arxiv: v2 [math.at] 19 Feb 2015

Transcript

1 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM arxiv: v2 [math.at] 19 Feb 2015 NGUYỄN SUM Abstract. We study the hit problem, set up by F. Peterson, of finding a minimal set of generators for the polynomial algebra P := F 2 [x 1, x 2,..., x ] as a module over the mod-2 Steenrod algebra, A. In this paper, we study a minimal set of generators for A-module P in some so-called generic degrees and apply these results to explicitly determine the hit problem for =. Dedicated to Prof. N. H. V. Hưng on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday 1. Introduction and statement of results Let V be an elementary abelian 2-group of ran. Denote by BV the classifying space of V. It may be thought of as the product of copies of the real projective space RP. Then P := H (BV ) = F 2 [x 1, x 2,..., x ], a polynomial algebra in variables x 1, x 2,..., x, each of degree 1. Here the cohomology is taen with coefficients in the prime field F 2 of two elements. Being the cohomology of a space, P is a module over the mod-2 Steenrod algebra A. The action of A on P is explicitly given by the formula x j, i = 0, Sq i (x j ) = x 2 j, i = 1, 0, otherwise, and subject to the Cartan formula Sq n (fg) = n Sq i (f)sq n i (g), i=0 for f, g P (see Steenrod and Epstein [30]). A polynomial f in P is called hit if it can be written as a finite sum f = i>0 Sqi (f i ) for some polynomials f i. That means f belongs to A + P, where A + denotes the augmentation ideal in A. We are interested in the hit problem, set up by F. Peterson, of finding a minimal set of generators for the polynomial algebra P as a module over the Steenrod algebra. In other words, we want to find a basis of the F 2 -vector space QP := P /A + P = F 2 A P. The hit problem was first studied by Peterson [22, 23], Wood [38], Singer [28], and Priddy [2], who showed its relation to several classical problems respectively in cobordism theory, modular representation theory, Adams spectral sequence for the stable homotopy of spheres, and stable homotopy type of classifying spaces of Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 55S10; 55S05, 55T15. 2 Keywords and phrases. Steenrod squares, polynomial algebra, Peterson hit problem. 3 This version is a revision of a preprint of Quy Nhơn University, Việt Nam,

2 2 NGUYỄN SUM finite groups. The vector space QP was explicitly calculated by Peterson [22] for = 1, 2, by Kameo [1] for = 3. The case = has been treated by Kameo [16] and by the present author [31]. Several aspects of the hit problem were then investigated by many authors. (See Boardman [1], Bruner, Hà and Hưng [2], Carlisle and Wood [3], Crabb and Hubbuc [], Giambalvo and Peterson [5], Hà [6], Hưng [7], Hưng and Nam [8, 9], Hưng and Peterson [10, 11], Janfada and Wood [12, 13], Kameo [1, 15], Minami [17], Mothebe [18, 19], Nam [20, 21], Repa and Selic [25], Silverman [26], Silverman and Singer [27], Singer [29], Waler and Wood [35, 36, 37], Wood [39, 0] and others.) The µ-function is one of the numerical functions that have much been used in the context of the hit