alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Subset sums of power values over Galois rings

AI contributions
  • OpenAI ChatGPT
  • Codex
View details

Abstract

Let R=GR(pm,pmf)R=GR(p^m,p^{mf}), where pp is prime, q=pfq=p^f, m,f≥1m,f\geq1, d≥2d\geq2 and p∤dp\nmid d. We count nn-element subsets of P={xd:x∈R}∖{0}P=\{x^d:x\in R\}\setminus\{0\}, the set of distinct nonzero ddth-power values, with a prescribed sum. For fixed m,d,nm,d,n with n≥3n\geq3, the count equals q−m(∣P∣n)(1+Om,d,n(q1−n/2)) q^{-m}\binom{|P|}{n}(1+O_{m,d,n}(q^{1-n/2})) as q→∞q\to\infty through admissible prime powers, uniformly over all targets and with both pp and ff allowed to vary. For fixed m,dm,d, we also classify uniform relative equidistribution at the remaining positive sizes: it fails at n=1n=1, and at n=2n=2 it holds along an admissible sequence if and only if, for all sufficiently large terms, gcd⁡(d,q−1)=1\gcd(d,q-1)=1 and (m≥2 or p≠2)(m\geq2\text{ or }p\ne2).

Introduction

Let R=GR⁡(pm,pmf)R=\operatorname{GR}(p^m,p^{mf}), where pp is prime, q=pfq=p^f, m,f≥1m,f\ge1, d≥2d\ge2 and p∤dp\nmid d. We use R/pR≅FqR/pR\cong\mathbb{F}_q and call mm the length of RR. Put P={xd:x∈R}∖{0}P=\{x^d:x\in R\}\setminus\{0\} and N=∣P∣N=|P|. For b∈Rb\in R and an integer n≥0n\ge0, put

NP(n,b)=#{S⊆P:∣S∣=n, ∑x∈Sx=b}.N_P(n,b)=\#\left\{S\subseteq P:|S|=n,\ \sum_{x\in S}x=b\right\}.

Distinctness is imposed on the power values themselves, including any nonzero nonunit power values.

Write g=gcd⁡(d,q−1)g=\gcd(d,q-1) for the index of (Fq×)d(\mathbb{F}_q^\times)^d in Fq×\mathbb{F}_q^\times. A prime power q=pfq=p^f is admissible when p∤dp\nmid d. For fixed m,dm,d and positive nn, uniform relative equidistribution along an admissible sequence q→∞q\to\infty means that

NP(n,b)q−m(Nn)→1\frac{N_P(n,b)}{q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}}\to1

uniformly over b∈Rb\in R. Relative normalisation is restricted to 1≤n≤N1\le n\le N, which holds eventually for fixed positive nn.

The finite-field antecedents include Li and Wan’s exact count over nonzero field elements [6 Theorem 1.2] and Zhu and Wan’s subgroup estimates [11 Theorems 4.1 and 4.4], whose cycle weights give the corresponding fixed-size field rates, including characteristic two. Exact quadratic-residue counts in odd characteristic appear in Weiqiong Wang, Li-Ping Wang and Haiyan Zhou [10 Theorems 5.1 and 5.2]. Weiqiong Wang and Jennifer Nguyen [9 Theorem 3.1] and Hyok Choe and Chunghyok Choe [1 Theorem 3.1] give small-size all-target subgroup positivity criteria in odd and binary characteristic, respectively, under explicit field-size and index hypotheses.

At length two in odd characteristic, Ding and Zhou’s results [2 Theorem 6.1] and [3 Theorem 5.11 and Corollary 5.12] cover the same distinct nonzero power-value set, with main term q−2(Nn)q^{-2}\binom{N}{n}. Their combined exact formulas give the same coefficient majorant and all-target fixed-size upper rates Od,n(q1−n/2)O_{d,n}(q^{1-n/2}) for g>1g>1 and On(q1−n)O_n(q^{1-n}) for g=1g=1, including p∣np\mid n. In particular, the bound for g=1g=1 implies uniform relative equidistribution when n=2n=2. These are extracted consequences of exact formulas, distinct from printed compressed estimates or separately stated rate theorems. Appendix A gives the comparison and the qualified target scope of the retained 2019 derivation.

The counting background comprises the weighted distinct-coordinate sieve and cycle-index formulas [7 Theorem 2.6, Proposition 2.8 and Lemma 4.1], and the character-product method [5 Lemma 2.5]. Our signed character-and-cycle identity specialises Li and Wan’s general finite-ring formula [8 Lemma 3.1].

Main results. For fixed m,d,nm,d,n with n≥3n \ge3, Theorem 7 gives

NP(n,b)=q−m(Nn)(1+Om,d,n(q1−n/2)),N_P(n,b)=q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}\left(1+O_{m,d,n}\left(q^{1-n/2}\right)\right),

uniformly over every b∈Rb \in R, as q→∞q \to\infty along any admissible sequence. The prime pp, extension degree ff and pointwise index gg may all vary. For fixed mm, dd and a fixed positive size nn, the complete classification of uniform relative equidistribution over every target along any admissible sequence qj=pjfj→∞q_j=p_j^{f_j}\to\infty is given by Theorem 9:

  • At n=1n=1, uniform relative equidistribution always fails.

  • At every n≥3n \ge3, it always holds.

  • At n=2n=2, it holds if and only if, eventually, both gj=gcd⁡(d,qj−1)=1,(m≥2 or pj≠2)g_j=\gcd(d,q_j-1)=1,\qquad(m\ge2\text{ or }p_j\ne2).

The successful pair cases have relative error Om,d(qj−1)O_{m,d}(q_j^{-1}).

Theorem 7 also provides explicit finite bounds, sharper estimates when g=1g=1, and sufficient conditions ensuring positivity for every target. Proposition 5 determines the order of an explicit nonnegative majorant for the relative error, while Proposition 8 establishes the necessity of the conditions in the classification through obstructions arising from the actual subset-sum counts.

Relative to the length-two results, the present scope includes arbitrary fixed length and admissible binary rings, with all permitted nonzero power values. Their possible valuations are 0,d,2d,…<m0,d,2d,\ldots<m. Nonunit layers occur when m>dm>d.

We resolve the power-value character sums by conductor, the least r∈{0,…,m}r\in\{0,\ldots,m\} for which an additive character depends only on the residue class modulo prRp^rR. The resulting bounds lead to the finite counting inequality, from which we obtain the uniform error estimates by estimating the cycle coefficients. We then complete the classification using exact counts for n=1n=1 and n=2n=2. Appendix B recalls Li and Wan’s exact field count and derives its relative-error normalisation and fixed-size expansion.

Notation and conventions

Throughout the paper, pp is a prime. Let

R=GR⁡(pm,pmf),q=pf,m,f∈Z≥1,d∈Z≥2,p∤d.R=\operatorname{GR}(p^m,p^{mf}),\qquad q=p^f,\qquad m,f\in\mathbb{Z}_{\ge1},\qquad d\in\mathbb{Z}_{\ge2},\qquad p\nmid d.

Fix the residue-field identification R/pR=FqR/pR=\mathbb{F}_q. For 1≤s≤m1\le s\le m, put

Rs=R/psR,Hs={ud:u∈Rs×},H=H1=(Fq×)d,g=gcd⁡(d,q−1).R_s=R/p^sR,\qquad H_s=\{u^d:u\in R_s^\times\},\qquad H=H_1=(\mathbb{F}_q^\times)^d,\qquad g=\gcd(d,q-1).

Write

P={xd:x∈R}∖{0},N=∣P∣,J=⌊m−1d⌋.P=\{x^d:x\in R\}\setminus\{0\},\qquad N=|P|,\qquad J=\left\lfloor\frac{m-1}{d}\right\rfloor.

Write R^\widehat{R} for the additive character group of RR. For ψ∈R^\psi\in\widehat{R}, define its conductor by

c(ψ)=min⁡{r∈{0,…,m}:ψ∣prR=1}.c(\psi)=\min\{r\in\{0,\ldots,m\}:\psi|_{p^rR}=1\}.

