WorksMathematics
Almost all -Markov numbers are unique
Abstract
For every fixed nonnegative integer , we prove that almost every positive integral solution of [x^2+y^2+z^2+k(xy+xz+yz)= 3(k+1)xyz]is uniquely determined, up to permutation, by its largest coordinate.
Introduction
The classical Markov equation
arose in Markoff’s study of indefinite binary quadratic forms [15, 16]. His work connects its positive integral solutions with the discrete part of the Markov spectrum and with extremal phenomena in Diophantine approximation. The solutions are generated from by permutations and the Vieta involution . This recursive description gives a tree of triples. Frobenius [11] conjectured in 1913 that each triple, after its coordinates have been put in increasing order, is determined by its largest coordinate.
Two lines of work on this problem concern arithmetic restrictions on the largest coordinate and the geometry of the solution tree. Baragar [3], Schmutz [20], and Button [5] obtained uniqueness results in special arithmetic cases. Lang and Tan [14] gave a short proof of uniqueness when the largest coordinate is a prime power, combining congruences with the geometry of the modular torus. A useful arithmetic invariant of a classical triple is a root of , selected by the relation . The uniqueness of an appropriate representative of this root underlies several of these results.
The geometric interpretation goes back to Cohn [8, 9]. A classical Markov number occurs as one third of the trace of a simple closed geodesic on the modular torus; the corresponding length is . The uniqueness problem is thereby related to the multiplicity of simple lengths, with the symmetries of the torus taken into account. McShane and Rivin [17] extended the simple length function to a norm on the first homology of a punctured torus and counted simple geodesics by primitive lattice points in its unit ball. In the arithmetic formulation, Zagier [22] had obtained an asymptotic of order for the number of sorted Markov triples with largest coordinate at most . Risager [19] recently improved the error in this classical triple count to . These asymptotics count each triple. To obtain the same leading term for distinct largest coordinates, one must also control repeated values in the tree.
Gyoda and Matsushita [13] introduced the family
in the setting of generalized cluster algebras. They proved that all positive integral solutions are generated from by the three Vieta involutions. Their work also shows that unequal parameters can give distinct triples with the same largest coordinate. The equal-parameter family retains the permutation symmetry of the classical equation and is the subject of the present paper:
A positive integer appearing in one of its positive integral solutions is called a -Markov number.
Gyoda and Maruyama [12 Conjecture 1.8] formulated the largest-coordinate uniqueness conjecture for this family. Their generalized Cohn matrices lead to a criterion involving the roots of , and to uniqueness results for prime and certain prime-power largest coordinates. The same uniqueness problem appears in Chen and Huang [6 Conjecture 7.3], in their study of mutation-preserving generalized cluster algebras and Laurent mutation invariants. Combinatorial studies include Banaian’s work on orderings of -Markov numbers [1], the study by Banaian and Huang of monotonicity along lines for the extended labels [2], and parameter comparisons in [21]. These studies compare values at specified labels or parameters. The counting question considered here asks how often any two distinct triples share their largest coordinate for one fixed parameter.
For the classical equation, Chen [7] proved that almost all represented largest coordinates are unique. His proof uses the geometry of the homology norm to reduce equal lengths to rational linear relations, then combines polynomial dynamics, -adic interpolation, and lattice orbit counting. Doan [10] developed this approach for simple lengths on punctured tori and tori with geodesic boundary, and transferred the result to four-cusped spheres. The latter transfer corresponds to the parameter in (1).
There is also a direct arithmetic explanation of this special parameter. Gyoda and Matsushita [13 Theorem 11] proved that the 2-Markov triples are exactly the coordinatewise squares of classical Markov triples. Indeed, squaring gives (1) for and , and
identifies the two mutation rules. Generation from gives the converse. Hence the classical density theorem also gives the result for . The new parameter range in the following theorem is and ; the statement and proof treat every fixed nonnegative integer together.
For a positive integer and a real number , put
and define
Here denotes the indicator of a condition . Thus counts sorted triples and counts their distinct largest coordinates. All limits are taken with fixed.
Theorem 1.1. For every fixed integer , there is a constant such that
Consequently,
The constant is
where and is the unit ball of the norm constructed in § 3.