problem. For a positive integer n, by µ(n) one means the smallest number r for which it is possible to write n = 1 i r (2di 1), where d i > 0. A routine computation shows that µ(n) = s if and only if there exists uniquely a sequence of integers d 1 > d 2 >... > d s 1 d s > 0 such that n = 2 d1 + 2 d ds ds s. (1.1) From this it implies n s is even and µ( n s 2 ) s. Denote by (P ) n the subspace of P consisting of all the homogeneous polynomials of degree n in P and by (QP ) n the subspace of QP consisting of all the classes represented by the elements in (P ) n. Peterson [22] made the following conjecture, which was subsequently proved by Wood [38]. Theorem 1.1 (Wood [38]). If µ(n) >, then (QP ) n = 0. One of the main tools in the study of the hit problem is Kameo s homomorphism Sq 0 : QP QP. This homomorphism is induced by the F 2 -linear map, also denoted by Sq 0 : P P, given by { Sq 0 y, if x = x 1 x 2... x y 2, (x) = 0, otherwise, for any monomial x P. Note that Sq 0 is not an A-homomorphism. However, Sq 0 Sq 2t = Sq t Sq 0, and Sq 0 Sq 2t+1 = 0 for any non-negative integer t. Theorem 1.2 (Kameo [1]). Let m be a positive integer. If µ(2m + ) =, then ( Sq 0 ) m : (QP ) 2m+ (QP ) m is an isomorphism of the F 2 -vector spaces. Based on Theorems 1.1 and 1.2, the hit problem is reduced to the case of degree n with µ(n) = s <. The hit problem in the case of degree n of the form (1.1) with s = 1, d i 1 d i > 1 for 2 i < and d 1 > 1 was partially studied by Crabb and Hubbuc [], Nam [20], Repa and Selic [25] and the present author [33]. In this paper, we explicitly determine the hit problem for the case =. First, we study the hit problem for the case of degree n of the form (1.1) for s = 1. The following theorem gives an inductive formula for the dimension of (QP ) n in this case.

3 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 3 Theorem 1.3. Let n = 1 i 1 (2di 1) with d i positive integers such that d 1 > d 2 >... > d 2 d 1, and let m = 1 i 2 (2di d 1 1). If d 1 1 3, then dim(qp ) n = (2 1) dim(qp 1 ) m. For d 2 > d 1, the theorem follows from a result in Nam [20]. For d 2 = d 1 >, it has been proved in [33]. However, for either d 1 = 1 or d 2 = d 1 =, the theorem is new. From the results in Peterson [22] and Kameo [1], we see that if = 3, then this theorem is true for either d 1 > d 2 2 or d 1 = d 2 3; if = 2, then it is true for d 1 2. The main tool in the proof of the theorem is Singer s criterion on the hit monomials (Theorem 2.12.) So, the condition d 1 > d 2 >... > d 2 d 1 > 0 is used in our proof when we use this criterion. Based on Theorem 1.3, we explicitly compute QP. Theorem 1.. Let n be an arbitrary positive integer with µ(n) <. The dimension of the F 2 -vector space (QP ) n is given by the following table: n s = 1 s = 2 s = 3 s = s 5 2 s s s s s s s s+ + 2 s s+t s+1 3, t s s s s s s s+ + 2 s s s s+t + 2 s 2, t s s s s s s s+t s+t + 2 s 3, t s s s s+u s s 3, u s+u s s 3, u s+t+u + 2 s+t + 2 s 3, u 2, t The vector space QP was also computed in Kameo [16] by using computer calculation. However the manuscript is unpublished at the time of the writing.