The trivial additive character is denoted by 11, and c(ψ)=0c(\psi)=0 precisely when ψ=1\psi=1. Sums over empty index sets are zero. We write 1E\mathbf{1}_E for the indicator of a condition EE and vp(i)v_p(i) for the pp-adic valuation of a positive integer ii.

Power values and exact character sums

The Fourier count requires power-value character sums resolved by conductor. We first decompose the value set by valuation, then calculate the layer sums and the effect of integer multiplication.

The complete fibres of HsH_s over HH determine the layer sums. For 0≤t<m0 \le t < m, the map μt:Rm−t→ptR\mu_t:R_{m-t}\to p^tR is given by multiplication by ptp^t and sends units to elements of valuation exactly tt. The following proposition also accounts for the changes in conductor and induced field character that can arise from integer multiplication.

Proposition 1 (Power values and exact character sums). For 0≤t<m0 \le t < m, the map

μt:Rm−t⟶ptR,μt(x+pm−tR)=ptx(1)\mu_t:R_{m-t}\longrightarrow p^tR,\qquad\mu_t(x+p^{m-t}R)=p^tx \tag*{(1)}

is a well-defined isomorphism of RR-modules. Interpret ptHm−tp^tH_{m-t} as the image μt(Hm−t)\mu_t(H_{m-t}). Then

P=⋃j=0Jμjd(Hm−jd),N:=∣P∣=q−1g∑j=0Jqm−jd−1.(2)P=\bigcup_{j=0}^{J}\mu_{jd}(H_{m-jd}),\qquad N:=|P|=\frac{q-1}{g}\sum_{j=0}^{J}q^{m-jd-1}. \tag*{(2)}

If c(ψ)=r>0c(\psi)=r>0, define

λψ(h)=ψ(pr−1h~)(h∈Fq),(3)\lambda_\psi(h)=\psi(p^{r-1}\widetilde h)\qquad(h\in\mathbb{F}_q), \tag*{(3)}

where h~∈R\widetilde h\in R is any lift of hh. This is independent of the lift and is a nontrivial additive character of Fq\mathbb{F}_q. Put

ηH(λ)=∑h∈Hλ(h).\eta_H(\lambda)=\sum_{h\in H}\lambda(h).

The exact layer sums are

∑y∈μjd(Hm−jd)ψ(y)={∣H∣qm−jd−1,r≤jd,qm−rηH(λψ),r=jd+1,0,r≥jd+2,(0≤j≤J, 1≤r≤m).\sum_{y\in\mu_{jd}(H_{m-jd})}\psi(y)= \begin{cases} |H|q^{m-jd-1}, & r\le jd,\\ q^{m-r}\eta_H(\lambda_\psi), & r=jd+1,\\ 0, & r\ge jd+2, \end{cases} \qquad(0\le j\le J,\ 1\le r\le m).

To express the sum over all valuation layers, put

Ar=q−1g∑j=⌈r/d⌉Jqm−jd−1(1≤r≤m).A_r=\frac{q-1}{g}\sum_{j=\lceil r/d\rceil}^{J}q^{m-jd-1}\qquad(1\le r\le m).

Then, for S(ψ)=∑y∈Pψ(y)S(\psi)=\sum_{y\in P}\psi(y), we have

S(ψ)={N,r=0,Ar+1d∣(r−1)qm−rηH(λψ),1≤r≤m.(4)S(\psi)= \begin{cases} N, & r=0,\\ A_r+1_{d\mid(r-1)}q^{m-r}\eta_H(\lambda_\psi), & 1\le r\le m. \end{cases} \tag*{(4)}

Let ψ\psi have conductor cc, and let i≥1i\ge1 be an integer. Write i=peai=p^ea, with e=vp(i)e=v_p(i) and p∤ap\nmid a, and let aˉ∈Fp×⊆Fq×\bar a\in\mathbb{F}_p^\times\subseteq\mathbb{F}_q^\times be its residue. For ψi(x)=ψ(ix)\psi_i(x)=\psi(ix), one has

ci:=c(ψi)=max⁡{c−e,0}.(5)c_i:=c(\psi_i)=\max\{c-e,0\}. \tag*{(5)}

If ci>0c_i>0, then

λψi(h)=λψ(aˉh)(h∈Fq).(6)\lambda_{\psi_i}(h)=\lambda_\psi(\bar ah)\qquad(h\in\mathbb{F}_q). \tag*{(6)}

Consequently the complete twisted sum is

Si(ψ):=∑y∈Pψ(iy)={N,ci=0,q−1g∑j=⌈ci/d⌉Jqm−jd−1+1d∣(ci−1)qm−ci∑h∈Hλψ(aˉh),1≤ci≤m.(7)S_i(\psi):=\sum_{y\in P}\psi(iy)= \begin{cases} N, & c_i=0,\\ \frac{q-1}{g}\sum_{j=\lceil c_i/d\rceil}^{J}q^{m-jd-1} +1_{d\mid(c_i-1)}q^{m-c_i}\sum_{h\in H}\lambda_\psi(\bar ah), & 1\le c_i\le m. \end{cases} \tag*{(7)}

In the second branch c>0c>0, so λψ\lambda_\psi is defined. The number of additive characters of each conductor is

#{ψ∈R^:c(ψ)=r}={1,r=0,qr−qr−1,1≤r≤m.(8)\#\{\psi\in\widehat R:c(\psi)=r\}= \begin{cases} 1, & r=0,\\ q^r-q^{r-1}, & 1\le r\le m. \end{cases} \tag*{(8)}

Proof. Since RR is a free module of rank ff over Z/pmZ\mathbb{Z}/p^m\mathbb{Z}, we have

Ann⁡R(pt)=pm−tR(0≤t≤m).(9)\operatorname{Ann}_{R}(p^t)=p^{m-t}R \qquad(0\le t\le m). \tag*{(9)}

The annihilator identity makes (1) well-defined and injective. Surjectivity and RR-linearity follow from multiplication by ptp^t. At t=0t=0 this is the canonical identification Rm=R/pmR=RR_m=R/p^mR=R.

We also have ∣Rs∣=qs|R_s|=q^s. The kernel of Rs×→Fq×R_s^\times\to\mathbb{F}_q^\times is the finite abelian pp-group 1+pRs1+pR_s, of order qs−1q^{s-1}. Since p∤dp\nmid d, the ddth-power map is an automorphism of this kernel.

If v∈Rs×v\in R_s^\times has residue in HH, choose w∈Rs×w\in R_s^\times whose residue is a ddth root of the residue of vv. Then vw−d∈1+pRsvw^{-d}\in1+pR_s is a ddth power, so vv is also a ddth power. The converse follows by reduction. Thus HsH_s is the full inverse image of HH. Since Fq×\mathbb{F}_q^\times is cyclic, its ddth-power map has kernel of size gg, so

∣Hs∣=∣H∣qs−1=q−1gqs−1.|H_s|=|H|q^{s-1}=\frac{q-1}{g}q^{s-1}.

Every nonzero x∈Rx\in R can be written x=pjux=p^ju with uu a unit. Its ddth power is nonzero exactly when jd<mjd<m, and then has valuation jdjd. Hence xdx^d belongs to μjd(Hm−jd)\mu_{jd}(H_{m-jd}). Conversely, if v∈Rm−jd×v\in R_{m-jd}^\times, choose a unit lift w∈R×w\in R^\times. Then

μjd(vd)=pjdwd=(pjw)d.\mu_{jd}(v^d)=p^{jd}w^d=(p^jw)^d.

The different images in (2) have different valuations. This proves the disjoint decomposition and its cardinality.

Let c(ψ)=r>0c(\psi)=r>0. Two lifts differ by pRpR, so multiplication by pr−1p^{r-1} puts their difference in prRp^rR, on which ψ\psi is trivial. Thus (3) is lift-independent. It defines an additive character of Fq\mathbb{F}_q because ψ\psi is additive, and it is nontrivial because ψ\psi is nontrivial on pr−1Rp^{r-1}R.

