arXiv:2005.14358v3 [math.NT] 21 Feb 2021

arXiv:2005.14358v3 [math.NT] 21 Feb 2021

On the distribution of multivariate Jacobi sums

Qing Lu

Weizhe Zheng

Abstract

LetF_qbe a finite field ofq elements. We show that the normalized Jacobi sum q^−(m−1)/2J(χ₁, . . . , χ_m) (χ₁· · ·χ_m nontrivial) is asymptotically equidis- tributed on the unit circle, when χ1 ∈ A¹, . . . , χm ∈ A^m run through ar- bitrary sets of nontrivial multiplicative characters of F^×_q, if #A1 ≥ q^12+ǫ,

#A2 ≥ (logq)^1δ−1 for ǫ > δ > 0 fixed and q → ∞ or if #A1#A2/q → ∞. This extends previous results of Xi, Z. Zheng, and the authors.

LetF_q be a finite field of q elements and letC be the field of complex numbers.

We let X^q denote the set of nontrivial multiplicative characters F^×_q → C^×. For m≥2,χ1, . . . , χm ∈ X^q satisfying χ1· · ·χm 6=1, we consider the Jacobi sum

J(χ1, . . . , χm) = ^X

a1,...,am∈F^×q

a1+···+am=1

χ1(a1)· · ·χm(am),

which has absolute value q^m−21. For a nonempty subset A ⊆ Xq^m, we define the discrepancy D(A), to be the supremum of

#{(χ1, . . . , χm)∈ A^◦ |q^−m−21J(χ1, . . . , χm)∈e^2πi[a,b]}

#A^◦ −(b−a)

for all real numbers a≤b≤a+ 1, where

A^◦ ={(χ1, . . . , χm)∈ A |χ1· · ·χm 6=1}

ande^2πi[a,b] denotes the image of the interval [a, b] under the mapx7→e^2πix. ForA^◦ empty we adopt the convention thatD(A) = 1.

The goal of this note is to prove the following equidistribution property.

∗School of Mathematical Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; email:

qlu@bnu.edu.cn. Partially supported by Beijing Natural Science Foundation Grant 1202014;

Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities of China; China Scholarship Council.

†Morningside Center of Mathematics and Hua Loo-Keng Key Laboratory of Mathemat- ics, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China; University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China; email:

wzheng@math.ac.cn. Partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants 11822110, 11688101, 11621061.

Theorem 1. There exists a constant C such that for all q and all integers m ≥2, s≥1 and for all nonempty subsets A¹ ⊆ X^q, A² ⊆ X^q, B ⊆ Xq^m−2, we have

D(A¹× A²× B)≤C



s

√q A1

!_2s+1¹

+ 1

√sA₂

q A1

_2s¹

logq



, (1)

D(A1× A2× B)≤C

q A1A2

¹₄

. (2)

Here Ai = #Aⁱ.

Corollary 2. (i) Let 0< ǫ≤ ¹2 and c >0 be real constants. Then for nonempty subsets A¹ ⊆ X^q, A² ⊆ X^q, B ⊆ Xq^m−2 satisfying #A¹ ≥ cq^12+ǫ, we have D(A¹× A²× B)→0 as

#A2

(logq)^1ǫ−1(log logq) → ∞.

(ii) For nonempty subsets A1 ⊆ Xq, A2 ⊆ Xq, B ⊆ Xq^m−2, D(A1× A2× B) → 0 as #A¹#A²/q→ ∞.

Remark 3. (i) For m= 2, the problem of asymptotic equidistribution of {q^−1/2J(χ1, χ2)}^χ1∈A1, χ2∈A2, χ1χ26=1

was first suggested by Shparlinski [S, Section 5].

(ii) The case s = 1 of (1) was proved in [LZZ, (1.2)], which implies D(A¹ × A² × B) → 0 as _q^A_log^1A2²q → ∞. The case m = 2 of (1) is a theorem of Xi [X, Theorem 1.5] and the problem of generalization to multivariate Jacobi sums was suggested by him in [X].

(iii) The bound (2) improves [LZZ, (1.3)]. Note that (2) is stronger than (1) when (A1q)^1/3 ≤A2 ≤A1.

(iv) It follows from a theorem of Katz [K, Theorem 9.5] (see also [LZZ, (1.7)] for the case m= 2) that for fixed χ2, . . . , χm ∈ X^q satisfying χ2· · ·χm 6=1,

{q^−(m−1)/2J(χ1, . . . , χm)}^χ1∈X^q, χ1···χm6=1

is asymptotically equidistributed on the unit circle asq→ ∞.

(v) When one or both of theAⁱ’s areX^q, better bounds than Theorem 1 have been given. See [KZ] by Katz and Z. Zheng (for the casem= 2 andA¹ =A² =X^q) and [LZZ, Theorems 1.4, 1.6].

Theorem 1 follows from the following bounds of the moments of Jacobi sums, which we deduce from results of Deligne and Katz. Our proof of (3) is similar to that of Xi [X, Theorem 1.4], using Hölder’s inequality. Our proof of (4) using Cauchy’s inequality was originally presented using matrices indexed byF^d×_q. Xi suggested the current presentation, similar to the proof of [dlBSSV, Lemma 3.8].

Theorem 4. For all integers m ≥ 2, s ≥ 1, n ≥ 1 and for all nonempty subsets A¹ ⊆ X^q, A² ⊆ X^q, B ⊆ Xq^m−2, we have

|M⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤A¹₁^−2s1(s!A^s₂q+sA^2s₂ (n√q+ 1))^2s1 B, (3)

|M⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤n^qA1A2qB, (4)

where M⁽ⁿ⁾ = ^P_{(χ1,...,χm)∈A}^◦(q^−m−21J(χ₁, . . . , χ_m))ⁿ, A = A1 × A2 × B, A_i = #Ai, B = #B.

Proof. We have

M⁽ⁿ⁾ = ^X

(χ3,...,χm)∈B

X

χ1∈A1, χ2∈A2

(χ1,...,χm)∈A^◦

(q^−m−21J(χ1, . . . , χm))ⁿ,

It suffices to prove the stated estimates for the inner sum. Thus we may assume B = 1. Let B = {(χ3, . . . , χm)} and λ = χ3· · ·χm. Fix a nontrivial additive characterψ: F_q →C^×. For χ∈F^d×_q =X^q∪ {1}, consider the Gauss sum

G(χ) = ^X

a∈F^×q

ψ(a)χ(a).

Recall that |G(χ)|=√q for χ∈ X^q and G(1) =−1. We have J(χ1, . . . , χm) = G(χ1)· · ·G(χm)

G(χ1· · ·χm) . By the above, we have

|M⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤ ^X

χ1∈A1

X

χ2∈A2

χ1χ2λ6=1

q⁻ⁿG(χ2)ⁿG(χ1χ2λ)ⁿ

.

By Hölder’s inequality, we get

|M⁽ⁿ⁾|^2s ≤A^2s₁ ^{−1 X}

χ1∈_Fc^×_q

X

χ2∈A2

χ1χ2λ6=1

q⁻ⁿG(χ2)ⁿG(χ1χ2λ)ⁿ

2s

=A^2s₁ ^{−1 X}

η,ρ∈A^s2

S(η,ρ)

Ys i=1

q⁻ⁿG(ηi)ⁿG(ρi)ⁿ, where

S(η,ρ) = ^X

χ∈_Fc^×q\C^η,ρ

Ys i=1

q⁻ⁿG(χηiλ)ⁿG(χρiλ)ⁿ,

Here C^η,ρ = {η₁⁻¹λ⁻¹, . . . , η_s⁻¹λ⁻¹, ρ⁻₁¹λ⁻¹, . . . , ρ⁻_s¹λ⁻¹}. Each summand of S(η,ρ) has absolute value 1, which implies the trivial bound|S(η,ρ)| ≤q−2. Ifρ is not a

permutation ofη, then, removing the redundant factors in the product and applying Katz’s bound [K, page 162, line 8] to the sum extended toF^d×_q, we get

|S(η,ρ)| ≤

X

χ∈_Fc^×_q

+

X

χ∈C^η,ρ

≤snq−1

√q + 2s

√qⁿ,

where we used the fact #C^η,ρ≤2s. Therefore,

|M⁽ⁿ⁾|^2s≤A^2s₁ ⁻¹(s!A^s₂q+A^2s₂ s(n√q+ 1)).

For the proof of (4), let M˜⁽ⁿ⁾ = ^X

χ1∈A1

χ2∈A²

q^−(m+1)n2 G(χ1)ⁿ· · ·G(χm)ⁿG(χ1χ2λ)ⁿ.

Then

|M˜⁽ⁿ⁾−M⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤min{A1, A2}q^−n/2 ≤^qA1A2q^−n/2 and

M˜⁽ⁿ⁾ =q^−(m+1)n2 G(χ₃)ⁿ. . . G(χ_m)^{n X}

χ1∈A1

χ2∈A2

X

a∈F^×q

G(χ₁)ⁿG(χ₂)ⁿχ₁(a)χ₂(a)λ(a)Kl_n(a).

Here we used

G(χ)ⁿ= ^X

a∈F^×q

Kln(a)χ(a), where

Kl_n(a) = ^X

a1,...,an∈F^×q

a1···an=a

ψ(a₁+· · ·+a_n)

is the Kloosterman sum. Applying Deligne’s bound [D, (7.1.3)]

|Kln(a)| ≤nq^(n−1)/2, we get

|M˜⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤nq^{−1/2 X}

a∈F^×q

|g₁(a)g₂(a)|, wheregi(a) =^P_χ∈Aiq^−n/2G(χ)ⁿχ(a). Since

X

a∈F^×q

|gi(a)|² = ^X

a∈F^×q

X

η,ρ∈Ai

q⁻ⁿG(η)ⁿG(ρ)ⁿηρ(a) =Ai(q−1),

we have _X

a∈F^×q

|g1(a)g2(a)| ≤^qA1A2(q−1) by Cauchy’s inequality. Therefore,

|M⁽ⁿ⁾| ≤^qA1A2q^−1/2(n(q−1) + 1).

Proof of Theorem 1. Given nonnegative functions f and g, we write f ≪ g for the existence of anabsolute constantC0 such thatf ≤C0g. Let D=D(A¹× A²× B).

We apply the Erdős-Turán inequality [ET, Theorem III]. For any real numberK ≥1, we have

D≪ 1

K + ^X

1≤n≤K

M⁽ⁿ⁾ n#A^◦. Note that #A^◦ ≥(A1−1)A2B.

For (1), taking C ≥ 2, we may assume A1 ≥ (2s)^2s+1√q since D ≤ 1. By (3), we get

D≪ 1

K + ^X

1≤n≤K





√s n

q A1A^s₂

!_2s¹

+ 1 n

sn√q A1

!_2s¹



≪ 1 K +√

s q

A1A^s₂

!_2s¹

(1 + logK) +s sK√q A1

!_2s¹

. (5)

Taking K = s^−1A√¹q

_2s+1¹

, the first and third terms of the right-hand side of (5) are both equal to s^√_A^q₁

1

2s+1. For the remaining term, note that K ≥ 2 by our assumption onA1 and thus 1 + logK ≪logK ≪s⁻¹logq. Here in the last estimate we used the factA1 < q, which impliesK < q^4s+21 . The bound (1) follows.

For (2), we may assume A₁A₂ ≥q and, by symmetry, A₁ ≥√q. By (4), we get D≪ 1

K +K

s q A₁A₂. We conclude by taking K =_A^q

1A2

₋1/4

.

Proof of Corollary 2. Part (ii) is obvious from (2). For (i), it suffices to show the existence of a constant C^′ >0 (depending on ǫ and c) such that

D(A1× A2× B)≤C^′



(log logq)⁻¹+

vu

ut(logq)^1ǫ−1(log logq) A2



.

To see this, we takes =⌈_{2 log log}^ǫlogq_q⌉in (1) and note that there exist constants c^′ and c^′′ (depending onǫ and c) such that

log



s

√q A1

!_2s+1¹ 

≤logs+ log(c⁻¹q^−ǫ) 2s+ 1

≤(log logq−log log logq)−log logq+c^′

=−log log logq+c^′, log 1

√s

q A1

_2s¹

logq

!

≤ −1

2logs+log(c⁻¹q^12−ǫ)

2s + log logq

≤ −1

2(log logq−log log logq) +

1 2ǫ −1

log logq+ log logq+c^′′

=

1 2ǫ − 1

2

log logq+1

2log log logq+c^′′.

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Ping Xi for many helpful comments, especially his suggestion on the presentation of the proof of (4). We are grateful to Nick Katz and Zhiyong Zheng for encouragement. We thank the referee for useful comments. We acknowledge the support of Princeton University, where part of this work was done during a visit.

References

[dlBSSV] R. de la Bretèche, M. Sha, I. E. Shparlinski, and J. F. Voloch,The Sato-Tate distribution in thin parametric families of elliptic curves, Math. Z.290(2018), no. 3-4, 831–855, DOI 10.1007/s00209-018-2042-0. MR3856834↑2

[D] P. Deligne, Application de la formule des traces aux sommes trigonométriques, Coho- mologie étale, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 569, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.

Séminaire de Géométrie Algébrique du Bois-Marie SGA 4¹₂, pp. 168–232.↑4

[ET] P. Erdös and P. Turán,On a problem in the theory of uniform distribution. I, II, Nederl.

Akad. Wetensch., Proc. 51 (1948), 1146–1154, 1262–1269 = Indagationes Math. 10, 370–378, 406–413. MR0027895 (10,372c), MR0027896 (10,372d)↑5

[K] N. M. Katz,Gauss sums, Kloosterman sums, and monodromy groups, Annals of Math- ematics Studies, vol. 116, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1988. MR955052 (91a:11028)↑2, 4

[KZ] N. M. Katz and Z. Zheng, On the uniform distribution of Gauss sums and Jacobi sums, Analytic number theory, Vol. 2 (Allerton Park, IL, 1995), Progr. Math., vol. 139, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 1996, pp. 537–558. MR1409377 (97e:11089)↑2 [LZZ] Q. Lu, W. Zheng, and Z. Zheng,On the distribution of Jacobi sums, J. Reine Angew.

Math. 741(2018), 67–86, DOI 10.1515/crelle-2015-0087. MR3836143↑2

[S] I. E. Shparlinski,On the distribution of arguments of Gauss sums, Kodai Math. J. 32 (2009), no. 1, 172–177, DOI 10.2996/kmj/1238594554. MR2518562 (2010b:11104)↑2 [X] P. Xi, Equidistributions of Jacobi sums. arXiv:1809.04286v1, preprint.↑2