αn ’s are repeated, these formulae
involve the successive derivatives of the function at the given point. For instance,
for a constant sequence αn = z0 for all n ≥ 1, one obtains the Taylor series
expansion of f at z0 . These formulae have been studied by I. Newton and J-L.
Lagrange.
Analytic formulae for the coefficients an and for the remainder fn follow from
Cauchy’s residue Theorem. Indeed, let x, z, α1 , . . . , αn be complex numbers
with x 6∈ {z, α1 , . . . , αn }. Starting from the easy relation
1 1 z − α1 1 ,
= + · (2.2)
x−z x − α1 x − α1 x − z
one deduces by induction the next formula due to Hermite:
n−1
1 X (z − α1 )(z − α2 ) · · · (z − αj )
=
x−z j=0
(x − α1 )(x − α2 ) · · · (x − αj+1 )
(z − α1 )(z − α2 ) · · · (z − αn ) 1
+ · ·
(x − α1 )(x − α2 ) · · · (x − αn ) x − z
Let D be an open disc containing α1 , . . . , αn , let C denote the circumference of
D, let D′ be an open disc containing the closure of D. Assume f is analytic in
D′ . Then
1 f (x)dx
Z
aj = (0 ≤ j ≤ n − 1)
2iπ C (x − α1 )(x − α2 ) · · · (x − αj+1 )
and
1 f (x)dx
Z
fn (z) = ·
2iπ C (x − α1 )(x − α2 ) · · · (x − αn )(x − z)
Pólya applies these formulae to prove that if f is an entire function which does
not grow too fast and satisfies f (n) ∈ Z for n ∈ Z≥0 , then the coefficients an in
the expansion of f at the sequence (αn )n≥1 = {0, 1, 2, . . .} vanish for sufficiently
large n, hence f is a polynomial.
Further works on this topic, using a variety of methods, are due to G.H. Hardy,
G. Pólya, D. Sato, E.G. Straus, A. Selberg, Ch. Pisot, F. Carlson, F. Gross,. . .
– and A.O. Gel’fond (see § 2.3).
10
2.3 Transcendence of eπ
Pólya’s study of the growth of transcendental entire functions taking integral
values at the positive rational integers was extended to the Gaussian integers
by A.O. Gel’fond in 1929 [30]. By means of interpolation series at the points
in Z[i], he proved that if f is a transcendental entire function which satisfies
f (α) ∈ Z[i] for all α ∈ Z[i], then
1
lim sup log |f |R ≥ γ. (2.3)
R→∞ R2
The example of the Weierstraß sigma function attached to the lattice Z[i]
Y z ωz + z22
σ(z) = z 1− e 2ω
ω
ω∈Z[i]\{0}
(which is the Hadamard canonical product with a simple zero at any point of
Z[i]), shows that the constant γ cannot be larger than π/2. Often for such
problems, dealing with a discrete subset of C, replacing integer values by zero
values gives some hint of what should be expected, at least for the order of
growth (the exponent 2 of R2 in the left hand side of formula (2.3)), if not for
the value of the constant (the number γ in the right hand side of formula (2.3)).
Other examples of Hadamard canonical products are
Y z z/n
z 1− e = −eγz Γ(−z)−1
n
n≥1
eπ = 23, 140 692 632 779 269 005 729 086 367 . . .
is irrational is equivalent to saying that the function eπz cannot take all its values
in Q(i) when the argument z ranges over Z[i]. By expanding the function eπz
into an interpolation series at the Gaussian integers, Gel’fond was able to prove
the transcendence of eπ . More generally Gel’fond proved the transcendence of
11
αβ for α and β algebraic, α 6= 0, α 6= 1 and β imaginary quadratic. In 1930,
Kuzmin extended the proof
√
to the case where β is real quadratic, thus proving
the transcendence of 2 2 . The same year, Boehle proved that if β is algebraic
2 d−1
of degree d ≥ 2, then one at least of the d − 1 numbers αβ , αβ , . . . , αβ is
transcendental (see for instance [25]).
The next important step came from Siegel’s introduction of further ideas in
the theory (see § 3.1.2).
We conclude this subsection by noting that our knowledge of the Diophantine
properties of the number eπ is far from being complete. It was proved recently by
Yu.V. Nesterenko (see § 3.1.6) that the two numbers π and eπ are algebraically
independent, but there is no proof so far that eπ is not a Liouville number.
This approach has been developed in 2006 [69] by T. Rivoal, who applies it to
the Hurwitz zeta function
∞
X 1
ζ(s, z) = (s ∈ C, ℜe(s) > 1, z ∈ C).