The first density statement concerns the represented largest coordinates; the second counts all solutions in nonunique fibers, with their multiplicities. The square correspondence above gives and , so .
We construct the required norm from the Vieta recursion and Farey labels. Its positive corners at rational directions determine its rational linear isometry group, and its exponentially small variation between consecutive Farey rays confines equal-length pairs to finitely many rational graph planes at each scale. On a fixed graph, integral polynomial dynamics and the interpolation argument of Poonen [18] yield a zero-density statement. The lattice orbit theorem of Burrin–Nevo–Rühr–Weiss [4], with the cusp-width normalization given in Theorem 5.4, converts the finite congruence counts into real counts. A second Farey partition bounds the sum over graphs of growing complexity. Primitive lattice counting then gives (3).
Descent, Farey labels, and polynomial dynamics
Throughout the proof, is fixed. The notation denotes the Euclidean norm. Positive constants may depend on and may change from line to line. Put
The symbol denotes the set of nonzero primitive vectors in , with both signs included. Set
Lemma 2.1 (Descent and the label tree). Every positive integral solution of (1) descends by Vieta mutation to . The coordinates of every solution are pairwise coprime. There are integer labels , indexed by , such that
with . Primitive vectors in are in bijection with sorted positive solutions, and is the largest coordinate of the corresponding solution.
Proof. For a sorted solution , the other root in the last coordinate is
Let be the monic quadratic in that coordinate. Then
If , this equals . If , the inequality gives . Thus unless . In the latter case , so the two possibilities are and . The mutation of either of the other coordinates is greater than : for example, . Hence each noninitial sorted solution has a unique descending parent, and descent terminates because the sum of the coordinates decreases.
Pairwise coprimality is preserved along an edge. Indeed, if a prime divides both and , the mutation formula gives . Substitution into the equation modulo then gives , contradicting . The other retained coordinate is treated identically. Starting at proves the claim. In particular, equal coordinates greater than cannot occur.
The dual graph of the Farey triangulation is a tree: adjacent unimodular pairs are refined by their mediant . Starting with the triangle of unoriented directions , assign its three labels the value and propagate across its edges by (8). This gives every label unambiguously. Equivalently, in begin with the boundary vectors , of labels , and insert mediants. For an explicit description of the parents of , where and , choose the unique with , and put . Then
belong to , have determinant one, and sum to . Their slopes lie on opposite sides of , and these properties uniquely determine . Every integer vector strictly between their rays is a positive integer combination of , so its first coordinate is at least . They are therefore consecutive before is inserted. Passage to a parent decreases the first coordinate and ends at or .
At a sorted solution with distinct coordinates, the two upward mutations give distinct children, each with the original triple as its unique descending parent. The triple has one distinct upward child. These rules identify successive mediant insertions with the sorted mutation tree. The two boundary vectors correspond to and ; interior mediants correspond to all remaining solutions. □
Define
The group has order 12, preserves the six vectors , and has as a closed fundamental cone. These assertions follow by multiplying the two displayed matrices: has order 6 and its cube is . Both generators preserve the initial unoriented Farey triangle. Uniqueness of the recursion therefore gives
Every -orbit in has exactly one representative in .
Lemma 2.2 (An ambient polynomial action). Let and . There is a right action of on , by integral polynomial automorphisms, and polynomials for , such that
The action preserves
and .
Proof. Writing , , and gives the identity
Define
and set
The two polynomial maps have orders 2 and 3 and preserve . The presentation , with factors generated by the classes of and , defines the claimed action; acts trivially. The three initial coordinate directions are , , .
For , direct composition gives
In particular, every power of fixes the first coordinate identically. Choose with , and put , where . Any other choice is , so this is well-defined. Replacing by proves equivariance; triviality of proves . Finally the polynomial identity across a Farey edge is . At this is precisely the affine transform of (8), with the same initial labels. □
The convex norm and exponential Farey estimates
For , let
We construct a norm with for every primitive integer vector. Its unit ball will be denoted by .
Fan recurrences and convexity
Fix a primitive vector , and choose with . Set and . The Farey recursion gives
where
Substitution into (11), or elimination of , gives
Indeed, using in (15) gives
The cubic identity therefore gives , while
Since
and , the sum is positive. Thus both coefficients in (15) are positive.