For 0≤j≤J0\le j\le J, choose lifts h~∈R\tilde{h}\in R of h∈Hh\in H. Since Hm−jdH_{m-jd} is the full inverse image of HH, we have

μjd(Hm−jd)=∐h∈H(pjdh~+pjd+1R).\mu_{jd}(H_{m-jd})=\coprod_{h\in H}(p^{jd}\tilde{h}+p^{jd+1}R).

Hence the character sum over this layer is

∑h∈Hψ(pjdh~)∑z∈pjd+1Rψ(z).\sum_{h\in H}\psi(p^{jd}\tilde{h})\sum_{z\in p^{jd+1}R}\psi(z).

If r≤jdr\le jd, the character is trivial on the entire layer, giving ∣H∣qm−jd−1|H|q^{m-jd-1}. If r=jd+1r=jd+1, the inner sum is qm−rq^{m-r} and ψ(pjdh~)=λψ(h)\psi(p^{jd}\tilde{h})=\lambda_\psi(h), giving qm−rηH(λψ)q^{m-r}\eta_H(\lambda_\psi). If r≥jd+2r\ge jd+2, the restriction of ψ\psi to pjd+1Rp^{jd+1}R is nontrivial, since otherwise its conductor would be at most jd+1jd+1. The inner sum therefore vanishes by character orthogonality.

The layers with jd≥rjd\ge r contribute ArA_r in total. A boundary layer exists precisely when d∣(r−1)d\mid(r-1), and its index is (r−1)/d(r-1)/d. For 1≤r≤m1\le r\le m this index automatically lies between 00 and JJ. Summing the three cases proves the positive-conductor branch of (4). For conductor zero the character is trivial on RR, so S(1)=NS(1)=N directly.

For the twist, the image of the integer aa is a unit. If e≥ce\ge c, then iR⊆pcRiR\subseteq p^cR, so ψi=1\psi_i=1. If e<ce<c, the character ψi\psi_i is trivial on pc−eRp^{c-e}R and is nontrivial on pc−e−1Rp^{c-e-1}R, because

ipc−e−1R=pc−1aR=pc−1R.ip^{c-e-1}R=p^{c-1}aR=p^{c-1}R.

This proves (5), including c=0c=0. In the positive case, if h~\tilde{h} lifts hh, then

λψi(h)=ψi(pci−1h~)=ψ(pc−e−1ah~)=λψ(ahˉ),\begin{aligned} \lambda_{\psi_i}(h)=\psi_i(p^{c_i-1}\tilde{h}) \\ &=\psi(p^{c-e-1}a\tilde{h})=\lambda_\psi(a\bar{h}), \end{aligned}

since ah~\tilde{a h} lifts ah‾\overline{a h}. Formula (7) follows by applying (4) to ψi\psi_i.

Finally, for 1≤r≤m1\le r\le m, characters of conductor at most rr factor through RrR_r, whose additive group (Z/prZ)f(\mathbb{Z}/p^r\mathbb{Z})^f has qrq^r characters. Subtracting the qr−1q^{r-1} characters of conductor at most r−1r-1 proves (8). Conductor zero consists of the unique trivial character.

Finite-field estimate and uniform conductor bounds

Gauss sums bound the remaining finite-field subgroup sums. Substitution into the exact layer formula gives nonnegative conductor bounds for all integer-multiplication twists.

The finite-field estimate

The finite-field estimate. Let ε\varepsilon denote the trivial multiplicative character of Fq×\mathbb{F}_q^\times, and set

H⊥={χ∈Fq×^:χ∣H=1},G(χ,λ)=∑x∈Fq×χ(x)λ(x).H^\perp=\{\chi\in\widehat{\mathbb{F}_q^\times}:\chi|_H=1\},\qquad G(\chi,\lambda)=\sum_{x\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times}\chi(x)\lambda(x).

Here the hat denotes the multiplicative character group. We use the classical Gauss sum identities of [2 Lemma 2.5(i), p. 153] and [4 Lemma 4.1(i)–(iv), p. 381]. The latter applies to finite fields of arbitrary characteristic and extension degree.

Lemma 2 (Subgroup detector and uniform bound). For x∈Fq×x\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times,

1H(x)=1g∑χ∈H⊥χ(x).(10)\mathbf{1}_H(x)=\frac{1}{g}\sum_{\chi\in H^\perp}\chi(x). \tag*{(10)}

For every nontrivial additive character λ\lambda of Fq\mathbb{F}_q,

∣ηH(λ)∣≤KH,KH=1+(g−1)qg.(11)|\eta_H(\lambda)|\le K_H,\qquad K_H=\frac{1+(g-1)\sqrt{q}}{g}. \tag*{(11)}

Proof. Choose a generator α\alpha of Fq×\mathbb{F}_q^\times. Then H=⟨αg⟩H=\langle\alpha^g\rangle. If ω(α)=exp⁡(2πi/(q−1))\omega(\alpha)=\exp(2\pi i/(q-1)), then

H⊥={ωj(q−1)/g:0≤j<g}.H^\perp=\{\omega^{j(q-1)/g}:0\le j<g\}.

For x=αkx=\alpha^k, the right-hand side of (10) is

1g∑j=0g−1exp⁡(2πijk/g)=1g∣k=1H(x).\frac{1}{g}\sum_{j=0}^{g-1}\exp(2\pi ijk/g)=\mathbf{1}_{g\mid k}=\mathbf{1}_H(x).

In particular, the detector contains exactly gg characters, including ε\varepsilon once. Orthogonality gives all three trivial-character cases:

G(ε,1)=q−1,G(ε,λ)=−1(λ≠1),G(χ,1)=0(χ≠ε).G(\varepsilon,1)=q-1,\qquad G(\varepsilon,\lambda)=-1\quad(\lambda\ne1),\qquad G(\chi,1)=0\quad(\chi\ne\varepsilon).

For nontrivial χ,λ\chi,\lambda, character values have modulus one and the substitution x=tyx=ty gives

∣G(χ,λ)∣2=∑x,y∈Fq×χ(x)χ(y)‾λ(x−y)=∑t∈Fq×χ(t)∑y∈Fq×λ((t−1)y)=(q−1)−∑t∈Fq×t≠1χ(t)=q.\begin{aligned} |G(\chi,\lambda)|^2 &=\sum_{x,y\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times}\chi(x)\overline{\chi(y)}\lambda(x-y)\\ &=\sum_{t\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times}\chi(t)\sum_{y\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times}\lambda((t-1)y) =(q-1)-\sum_{\substack{t\in\mathbb{F}_q^\times\\t\ne1}}\chi(t)=q. \end{aligned}

The inner sum is q−1q-1 at t=1t=1 and −1-1 otherwise, while ∑t≠1χ(t)=−1\sum_{t\ne1}\chi(t)=-1. Inserting (10) now yields

ηH(λ)=1g(−1+∑χ∈H⊥χ≠εG(χ,λ)).\eta_H(\lambda)=\frac{1}{g}\left(-1+\sum_{\substack{\chi\in H^\perp\\\chi\ne\varepsilon}}G(\chi,\lambda)\right).

The triangle inequality proves (11), uniformly over all nontrivial additive characters. The contribution −1-1 remains when g=1g=1, in which case ηH(λ)=−1\eta_H(\lambda)=-1 and KH=1K_H=1.

Uniform conductor bounds

Define

B0=N,Br=Ar+1d∣(r−1)qm−rKH(1≤r≤m).(12)B_0=N,\qquad B_r=A_r+1_{d\mid(r-1)}q^{m-r}K_H\qquad(1\le r\le m). \tag*{(12)}

These numbers are nonnegative. By (4) and Lemma 2,

∣S(ψ)∣≤Bc(ψ)(ψ∈R^).|S(\psi)|\le B_{c(\psi)}\qquad(\psi\in\widehat{R}).