4 NGUYỄN SUM Carlisle and Wood showed in [3] that the dimension of the vector space (QP ) n is uniformly bounded by a number depended only on. In 1990, Kameo made the following conjecture in his Johns Hopins University PhD thesis [1]. Conjecture 1.5 (Kameo [1]). For every non-negative integer n, dim(qp ) n (2 i 1). 1 i The conjecture was shown by Kameo himself for 3 in [1]. From Theorem 1., we see that the conjecture is also true for =. By induction on, using Theorem 1.3, we obtain the following. Corollary 1.6. Let n = 1 i 1 1) with d (2di i positive integers. If d 1 d 2 2, d i 1 d i i 1, 3 i 1, d 1 1 2, then dim(qp ) n = (2 i 1). 1 i For the case d i 1 d i i, 2 i 1, and d 1, this result is due to Nam [20]. This corollary also shows that Kameo s conjecture is true for the degree n as given in the corollary. By induction on, using Theorems 1.3, 1. and the fact that Kameo s homomorphism is an epimorphism, one gets the following. Corollary 1.7. Let n = 1 i 2 1) with d (2di i positive integers and let d 1 = 1, n r = 1 i r 2 (2di dr 1 1) 1 with r = 5, 6,...,. If d 1 d 2, d i 2 d i 1 i, for i and 5, then dim(qp ) n = (2 i 1) + ( ) (2 i 1) dim Ker( Sq 0 ) n r, 1 i 5 r r+1 i where ( Sq 0 ) nr : (QP r ) 2nr+r (QP r ) nr denotes Kameo s homomorphism Sq 0 in degree 2n r + r. Here, by convention, r+1 i (2i 1) = 1 for r =. This corollary has been proved in [33] for the case d i 2 d i 1 > i + 1 with 3 i. Obviously 2n r +r = 1 i r 2 1), where e (2ei i = d i d r 1 +1, for 1 i r 2. So, in degree 2n r + r of P r, there is a so-called spie x = x 2e x 2e x 2e r 2 1 r 2, i.e. a monomial whose exponents are all of the form 2 e 1 for some e. Since the class [x] in (QP ) 2nr+r represented by the spie x is nonzero and Sq 0 ([x]) = 0, we have Ker( Sq 0 ) nr 0, for any 5 r. Therefore, by Corollary 1.7, Kameo s conjecture is not true in degree n = 2n + for any 5, where n = 2 d d d This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall some needed information on the admissible monomials in P and Singer s criterion on the hit monomials. We prove Theorem 1.3 in Section 3 by describing a basis of (QP ) n in terms of a given basis of (QP 1 ) m. In Section, we recall the results on the hit problem for 3. Theorem 1. will be proved in Section 5 by explicitly determining all of the admissible monomials in P.

5 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 5 The first formulation of this paper was given in a 20-page preprint in 2007 [31], which was then publicized to a remarable number of colleagues. One year latter, we found the negative answer to Kameo s conjecture on the hit problem [32, 33]. Being led by the insight of this new study, we have remarably reduced the length of the paper. The main results of the present paper have already been announced in [3]. However, we correct Theorem 3 in [3] by replacing the condition d with d Preliminaries In this section, we recall some results in Kameo [1] and Singer [29] which will be used in the next sections. Notation 2.1. Throughout the paper, we use the following notations. N = {1, 2,..., }, In particular, we have X J = X {j1,j 2,...,j s} = X N = 1, j N \J X = x 1 x 2... x, x j, J = {j 1, j 2,..., j s } N, X j = X {j} = x 1... ˆx j... x, 1 j. Let α i (a) denote the i-th coefficient in dyadic expansion of a non-negative integer a. That means a = α 0 (a)2 0 + α 1 (a)2 1 + α 2 (a) , for α i (a) = 0 or 1 and i 0. Denote by α(a) the number of 1 s in dyadic expansion of a. Let x = x a1 1 xa xa P. Denote ν j (x) = a j, 1 j. Set J i (x) = {j N : α i (ν j (x)) = 0}, for i 0. Then we have x = XJ 2i. i(x) i 0 For a polynomial f in P, we denote by [f] the class in QP represented by f. For a subset S P, we denote [S] = {[f] : f S} QP. Definition 2.2. For a monomial x, define two sequences associated with x by ω(x) = (ω 1 (x), ω 2 (x),..., ω i (x),...), σ(x) = (ν 1 (x), ν 2 (x),..., ν (x)), where ω i (x) = 1 j α i 1(ν j (x)) = deg X Ii 1(x), i 1. The sequence ω(x) is called the weight vector of x (see Wood [39]). The weight vectors and the sigma vectors can be ordered by the left lexicographical order. Let ω = (ω 1, ω 2,..., ω i,...) be a sequence of non-negative integers such that ω i = 0 for i 0. Define deg ω = i>0 2i 1 ω i. Denote by P (ω) the subspace of P spanned by all monomials y such that deg y = deg ω, ω(y) ω, and by P (ω) the subspace of P spanned by all monomials y P (ω) such that ω(y) < ω. Denote by A + s the subspace of A spanned by all Sqj with 1 j < 2 s.