At a mediant insertion inside , let be the traces of the two parents, the new trace and the old trace. Inductively and . If , then
Consequently is the larger root. Since ,
For the second inequality, multiply traces by ; the first inequality becomes a multiplicative lower bound, and the first coordinates add under mediants. The boundary traces are at least , which starts the induction.
For a convex positively homogeneous function and , define its set of supporting functionals by
We identify linear forms with Euclidean vectors. The set is a segment in the line . Denote its endpoints by and , ordered so that their difference is a nonnegative multiple of , where . They are the extreme supporting gradients on the clockwise and counterclockwise sides of the ray through .
Proposition 3.1. There is a -invariant strictly convex norm on taking the values (14) on primitive integer vectors. It satisfies . At a primitive vector , the difference of the extreme gradients, in counterclockwise order, is
Proof. For a reduced rational , define . Writing gives
and hence
Suppose are consecutive vectors in the Farey sequence of a fixed order. Then for a positive integer . Expressing and and applying (20) on the two sides of the fan gives
Writing , , and , the difference between the right and left slopes of the polygonal interpolant at is
Thus the interpolant at every Farey order is convex. A finer interpolant agrees at all previous vertices and, by convexity, lies below each previous chord. The interpolants decrease and are bounded between zero and the endpoint chord. Their limit is finite, convex, and continuous on . Every interpolant of order at least takes the value at the reduced fraction , so the limit retains this value. The fan expansions at and give the endpoint limits along and and finite limits of the corresponding secant slopes. Convexity then gives continuity and finite one-sided derivatives at both endpoints. At in the interior, with and , it gives
The two one-sided derivatives therefore satisfy
For instance, the first derivative equals , as is seen by evaluating ; the second equals .
Set and
Extend by -invariance. The unique representative in the closed fundamental cone makes the extension well-defined. It is positively homogeneous and even, since . We check convexity at the boundary of the cone. At either boundary vector, choose the adjacent vector . The fan traces obey and hence , by the root symmetries. Thus . The traces at and are and , respectively. At the inward derivative is ; at it is . Since , these identities give
At , the gradients on the two sides are
because the boundary reflection is . At , they are
Their counterclockwise differences are respectively and . The same property holds at the other cone boundaries by -invariance. On a line of direction crossing the ray of , the derivative jumps by . The restriction of to a line not through the origin is convex between its finitely many cone crossings and at each crossing, so it is convex on that line. On a line through the origin, is convex. Thus is globally convex.
The lower bound (18) and the endpoint chord give on rational directions and then everywhere by continuity. Convexity and homogeneity give the triangle inequality, so is a norm. Formula (21), the boundary identities, and unimodularity of give (19). Finally a line segment on the unit sphere would make linear on an open cone. That cone contains a rational ray, contradicting its strictly positive gradient jump. The norm is strictly convex.
The expanding coefficient
We next estimate the full change of gradient within an open Farey sector.
Lemma 3.2. Let be the parent traces of a mediant inside , and let be the new trace. In the fan centered at the first parent, with , , denote the expanding coefficient by . Then
Proof. Set
If is the old trace, evaluating the quadratic with roots at gives
Here is to the right of the quadratic’s vertex. Its positive value implies , and
Since and , it follows that . Solving the two fan initial equations yields
In particular .
For a lower bound, use , , and . The numerator in the first line of (3.12) is at least
We may therefore replace its denominator by the larger number :
The middle inequality follows from
Finally , and on . These facts prove (23).
:::
Finite fans and small integral normals
Let be the fan obtained by taking the Farey fractions of order in and their -images. Its rays are generated by primitive vectors; an open sector means the open cone between consecutive rays. Increasing the order refines the fan. Every supporting functional satisfies $c\le|\alpha|\le C.
Proposition 3.3 (Farey estimates). There are positive constants , , , , depending only on , with the following properties for .
(i) The fan has rays, generated by vectors of length at most .
(ii) In each open sector, all supporting functionals differ by at most . The sum over all open sectors of their total normal angular variations is at most .