The boundary factor qm−rq^{m-r} counts residue lifts. For 0≤c≤m0\le c\le m, put

ri(c)=max⁡{c−vp(i),0}(i≥1).r_i(c)=\max\{c-v_p(i),0\}\qquad(i\ge1).

For c(ψ)=cc(\psi)=c, applying the bound to ψi\psi_i gives

∣Si(ψ)∣≤Bri(c).(13)|S_i(\psi)|\le B_{r_i(c)}. \tag*{(13)}

If ri(c)>0r_i(c)>0, the induced character in (6) is nontrivial because multiplication by aˉ\bar a is a bijection of Fq\mathbb{F}_q. If p∣ip\mid i, the twist is trivial and Si(ψ)=N=B0S_i(\psi)=N=B_0. These terms remain in the majorant even when the original character ψ\psi is nontrivial.

Field and unit-only specialisations. For m=1m=1, one has J=0J=0, N=(q−1)/gN=(q-1)/g and B1=KHB_1=K_H. Appendix B treats g=1g=1, and the general estimates and pair obstruction cover the remaining indices. If d≥md\ge m, then J=0J=0 and PP consists only of power units, with N=(q−1)qm−1/gN=(q-1)q^{m-1}/g, B1=qm−1KHB_1=q^{m-1}K_H and Br=0B_r=0 for 2≤r≤m2\le r\le m. The indices ri(c)r_i(c) still permit lower-conductor or trivial twists of high-conductor characters.

Subset counting and the finite error inequality

Fourier inversion separates the average count as the trivial-character contribution. The twisted-sum bounds control the remaining coefficients.

Set

Fψ(z)=∏y∈P(1+zψ(y)).F_\psi(z)=\prod_{y\in P}(1+z\psi(y)).

Write [zn]F(z)[z^n]F(z) for the coefficient of znz^n in a formal power series. The empty subset has sum zero, and we use (Nn)=0\binom{N}{n}=0 for n>Nn>N. Expanding the product gives the fixed-cardinality identity

[zn]Fψ(z)=∑T⊆P∣T∣=nψ(∑y∈Ty).(14)[z^n]F_\psi(z)=\sum_{\substack{T\subseteq P\\ |T|=n}}\psi\left(\sum_{y\in T}y\right). \tag*{(14)}

The cycle form of the distinct-coordinate sieve groups tuples by identifying coordinates. A cycle of length ii uses one value yy in ii positions, producing the character weight ψ(iy)\psi(iy) and hence the sum Si(ψ)S_i(\psi). For a character of conductor cc, the nonnegative coefficient below bounds ∣[zn]Fψ(z)∣|[z^n]F_\psi(z)| by replacing these twisted sums with Bri(c)B_{r_i(c)}. For 0≤c≤m0\le c\le m and an integer n≥0n\ge0, define

Cc(n)=[zn]exp⁡(∑i=1nBri(c)izi).(15)C_c(n)=[z^n]\exp\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{B_{r_i(c)}}{i}z^i\right). \tag*{(15)}

For 1≤n≤N1\le n\le N, the signed coefficient identity below is the generating-function form of Li and Wan’s finite-ring sieve [8 Lemma 3.1 and its proof, pp. 8–9]. We derive the coefficient majorant directly from Fψ(z)F_\psi(z) and (13).

Theorem 3 (Conductor-grouped error inequality). For every b∈Rb\in R and integer n≥0n\ge0,

∣NP(n,b)−q−m(Nn)∣≤q−m∑c=1m(qc−qc−1)[zn]exp⁡(∑i=1nBmax⁡{c−vp(i),0}izi).(16)\left|N_P(n,b)-q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}\right| \le q^{-m}\sum_{c=1}^{m}(q^c-q^{c-1})[z^n]\exp\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{B_{\max\{c-v_p(i),0\}}}{i}z^i\right). \tag*{(16)}

Proof. The additive group of RR is (Z/pmZ)f(\mathbb{Z}/p^m\mathbb{Z})^f, so

q−m∑ψ∈R^ψ(x)=1x=0(x∈R):q^{-m}\sum_{\psi\in\widehat{R}}\psi(x)=1_{x=0}\qquad(x\in R):

the coordinate sums are finite geometric series. Apply this to x=∑y∈Ty−bx=\sum_{y\in T}y-b and use (14). Interchanging finite sums yields exact Fourier inversion:

NP(n,b)=q−m∑ψ∈R^ψ(−b)[zn]Fψ(z).(17)N_P(n,b)=q^{-m}\sum_{\psi\in\widehat{R}}\psi(-b)[z^n]F_\psi(z). \tag*{(17)}

For the trivial character, F1(z)=(1+z)NF_1(z)=(1+z)^N, so its contribution is q−m(Nn)q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}.

Work in C[[z]]\mathbb{C}[[z]]. Since ψ(y)i=ψ(iy)\psi(y)^i=\psi(iy), the formal logarithm gives

log⁡Fψ(z)=∑i≥1(−1)i−1Si(ψ)izi.\log F_\psi(z)=\sum_{i\geq1}\frac{(-1)^{i-1}S_i(\psi)}{i}z^i.

Truncating at degree nn gives

Fψ(z)≡exp⁡(∑i=1n(−1)i−1Si(ψ)izi)(modzn+1).(18)F_\psi(z)\equiv\exp\left(\sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{(-1)^{i-1}S_i(\psi)}{i}z^i\right)\pmod{z^{n+1}}. \tag*{(18)}

Put c=c(ψ)c=c(\psi). If n≥1n\geq1, expansion of the exponential in (18) expresses its degree-nn coefficient as

∑k1,…,kn≥0∑i=1niki=n∏i=1n((−1)i−1Si(ψ)/i)kiki!.\sum_{\substack{k_1,\ldots,k_n\geq0\\ \sum_{i=1}^{n}ik_i=n}}\prod_{i=1}^{n}\frac{\left((-1)^{i-1}S_i(\psi)/i\right)^{k_i}}{k_i!}.

Taking termwise absolute values and applying (13) bounds this coefficient by Cc(n)C_c(n) in modulus:

∣[zn]Fψ(z)∣≤Cc(n).(19)\left|[z^n]F_\psi(z)\right|\leq C_c(n). \tag*{(19)}

For n=0n=0, the exponent is an empty sum and both sides are one. All divisions by ii take place in C[[z]]\mathbb{C}[[z]].

Subtract the trivial-character contribution from (17). All character values have modulus one. The triangle inequality and (19), followed by grouping the nontrivial characters according to (8), give

∣NP(n,b)−q−m(Nn)∣≤q−m∑ψ≠1Cc(ψ)(n)=q−m∑c=1m(qc−qc−1)Cc(n).\left|N_P(n,b)-q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}\right|\leq q^{-m}\sum_{\psi\ne1}C_{c(\psi)}(n)=q^{-m}\sum_{c=1}^{m}(q^c-q^{c-1})C_c(n).

For n>Nn>N, the subset count and the product coefficient vanish, as does (Nn)\binom{N}{n}. The nonnegative majorant continues to give a valid inequality. □

Relative normalisation and size comparisons

To extract fixed-size asymptotics from the finite inequality, we compare the binomial denominator and the cycle contributions uniformly.

For 1≤n≤N1\leq n\leq N, define the uniform relative error and its nonnegative majorant by

ρn(q)=sup⁡b∈R∣NP(n,b)q−m(Nn)−1∣.(20)\rho_n(q)=\sup_{b\in R}\left|\frac{N_P(n,b)}{q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}}-1\right|. \tag*{(20)}
Mn(q)=∑c=1m(qc−qc−1)Cc(n)(Nn).(21)M_n(q)=\frac{\sum_{c=1}^{m}(q^c-q^{c-1})C_c(n)}{\binom{N}{n}}. \tag*{(21)}

Dividing (16) by the positive main term gives ρn(q)≤Mn(q)\rho_n(q)\leq M_n(q). The majorant may overestimate the error by discarding cancellation between Fourier terms.