6 6 NGUYỄN SUM Definition 2.3. Let ω be a sequence of non-negative integers and f, g two polynomials of the same degree in P. i) f g if and only if f g A + P. ii) f (s,ω) g if and only if f g A + s P + P (ω). Since A + 0 P = 0, f (0,ω) g if and only if f g P (ω). If x is a monomial in P and ω = ω(x), then we denote x s g if and only if x (s,ω(x)) g. Obviously, the relations and (s,ω) are equivalence relations. We recall some relations on the action of the Steenrod squares on P. Proposition 2.. Let f be a polynomial in P. i) If i > deg f, then Sq i (f) = 0. If i = deg f, then Sq i (f) = f 2. ii) If i is not divisible by 2 s, then Sq i (f 2s ) = 0 while Sq r2s (f 2s ) = (Sq r (f)) 2s. Proposition 2.5. Let x, y be monomials and let f, g be polynomials in P such that deg x = deg f, deg y = deg g. i) If ω i (x) 1 for i > s and x t f with t s, then xy 2s t fy 2s. ii) If ω i (x) = 0 for i > s, x s f and y r g, then xy 2s s+r fg 2s. Proof. Suppose that x + f + Sq u (z u ) = h P (ω(x)), (2.1) 1 u<2 t where z u P. From this and Proposition 2., we have Sq u (z u )y 2s = Sq u (z u y 2s ) for 1 u < 2 t 2 s. Observe that ω v (xy 2s ) = ω v (x) for 1 v s. If z is a monomial and z P (ω(x)), then there exists an index i 1 such that ω j(z) = ω j (x) for j i 1 and ω i (z) < ω i (x). If i > s, then ω i (x) = 1, ω i (z) = 0. Then we have ( α i 1 deg x ) ( 2 j 1 ω j (x) = α i 1 2 i 1 + ) 2 j 1 ω j (x) = 1. j>i 1 j i 1 On the other hand, since deg x = deg z, ω i (z) = 0 and ω j (z) = ω j (x), for j i 1, one gets ( α i 1 deg x ) ( 2 j 1 ω j (x) = α i 1 deg z ) 2 j 1 ω j (z) 1 j i 1 1 j i 1 ( ) = α i 1 2 j 1 ω j (z) = 0. This is a contradiction. Hence, 1 i s. From the above equalities and the fact that h P (ω(x)), one gets xy 2s + fy 2s + Sq i (z i y 2 s ) = hy 2s P (ω(xy2s )). 1 i<2 t The first part of the proposition is proved. Suppose that y + g + 1 j<2 Sq j (u r j ) = h 1 P (ω(y)), where u j P. Then xy 2s = xg 2s + xh 2s 1 + xsq j2 s(u 2s j ). 1 j<2 r Since ω i (x) = 0 for i > s and h 1 P (ω(y)), we get xh2s 1 P (ω(xy2s )). Using the Cartan formula and Proposition 2., we obtain xsq j2s (u 2s j ) = (xu Sqj2s 2s j ) + Sq b2s (x)(sq j b (u j )) 2s. 0<b j j>i

7 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 7 Since ω i (x) = 0 for i > s, we have x = 0 i<s X2i J i(x). Using the Cartan formula and Proposition 2., we see that Sq b2s (x) is a sum of polynomials of the form (Sq bi (X Ji(x))) 2i, 0 i<s where 0 i<s b i2 i = b2 s and 0 b i deg X Ji(x). Let l be the smallest index such that b l > 0 with 0( l < s. Suppose that a monomial z appears as a term of the polynomial 0 i<s (X Ji(x))) 2i) (Sq j b (u (Sqbi j )) 2s. Then ω u (z) = deg X Ju 1 (x) = ω u (x) = ω u (xy 2s ) for u l, and ω l+1 (z) = deg X Jl (x) b l < deg X Jl (x) = ω l+1 (x) = ω l+1 (xy 2s ). Hence, ( (Sq bi (X Ji(x))) 2i) (Sq j b (u j )) 2s P (ω(xy2s )). 