(iii) The full normal angle at each boundary ray is at least .
(iv) The total angular width of any sectors is at most .
(v) If is a supporting functional at any point of an open sector, then throughout that sector
Proof. For adjacent fractions in the basic cone, let their traces be . The one-sided derivatives computed above show that the total variation of in the open interval is exactly
To check the identity, the inward derivative at the left endpoint is , whereas the inward derivative at the right endpoint is ; subtract them. This is the entire variation of the monotone derivative, including any continuous part. Since , , and , summing over the gaps gives , up to an absolute factor. For an open gap , the positive Lebesgue–Stieltjes measure has mass . The support curve on the slice satisfies the vector-valued measure identity
because is Lipschitz and . At each jump, include the full segment between the two extreme supports. The complete gradient variation on is therefore at most
The lower bound on support lengths gives the same estimate, up to a fixed factor, for normal angular variation. The finitely many fixed linear maps in change these bounds only by constant factors.
For a boundary vector , the absolute determinant of the extreme supports equals , by (19). From (16),
For this is ; for it is . Using and gives
Together with , positivity on bounded intervals, and , they imply (iii).
For (iv), let be the smaller denominator of a Farey gap. Its width is , because . There are gaps with smaller denominator . Those with have total width ; any of the others have the same bound. Angular width is comparable to slope width on , and the finite -images preserve the estimate. Assertion (i) is the elementary Farey count, and (v) follows by comparing with a supporting functional at .
Strict convexity means that every nonzero linear form has a unique contact point on : the point where it attains its maximum. Its positive ray is called the contact direction of . The normal directions of supporting functionals run monotonically around the circle; the normals at a corner fill the arc between its two extreme supports. For nonzero vectors , write
for the smaller angle from to the unoriented line through .
Lemma 3.4 (Excision of small integral normals). Let and . From remove the rays of and every open sector whose closure contains the contact direction of some with . The number removed is at most
For every retained sector, each of its supporting functionals satisfies
Proof. Distinct nonparallel integer normals of length at most have angular separation at least . Choose a preliminary order , with sufficiently large, so that the normal variation inside any of its open sectors is smaller than this separation. Each such sector then contains at most one distinct contact direction for the specified normals. On a boundary ray several normals may have the same contact, but there are only such rays. Thus the number of distinct contact directions is .
At order , each contact direction belongs to the closures of at most two sectors. Proposition 3.3(iv) bounds their total angular width by . The intersection of each of these sectors with is convex, has perimeter , and has area at most times its angular width. The elementary lattice bound for a planar convex set proves the first two terms of (3.16). Each boundary ray contains only one primitive integer vector, giving the term.
By deletion of every sector whose closure contains a contact, there is a full boundary corner between a retained sector and each specified contact direction, in either direction around the circle. Monotonicity of the normal direction and the complete corner bound in Proposition 3.3(iii) yield (3.17). Normals of both signs are included.
Rational linear isometries
Proposition 4.1. The rational linear isometry group of is exactly :
Proof. The inclusion of follows from Proposition 3.1. Conversely, suppose preserves , and write with integral and a positive integer. For , write with and . Since , we have . Thus the factor in belongs to a fixed finite set.
Let , so . Positive homogeneity and give
The endpoint orders agree when and are interchanged when . Since and , formula (19) yields
Cancelling the nonzero vector gives
If a fixed occurred for infinitely many primitive vectors, their associated would tend to infinity along a subsequence, whereas
By (28), the left side tends to zero for and to infinity for , a contradiction. Hence all sufficiently large primitive vectors have , and (31) then gives .
For two sufficiently large consecutive vectors , both images under are integral. Their difference shows that is integral, and then is integral as well. Therefore . The shortest primitive vectors for are precisely , by Lemma 2.1. The full group of linear maps permuting this hexagon is : there are six choices for the image of and two compatible choices for the adjacent image of , and the twelve elements of realize them. Thus . □
Zero density on a fixed rational graph
Proposition 5.1. For every fixed ,
Finite orbits and a paired action
Let and . For , write
For a nonzero integral vector , put . Write , where is a positive integer and is a nonsingular integral matrix, and set . Then : for , is integral. If is primitive, divides both coordinates of , hence divides . It therefore equals and is determined by modulo . Thus
is a residue condition. If , there are no feasible vectors.