Throughout the asymptotic analysis, m,d,nm,d,n are fixed positive integers with d≥2d\geq2, and q=pf→∞q=p^f\to\infty through admissible prime powers. Both pp and ff may vary, as may g=gcd⁡(d,q−1)g=\gcd(d,q-1), with 1≤g≤d1\leq g\leq d.

Lemma 4. For every admissible qq,

qm2g≤N≤qmg,N=qmg(1+O(q−1)).\frac{q^m}{2g}\leq N\leq\frac{q^m}{g},\qquad N=\frac{q^m}{g}\left(1+O(q^{-1})\right).

The implied constant can be chosen absolute for d≥2d \ge2 and m≥1m \ge1. For 1≤r≤m1 \le r \le m,

Ar≤qm−rg,Br≤2qm−r+1/2.A_r \le\frac{q^{m-r}}{g}, \qquad B_r \le2q^{m-r+1/2}.

If g=1g=1, the stronger comparison Br≤2qm−rB_r \le2q^{m-r} holds. If qm≥4gnq^m \ge4gn, then N≥2nN \ge2n and

(Nn)≥qmn(4g)nn!.(22)\binom{N}{n} \ge\frac{q^{mn}}{(4g)^n n!}. \tag*{(22)}

Proof. Write Q=qmQ=q^m. Formula (2) becomes

N=Qg(1−q−1)∑j=0Jq−jd.N=\frac{Q}{g}(1-q^{-1})\sum_{j=0}^{J}q^{-jd}.

The first summand gives the lower bound. The geometric comparison gives

(1−q−1)∑j=0Jq−jd≤1−q−11−q−d≤1.(1-q^{-1})\sum_{j=0}^{J}q^{-jd}\le\frac{1-q^{-1}}{1-q^{-d}}\le1.

The remaining terms after the first are O(q−2)O(q^{-2}), uniformly under d≥2d\ge2, proving the asymptotic comparison. If a=⌈r/d⌉≤Ja=\lceil r/d\rceil\le J, the same argument gives Ar≤qm−da/g≤qm−r/gA_r\le q^{m-da}/g\le q^{m-r}/g. Otherwise Ar=0A_r=0. Since KH≤qK_H\le\sqrt{q}, (12) gives the first bound on BrB_r. For g=1g=1, KH=1K_H=1, giving the stronger one. Finally N≥Q/(2g)N\ge Q/(2g) and Q≥4gnQ\ge4gn imply N≥2nN\ge2n. Each of the nn factors in the falling factorial is at least N/2N/2, proving (22). □

Let

Pn={(k1,…,kn)∈Z≥0n:∑i=1niki=n},ℓ(k)=∑i=1nki.\mathcal{P}_n=\{(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in\mathbb{Z}_{\ge0}^n:\sum_{i=1}^{n}ik_i=n\}, \qquad\ell(k)=\sum_{i=1}^{n}k_i.

Expanding the exponential in (15) gives the finite identity

Cc(n)=∑k∈Pn∏i=1nBri(c)kiikiki!.(23)C_c(n)=\sum_{k\in\mathcal{P}_n}\prod_{i=1}^{n}\frac{B_{r_i(c)}^{k_i}}{i^{k_i}k_i!}. \tag*{(23)}

A factor with ki=0k_i=0 is understood to be one, including when Bri(c)=0B_{r_i(c)}=0. Here kik_i records cycles of length ii. A cycle with pc∣ip^c\mid i uses the full value B0=NB_0=N.

When p>np>n and 1≤c≤m1\le c\le m, every ri(c)r_i(c) with 1≤i≤n1\le i\le n equals cc. In this regime,

Cc(n)=[zn](1−z)−Bc=Bc(Bc+1)⋯(Bc+n−1)n!.C_c(n)=[z^n](1-z)^{-B_c}=\frac{B_c(B_c+1)\cdots(B_c+n-1)}{n!}.

The identity follows from the formal differential equation for (1−z)−Bc(1-z)^{-B_c} and holds for every nonnegative real BcB_c, including Bc=0B_c=0.

In the field case m=1m=1, the positive-conductor coefficient C1(n)C_1(n) in (23) is the cycle coefficient retained in Zhu and Wan’s subgroup estimates [11 proofs of Theorems 4.1 and 4.4].

The exact order of the nonnegative majorant

We determine the order of Mn(q)\mathcal{M}_n(q) by comparing the powers of qq in (23). We first identify the exponent βr\beta_r for which Br≍qm−βrB_r\asymp q^{m-\beta_r} whenever Br>0B_r>0. Define β0=0\beta_0=0 and, for 1≤r≤m1\le r\le m, define

βr={r−12,g>1, d∣(r−1),r,g=1, d∣(r−1),d⌈r/d⌉,d∤(r−1), ⌈r/d⌉≤J,+∞,otherwise.(24)\beta_r= \begin{cases} r-\frac{1}{2}, & g>1,\ d\mid(r-1),\\ r, & g=1,\ d\mid(r-1),\\ d\lceil r/d\rceil, & d\nmid(r-1),\ \lceil r/d\rceil\le J,\\ +\infty, & \text{otherwise}. \end{cases} \tag*{(24)}

Thus βr=+∞\beta_r=+\infty exactly when Br=0B_r=0. For finite values, Lemma 4 and the first surviving term give, uniformly in pp, ff, gg,

12dqm−βr≤Br≤2qm−βr(0≤r≤m, βr<∞).(25)\frac{1}{2d}q^{m-\beta_r}\le B_r\le2q^{m-\beta_r}\qquad(0\le r\le m,\ \beta_r<\infty). \tag*{(25)}

For a boundary index, its possible full-layer term begins at valuation r+d−1r+d-1, so it has strictly smaller order than its boundary term. For g>1g>1, the leading boundary coefficient (g−1)/g(g-1)/g is at least 1/21/2.

A pair (c,k)∈{1,…,m}×Pn(c,k)\in\{1,\ldots,m\}\times\mathcal{P}_n is called supported when every ri(c)r_i(c) with ki>0k_i>0 has finite βri(c)\beta_{r_i(c)}. Only supported patterns contribute to the majorant. For such pairs put

wc(i)=m(i−1)+βri(c),Δ(c,k)=∑1≤i≤nki>0kiwc(i)−c.(26)w_c(i)=m(i-1)+\beta_{r_i(c)},\qquad\Delta(c,k)=\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq n\\ k_i>0}} k_iw_c(i)-c. \tag*{(26)}

After including the conductor multiplicity and normalising by (Nn)\binom{N}{n}, the exponent is

c+∑1≤i≤nki>0ki(m−βri(c))−mn=−Δ(c,k).c+\sum_{\substack{1\leq i\leq n\\ k_i>0}}k_i\left(m-\beta_{r_i(c)}\right)-mn=-\Delta(c,k).

Every sum involving the weights of a supported partition is taken only over indices with ki>0k_i>0.

Proposition 5. Fix m≥1m\geq1, d≥2d\geq2 and n≥1n\geq1. The minimum supported gap is

γ={n/2−1,g>1,n−1,g=1, m≥2,n−1−⌊n/p⌋,g=1, m=1.(27)\gamma= \begin{cases} n/2-1, & g>1,\\ n-1, & g=1,\ m\geq2,\\ n-1-\lfloor n/p\rfloor, & g=1,\ m=1. \end{cases} \tag*{(27)}

Moreover,

Mn(q)≍m,d,nq−γ.(28)M_n(q)\asymp_{m,d,n}q^{-\gamma}. \tag*{(28)}

The comparison constants are uniform in all admissible pp, ff, gg for sufficiently large qq. The exponent is evaluated pointwise when the residue characteristic or subgroup index varies. The comparison concerns Mn(q)M_n(q). Its implication for ρn(q)\rho_n(q) is the upper bound ρn(q)≤Mn(q)\rho_n(q)\leq M_n(q).