(k + z)s
k=1
z 2 (z − 1)2 · · · (z − n + 1)2
·
(z + 1)2 · · · (z + n)2
12
into a Lagrange interpolation series. Furthermore, he gives a new proof of the
irrationality of ζ(2) by expanding the function
∞
X 1 1
−
k k+z
k=1
as a Hermite–Lagrange series in
2
z(z − 1) · · · (z − n + 1)
·
(z + 1) · · · (z + n)
It is striking that these constructions yield exactly the same sequences of rational
approximations as the one produced by methods which look very much different
[26].
Further developments of the interpolation methods should be possible. For
instance Taylor series are the special case of Hermite’s formula with a single
point and multiplicities — they give rise to Padé approximants. Multiplicities
could also be introduced in Lagrange–Rivoal interpolation.
13
3.1.1 The origin of the Thue–Siegel Lemma
The first improvement of Liouville’s inequality was reached by A. Thue in 1909
[87, 88]. Instead of evaluating the values at p/q of a polynomial in a single
variable (viz. the irreducible polynomial of the given algebraic number α), he
considers two approximations p1 /q1 and p2 /q2 of α and evaluates at the point
(p1 /q1 , p2 /q2 ) a polynomial P in two variables. This polynomial P ∈ Z[X, Y ] is
constructed (or rather is shown to exist) by means of Dirichlet’s box principle
(Lemma 3.1). The required conditions are that P has zeroes of sufficiently large
multiplicity at (0, 0) and at (p1 /q1 , p2 /q2 ). The multiplicity is weighted: this is
what Thue called index of P at a point. The estimate for the coefficients of the
solution of the system of linear equations in Lemma 3.1 plays an important role
in the proof.
One of the main difficulties that Thue had to overcome was to produce a
zero estimate, in order to find a non–zero value of some derivative of P .
A crucial feature of Thue’s argument is that he needs to select a second
approximation p2 /q2 depending on a first one p1 /q1 . Hence a first very good
approximation p1 /q1 is required to produce an effective result from this method.
In general, such arguments lead to sharp estimates for all p/q with at most one
exception. This approach has been worked out by J.W.S. Cassels, H. Davenport
and others to deduce upper bounds for the number of solutions of certain Dio-
phantine equations. However, these results are not effective, meaning that they
do not yield complete solutions of these equations. More recently, E. Bombieri
has produced examples where a sufficiently good approximation exists for the
method to work in an effective way. Later, he produced effective refinements
to Liouville’s inequality by extending the argument (see [24] Chap. 1 § 5.4).
Further improvement of Thue’s method were obtained by C.L. Siegel in the
1920’s: he developed Thue’s method and succeeded in refining his irrationality
measure for algebraic real numbers. In 1929, Siegel [81], thanks to a further
sharpening of his previous estimate, derived his well known theorem on integer
points on curves: the set of integral points on a curve of genus ≥ 1 is finite.
The introduction of the fundamental memoir [81] of C.L. Siegel in 1929
stresses the importance of Thue’s idea involving the pigeonhole principle. In the
second part of this fundamental paper he extends the Lindemann–Weierstraß
Theorem (on the algebraic independence of eβ1 , . . . , eβn when β1 , . . . , βn are Q-
linearly independent algebraic numbers) from the usual exponential function to
a wide class of entire functions which he calls E-functions. He also introduces
the class of G-functions which has been extensively studied since 1929. See
also his monograph in 1949 [83], Shidlovskii’s book [80] and the Encyclopaedia
volume by Feldman and Nesterenko [24] for E–functions, André’s book [3] and
[24] Chap. 5 § 7 for G–functions. Among many developments related to G
functions are the works of Th. Schneider, V.G. Sprindzuck and P. Dèbes related
to algebraic functions (see [24] Chap. 5 § 7).
The work of Thue and Siegel on the rational approximation to algebraic
numbers was extended by many a mathematician, including Th. Schneider,
A.O. Gel’fond, F. Dyson, until K. F. Roth obtained in 1955 a result which is
14
essentially optimal. For his proof he introduces polynomials in many variables.
A powerful higher dimensional generalization of Thue–Siegel–Roth’s Theo-
rem, the Subspace Theorem, was obtained in 1970 by W.M. Schmidt [75]; see
also [7, 9]. Again, the proof involves a construction of an auxiliary polynomial in
several variables, and one of the most difficult auxiliary results is a zero estimate
(index theorem).