Primitive vectors in any one residue class modulo form one -orbit. To see this, complete to matrices . If , then for some . Choose . The matrix sends to . The feasible primitive vectors are therefore a finite union of -orbits.
Fix an odd prime , for example . Write for the ring of -adic integers and for its fraction field. Let be the valuation normalized by , and set for and . Lemma 2.2 gives a right action of on the entire :
Take to be the kernel of this action on . This is a finite-index normal subgroup of ; it is finitely generated and contains . The feasible primitive vectors are still a finite union of -orbits. Fix one such orbit , put , and define
Equivariance gives the exact identity
Analytic interpolation and a zero–one law
The Tate algebra is the algebra of power series with integral coefficients tending to zero -adically; it carries the coefficient supremum norm.
Lemma 5.2 (Interpolation). Suppose an integral polynomial automorphism fixes every point of , where is odd. On each residue ball , its iterates extend to a jointly analytic action of .
Proof. Choose representing the residue ball and use coordinates . The normalized map has the form
In fact, . Applying the pointwise congruence also to , for every , and expanding to first order gives for all , so . The integral Taylor coefficients of degree acquire a factor after normalization. This proves coefficientwise congruence in (36). Let on the Tate algebra. By (36), maps times this algebra into times it. Therefore
converges in the Tate algebra in : the coefficient valuations of its th summand are at least , which tend to infinity for odd . For every nonnegative integer the binomial identity gives . Density of the nonnegative integers in and continuity give the group law . This is Poonen’s interpolation argument [18 Theorem 1], here with coefficient congruence exponent . Transport the action back by , and use for the resulting action on .
We also recall the elementary zero statement used below. A nonzero one-variable Tate series has only finitely many zeros in (Strassmann’s theorem). One proof takes the largest index at which is maximal. If is a zero, division by produces a Tate series whose last maximal index is : its coefficients are , so and for . Induction gives at most zeros, counting multiplicity. Scaling coefficients proves the same statement over .
Let be the closure of in . Each finite residue image of this orbit is a transitive finite -set. Its uniform probability measures are compatible, since the transition maps have equal-size fibers. Their inverse limit is a -invariant probability measure of full support on . This action is ergodic: if an integrable function is -invariant, its conditional expectation on every finite residue partition is constant, by transitivity. The residue partitions have diameters tending to zero, so their locally constant functions are dense in . The conditional expectations therefore converge in to the original function, which is constant almost everywhere.
Lemma 5.3 (Zero–one law). For any integral polynomial on the ambient space,
Proof. Let and let be a generator of . The interpolation of Lemma 5.2 preserves : each -adic time is a uniform limit of integer times on the compact residue ball. It also preserves , first for continuous test functions by that uniform limit, then for all Borel sets. For each , the function is analytic on . Its zero set is either all of or finite. In either case, with normalized Haar measure ,
Integrating over , using Fubini, the group law, and preservation of by , gives
This holds for all generators. Ergodicity proves the assertion.
Apply this lemma to from (34). If its zero set has measure one, closedness and full support imply that it vanishes throughout . At every actual integral orbit point, (35) is an equality of integers. Injectivity of then gives
The directions of are dense in the projective line. Indeed, for a primitive the parabolic belongs to , and some positive power belongs to the finite-index subgroup . If is not parallel to , its iterates approach the direction of . Omitting the single parallel direction leaves a dense set of rational directions; supplies both orientations. Continuity and homogeneity of would give , contrary to Proposition 4.1. Its zero set therefore has measure zero. The sets decrease to . Continuity of the probability measure from above gives
Lattice orbit counting and cusp widths.
Theorem 5.4 (Finite-index orbit counting). Let have finite index and contain , and let . Choose with and let be the least positive integer such that . Let
where is a fixed nonnegative -periodic Lipschitz function. Then
This follows from [4 Theorem 2.7 and Section 5.2], which applies to every finite-index subgroup of . To compute the constant, set and
Then and . The cusp-normalized disk constant in [4 Section 3.5] is . Rescaling to multiplies this constant by . Since , the density per unit Euclidean area is
In the orbit-map coordinates of [4 Section 5.2], integration over a fixed stabilizer interval makes the main term proportional to
The disk constant therefore gives the stated density for every such region. These constants count both signs, consistently with . The norm ball has a Lipschitz radial function: on the Euclidean unit circle it is , a positive Lipschitz function.
Proof of Proposition 5.1. Continue with the fixed feasible orbit . For each , let be the kernel of the action of on the whole ambient space modulo , and write . The group is normal in and contains . The stabilizer of the oriented vector in is , so its stabilizer in is generated by , where . Write for the image of in , and let be the order of . For ,
Thus the -orbits correspond to the orbits of right multiplication by in , each of size . For , use the completion . Normality shows that its cusp width for is the least with . Such an is a multiple , and membership is equivalent to , or . Every width is therefore . Each -orbit contains both signs, since .
Set
This set is invariant under right multiplication by : and , so equivariance fixes the two coordinate polynomials in (34). Moreover,
Indeed, the orbit map from to the finite residue orbit of has equal-size fibers; its uniform group measure pushes forward to uniform orbit measure.
Every genuine collision belongs to one of the selected -orbits. For a fixed , apply Theorem 5.4 to each of these finitely many orbits, with . Their total leading coefficient is
The factor cancels. In particular, if counts collisions in , then
First take for this fixed , and then take . Equations (38) and (40) give a zero upper bound. Summing over the finitely many feasible -orbits proves (32). □
Uniform summation over rational graphs
We prove that the excess of -orbits over distinct norm values is . All constants in this section depend only on the fixed norm and its Farey estimates, except where additional subscripts are displayed.
Graph complexity and a population bound
For , put
and define
Lemma 6.1. Let and , and let be a set of integral graph points with . Then, uniformly in ,
For , there are rational matrices with . Each of their graph planes has two spanning integer vectors of length .
Proof. If the inputs span a space of dimension at most one, they lie in for some , taking if all inputs are zero. An input determines its graph point, so
This proves (42) in this case. Otherwise choose two independent inputs. Rounding coordinates in their basis shows that their generated sublattice has covering radius at most half the sum of their lengths, hence . The larger lattice has no greater covering radius. The Voronoi cells centered at the selected inputs have disjoint interiors, area , and lie in a disk of radius . Thus . The same argument on the output lattice gives . If a row of has length comparable to , the condition confines the inputs to a strip of width . Its intersection with the input disk has area and perimeter . The planar lattice bound gives . Taking the strongest of these bounds, and the trivial disk bound when necessary, proves (42).
Let be the least positive integer for which is integral. It is the exponent of the finite group , since is equivalent to integrality of . Hence . If , write with and the four entries of bounded by . There are such choices. The integer vectors , , span its graph plane and have length .
6.2. A first partition and rank reduction. A collision will mean a pair satisfying and . Fix a sufficiently large constant , and choose a larger constant such that
Use the coarse fan of order and the fine fan of order . Apply Lemma 3.4 with at the coarse order, for a fixed sufficiently large , and also remove the fine fan rays. The number of primitive vectors removed is at most
The constants and can be fixed once is fixed.
Consider collisions whose two endpoints have survived, in a fixed pair of fine open sectors. Choose supporting functionals at interior points of these sectors, and put $\ell=(\lambda,-\lambda')\in . Every such collision satisfies
Every fine sector containing a retained point lies wholly in a retained coarse sector. Thus the chosen supports themselves satisfy the coarse normal separation (30).
We will use the following elementary estimate. If are linearly independent integral vectors of length at most , their -dimensional volume is at least one: its square is the sum of the squares of the integral minors. The largest singular values of their column matrix are at most , so the smallest is at least . Consequently,
Lemma 6.2 (Rank reduction). For all sufficiently large , the collision vectors in one such pair of fine sectors span a space of dimension at most two.
Proof. Four independent integral collision vectors would have determinant of absolute value at least one. Taking the first coordinate along , estimate (45) instead bounds it by , a contradiction.