Proof. First suppose g>1g>1. At every positive index with finite βr\beta_r, we have βr≥r−1/2\beta_r\geq r-1/2, and β0=0\beta_0=0. For a used length i=1i=1,

wc(1)=βc≥c−1/2=c+1/2−1.w_c(1)=\beta_c\geq c-1/2=c+1/2-1.

For a used length i≥2i\geq2, all finite βr\beta_r are nonnegative, so

wc(i)≥m(i−1)≥c(i−1)≥c+i/2−1,w_c(i)\geq m(i-1)\geq c(i-1)\geq c+i/2-1,

where the last difference is (i−2)(c−1/2)≥0(i-2)(c-1/2)\geq0. Summing over a supported partition gives

Δ(c,k)≥n/2−1+(ℓ(k)−1)(c−1)≥n/2−1.(29)\Delta(c,k)\geq n/2-1+(\ell(k)-1)(c-1)\geq n/2-1. \tag*{(29)}

Conductor c=1c=1 and k1=nk_1=n attain equality because β1=1/2\beta_1=1/2.

Suppose next g=1g=1 and m≥2m\geq2. Then βr≥r\beta_r\geq r for all finite indices, including r=0r=0. Write e=vp(i)e=v_p(i). The elementary inequality e≤i−1e\leq i-1 follows from 2e≤i2^e\leq i and 2e≥e+12^e\geq e+1. If ri(c)>0r_i(c)>0, then

wc(i)≥m(i−1)+c−e≥c+i−1,w_c(i)\geq m(i-1)+c-e\geq c+i-1,

since (m−1)(i−1)≥e(m-1)(i-1)\geq e. If ri(c)=0r_i(c)=0, then c≤e≤i−1c\leq e\leq i-1, and (m−1)(i−1)≥c(m-1)(i-1)\geq c, which gives the same inequality. Thus

Δ(c,k)≥n−1+(ℓ(k)−1)(c−1)≥n−1.\Delta(c,k)\geq n-1+(\ell(k)-1)(c-1)\geq n-1.

Conductor one with all singleton cycles attains equality, since β1=1\beta_1=1.

Finally, if g=1g=1, m=1m=1, only c=1c=1 occurs and

w1(i)={i,p∤i,i−1,p∣i.w_1(i)= \begin{cases} i, & p\nmid i,\\ i-1, & p\mid i. \end{cases}

Therefore

Δ(1,k)=n−1−∑p∣iki.\Delta(1,k)=n-1-\sum_{p\mid i}k_i.

There are at most ⌊n/p⌋\lfloor n/p\rfloor cycles with lengths divisible by pp. This number is attained by that many pp-cycles and the remaining singleton cycles. This proves (27).

By (25), (qc−qc−1)≍qc(q^{c}-q^{c-1}) \asymp q^{c}, Lemma 4 and (23), each normalised supported summand is comparable to q−Δ(c,k)q^{-\Delta(c,k)}, with constants depending only on m,d,nm,d,n. There are finitely many terms and all are nonnegative. The attaining terms above therefore give (28). Uniformity in p,f,gp,f,g follows from these estimates and the finitely many valuation patterns of 1,…,n1,\ldots,n. □

Remark 6 (Dominant contributions). When g>1g>1 and n≥3n\geq3, the conductor-one singleton contribution is

(q−1)B1nn!(Nn)=(g−1)nq1−n/2(1+Om,d,n(q−1/2)).\frac{(q-1)B_1^n}{n!\binom{N}{n}}=(g-1)^nq^{1-n/2}\left(1+O_{m,d,n}(q^{-1/2})\right).

This estimate is uniform over 2≤g≤d2\leq g\leq d. All supported terms with conductor c>1c>1 have a strictly larger gap: in (29), either ℓ>1\ell>1 gives strictness, or a single cycle of length n≥3n\geq3 gives strictness in the last inequality for i≥2i\geq2. For c=1c=1, every nonsingleton cycle has strict slack unless m=1,p=2,i=2m=1,p=2,i=2. In that exceptional regime every partition into cycles of lengths one and two attains the same gap n/2−1n/2-1.

For g=1,m=1g=1,m=1, the dominant power is obtained by maximising the number of pp-divisible cycles.

Uniform relative-error theorem and positivity

The preceding gap calculation determines the order of the majorant in qq. Summing the cycle weights now gives an explicit relative-error bound and sufficient conditions for positivity at every target.

Theorem 7 (Uniform fixed-size estimates). Let m,d,nm,d,n be fixed, with m≥1m\geq1, d≥2d\geq2 and n≥1n\geq1. For an admissible q=pfq=p^f satisfying qm≥4gnq^m\geq4gn, put

Dm,g,n=m(n+1)n!(4g)n.D_{m,g,n}=m(n+1)n!(4g)^n.

Then 1≤n≤N1\leq n\leq N and

ρn(q)≤Mn(q)≤Dm,g,nq−γ,(30)\rho_n(q)\leq M_n(q)\leq D_{m,g,n}q^{-\gamma}, \tag*{(30)}

where γ\gamma is (27). In particular, for every fixed n≥3n\geq3 and every admissible sequence q=pf→∞q=p^f\to\infty,

NP(n,b)=q−m(Nn)(1+Om,d,n(q1−n/2))uniformly in b∈R.(31)N_P(n,b)=q^{-m}\binom{N}{n}\left(1+O_{m,d,n}(q^{1-n/2})\right)\quad\text{uniformly in }b\in R. \tag*{(31)}

An explicit constant in (31) is Dm,d,n=m(n+1)n!(4d)nD_{m,d,n}=m(n+1)n!(4d)^n, valid once qm≥4dnq^m\geq4dn. When g=1,m≥2g=1,m\geq2, the stronger rate is Om,n(q1−n)O_{m,n}(q^{1-n}), and when g=1,m=1g=1,m=1, it is On(q1−n+⌊n/p⌋)O_n(q^{1-n+\lfloor n/p\rfloor}), uniformly in the residue characteristic.

Whenever the hypotheses of (30) hold and Dm,g,nq−γ<1D_{m,g,n}q^{-\gamma}<1, every count NP(n,b)N_P(n,b) is positive. For the universal n≥3n\geq3 statement, sufficient explicit conditions are

qm≥4dn,qn/2−1>Dm,d,n.q^m\geq4dn,\qquad q^{n/2-1}>D_{m,d,n}.

Proof. Expand Cc(n)C_c(n) in Mn(q)M_n(q) using (23). For each supported term, bound the conductor multiplicity by qcq^c and apply (25) to obtain the numerator bound

2ℓ(k)∏iikiki!qc+∑1≤i≤nki>0ki(m−βri(c)).\frac{2^{\ell(k)}}{\prod_i i^{k_i}k_i!}q^{c+\sum_{1\leq i\leq n\atop k_i>0}k_i(m-\beta_{r_i}(c))}.

Dividing by (22) gives a contribution of at most

(4g)nn!2ℓ(k)∏iikiki!q−Δ(c,k).(4g)^n n!\frac{2^{\ell(k)}}{\prod_i i^{k_i}k_i!}q^{-\Delta(c,k)}.

By Proposition 5, every gap is at least γ\gamma. The partition weights have the exact sum

∑k∈Pn2ℓ(k)∏iikiki!=[zn]exp⁡(2∑i≥1zii)=[zn](1−z)−2=n+1.\sum_{k\in\mathcal{P}_n}\frac{2^{\ell(k)}}{\prod_i i^{k_i}k_i!} =[z^n]\exp\left(2\sum_{i\geq1}\frac{z^i}{i}\right) =[z^n](1-z)^{-2}=n+1.

Summing over at most mm conductors proves (30). For g=1,m=1,p≥2g=1,m=1,p\geq2 implies

n−1−⌊n/p⌋≥⌊n/2⌋−1≥n/2−1.n-1-\lfloor n/p\rfloor\geq\lfloor n/2\rfloor-1\geq n/2-1.