Schmidt’s Subspace Theorem together with its variants (including effective
estimates for the exceptional subspaces as well as results involving several val-
uations) have a large number of applications: to Diophantine approximation
and Diophantine equations, to transcendence and algebraic independence, to
the complexity of algebraic numbers – see [7].
We give here only a simplified statement of this fundamental result, which
is already quite deep and very powerful.
that one can take α = 1, provided that we select for log α a non–zero multiple of 2iπ The
result allowing α = 1 is not more general: it amounts to the same to take α = −1, provided
that one replaces β by 2β.
15
A.O. Gel’fond’s proof [31] rests on the fact that the two entire functions ez
and eβz are algebraically independent, they satisfy differential equations with
algebraic coefficients and they take simultaneously values in K for infinitely
many z, viz. z ∈ Z log α.
Th. Schneider’s proof [76] is different: he notices that the two entire functions
z and αz = ez log α are algebraically independent, they take simultaneously
values in K for infinitely many z, viz. z ∈ Z + Zβ. He makes no use of
differential equations, since the coefficient log α which occurs by derivating the
function αz is not algebraic.
Schneider introduces a polynomial A(X, Y ) ∈ Z[X, Y ] in two variables and
considers the auxiliary function
F (z) = A(z, αz )
at the points m + nβ: these values γmn are in the number field K = Q(α, β, αβ ).
Gel’fond also introduces also a polynomial A(X, Y ) ∈ Z[X, Y ] in two vari-
ables and considers the auxiliary function
the values γmn at the points m log α of the derivatives F (n) (z) are again in the
number field K.
With these notations, the proofs are similar: the first step is the existence
of a non–zero polynomial A, of partial degrees bounded by L1 and L2 , say,
such that the associated numbers γmn vanish for certain values of m and n, say
0 ≤ m < M , 0 ≤ n < N . This amounts to showing that a system of linear
homogeneous equations has a non–trivial solution; linear algebra suffices for the
existence. In this system of equations, the coefficients are algebraic numbers
in the number field K, the unknowns are the coefficients of the polynomial A,
and we are looking for a solution in rational integers. There are several options
at this stage: one may either require only coefficients in the ring of integers
of K, in which case the assumption L1 L2 > M N suffices. An alternative way
is to require the coefficients to be in Z, in which case one needs to assume
L1 L2 > M N [K : Q].
This approach is not quite sufficient for the next steps: one will need es-
timates for the coefficients of this auxiliary polynomial A. This is where the
Thue–Siegel Lemma occurs into the picture: by assuming that the number of
unknowns, namely L1 L2 , is slightly larger than the number of equations, say
twice as large, this lemma produces a bound, for a non–trivial solution of the
homogeneous linear system, which is sharp enough for the rest of the proof.
The second step is an induction: one proves that γmn vanishes for further
values of (m, n). Since there are two parameters (m, n), there are several options
for this extrapolation (increasing m, or n, or m+n for instance), but anyway the
idea is that if F has sufficiently many zeroes, then F takes rather small values on
some disc (Schwarz Lemma), and so do its derivatives (Cauchy’s inequalities).
Further, an element of K which is sufficiently small should vanish (by a Liouville
16
type inequality, or a so-called size inequality, or else the product formula – see
for instance [41, 9, 24, 104] among many references on this topic).
For the last step, there are also several options: one may perform the induc-
tion with infinitely many steps and use an asymptotic zero estimate, or else stop
after a finite number of steps and prove that some determinant does not vanish.
The second method is more difficult and this is the one Schneider succeeded to
complete, but his proof can be simplified by pursuing the induction forever.
There is a duality between the two methods. In Gel’fond ’s proof, replace L1
and L2 by S1 and S2 , and replace M and N by T0 and T1 ; hence the numbers
γmn which arise are
t0
d
e(s1 +s2 β)z z=t1 log α
dz
while in Schneider’s proof replacing L1 and L2 by T1 and T2 , and replacing M
and N by S0 and S1 , then the numbers γmn which arise are
17
C(1, log α1 , . . . , log αn ) ⊂ Cn means that Baker’s method requires only tools
from the theory of one complex variable.
On the other hand, the corresponding extension of Schneider’s method re-
quires several variables: under the same assumptions, consider the functions
{0} × Zn + Z(β0 , β1 , . . . , βn ).
functions, and this is important for applications, for instance to elliptic functions. To deal
with functions which are analytic in a disc only is also an interesting issue [90, 91, 92, 93, 94].
18
This statement includes the Hermite–Lindemann Theorem on the transcen-
dence of eα : take
This criterion 3.3 does not include some of the results which are proved by
means of Schneider’s method (for instance it does not contain the Six Expo-
nentials Theorem 3.8), but there are different criteria (not involving differential
equations) for that purpose (see for instance [41, 95, 104]).