Suppose three independent vectors span . Their exterior product is a nonzero integral vector, so their three-dimensional volume is at least one. Since their lengths are , their smallest singular value is at least . It follows that
A primitive integral normal to has the form , of length at most after fixing large enough. If , the output coordinate plane is contained in , and (47) contradicts . Otherwise write , with and . Projecting the output component onto gives . Since , this yields
This contradicts the lower bound from the coarse excision, by (43). Three independent vectors are therefore impossible as well. □
If a space of dimension at most two has a projection of rank at most one onto one coordinate plane, there are at most two possible primitive vectors at that endpoint. For each, the other endpoint lies on a convex norm circle of radius , with integer points. Indeed, order these points cyclically along the convex boundary. The arc between consecutive points has length at least their Euclidean distance, which is at least one. Their number is therefore bounded by the perimeter, apart from the harmless cases of zero or one point. There are fine sector pairs, so these degenerate blocks contribute collisions.
Every remaining two-dimensional space has both projections of rank two. It is the graph of a unique rational invertible matrix , since it is spanned by integral vectors. Necessarily . Lemma 6.1 shows that the blocks with have total population at most
A second partition for complexity bands
For integers , put and
We only need . There are at most candidates in a band. By Lemma 6.1, if the sum of two distinct graph planes in this band is three-dimensional, it has a primitive integral normal of length at most
Here is a fixed positive constant. Indeed, choose three independent vectors from their integer spanning pairs of length and take their exterior product.
Fix a sufficiently large integer . For each , apply the excision lemma at coarse order with , and remove also the rays of a fine fan of order . Here is fixed with
Since , all these extra deletions together cost at most
This follows by summing . As before, each fine sector with retained points lies in a retained coarse sector at that band.
For this second partition, include all retained collisions on each candidate graph; this contains the blocks assigned by the first partition. For a fixed band and a pair of its fine sectors, call the retained collision block in the graph of large if its population is at least
In the required range ,
Thus one sufficiently large makes the threshold exceed every fixed multiple of , simultaneously for all these bands.
Lemma 6.3 (A large block contains a well-spread pair). The inputs of a large block contain two vectors with
*for all sufficiently large , uniformly in . *
Proof. Among the inputs choose a pair maximizing the absolute determinant . A collinear primitive set has at most two points, so . Every other input has coordinates in in this basis, by maximality of . Thus all inputs lie in a parallelogram of area and perimeter . Their number is at most . In view of (52) and its uniform domination of , inequality (53) follows. □
Lemma 6.4 (One large graph per sector pair). For all sufficiently large fixed and then all sufficiently large , each band and each pair of its fine sectors contain at most one large graph block.
Proof. Choose supports in the two fine sectors and write . For a large graph , put . At the two points of Lemma 6.3, the fine approximation gives . Their dual basis has length at most , so
If two different large graphs occurred, their sum would have dimension or . From their integer spanning vectors of length choose a basis for . On each of these vectors the value of has absolute value at most , by (54). The integer -volume is at least one, so the smallest singular value is at least . Consequently
If , this contradicts for sufficiently large . If , choose its primitive integral normal as in (49). Here : otherwise a linear functional depending only on the input would vanish on a graph with full input projection and hence be zero. Projection onto this normal line and give
The band excision instead gives the lower bound . These contradict one another since
One choice of , depending only on the fixed geometry and , suffices. □
There are fine sector pairs in band . Summing the small-block bound over its candidate graphs gives . By Lemmas 6.4 and 6.1, the large blocks contribute at most . Therefore all bands with together contribute at most
The set
is finite. Proposition 5.1 gives a total contribution from its members.
From collision bounds to excess
Let
Define the excess . Discard every complete -orbit that meets the deleted set. If primitive vectors were deleted, this discards at most orbits. Deleting one orbit reduces the excess by at most one. All the remaining vectors satisfy the required geometric conditions.
Within a retained norm fiber containing different -orbits, the excess is bounded by the number of non- collision pairs. Consequently
The preceding estimates give
Here with fixed, and the constant on the right is independent of . Letting gives
Completion of the proof
The standard elementary primitive lattice count in a bounded convex body gives
Indeed, count all nonzero lattice points in as , and apply Möbius inversion to their common coordinate divisor. With denoting the Möbius function, the sums and give (59).
Apart from finitely many primitive vectors, the -action is free: any nonidentity element has its fixed vectors on finitely many lines, and each rational ray has just one primitive vector. Consequently
Combining this with (58) proves the same asymptotic for .
By Lemma 2.1, a -orbit corresponds to exactly one sorted positive solution, with largest coordinate . The map
is strictly increasing. Thus, with
we have exactly and . Equations (58)–(61) prove (1.3) and (1.6). Finally,
because for integers . This proves both density statements in Theorem 1.1.
Zhili College, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
Email address: [email protected]
References
- [1]E. Banaian, Orderings on k-Markov numbers, Ramanujan J. 71 (2026), Article 12. doi:10.1007/s11139-026-01468-5.DOI
- [2]E. Banaian and M. Huang, Orderings of generalized k-Markov numbers, preprint (2026), arXiv:2604.17445v1.arxiv.org/abs/2604.17445
- [3]A. Baragar, On the unicity conjecture for Markoff numbers, Canad. Math. Bull. 39 (1996), no. 1, 3–9.DOI
- [4]C. Burrin, A. Nevo, R. Rühr, and B. Weiss, Effective counting for discrete lattice orbits in the plane via Eisenstein series, Enseign. Math. 66 (2020), no. 3–4, 259–304. The numbering cited here is that of arXiv:1905.01493v1.DOI
- [5]J. O. Button, The uniqueness of the prime Markoff numbers, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 58 (1998), no. 1, 9–17.DOI
- [6]Z. Chen and Y. Huang, Mutation-preserving generalized cluster algebras and Laurent mutation invariants, preprint (2026), arXiv:2608.10551v3.arxiv.org/abs/2608.10551
- [7]W. Y. Chen, Almost all Markoff numbers are unique, preprint (2026), Hexagon:2610.00281v2.
- [8]H. Cohn, Approach to Markoff’s minimal forms through modular functions, Ann. of Math. (2) 61 (1955), no. 1, 1–12.DOI
- [9]H. Cohn, Representation of Markoff’s binary quadratic forms by geodesics on a perforated torus, Acta Arith. 18 (1971), 125–136.DOI
- [10]N. M. Doan, Almost all simple lengths are unique up to isometry, preprint (2026), Hexagon:2610.00298v1.
- [11]G. Frobenius, Über die Markoffschen Zahlen, Sitzungsber. Königl. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berlin (1913), 458–487.
- [12]Y. Gyoda and S. Maruyama, Uniqueness theorem of generalized Markov numbers that are prime powers, Integers 26 (2026), A91. doi:10.5281/zenodo.21678095.
- [13]Y. Gyoda and K. Matsushita, Generalization of Markov Diophantine equation via generalized cluster algebra, Electron. J. Combin. 30 (2023), no. 4, P4.10, 20 pp. doi:10.37236/11420.DOI
- [14]M. L. Lang and S. P. Tan, A simple proof of the Markoff conjecture for prime powers, Geom. Dedicata 129 (2007), 15–22.
- [15]A. Markoff, Sur les formes quadratiques binaires indéfinies, Math. Ann. 15 (1879), 381–406.DOI
- [16]A. Markoff, Sur les formes quadratiques binaires indéfinies, Math. Ann. 17 (1880), 379–399.DOI
- [17]G. McShane and I. Rivin, A norm on homology of surfaces and counting simple geodesics, Int. Math. Res. Not. (1995), no. 2, 61–69.
- [18]B. Poonen, p-adic interpolation of iterates, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 46 (2014), no. 3, 525–527. Author’s version.DOI
- [19]M. S. Risager, Counting Markov triples and simple geodesics, preprint (2026), arXiv:2610.36069v1.arxiv.org/abs/2610.36069
- [20]P. Schmutz, Systoles of arithmetic surfaces and the Markoff spectrum, Math. Ann. 305 (1996), 191–203.DOI
- [21]Q. Tang, Parameter monotonicity for generalized k-Markov numbers, preprint (2026), Hexagon:2611.00023v1.
- [22]D. Zagier, On the number of Markoff numbers below a given bound, Math. Comp. 39 (1982), no. 160, 709–723.DOI