The other branches of (27) also have gap at least n/2−1n/2-1. Since g≤dg \le d, the asserted universal rate follows. The decay exponent is positive for n≥3n \ge3, so the relative error tends to zero. The main term is positive in the stated domain. If its relative-error upper bound is strictly less than one, the count is strictly positive.

Small-size obstructions and the fixed-size classification

The upper bounds supply sufficiency for equidistribution. Exact counts at target zero give the small-size obstructions needed for necessity.

Proposition 8 (Exact small-size obstructions). For n=1n=1, uniform relative equidistribution fails along every admissible sequence. For n=2n=2, put T=∣{y∈P:2y=0}∣T=\lvert\{y\in P:2y=0\}\rvert. Then

NP(2,0)={0,−1∉H,(N−T)/2,−1∈H,(32)N_P(2,0)= \begin{cases} 0, & -1\notin H,\\ (N-T)/2, & -1\in H, \end{cases} \tag*{(32)}

where

T={0,p≠2,N,p=2, m=1,1d∣(m−1)(q−1)/g,p=2, m≥2.(33)T= \begin{cases} 0, & p\ne2,\\ N, & p=2,\ m=1,\\ \mathbf{1}_{d\mid(m-1)(q-1)/g}, & p=2,\ m\ge2. \end{cases} \tag*{(33)}

If −1∈H-1\in H and (p,m)≠(2,1)(p,m)\ne(2,1), then, for fixed m,dm,d as q→∞q\to\infty,

NP(2,0)q−m(N2)=g+Om,d(q−1).(34)\frac{N_P(2,0)}{q^{-m}\binom{N}{2}}=g+O_{m,d}(q^{-1}). \tag*{(34)}

The estimate is uniform in p,f,gp,f,g.

Proof. The value zero is excluded from PP, so NP(1,0)=0N_P(1,0)=0 whereas q−mN>0q^{-m}N>0. Its relative error equals one.

The full residue-fibre description in Proposition 1 gives P=−PP=-P if −1∈H-1\in H and P∩(−P)=∅P\cap(-P)=\varnothing otherwise, since the cosets HH and −H-H are equal or disjoint, respectively. A distinct ordered pair with sum zero is (y,−y)(y,-y) with y∈Py\in P and 2y≠02y\ne0. Division by two proves (32).

For odd pp, multiplication by two is invertible. For p=2p=2, m=1m=1, it annihilates the whole ring. For p=2p=2, m≥2m\ge2, (9) with t=1t=1 gives Ann⁡R(2)=2m−1R\operatorname{Ann}_R(2)=2^{m-1}R. Its nonzero elements have valuation m−1m-1. Therefore a layer of PP contributes only when jd=m−1jd=m-1, and that layer has size (q−1)/g(q-1)/g. This proves (33). In this last case,

T/N=Om,d(q1−m)=Om,d(q−1).T/N=O_{m,d}(q^{1-m})=O_{m,d}(q^{-1}).

In the cases relevant to (34),

NP(2,0)q−m(N2)=qm(N−T)N(N−1)=qmN(1−TN)NN−1.\frac{N_P(2,0)}{q^{-m}\binom{N}{2}} =\frac{q^m(N-T)}{N(N-1)} =\frac{q^m}{N}\left(1-\frac{T}{N}\right)\frac{N}{N-1}.

Lemma 4 and g≤dg\le d give (34). □

Theorem 9 (Fixed-positive-size classification). Fix m≥1m\ge1, d≥2d\ge2, and a positive integer nn. Along any admissible sequence qj=pjfj→∞q_j=p_j^{f_j}\to\infty, put

Rj=GR⁡(pjmfj,pjmfjj)R_j=\operatorname{GR}(p_j^{m f_j},p_j^{m f_j j}), Pj={xd:x∈Rj}∖{0}P_j=\{x^d:x\in R_j\}\setminus\{0\}, Nj=∣Pj∣N_j=\lvert P_j\rvert, gj=gcd⁡(d,qj−1)g_j=\gcd(d,q_j-1).

Uniform relative equidistribution

sup⁡b∈Rj∣NPj(n,b)qj−m(Njn)−1∣⟶0\sup_{b\in R_j}\left\lvert\frac{N_{P_j}(n,b)}{q_j^{-m}\binom{N_j}{n}}-1\right\rvert\longrightarrow0

has the following classification:

(1) If n=1n=1, it always fails.

(2) If n≥3n\ge3, it always holds, with rate (31).

(3) If n=2n=2, it holds if and only if, eventually,

gj=1,(m≥2 or pj≠2).g_j=1,\qquad(m\ge2\text{ or }p_j\ne2).

In the successful n=2n=2 cases the relative error is Om,d(qj−1)O_{m,d}(q_j^{-1}).

The quotient is used only when 1≤n≤Nj1\le n\le N_j, which holds for all sufficiently large jj.

Proof. The first two assertions follow from Proposition 8 and Theorem 7. If n=2n=2 and eventually g=1g=1, the exponent in (27) is one for m≥2m\ge2, and also for m=1m=1, p≠2p\ne2. The constants in (30) are uniform, proving sufficiency.

If g≥2g\ge2 infinitely often, consider those terms of the sequence. At target zero, (32) and (34) give a ratio of either zero or g+Om,d(q−1)g+O_{m,d}(q^{-1}), except that field characteristic two always gives zero. Because 2≤g≤d2\le g\le d, the ratio’s distance from one is bounded away from zero for sufficiently large qq on that subsequence. If m=1m=1, p=2p=2 infinitely often, the ratio at target zero is exactly zero. Either circumstance prevents uniform convergence and proves necessity. □

Remark 10 (All extension degrees). For a fixed admissible pp and d≥2d\ge2, equidistribution at n=2n=2 cannot hold along all extension degrees f→∞f\to\infty. Choose a prime ℓ∣d\ell\mid d. Since p∤dp\nmid d, the residue of pp has a finite multiplicative order modulo ℓ\ell. For every positive multiple of that order, ℓ∣(pf−1)\ell\mid(p^f-1), hence g≥ℓg\ge\ell infinitely often. Theorem 9 applies. Selected extension-degree subsequences with g=1g=1 can have the successful n=2n=2 behaviour, subject to the field characteristic-two exception.

In residue characteristic two, admissibility requires odd dd. At n=2n=2, the field case always fails, while length m≥2m\ge2 succeeds on eventual index-one sequences. The self-pair correction is (33). For even dd, every admissible pp is odd and g≥2g\ge2 because q−1q-1 is even, so pairs fail along every admissible sequence.

Appendix A. Technical comparison with the length-two literature

Throughout this comparison, m=2m=2, pp is odd, d≥2d\ge2 and p∤dp\nmid d. Both papers of Ding and Zhou cover subset sums over the same distinct nonzero power-value set PP, with N=q(q−1)/gN=q(q-1)/g. Their 2019 exponent kk, extension parameter rr and subgroup index correspond to our dd, ff and gg, respectively. The complete residue fibres have qq lifts and gg roots per value [2 Lemma 2.9(1), pp. 155–156]. Together with the character definitions and [2 Lemma 2.8, p. 154], these give the exact sums NN, qηH(λψ)q\eta_H(\lambda_\psi) and 00 at conductors 00, 11 and 22. Integer twists lower conductors as in (5), rescale the induced field character by the unit part when the lowered conductor is positive, and contribute the full value NN when trivial.

Consequences of the 2019 estimates

The printed all-target bound has main term q−2(Nn)q^{-2}\binom{N}{n} [2 Theorem 6.1, pp. 166–167]. The proof estimates [2 proof of Theorem 3.2, pp. 158–159] and distinct-value conversion [2 Section 6, pp. 166–167] also yield, for fixed d,nd,n, with n≥1n\ge1, relative-error bounds Od,n(q−1)O_{d,n}(q^{-1}) for g>1g>1 and On(q−n)O_n(q^{-n}) for g=1g=1. These bounds use positive normalisation on 1≤n≤N1\le n\le N and hold uniformly over unit targets along arbitrary admissible sequences, and over all targets along sequences with eventually p∤np\nmid n.