Here is the idea of the proof of the Schneider–Lang Criterion 3.3. We argue
by contradiction: assume f1 and f2 take simultaneously their values in the
number field K for different values w1 , . . . , wS ∈ C. We want to show that there
exists a non–zero polynomial P ∈ Z[X1 , X2 ] such that the function P (f1 , f2 )
is the zero function: this will contradict the assumption that f1 and f2 are
algebraically independent.
The first step is to show that there exists a non–zero polynomial P ∈
Z[X1 , X2 ] such that F = P (f1 , f2 ) has a zero of high multiplicity, say ≥ T ,
at each ws , (1 ≤ s ≤ S): we consider the system of ST homogeneous linear
equations
t
d
F (ws ) = 0 for 1 ≤ s ≤ S and 0 ≤ t < T (3.4)
dz
where the unknowns are the coefficients of P . If we require that the partial
degrees of P are strictly less than L1 and L2 respectively, then the number
of unknowns is L1 L2 . Since we are looking for a polynomial P with rational
integer coefficients, we need to introduce the degree [K : Q] of the number field
K. As soon L1 L2 > T S[K : Q], there is a non–trivial solution. Further, the
Thue–Siegel Lemma produces an upper bound for the coefficients of P .
The next step is an induction: the goal is to prove that F = 0. By induction
on T ′ ≥ T , one proves
t
d
F (ws ) = 0 for 1 ≤ s ≤ S and 0 ≤ t < T ′ .
dz
One already knows that it holds for T ′ = T by (3.4).
The proof of this induction is the same as the ones by Gel’fond and Schneider
of the transcendence of αβ , (see § 3.1.2), combining an analytic upper bound
(Schwarz Lemma) and an arithmetic lower bound (Liouville’s inequality). At
the end of the induction, one deduces F = 0, which is the desired contradiction
with the algebraic independence of f1 and f2 .
As we have seen in § 3.1.2, such a scheme of proof is characteristic of the
Gel’fond–Schneider’s method.
19
The main analytic argument is Schwarz Lemma for functions of one variable,
which produces an upper bound for the modulus of an analytic function having
many zeroes. One also requires Cauchy’s inequalities in order to bound the
moduli of the derivatives of the auxiliary function.
In this context, a well known open problem raised by Th. Schneider (this is
the second in the list of his 8 problems from his book [79]) is related with his
proof of the transcendence of j(τ ), where j is the modular function defined in the
upper half plane ℑm(z) > 0 and τ is an algebraic point in this upper half plane
which is not imaginary quadratic. Schneider himself proved the transcendence
of j(τ ), but his proof is not direct, it rests on the use of elliptic functions (one
may apply the Schneider–Lang Criterion for meromorphic functions). There-
fore, the question is to prove the same result by using modular functions. In
spite of recent progress on transcendence and modular functions (see § 3.1.6),
this problem is still open. The difficulty lies in the analytic estimate and the
absence of a suitable Schwarz Lemma - the best results on this topic are due to
I.Wakabayashi [90, 91, 92, 93, 94].
Γ(a)Γ(b)
B(a, b) =
Γ(a + b)
is transcendental.
His proof involves a generalization of Gel’fond’s method to several variables
and yields a general transcendence criterion for functions satisfying differential
equations with algebraic coefficients and taking algebraic values at the points of
a large Cartesian product. He applies this criterion to the theta functions asso-
ciated with the Jacobian of the Fermat curves. His transcendence results apply
more generally to yield transcendence results on periods of abelian varieties.
After a suggestion of P. Cartier, S. Lang extended the classical results on
the transcendence of the values of the classical exponential function to the ex-
ponential function of commutative algebraic groups. During this process, he
generalized the one dimensional Schneider–Lang criterion 3.3 to several vari-
ables [41] Chap. IV. In this higher dimensional criterion, the conclusion is that
the set of exceptional values in Cn cannot contain a large Cartesian product.
This was the generalization to several variables of the fact that in the one di-
mensional case the exceptional set is finite (with a bound for the number of
elements).
A simplified version of the Schneider–Lang Criterion in several variables for
Cartesian products is the following ([104] Theorem 4.1).
Theorem 3.5 (Schneider–Lang Criterion in several variables). Let d and n be
two integers with d > n ≥ 1, K be a number field, and f1 , . . . , fd be algebraically
20
independent entire functions of finite order of growth. Assume, for 1 ≤ ν ≤
n and 1 ≤ i ≤ d, that the partial derivative (∂/∂zν )fi of fi belongs to the
ring K[f1 , . . . , fd ]. Further, let (y 1 , . . . , y n ) be a basis of Cn over C. Then the
numbers
1 ≤ i ≤ d, (s1 , . . . , sn ) ∈ Zn
fi (s1 y 1 + · · · + sn y n ),
21
Proposition 3.7 (Schwarz Lemma in several variables). Let S be a finite subset
of Cn and ǫ be a positive real number. There exists a positive real number
r0 = r0 (S, ǫ) such that, for any positive integer t, any real numbers R and r
with R > r ≥ r0 and any entire function having a zero of multiplicity ≥ t at
each point of S,
t(Ω(S)−ǫ)
4nr
|f |r ≤ |f |R .
R
More recent results on Schwarz Lemma in several variables are due to D. Roy
[70, 71, 72, 73].
The condition dℓ > d + ℓ in integers d and ℓ means that the relevant cases
are d = 2 and ℓ = 3 or d = 3 and ℓ = 2 (there is a symmetry), hence the name
(since ℓd = 6 in these cases). We refer to [41, 95] for more information on this
topic.
The classical proof by Schneider’s method involves an auxiliary function of
the form
F (z) = P (ex1 z , . . . , exd z ),
where the existence of the polynomial P follows from Dirichlet’s box principle
and the Thue–Siegel Lemma. The conditions which are required are that F
vanishes at many points of the form s1 y1 + . . . + sℓ yℓ with varying integers
s1 , . . . , sℓ , the induction shows that F vanishes at more points of this form,
until one deduces that F vanishes at all such points, and the conclusion then
easily follows. One could avoid an infinite induction by using a zero estimate.
A variant is to use an interpolation determinant (see § 4 and [104] Chap. 2).
As an example of upper bound for an interpolation determinant, here is the
statement of Lemma 2.8 in [104].
22
is bounded from above by
−L(L−1)/2+σ1 +···+σL L σµ
R Y d
|∆| ≤ L! max sup
ϕλ (z) .
r 1≤µ≤L |z|=R dz
λ=1
23
transcendence degree of the field
Q q, P (q), Q(q), R(q)
24
A Schwarz Lemma is a statement which gives an upper bound for the max-
imum modulus of an analytic function which vanishes at given points - multi-
plicities may be there. We gave an example in Proposition 3.7.
When the function has only small values at these points, instead of zeoes,
one speaks either of a small value Lemma or of an approximate Schwarz Lemma
[66].
A Schwarz Lemma implies a zero estimate, and a small value Lemma implies
a Schwarz Lemma. However, the assumptions for obtaining a small value Lemma
for instance are usually stronger than for only a Schwarz Lemma: as an example,
in one variable there is no need to introduce an assumption on the distance of
the given points for a Schwarz Lemma, while for a small value Lemma it is
requested.
This construction of universal auxiliary functions is developed in [99] (see
Lemme 2.1) and [100].
Here is Proposition 4.10 of [104].
Proposition 3.11. Let L and n be positive integers, N , U , V , R, r positive
real numbers and ϕ1 , . . . , ϕL entire functions in Cn . Define W = N + U + V
and assume
L
R X
W ≥ 12n2 , e ≤ ≤ eW/6 , |ϕλ |R ≤ eU
r
λ=1
and n
(2W )n+1 ≤ LN log(R/r) .
Then there exist rational integers p1 , . . . , pL , with
0 < max |pλ | ≤ eN ,
1≤λ≤L
3.2.2 Duality
In the papers [99] (see Lemme 2.1) and [100], a dual construction is performed,
where auxiliary analytic functionals are constructed, and the duality between the
methods of Schneider and Gel’fond can be explained by means of the Fourier–
Borel transform (see [99], especially Lemmas 3.1 and 7.6, and [104], § 13.7). In
the special case of exponential polynomials, it reduces to the relation
Dσ z τ etz (s) = Dτ (z σ esz ) (t),
(3.12)
where σ, τ , s, t, z stand for tuples
σ = (σ1 , . . . , σn ) ∈ Zn≥0 , τ = (τ1 , . . . , τn ) ∈ Zn≥0 ,
s = (s1 , . . . , sn ) ∈ Cn , t = (t1 , . . . , tn ) ∈ Cn ,
z = (z1 , . . . , zn ) ∈ Cn
25
and σ1 σn
∂ ∂
Dσ = ···
∂z1 ∂zn
(see [99] Lemma 3.1 and [104] Corollary 13.21), which is a generalization in
several variables of the formula
σ τ
d τ tz d
(z σ esz ) (t)
z e (s) =
dz dz
Another (less special) case of (3.12) is the duality between Schneider’s method
in several variables and Baker’s method. In Baker’s method one considers the
values at (t, t log α1 , . . . , t log αn ) of
τ0 τn
∂ ∂
z0σ es1 z1 · · · esn zn es0 (β0 z0 +···+βn zn ) ,
···
∂z0 ∂zn
at the points
(s0 β0 , s1 + s0 β1 , . . . , sn + s0 βn ),
and these values are just the same, namely
min{τ0 ,σ}
X σ!τ0 !
tσ−k (s0 β0 )τ0 −k (s1 +s0 β1 )τ1 · · · (sn +s0 βn )τn (α0s0 · · · αnsn )t
k!(τ0 − k)!(σ − k)!
k=0
with
α0 = eβ0 α1β1 · · · αnβn .
This is a special case of (3.12) with
τ = (τ0 , . . . , τn ) ∈ Zn+1
≥0 , σ = (σ0 , 0, . . . , 0) ∈ Zn+1
≥0 ,
26
3.3 Mahler’s Method
In 1929, K. Mahler [50] developed an original method to prove the transcendence
of values of functions satisfying certain types of functional equations. This
method was somehow forgotten, for instance it is not quoted among the 440
references of the survey paper [25] by N.I. Fel’dman, and A.B. Šidlovskiı̆. After
the publication of the paper [52] by Mahler, several mathematicians (including
K. Kubota, J.H. Loxton and A.J. van der Poorten) extended the method (see the
Lecture Notes [64] by K. Nishioka for further references). The construction of
the auxiliary function is similar to what is done in Gel’fond–Schneider’s method,
with a main difference: in place of the Thue–Siegel Lemma, only linear algebra
is required. No estimate for the coefficients of the auxiliary polynomial is needed
in Mahler’s method.
The following example is taken from § 1.1 of [64]. Let d ≥ 2 be a rational
integer and α an algebraic number with 0 < |α| < 1. Let us prove that the
number
∞
X k
αd
k=0
is transcendental, a result due to K. Mahler [50]. The basic remark is that the
function
∞
X k
f (z) = zd
k=0
d
satisfies the functional equation f (z ) = f (z) − z. It is not difficult to check
also that f is a transcendental function, which means that if P is a non–zero
polynomial in C[X, Y ], then the function F (z) = P z, f (z) is not the zero
function. From linear algebra, it follows that if L is a sufficiently large integer,
there exist a non–zero polynomial P in Z[X,
Y ] of partial degrees ≤ L such that
the associated function F (z) = P z, f (z) has a zero at the origin of multiplicity
> L2 . Indeed, the existence of P amounts to showing the existence of a non–
trivial solution to a system of L2 +1 homogeneous linear equations with rational
coefficients in (L + 1)2 unknowns.
If T denotes the multiplicity of F at the origin, then the limit
k k
lim F (αd )α−d T
k→∞
k
is a non–zero constant. This produces an upper bound for |F (αd )| when k is a
sufficiently large positive integer, and this upper bound is not compatible with
Liouville’s inequality. Hence f (α) is transcendental.
Another instructive example of application of Mahler’s method is given by
D.W. Masser in the first of his Cetraro’s lectures [56].
The numbers whose transcendence is proved by this method are not Liou-
ville numbers, but they are quite well approximated by algebraic numbers. In
the example we discussed, the number f (α) is very well approximated by the
27
algebraic numbers
K
X k
αd , (K > 0).
k=0
4 Interpolation determinants
An interesting development of the saga of auxiliary functions took place in
1991, thanks to the introduction of interpolation determinants by M. Laurent.
Its origin goes back to earlier works on a question raised by Lehmer which we
first introduce.
28
has a maximal rank; therefore some determinant is not zero. This determinant
is bounded from above by means of Hadamard’s inequality; the upper bound
depends on M (θ). On the other hand, the absolute value ofQthis determinant
is shown to be big, because it has many factors of the form i,j |θip − θj |k , for
many primes p. The lower bound makes use of a Lemma due to Dobrowolski:
For θ not a root of unity, Y p
|θi − θj | ≥ pd
i,j
29
iliary functions (or auxiliary functionals) were required, together with a zero
estimate (or an interpolation estimate). The first solution to this problem in
1997 [74] (see also [104] Corollary 15.10) makes a detour via measures of simulta-
neous approximations: such measures can be proved by means of interpolation
determinants, and they suffice to produce algebraic independence statements
(small transcendence degree: at least two numbers in certain given sets are al-
gebraically independent). Conjecturally, this method should also produce large
transcendence degree results - see [104] Conjecture 15.31. See also the work by
P. Philippon [67].
Another approach, due to M. Laurent and D. Roy [45] (see also [63] Chap. 13)
is based on the observation that in algebraic independence proofs, the determi-
nants which occur produce sequences of polynomials having small values to-
gether with their derivatives at a given point. By means of a generalization
of Gel’fond’s transcendence criterion involving multiplicities, M. Laurent and
D. Roy succeeded to get algebraic independence results. Further generalisa-
tions of Gel’fond’s criterion involving not only multiplicities, but also several
points (having some structure, either additive or multiplicative) are being in-
vestigated by D. Roy in connection with his original strategy towards a proof
of Schanuel’s Conjecture [70, 71].
References
[1] M. Ably and M. M’zari, Interpolation polynomiale sur un ordre d’un
corps de nombres, The Ramanujan J., 17 (2008), pp. 281–304.
30
[4] A. Baker and G. Wüstholz, Logarithmic forms and Diophantine ge-
ometry, New Mathematical Monographs 9. Cambridge University Press,
2007.
[5] K. Barré-Sirieix, G. Diaz, F. Gramain, and G. Philibert, Une
preuve de la conjecture de Mahler-Manin, Invent. Math., 124 (1996),
pp. 1–9.
[6] D. Bertrand and D. Masser, Linear forms in elliptic integrals, Invent.
Math., 58 (1980), pp. 283–288.
[7] Y. Bilu, The many faces of the subspace theorem [after Adamczewski,
Bugeaud, Corvaja, Zannier. . . ]. Séminaire Bourbaki, 59e année (2006–
2007), No 967; Astérisque 317 (2008) 1–38, 2006.
[8] E. Bombieri, Algebraic values of meromorphic maps, Invent. Math., 10
(1970), pp. 267–287.
[9] E. Bombieri and W. Gubler, Heights in Diophantine geometry, New
Mathematical Monographs 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2006.
[10] E. Bombieri and S. Lang, Analytic subgroups of group varieties, Invent.
Math., 11 (1970), pp. 1–14.
[11] J.-B. Bost, Périodes et isogénies des variétés abéliennes sur les corps
de nombres (d’après D. Masser et G. Wüstholz), séminaire Bourbaki, vol.
1994/95, Astérisque, (1996), pp. 115–161, Exp. No. 795, 4.
[12] R. Breusch, A proof of the irrationality of π, The American Mathemat-
ical Monthly, 61 (1954), pp. 631–632.
[13] C. Brezinski, The long history of continued fractions and Padé approx-
imants, in Padé approximation and its applications (Amsterdam, 1980),
vol. 888 of Lecture Notes in Math., Springer, Berlin, 1981, pp. 1–27.
31
[17] A. Chambert-Loir, Théorèmes d’algébricité en géométrie diophantienne
(d’après J.-B. Bost, Y. André, D. & G. Chudnovsky), séminaire Bourbaki,
vol. 2000/2001, exp. no. 886, Astérisque, 282 (2002), pp. 175–209.
[18] J. Coates, On the algebraic approximation of functions. I, II, III,
IV, Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A 69=Indag. Math., 28 (1966),
pp. 421–434, 435–448, 449–461 and 29 (1967), pp. 205–212.
[19] , Approximation in algebraic function fields of one variable, J. Aus-
tral. Math. Soc., 7 (1967), pp. 341–355.
[20] S. David, On the height of subvarieties of group varieties. To appear,
2009.
[21] E. Dobrowolski, On a question of Lehmer and the number of irreducible
factors of a polynomial, Acta Arith., 34 (1979), pp. 391–401.
[22] L. Euler, Introductio in Analysin Infinitorum. (Opera Omnia. Series
Prima: Opera Mathematica, Volumen Novum.), Societas Scientiarum
Naturalium Helveticae, Geneva, 1945.
www.math.dartmouth.edu/∼euler/pages/E101.html .
[23] A. Faisant and G. Philibert, Quelques résultats de transcendance liés
à l’invariant modulaire j, J. Number Theory, 25 (1987), pp. 184–200.
[24] N. I. Fel′ dman and Y. V. Nesterenko, Transcendental numbers, in
Number Theory, IV, vol. 44 of Encyclopaedia Math. Sci., Springer, Berlin,
1998, pp. 1–345.
[25] N. I. Fel′ dman and A. B. Šidlovskiı̆, The development and present
state of the theory of transcendental numbers, Uspehi Mat. Nauk, 22
(1967), pp. 3–81.
[26] S. Fischler, Irrationalité de valeurs de zêta (d’après Apéry, Rivoal,. . . ),
Astérisque, (2004), pp. 27–62.
[27] É. Gaudron, Mesure d’indépendance linéaire de logarithmes dans un
groupe algébrique commutatif, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math., 333
(2001), pp. 1059–1064.
[28] , Formes linéaires de logarithmes effectives sur les variétés
abéliennes, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 39 (2006), pp. 699–773.
[29] , Étude du cas rationnel de la théorie des formes linéaires de loga-
rithmes, J. Number Theory, 127 (2007), pp. 220–261.
[30] A. O. Gel′ fond, Sur les propriétés arithmétiques des fonctions entières,
Tôhoku Math. Journ., 30 (1929), pp. 280–285.
[31] , Sur le septième problème de D. Hilbert, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 7
(1934), pp. 623–630.
32
[32] , Isčislenie konečnyh raznosteı̆, Gosudarstv. Izdat. Tehn.-Teor. Lit.,
Moscow-Leningrad, 1952. French transl., Calcul des différences finies,
Dunod (1963); engl. transl., Calculus of finite differences, Hindustan Pub-
lishing Corp. (1971).
[33] , Transcendental and algebraic numbers, Translated from the first
Russian edition by Leo F. Boron, Dover Publications Inc., New York,
1960.
33
[45] M. Laurent and D. Roy, Criteria of algebraic independence with mul-
tiplicities and approximation by hypersurfaces, J. reine Angew. Math., 536
(2001), pp. 65–114.
[46] D. H. Lehmer, Factorization of certain cyclotomic functions, Annals of
Math., 34 (1933), pp. 461–479.
[49] , Sur des classes très étendues de quantités dont la valeur n’est ni
algébrique, ni même réductible à des irrationnelles algébriques, J. Math.
Pures et Appl., 16 (1851), pp. 133–142.
http://portail.mathdoc.fr/JMPA/.
[50] K. Mahler, Arithmetische Eigenschaften der Lösungen einer Klasse von
Funktionalgleichungen, Math. Ann., 101 (1929), pp. 342–366.
34
[59] M. Mignotte, Entiers algébriques dont les conjugués sont proches du cer-
cle unité, in Séminaire Delange-Pisot-Poitou, 19e année: 1977/78, Théorie
des nombres, Fasc. 2, Secrétariat Math., Paris, 1978, pp. 6, Exp. No. 39.
http://www.numdam.org/.
[60] M. Mignotte and M. Waldschmidt, Approximation des valeurs
de fonctions transcendantes, Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A
78=Indag. Math., 37 (1975), pp. 213–223.
[61] Y. V. Nesterenko, Modular functions and transcendence questions,
Mat. Sb., 187 (1996), pp. 65–96.
[68] G. Pólya, Über ganzwertige ganze Funktionen, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo,
40 (1915), pp. 1–16.
35
[74] D. Roy and M. Waldschmidt, Approximation diophantienne et
indépendance algébrique de logarithmes, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4),
30 (1997), pp. 753–796.
[75] W. M. Schmidt, Diophantine approximation, vol. 785, Lecture Notes in
Mathematics. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag, 1980.
[78] , Ein Satz über ganzwertige Funktionen als Prinzip für Transzen-
denzbeweise, Math. Ann., 121 (1949), pp. 131–140.
[79] , Einführung in die transzendenten Zahlen, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1957. French Transl., Introduction aux nombres transcendants, Gauthier-
Villars, Paris (1959).
[85] C. L. Stewart, Algebraic integers whose conjugates lie near the unit
circle, Bull. Soc. Math. France, 106 (1978), pp. 169–176.
36
[90] I. Wakabayashi, Meilleures estimations possibles pour
l’ensemble des points algébriques de fonctions analytiques, in
Seminar on number theory, 1983–1984 (Talence, 1983/1984),
Univ. Bordeaux I, Talence, 1984, pp. 8, Exp. No. 19.
http://www.digizeitschriften.de/resolveppn/GDZPPN002545349&L=2.
37
[104] , Diophantine approximation on linear algebraic groups, vol. 326
of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 2000.
Michel WALDSCHMIDT
Université P. et M. Curie (Paris VI)
Institut de Mathématiques CNRS UMR 7586
Théorie des Nombres Case 247
175, rue du Chevaleret
F–75013 PARIS
e-mail: miw@math.jussieu.fr
URL: http://www.math.jussieu.fr/∼miw/
38