0 i<s This implies Sq b2s (x)(sq j b (u j )) 2s P )) for 0 < b j. So, one gets (ω(xy2s xy 2s + xg 2s + s(xu 2s j ) P )). (ω(xy2s 1 j<2 r Sq j2 Since 1 j2 s < 2 r+s for 1 j < 2 r, we obtain xy 2s r+s xg 2s. Since ω i (x) = 0 for i > s and h P (ω(x)), we have P hg2s )). (ω(xy2s Using Proposition 2., the Cartan formula and the relation (2.1) with t = s, we get xg 2s + fg 2s + s ) = hg 2s P )). (ω(xy2s 1 u<2 s Sq u (z u g 2 Combining the above equalities gives xy 2s +fg 2s A r+s P +P )). This (ω(xy2s implies xy 2s r+s fg 2s. The proposition follows. Definition 2.6. Let x, y be monomials of the same degree in P. We say that x < y if and only if one of the following holds: i) ω(x) < ω(y); ii) ω(x) = ω(y) and σ(x) < σ(y). Definition 2.7. A monomial x is said to be inadmissible if there exist monomials y 1, y 2,..., y t such that y j < x for j = 1, 2,..., t and x t j=1 y j A + P. A monomial x is said to be admissible if it is not inadmissible. Obviously, the set of all the admissible monomials of degree n in P is a minimal set of A-generators for P in degree n. Definition 2.8. A monomial x is said to be strictly inadmissible if and only if there exist monomials y 1, y 2,..., y t such that y j < x, for j = 1, 2,..., t and x t j=1 y j A + s P with s = max{i : ω i (x) > 0}. It is easy to see that if x is strictly inadmissible, then it is inadmissible. The following theorem is a modification of a result in [1]. Theorem 2.9 (Kameo [1], Sum [33]). Let x, y, w be monomials in P such that ω i (x) = 0 for i > r > 0, ω s (w) 0 and ω i (w) = 0 for i > s > 0. i) If w is inadmissible, then xw 2r is also inadmissible. ii) If w is strictly inadmissible, then xw 2r y 2r+s is inadmissible.

8 8 NGUYỄN SUM Proposition 2.10 ([33]). Let x be an admissible monomial in P. Then we have i) If there is an index i 0 such that ω i0 (x) = 0, then ω i (x) = 0 for all i > i 0. ii) If there is an index i 0 such that ω i0 (x) <, then ω i (x) < for all i > i 0. Now, we recall a result in [29] on the hit monomials in P. Definition A monomial z in P is called a spie if ν j (z) = 2 sj 1 for s j a non-negative integer and j = 1, 2,...,. If z is a spie with s 1 > s 2 >... > s r 1 s r > 0 and s j = 0 for j > r, then it is called a minimal spie. The following is a criterion for the hit monomials in P. Theorem 2.12 (Singer [29]). Suppose x P is a monomial of degree n, where µ(n). Let z be the minimal spie of degree n. If ω(x) < ω(z), then x is hit. From this theorem, we see that if z is a minimal spie, then P (ω(z)) A+ P. The following lemma has been proved in [33]. Lemma 2.13 ([33]). Let n = 1 i 1 (2di 1) with d i positive integers such that d 1 > d 2 >... > d 2 d 1 > 0, and let x be a monomial of degree n in P. If [x] 0, then ω i (x) = 1 for 1 i d 1. The following is a modification of a result in [33]. Lemma 2.1. Let n be as in Lemma 2.13 and let ω = (ω 1, ω 2,...) be a sequence of non-negative integers such that ω i = 1, for 1 i s d 1, ω i 1 for i > s, ω i = 0 for i 0, and deg ω < n. Suppose f, g, h, p P with deg f = deg g = deg ω, deg h = deg p = (n deg ω)/2 s = 1 i=1 (2di s 1) j 1 2j 1 ω