Consequences of the 2023 exact formulas

The sequel’s constant-fibre formula counts distinct image values [3 Theorem 5.11, p. 130]. For A=R×A=R^\times and F(X)=XdF(X)=X^d [3 Corollary 5.12, p. 133], the image is PP, each fibre has size gg, and ∣R∖A∣=q|R\setminus A|=q. Image distinctness is imposed after cyclewise fibre conversion, since distinct bases can have repeated images. Combining the exact image Fourier/sieve identities [3 equations (5.1)–(5.5), pp. 131–132] with the character sums above gives our length-two coefficient majorant, with q−1q-1 and q2−qq^2-q characters of conductors one and two:

∣NP(n,b)−q−2(Nn)∣≤q−2{(q−1)C1(n)+(q2−q)C2(n)}.\left|N_P(n,b)-q^{-2}\binom{N}{n}\right|\le q^{-2}\{(q-1)C_1(n)+(q^2-q)C_2(n)\}.

where Cc(n)C_c(n) is defined in (15). For fixed d,nd,n with n≥1n\ge1, division by the positive main term on 1≤n≤N1\le n\le N gives all-target relative-error bounds Od,n(q1−n/2)O_{d,n}(q^{1-n/2}) for g>1g>1 and On(q1−n)O_n(q^{1-n}) for g=1g=1, uniformly over admissible varying odd p,f,gp,f,g, including p∣np\mid n. In particular, index-one pairs have relative-error bound O(q−1)O(q^{-1}) and satisfy uniform relative equidistribution, already covered by the qualified 2019 derivation above. These rates follow from the exact formulas and are not stated separately in the sequel. The coefficient majorant bounds the actual error and need not have the same order.

Appendix B. An exact formula in the index-one field case

We recall Li and Wan’s exact subset-count formula [6 Theorem 1.2] and derive its relative error and fixed-size asymptotic expansion.

Proposition 11. Suppose m=1m=1 and g=1g=1, so P=Fq×P=\mathbb{F}_q^\times. For every 1≤n≤q−11\le n\le q-1, put

L=⌊n/p⌋,an=(−1)n+L(q/p−1L).L=\lfloor n/p\rfloor,\qquad a_n=(-1)^{n+L}\binom{q/p-1}{L}.

Then the exact count is

NP(n,b)=1q[(q−1n)+(q1b=0−1)an].(35)N_P(n,b)=\frac{1}{q}\left[\binom{q-1}{n}+(q1_{b=0}-1)a_n\right]. \tag*{(35)}

In particular,

ρn(q)=(q−1)(q/p−1)/L(q−1n).(36)\rho_n(q)=\frac{(q-1)^{(q/p-1)/L}}{\binom{q-1}{n}}. \tag*{(36)}

attained at b=0b=0. For fixed d,nd,n, as q→∞q\to\infty through admissible prime powers with g=1g=1,

ρn(q)=n!pLL!q1+L−n(1+On(q−1)).(37)\rho_n(q)=\frac{n!}{p^L L!}q^{1+L-n}\left(1+O_n(q^{-1})\right). \tag*{(37)}

The error term is uniform in the prime characteristic. The parameter LL, the exponent and the leading coefficient are evaluated at each qq.

Proof. A nontrivial additive character of Fq\mathbb{F}_q has the ppth roots of unity as its image, each with q/pq/p preimages. Using ∏ζp=1(1+zζ)=1−(−z)p\prod_{\zeta^p=1}(1+z\zeta)=1-(-z)^p and removing the factor at zero gives

Fψ(z)=(1−(−z)p)q/p1+z.F_\psi(z)=\frac{(1-(-z)^p)^{q/p}}{1+z}.

The quotient is exact, and its degree-nn coefficient is

(−1)n∑j=0L(−1)j(q/pj)=(−1)n+L(q/p−1L).(-1)^n\sum_{j=0}^{L}(-1)^j\binom{q/p}{j}=(-1)^{n+L}\binom{q/p-1}{L}.

Pascal’s identity telescopes the sum, and L≤q/p−1L\le q/p-1 follows from n≤q−1n\le q-1. The coefficient is common to all nontrivial ψ\psi. Orthogonality gives

∑ψ≠1ψ(−b)=q1b=0−1,\sum_{\psi\ne1}\psi(-b)=q1_{b=0}-1,

so (17) proves (B.1). The largest absolute multiplier is q−1q-1, attained at $b=0, giving (B.2). For fixed nn, if p>np>n then L=0L=0 and the numerator binomial is one. If p≤np\le n, only finitely many primes occur, and for each of them the falling-factorial expansions give

(q/p−1L)=(q/p)LL!(1+On(q−1)),(q−1n)=qnn!(1+On(q−1)).\binom{q/p-1}{L}=\frac{(q/p)^L}{L!}\left(1+O_n(q^{-1})\right),\qquad \binom{q-1}{n}=\frac{q^n}{n!}\left(1+O_n(q^{-1})\right).

The same denominator expansion applies when p>np>n. Choosing the constants uniformly over the finitely many primes p≤np\le n and substituting into (B.2) proves (B.3) uniformly in the characteristic. □\square

Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript preparation process

OpenAI ChatGPT and Codex were used for literature and bibliographic assistance, manuscript editing and organisation.

The author independently verified the mathematical arguments and takes full responsibility for the content of the manuscript.

References

References

  1. [1]Hyok Choe and Chunghyok Choe. The k-subset sum problem over finite fields of characteristic 2. Finite Fields and Their Applications, 59:175–184, 2019. doi:10.1016/j.ffa.2019.05.003.DOI
  2. [2]Yuchen Ding and Haiyan Zhou. Subset sums over Galois rings. Journal of Number Theory, 205:148–169, 2019. doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2019.05.004.DOI
  3. [3]Yuchen Ding and Haiyan Zhou. Subset sums over Galois rings II. Journal of Number Theory, 252:118–136, 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2023.05.003.DOI
  4. [4]Daniel J. Katz. Asymptotic L^4 norm of polynomials derived from characters. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 263(2):373–398, 2013. doi:10.2140/pjm.2013.263.373.
  5. [5]Michiel Kosters. The subset sum problem for finite abelian groups. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 120(3):527–530, 2013. doi:10.1016/j.jcta.2012.10.006. Version used for result locators: arXiv:1112.6294v1.DOI
  6. [6]Jiyou Li and Daqing Wan. On the subset sum problem over finite fields. Finite Fields and Their Applications, 14(4):911–929, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.ffa.2008.05.003. Version used for result locators: arXiv:0708.2456v1.DOI
  7. [7]Jiyou Li and Daqing Wan. A new sieve for distinct coordinate counting. Science China Mathematics, 56(9):2351–2362, 2010. doi:10.1007/s11425-010-3121-9.
  8. [8]Jiyou Li and Daqing Wan. Counting polynomial subset sums. The Ramanujan Journal, 47:67–84, 2018. doi:10.1007/s11139-018-0020-0. Version used for result locators: arXiv:1507.06329v1.DOI
  9. [9]Weiqiong Wang and Jennifer Nguyen. The k-subset sum problem over finite fields. Finite Fields and Their Applications, 51:204–217, 2018. doi:10.1016/j.ffa.2018.02.001.DOI
  10. [10]Weiqiong Wang, Li-Ping Wang, and Haiyan Zhou. Subset sums of quadratic residues over finite fields. Finite Fields and Their Applications, 43:106–122, 2017. doi:10.1016/j.ffa.2016.09.003. Version used for result locators: arXiv:1702.03028v1.DOI
  11. [11]Guizhen Zhu and Daqing Wan. An asymptotic formula for counting subset sums over subgroups of finite fields. Finite Fields and Their Applications, 18(1):192–209, 2012. doi:10.1016/j.ffa.2011.07.010. Version used for result locators: arXiv:1101.0289v1.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_djtjveuu
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

OpenAI ChatGPT, Codex · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents