Uniform exclusion of Landau–Siegel zeros
Abstract
We prove the uniform exclusion of Landau–Siegel zeros. There is an absolute constant c > 0 such that every real zero of every primitive nonprincipal real Dirichlet L-function of conductor q ≥ 3 satisfies .
Introduction
For a primitive Dirichlet character of conductor , let
and use its analytic continuation elsewhere. For an absolute constant , the classical region
is zero-free except for a possible simple real zero attached to a real character [3 , Section 14]. Excluding this possibility uniformly is the Landau–Siegel zero problem. We prove its logarithmic formulation.
Theorem 1. There is an absolute constant such that every real zero of every primitive nonprincipal real Dirichlet -function of conductor satisfies
Possible exceptional zeros obstruct uniform estimates for primes in arithmetic progressions. They also affect the study of quadratic class numbers through the values in Dirichlet’s class-number formula. Siegel’s theorem of 1935 gives for every , with an ineffective constant [11, 3]. This estimate leaves open the possibility of a sequence of real zeros with . More uniformly across characters, Page’s theorem gives an absolute constant such that, for every , at most one primitive real character of conductor at most has a real zero in [9]. The common window depends on , not on each character’s own conductor. The Deuring–Heilbronn phenomenon, developed quantitatively by Linnik and Heath-Brown, forces other zeros away from [8, 6]; see Benli, Goel, Twiss, and Zaman [1] for a recent explicit form. Friedlander and Iwaniec [5] discuss the logarithmic zero-gap conjecture and its relation to lower bounds for .
The argument
The analytic starting point is that a zero with small forces a shortage of primes with ; compare [5 , Section 5]. Consequently, primes with carry enough logarithmic mass for the determinant comparison. We give the short logarithmic-derivative proof in Section 2.
The remaining argument is algebraic. Associate to a quadratic field and adjoin . Except for one fixed quadratic field, this gives a biquadratic field , with and . Let change the sign of and let change the sign of . For , put
We form rows indexed by triples whose entries are
There are columns. The interpolation estimate supplies enough independent rows to form a nonzero square determinant at the natural degree scale , for which . To favor the first exponent, we order the rows by and retain a row exactly when it increases the span of its predecessors. Here the integer will be large and fixed. Summed over the retained rows, the last two exponents account for an arbitrarily small fraction of the total degree.
At an odd prime with , taking -th powers modulo sends to either or . When , replacing a block of first factors by the corresponding conjugate strictly lowers the row weight. Subtraction therefore preserves the determinant and extracts powers of from the rows. Primes up to contribute the leading factor to the divisibility bound, whereas the evaluation points contribute to the size bound. This strict difference drives the contradiction. Taking to be a sufficiently large fixed power of controls the additional term in the size bound. Section 4 constructs the rows, Section 5 proves the two bounds, and Section 6 makes the parameter choices.
Interpolation and arithmetic context
The reusable algebraic input is Lemma 3, proved in Section 3. It bounds the separate degrees needed to interpolate on a linear image of an integer box in . Its hypothesis is that the kernel is spanned by a vector whose coordinates are linearly independent over . The estimate is uniform in the linear map and in the choice of coordinates on the three-dimensional image. This allows the interpolation box to have an arbitrarily large fixed aspect ratio without introducing a constant depending on the field. The proof uses a dimension count, a nearest-point argument for an integer polytope, and Lagrange interpolation on a supporting face.
General multiplicity estimates on commutative algebraic groups are developed in [10]; rectangular derivative conditions and interpolation duality appear in [4 , Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 1.3]. The estimate proved here makes the coefficient and coordinate uniformity explicit. The final comparison belongs to the interpolation-determinant method described by Laurent [7 , Section 6]. Bost’s arithmetic algebraicity criteria use spaces of derivations closed under -fold composition at almost all prime ideals [2 , Theorems 2.1 and 2.3]. In the torus interpretation recalled in Section 3, our argument controls this operation on one distinguished derivation at selected primes and uses it directly for determinant divisibility, rather than applying an algebraicity criterion. All algebraic estimates used in the proof are established below.
All logarithms are natural. Constants implicit in and are absolute unless a dependence is specified. All vector-space spans are over the indicated field, and we use , including when .
The prime bias forced by a real zero
We first record the prime-sum estimate that will be compared with the determinant bound. Let be primitive, nonprincipal, and real of conductor , and let be a real zero. Write
Lemma 2. For ,
Consequently, for each integer ,
where is absolute and depends only on .
Proof. Put . For the completed function
the Hadamard product and functional equation give, for real ,
Here runs over the nontrivial zeros with multiplicity. The sum of real parts converges, and each term is nonnegative. This is the standard logarithmic-derivative identity; see [3 , Sections 12 and 14]. The functional equation cancels the real constant from the Hadamard product. For , the gamma term is bounded for both parities. Keeping only the term for and using gives
Take , which lies in for . Writing for the von Mangoldt function, the Euler products give the nonnegative series
Also,
This proves (2.1). To obtain (2.2), use Mertens’ estimate and the elementary bound for primes dividing :
Removing primes at most costs a constant depending only on .
Interpolation on a projected integer box
The purpose of this section is to obtain a nonzero evaluation determinant using monomials whose separate degrees may be very different. No arithmetic estimates enter the interpolation lemma.
Lemma 3. Let be a surjective linear map, with , where the four coordinates of are linearly independent over . Let and be integers satisfying
Set and
Then the evaluation map from to is surjective.
Proof. Suppose the evaluation map is not surjective. There are complex numbers , not all zero, such that
Let and . We construct the test polynomial as a product. A translated polynomial will vanish at for every outside one supporting face of . A second polynomial will select a single vertex on that face, with total degree at most .
Put . For , the polynomials of separate degrees at most form a vector space of dimension . Since
there is a nonzero polynomial with and
A supporting face. The polynomial is nonzero because is surjective. A nonzero polynomial on cannot vanish on all of : this follows by applying the one-variable root bound successively to its four coordinates. Choose with whose distance to is least. Such a minimum exists because bounded neighborhoods of the compact set contain finitely many lattice points. Let be nearest to and set . By (3.3), .
The nearest-point inequality for shows that belongs to the supporting face
This face has dimension at most three: if is four-dimensional then is proper, and otherwise . Removing affine dependencies from a convex combination expresses as a combination of at most four vertices of . One coefficient is at least . Choosing its vertex gives
Indeed, subtracting from four times that convex combination leaves nonnegative coefficients with sum three.
For , define
The inclusion follows from (3.4). Since , for sufficiently small the point satisfies
Thus is closer to than is. By the choice of ,
Figure 1 illustrates the strict decrease in distance.

Figure 1. Schematic of (3.5). Both and lie in , and . Moving to decreases the distance to because . The dashed red segment is shorter than ; the argument takes place in .
Interpolation on the face. The integer vertices of span an affine space of dimension at most three. Solving their affine linear equations over and clearing denominators gives a hyperplane
containing . Rational independence gives . The restriction is therefore an affine bijection onto : each affine line parallel to meets exactly once.
Choose with . The other three coordinates determine a point of . Let , for , be those affine coordinate functions of . Thus for . The Lagrange polynomial
has total degree at most and satisfies
The denominators are nonzero integers; empty products are 1.
Now set . Translation preserves each separate degree of , and the total degree bound on bounds each of its separate degrees. Hence . Equation (3.6) eliminates the terms off , and eliminates all remaining terms except the one at . Substitution in (3.2) gives the contradiction
Corollary 4. Let satisfy the hypotheses of Lemma 3. For integers , set
The rows , with and , span . The constant 32 is independent of and .
Proof. Put . Since , every , and . In particular , and
Apply Lemma 3 to the monomial basis of .
Remark 5. The connection with multiplicity estimates is immediate. On , write . For , . Thus Corollary 4 is a rectangular multiplicity estimate. This interpolation viewpoint is standard in the subject; compare [4 , Section 1]. We use the evaluation rows directly in what follows.
A weighted determinant of conjugates
We now construct a nonzero determinant for which most of the total exponent lies in the first coordinate. This is the coordinate to which the prime congruence will apply.
A primitive nonprincipal real character corresponds to a fundamental discriminant with . Write with squarefree. Then and, for odd , , the Legendre symbol; see [3]. Temporarily exclude and put
Since is nonprincipal, , so . Every element of has a unique expression with . The automorphisms , and , generate .
For integers , retain the notation and set . For define . The map
satisfies .
It has rank three and
For example, the minor in the first three columns is , and multiplication verifies the displayed kernel. Its four coordinates are linearly independent over because are a -basis of . Thus Corollary 4 applies.
For , write
Fix an order of the columns. Order all indices in by increasing , with any fixed rule to break ties. Retain a row precisely when it increases the span of the earlier rows over . Rank is unchanged on extending scalars from to , so Corollary 4 guarantees retained rows. Every row in that corollary has weight at most . Therefore all retained rows have weight at most this bound.
Let be the set of retained indices, in their retained order, and put
Only the surjectivity conclusion of Corollary 4 enters the selection of these rows. The coefficients of the auxiliary polynomials used to prove it may depend on , but they do not enter , which is formed from the original monomial rows. Thus no bound on those coefficients is needed for the size estimate below. This is the interpolation-determinant construction, with a weighted row order; compare [7 , Section 6].
Lemma 6. There are absolute constants such that for every fixed integer and all sufficiently large in terms of alone,
In particular, .
Proof. The weight bound gives for every retained index. Thus . For each fixed value of , there are at most
retained indices; here follows from . List the first coordinates in increasing order as . Then . Writing , , gives
The last inequality has difference . For fixed , the condition holds whenever . Thus, uniformly in the field,
We may take and . □
Two bounds for the determinant
For , define . If , then : its product belongs to and is fixed by both and , so only its integer constant coefficient remains. In particular is a nonzero integer. We bound its absolute value from above at the complex embeddings and from below by divisibility.
The Archimedean bound
For every embedding and every ,
This estimate is valid for either sign of . Each row indexed by has Euclidean norm at most at every embedding. Hadamard’s inequality and the four embeddings give
The prime divisibility
Call a prime admissible if , , and . Euler’s criterion gives in
The -th-power map is a ring homomorphism in characteristic , and integer coefficients are fixed by it. Consequently
This is the Frobenius relation in the ring .
Lemma 7. For every admissible prime ,
Proof. Let or according as or . For a retained index , write with . In (4.2), replace the first factor by
and leave the other two factors unchanged. Denote the resulting row by . Expansion yields the exact identity
where are the standard coordinate vectors. Every row on the right after has smaller weight, since its weight is .
By the greedy selection rule, every earlier row lies in the -span of the earlier retained rows. Thus the matrix of replacement rows equals times the matrix of retained rows, where is lower triangular over with diagonal entries . In particular,
On the other hand, (5.2) shows that every entry of belongs to . Dividing its entries by leaves a matrix over . Factoring these powers from (5.5) proves (5.3). The equality of determinants is over ; the divisibility follows from the replacement entries themselves, so no integrality of is required. □
Taking norms in (5.3) gives . Since the norm is a nonzero integer, distinct admissible primes may be combined. Therefore
The second inequality uses in each row. Chebyshev’s bound and Lemma 2 now give, when and ,
The leading term here is . In (5.1), the corresponding term is , and . The weight makes small enough to preserve this difference.
Completion of the proof
Suppose Theorem 1 is false. Then there is a sequence of primitive nonprincipal real characters and real zeros with
To justify , there are only finitely many characters of bounded conductor, and for each of them . Analyticity therefore prevents zeros from accumulating at 1. Passing to a subsequence gives (6.1). In particular for all sufficiently large , so the field construction applies.
Fix for the moment. Combining (5.1) and (5.7), then dividing by , yields
The constants denoted by are absolute. The division is legitimate for all sufficiently large by Lemma 6.
First choose the integer so large that . Lemma 6 then makes the first term of (6.2) at most .
Next choose a fixed real and set . Along (6.1),
Take sufficiently large that the limiting upper bound for the second term of (6.2) is less than . This choice depends only on the absolute constants and the already fixed bound .
Finally let along (6.1). The third term tends to zero because is fixed and . The fourth tends to zero because is fixed. For the last term, Lemma 6 and give
both tending to zero. The conditions , , and the lower bound on all hold eventually. Taking an upper limit in (6.2) gives , a contradiction. This proves Theorem 1.
References
- [1]K. Benli, S. Goel, H. Twiss, and A. Zaman, Explicit Deuring–Heilbronn phenomenon for Dirichlet L-functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 154 (2026), no. 2, 509–525. doi:10.1090/proc/17450.DOI
- [2]J.-B. Bost. (2001). Algebraic leaves of algebraic foliations over number fields. In Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. (Vol. 93, pp. 161–221). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10240-001-8191-3
- [3]H. Davenport, Multiplicative number theory, 2nd ed., revised by H. L. Montgomery, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 74, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980.DOI
- [4]S. Fischler, Interpolation on algebraic groups, Compos. Math. 141 (2005), no. 4, 907–925. doi:10.1112/S0010437X05001351.DOI
- [5]J. B. Friedlander and H. Iwaniec, A note on Dirichlet L-functions, Expo. Math. 36 (2018), nos. 3–4, 343–350. doi:10.1016/j.exmath.2018.06.003.DOI
- [6]D. R. Heath-Brown. (1992). Zero-free regions for Dirichlet L-functions, and the least prime in an arithmetic progression. In Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) (Vol. 64, Number 2, pp. 265–338). https://doi.org/10.1112/plms/s3-64.2.265
- [7]M. Laurent, Sur quelques résultats récents de transcendance, Astérisque 198–199–200 (1991), 209–230. https://www.numdam.org/item/AST_1991__198-199-200__209_0/.numdam.org/item/AST_1991__198-199-200__209_0
- [8]U. V. Linnik. (1944). On the least prime in an arithmetic progression. II. The Deuring–Heilbronn phenomenon. In Rec. Math. [Mat. Sbornik] N.S.: 15(57) (Number 3, pp. 347–368). https://www.mathnet.ru/eng/sm6202mathnet.ru/eng/sm6202
- [9]A. Page, On the number of primes in an arithmetic progression, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 39 (1935), 116–141. doi:10.1112/plms/s2-39.1.116.DOI
- [10]P. Philippon. (1986). Lemmes de zéros dans les groupes algébriques commutatifs. In Bull. Soc. Math. France (Vol. 114, pp. 355–383). https://doi.org/10.24033/bsmf.2060
- [11]C. L. Siegel, Über die Classenzahl quadratischer Zahlkörper, Acta Arith. 1 (1935), 83–86. doi:10.4064/aa-1-1-83-86.DOI