Gauss's lemma (polynomials)

In algebra, Gauss's lemma,[1] named after Carl Friedrich Gauss, is a statement[note 1] about polynomials over the integers, or, more generally, over a unique factorization domain (that is, a ring that has a unique factorization property similar to the fundamental theorem of arithmetic). Gauss's lemma underlies all the theory of factorization and greatest common divisors of such polynomials.

Gauss's lemma asserts that the product of two primitive polynomials is primitive. (A polynomial with integer coefficients is primitive if it has 1 as a greatest common divisor of its coefficients.)

A corollary of Gauss's lemma, sometimes also called Gauss's lemma, is that a primitive polynomial is irreducible over the integers if and only if it is irreducible over the rational numbers. More generally, a primitive polynomial has the same complete factorization over the integers and over the rational numbers. In the case of coefficients in a unique factorization domain R, "rational numbers" must be replaced by "field of fractions of R". This implies that, if R is either a field, the ring of integers, or a unique factorization domain, then every polynomial ring (in one or several indeterminates) over R is a unique factorization domain. Another consequence is that factorization and greatest common divisor computation of polynomials with integers or rational coefficients may be reduced to similar computations on integers and primitive polynomials. This is systematically used (explicitly or implicitly) in all implemented algorithms (see Polynomial greatest common divisor and Factorization of polynomials).

Gauss's lemma, and all its consequences that do not involve the existence of a complete factorization remain true over any GCD domain (an integral domain over which greatest common divisors exist). In particular, a polynomial ring over a GCD domain is also a GCD domain. If one calls primitive a polynomial such that the coefficients generate the unit ideal, Gauss's lemma is true over every commutative ring.[2] However, some care must be taken when using this definition of primitive, as, over a unique factorization domain that is not a principal ideal domain, there are polynomials that are primitive in the above sense and not primitive in this new sense.

The lemma over the integers edit

If   is a polynomial with integer coefficients, then   is called primitive if the greatest common divisor of all the coefficients   is 1; in other words, no prime number divides all the coefficients.

Gauss's lemma (primitivity) — If P(X) and Q(X) are primitive polynomials over the integers, their product P(X)Q(X) is also primitive.

Proof: Clearly the product f(x)g(x) of two primitive polynomials has integer coefficients. Therefore, if it is not primitive, there must be a prime p which is a common divisor of all its coefficients. But p cannot divide all the coefficients of either f(x) or g(x) (otherwise they would not be primitive). Let arxr be the first term of f(x) not divisible by p and let bsxs be the first term of g(x) not divisible by p. Now consider the term xr+s in the product, whose coefficient is

 

The term arbs is not divisible by p (because p is prime), yet all the remaining ones are, so the entire sum cannot be divisible by p. By assumption all coefficients in the product are divisible by p, leading to a contradiction. Therefore, the coefficients of the product can have no common divisor and are thus primitive.  

Gauss's lemma (irreducibility) — A non-constant polynomial in Z[X] is irreducible in Z[X] if and only if it is both irreducible in Q[X] and primitive in Z[X].

The proof is given below for the more general case. Note that an irreducible element of Z (a prime number) is still irreducible when viewed as constant polynomial in Z[X]; this explains the need for "non-constant" in the statement.

Statements for unique factorization domains edit

Gauss's lemma holds more generally over arbitrary unique factorization domains. There the content c(P) of a polynomial P can be defined as the greatest common divisor of the coefficients of P (like the gcd, the content is actually a set of associate elements). A polynomial P with coefficients in a UFD R is then said to be primitive if the only elements of R that divide all coefficients of P at once are the invertible elements of R; i.e., the gcd of the coefficients is one.

Primitivity statement: If R is a UFD, then the set of primitive polynomials in R[X] is closed under multiplication. More generally, the content of a product   of polynomials is the product   of their individual contents.

Irreducibility statement: Let R be a unique factorization domain and F its field of fractions. A non-constant polynomial   in   is irreducible in   if and only if it is both irreducible in   and primitive in  .

(For the proofs, see #General version below.)

Let   be a unique factorization domain with field of fractions  . If   is a polynomial over   then for some   in  ,   has coefficients in  , and so – factoring out the gcd   of the coefficients – we can write   for some primitive polynomial  . As one can check, this polynomial   is unique up to the multiplication by a unit and is called the primitive part (or primitive representative) of   and is denoted by  . The procedure is compatible with product:  .

The construct can be used to show the statement:

  • A polynomial ring over a UFD is a UFD.

Indeed, by induction, it is enough to show   is a UFD when   is a UFD. Let   be a non-zero polynomial. Now,   is a unique factorization domain (since it is a principal ideal domain) and so, as a polynomial in  ,   can be factorized as:

 

where   are irreducible polynomials of  . Now, we write   for the gcd   of the coefficients of   (and   is the primitive part) and then:

 

Now,   is a product of prime elements of   (since   is a UFD) and a prime element of   is a prime element of  , as   is an integral domain. Hence,   admits a prime factorization (or a unique factorization into irreducibles). Next, observe that   is a unique factorization into irreducible elements of  , as (1) each   is irreducible by the irreducibility statement and (2) it is unique since the factorization of   can also be viewed as a factorization in   and factorization there is unique. Since   and   are uniquely determined by   up to unit elements, the above factorization of   is a unique factorization into irreducible elements.  

The condition that "R is a unique factorization domain" is not superfluous because it implies that every irreducible element of this ring is also a prime element, which in turn implies that every non-zero element of R has at most one factorization into a product of irreducible elements and a unit up to order and associate relationship. In a ring where factorization is not unique, say pa = qb with p and q irreducible elements that do not divide any of the factors on the other side, the product (p + qX)(a + qX) = pa + (p+a)qX + q2X2 = q(b + (p+a)X + qX2) shows the failure of the primitivity statement. For a concrete example one can take R = Z[i√5], p = 1 + i√5, a = 1 − i√5, q = 2, b = 3. In this example the polynomial 3 + 2X + 2X2 (obtained by dividing the right hand side by q = 2) provides an example of the failure of the irreducibility statement (it is irreducible over R, but reducible over its field of fractions Q[i√5]). Another well-known example is the polynomial X2X − 1, whose roots are the golden ratio φ = (1 + √5)/2 and its conjugate (1 − √5)/2 showing that it is reducible over the field Q[√5], although it is irreducible over the non-UFD Z[√5] which has Q[√5] as field of fractions. In the latter example the ring can be made into an UFD by taking its integral closure Z[φ] in Q[√5] (the ring of Dirichlet integers), over which X2X − 1 becomes reducible, but in the former example R is already integrally closed.

General version edit

Let   be a commutative ring. If   is a polynomial in  , then we write   for the ideal of   generated by all the coefficients of  ; it is called the content of  . Note that   for each   in  . The next proposition states a more substantial property.

Proposition[3] — For each pair of polynomials   in  ,

 

where   denotes the radical of an ideal. Moreover, if   is a GCD domain (e.g., a unique factorization domain), then

 

where   denotes the unique minimal principal ideal containing a finitely generated ideal  .[note 2]

A polynomial   is said to be primitive if   is the unit ideal  .[4] When   (or more generally when   is a Bézout domain), this agrees with the usual definition of a primitive polynomial. (But if   is only a UFD, this definition is inconsistent with the definition of primitivity in #Statements for unique factorization domains.)

Corollary[2] — Two polynomials   are primitive if and only if the product   is primitive.

Proof: This is easy using the fact[5] that   implies    

Corollary[6] — Suppose   is a GCD domain (e.g., a unique factorization domain) with the field of fractions  . Then a non-constant polynomial   in   is irreducible if and only if it is irreducible in   and the gcd of the coefficients of   is 1.

Proof: ( ) First note that the gcd of the coefficients of   is 1 since, otherwise, we can factor out some element   from the coefficients of   to write  , contradicting the irreducibility of  . Next, suppose   for some non-constant polynomials   in  . Then, for some  , the polynomial   has coefficients in   and so, by factoring out the gcd   of the coefficients, we write  . Do the same for   and we can write   for some  . Now, let   for some  . Then  . From this, using the proposition, we get:

 .

That is,   divides  . Thus,   and then the factorization   constitutes a contradiction to the irreducibility of  .

( ) If   is irreducible over  , then either it is irreducible over   or it contains a constant polynomial as a factor, the second possibility is ruled out by the assumption.  

Proof of the proposition: Clearly,  . If   is a prime ideal containing  , then   modulo  . Since   is a polynomial ring over an integral domain and thus is an integral domain, this implies either   or   modulo  . Hence, either   or   is contained in  . Since   is the intersection of all prime ideals that contain   and the choice of   was arbitrary,  .

We now prove the "moreover" part. Factoring out the gcd's from the coefficients, we can write   and   where the gcds of the coefficients of   are both 1. Clearly, it is enough to prove the assertion when   are replaced by  ; thus, we assume the gcd's of the coefficients of   are both 1. The rest of the proof is easy and transparent if   is a unique factorization domain; thus we give the proof in that case here (and see [note 3] for the proof for the GCD case). If  , then there is nothing to prove. So, assume otherwise; then there is a non-unit element dividing the coefficients of  . Factorizing that element into a product of prime elements, we can take that element to be a prime element  . Now, we have:

 .

Thus, either   contains   or  ; contradicting the gcd's of the coefficients of   are both 1.  

  • Remark: Over a GCD domain (e.g., a unique factorization domain), the gcd of all the coefficients of a polynomial  , unique up to unit elements, is also called the content of  .

Applications edit

It follows from Gauss's lemma that for each unique factorization domain  , the polynomial ring   is also a unique factorization domain (see #Statements for unique factorization domains). Gauss's lemma can also be used to show Eisenstein's irreducibility criterion. Finally, it can be used to show that cyclotomic polynomials (unitary units with integer coefficients) are irreducible.

Gauss's lemma implies the following statement:

  • If   is a monic polynomial in one variable with coefficients in a unique factorization domain   (or more generally a GCD domain), then a root of   that is in the field of fractions   of   is in  .[note 4]

If  , then it says a rational root of a monic polynomial over integers is an integer (cf. the rational root theorem). To see the statement, let   be a root of   in   and assume   are relatively prime. In   we can write   with   for some  . Then

 

is a factorization in  . But   is primitive (in the UFD sense) and thus   divides the coefficients of   by Gauss's lemma, and so

 

with   in  . Since   is monic, this is possible only when   is a unit.

A similar argument shows:

  • Let   be a GCD domain with the field of fractions   and  . If   for some polynomial   that is primitive in the UFD sense and  , then  .

The irreducibility statement also implies that the minimal polynomial over the rational numbers of an algebraic integer has integer coefficients.

Notes edit

  1. ^ This theorem is called a lemma for historical reasons.[citation needed]
  2. ^ A generator of the principal ideal is a gcd of some generators of I (and it exists because   is a GCD domain).
  3. ^ Proof for the GCD case: The proof here is adopted from Mines, R.; Richman, F.; Ruitenburg, W. (1988). A Course in Constructive Algebra. Universitext. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-96640-4. We need the following simple lemma about gcd:
    • If  , then  .
    (The proof of the lemma is not trivial but is by elementary algebra.) We argue by induction on the sum of the numbers of the terms in  ; that is, we assume the proposition has been established for any pair of polynomials with one less total number of the terms. Let  ; i.e.,   is the gcd of the coefficients of  . Assume  ; otherwise, we are done. Let   denote the highest-degree terms of   in terms of lexicographical monomial ordering. Then   is precisely the leading term of   and so   divides the (unique) coefficient of   (since it divides all the coefficients of  ). Now, if   does not have a common factor with the (unique) coefficient of   and does not have a common factor with that of  , then, by the above lemma,  . But   divides the coefficient of  ; so this is a contradiction. Thus, either   has a common factor with the coefficient of   or does with that of  ; say, the former is the case. Let  . Since   divides the coefficients of  , by inductive hypothesis,
     .
    Since   contains  , it contains  ; i.e.,  , a contradiction.  
  4. ^ In other words, it says that a unique factorization domain is integrally closed.

References edit

  1. ^ Article 42 of Carl Friedrich Gauss's Disquisitiones Arithmeticae (1801)
  2. ^ a b Atiyah & Macdonald 1969, Ch. 1., Exercise 2. (iv) and Exercise 3.
  3. ^ Eisenbud 1995, Exercise 3.4. (a)
  4. ^ Atiyah & Macdonald 1969, Ch. 1., Exercise 2. (iv)
  5. ^ Atiyah & Macdonald 1969, Ch. 1., Exercise 1.13.
  6. ^ Eisenbud 1995, Exercise 3.4.c; The case when R is a UFD.