s+j. i) If f (s,ω) g, then fh 2s gh 2s. ii) If ω i = 0 for i > s, and h p, then fh 2s fp 2s. This lemma can easily be proved by using Proposition 2.5, Theorem 2.12 and Lemma For latter use, we set P 0 = {x = x a1 1 xa xa : a 1 a 2... a = 0}, = {x = xa1 1 xa xa : a 1 a 2... a > 0}. P + It is easy to see that P 0 and P + have the following. are the A-submodules of P. Furthermore, we Proposition We have a direct summand decomposition of the F 2 -vector spaces QP = QP 0 QP +. Here QP 0 = P 0 /A+.P 0 and QP + = P + /A+.P +. We denote 3. Proof of Theorem 1.3 N = {(i; I) : I = (i 1, i 2,..., i r ), 1 i < i 1 <... < i r, 0 r < }. Let (i; I) N and j N. Denote by r = l(i) the length of I, and I, if j I, I j = (j, i 1,..., i r ), if 0 < j < i 1, (i 1,..., i t 1, j, i t,..., i r ), if i t 1 < j < i t, 2 t r + 1.

9 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 9 Here i r+1 = + 1. For 1 i, define the homomorphism f i = f ;i : P 1 P of algebras by substituting { x j, if 1 j < i, f i (x j ) = x j+1, if i j <. Definition 3.1. Let (i; I) N, let r = l(i), and let u be an integer with 1 u r. A monomial x P 1 is said to be u-compatible with (i; I) if all of the following hold: i) ν i1 1(x) = ν i2 1(x) =... = ν i(u 1) 1(x) = 2 r 1, ii) ν iu 1(x) > 2 r 1, iii) α r t (ν iu 1(x)) = 1, t, 1 t u, iv) α r t (ν it 1(x)) = 1, t, u < t r. Clearly, a monomial x P can be u-compatible with a given (i; I) N, r = l(i) > 0, for at most one value of u. By convention, x is 1-compatible with (i; ). u<t r x2r t i t Definition 3.2. Let (i; I) N. Denote x (I,u) = x 2r r u i u for 1 u r = l(i), and x (,1) = 1. For a monomial x in P 1, we define the monomial φ (i;i) (x) in P by setting (x 2r 1 φ (i;i) (x) = 0, otherwise. i f i (x))/x (I,u), if there exists u such that x is u-compatible with (i, I), Then we have an F 2 -linear map φ (i;i) : P 1 P. In particular, φ (i; ) = f i. For example, let I = (j) and 1 i < j. A monomial x P 1 is 1- compatible with (i; I) if and only if α 0 (ν j 1 (x)) = 1 and φ (i;i) (x) = (x i f i (x))/x j. Let = and I = (2, 3, ). The monomial x = x 12 1 x6 2 x9 3 is 1-compatible with (1; I); y = x 7 1x 15 2 x 7 3 is 2-compatible with (1; I); z = x 7 1x 7 2x 15 3 is 3-compatible with (1; I) and φ (1;I) (x) = x 7 1 x8 2 x 3 x8, φ (1;I)(y) = x 7 1 x7 2 x9 3 x6, φ (1;I)(z) = x 7 1 x7 2 x7 3 x8. Let x = X 2d 1 y 2d, with y a monomial in P 1 and X = x 1 x 2..., x 1 P 1. If r < d, then x is 1-compatible with (i; I) and φ (i;i) (x) = φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )f i (y) 2d = x 2r 1 i x 2d 2 r t 1 i t X 2d 1 i,i 1,...,i r f i (y) 2d. (3.1) 1 t r If d = r, ν j 1 (y) = 0, j = i 1, i 2,..., i u 1 and ν iu 1(y) > 0, then x is u-compatible with (i; I) and φ (i;i) (x) = φ (iu;j u)(x 2d 1 )f i (y) 2d, (3.2) where J u = (i u+1,..., i r ). Let B be a finite subset of P 1 consisting of some polynomials in degree n. We set Φ 0 (B) = φ (i; ) (B) = f i (B). Φ + (B) = 1 i (i;i) N,0<l(I) 1 Φ(B) = Φ 0 (B) Φ + (B). 1 i φ (i;i) (B) \ P 0.

10 10 NGUYỄN SUM It is easy to see that if B 1 (n) is a minimal set of generators for A-module P 1 in degree n, then Φ 0 (B 1 (n)) is a minimal set of generators for A-module P 0 in degree n and Φ + (B 1 (n)) P +. Proposition 3.3. Let n = 1 i 1 (2di 1) with d i positive integers such that d 1 > d 2 >... > d 2 d If B 1 (n) is a minimal set of generators for A-module P 1 in degree n, then B (n) = Φ(B 1 (n)) is also a minimal set of generators for A-module P in degree n. For d 1, this proposition is a modification of a result in Nam [20]. For d 2 = d 1 >, it has been proved in [33]. The proposition will be proved in Subsection 3.1. We need some lemmas. Lemma 3.. Let j 0, j 1,..., j d 1 N, with d a positive integer and let i = min{j 0,..., j d 1 }, I = (i 1,..., i r ) with {i 1,..., i r } = {j 0,..., j d 1 } \ {i}. Then, x := Xj 2t t d 1 φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 ). 0 t<d Lemma 3.5. Let n = 1 i 1 (2di 1) with d i positive integers such that d 1 > d 2 >... > d 2 d 1 = d > 0, m = 1 i 2 (2di d 1), and let y 0 be a monomial in (P ) m 1, y j = y 0 x j for 1 j, and (i; I) N. i) If r = l(i) < d, then φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )yi 2d 1 j<i φ (j;i) (X 2d 1 )y 2d j + i<j where t j = min(j, I), and I (j) = (I j) \ {t j } for j > i. ii) If r + 1 < d, then φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )y 2d i 1 j<i φ (j;i i) (X 2d 1 )y 2d j + i<j Denote I t = (t + 1, t + 2,..., ) for 1 t. Set Y t = φ (t;it)(x 2d 1 )x 2d u, d t + 1. u=t Lemma 3.6. For 1 t, Y t ( t+1,ω) (j;j) φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 )x 2d j, φ (tj;i (j) )(X 2d 1 )y 2d j, φ (i;i j) (X 2d 1 )y 2d j. where the sum runs over all (j; J) N with 1 j < t, J I t 1, J I t 1 and ω = ω(x 2d 1 1 x 2d 1 ). We assume that all elements of B 1 (n) are monomials. Denote B = B 1 (n). We set C = {z B : ν 1 (z) > 2 1 1}, D = {z B : ν 1 (z) = 2 1 1, ν 2 (z) > 2 1 1}, E = {z B : ν 1 (z) = ν 2 (z) = 2 1 1}. Since ω (z) 3 for all z B, we have B = C D E. If d = d 1 > 1, then D = E =. If d 2 > d 1 = 1, then E =.

11 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 11 We set B = { z P 1 : X 2d 1 z 2d B}. If either d or I I 1, then φ (i;i) (z) = φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )f i ( z) 2d. If d = d 1 = 1, then using the relation (3.2), we have φ (2;I2)(X 2d 1 )f 1 ( z) 2d, if z C, φ (1;I1)(z) = φ (3;I3)(X 2d 1 )f 2 ( z) 2d, if z D, (3.3) φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )f 3 ( z) 2d, if z E. For any (i; I) N, we define the homomorphism p (i;i) : P P 1 of algebras by substituting x j, if 1 j < i, p (i;i) (x j ) = s I x s 1, if j = i, x j 1, if i < j. Then p (i;i) is a homomorphism of A-modules. In particular, for I =, we have p (i; ) (x i ) = 0. Lemma 3.7. Let z B and (i; I), (j; J) N with l(j) l(i). i) If either d or d = 1 and I I 1, then { z, if (j; J) = (i; I), p (j;j) (φ (i;i) (z)) 0, if (j; J) (i; I). ii) If z C and d = 1, then z, if (i; I) = (1; I 1 ), p (i;i) (φ (1;I1)(z)) 0 mod D E, if (i; I) = (2; I 2 ), 0, otherwise. iii) If z D and d = 1, then z, if (i; I) = (1; I 1 ), (1; I 2 ), (2; I 2 ), p (i;i) (φ (1;I1)(z)) 0 mod E, if (i; I) = (3; I 3 ), 0, otherwise. iv) If z E and d = 1, then { z if I 3 I, p (i;i) (φ (1;I1)(z)) 0, otherwise. The above lemmas will be proved in Subsections In particular, for d >, the first part of Lemma 3.7 has been proved in [33]. Lemma 3.8 (Nam [20]). Let x be a monomial in P. Then x x, where x are monomials with ν 1 ( x) = 2 t 1 and t = α(ν 1 (x)). Now, based on Proposition 3.3 and Lemma 3.7, we prove Theorem 1.3. Proof of Theorem 1.3. Denote by S the cardinal of a set S. It is easy to chec that N = 2 1. Let (i; I), (j; J) N with l(j) l(i) and y, z B 1 (n). Suppose that φ (j;j) (y) = φ (i;i) (z). Using Lemma 3.7, we have y p (j;j) (φ (i;i) (z)) 0. From this, Lemma 3.7 and the relation (3.3), we get y = z and (i; I) = (j; J). Hence, φ (i;i) (B 1 (n)) φ (j;j) (B 1 (n)) =.

12 12 NGUYỄN SUM for (i; I) (j; J) and φ (i;i) (B 1 (n)) = B 1 (n). From Proposition 3.3, we have dim(qp ) n = B (n) = B 1 (n) (i;i) N = N dim(qp 1 ) n = (2 1) dim(qp 1 ) n. Set h u = 2 d1 u d 2 u + 2 d 1 u + 1, for 0 u d. We have h 0 = n, h d = m, 2h u + 1 = h u 1 and µ(2h u + 1) = 1 for 1 u d. By Theorem 1.2, Kameo s homomorphism ( Sq 0 ) h u : (QP 1 ) hu 1 (QP 1 ) hu is an isomorphism of the F 2 -vector spaces. So, the iterated homomorphism ( Sq 0 ) d = ( Sq 0 ) hd... ( Sq 0 ) h1 : (QP 1 ) n (QP 1 ) m is an isomorphism of the F 2 -vector spaces. Hence, dim(qp 1 ) n = dim(qp 1 ) m. The theorem is proved. In the remaining part of the section, we prove Proposition 3.3 and Lemmas Proof of Proposition 3.3. Denote by P (n) the subspace of (P ) n spanned by all elements of the set B (n). Let x be a monomial of degree n in P and [x] 0. By ( Lemma 2.13, we have ω i (x) = 1 for 1 i d 1 = d. Hence, we obtain x = 0 t<d X2t j t )ȳ 2d, for suitable monomial ȳ (P ) m, with m = 1 i 2 (2di d 1). According to Lemmas 3. and 2.1, there is (i; I) N such that ( x = Xj 2t t )ȳ 2d φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )ȳ 2d, 0 t<d where r = l(i) < d. Now, we prove [x] [P (n)]. The proof is divided into many cases. Case If ȳ = f i (y) with y (P 1 ) m, then [x] [P (n)]. Since the iterated homomorphism ( Sq 0 ) d : (QP 1 ) n (QP 1 ) m is an isomorphism of the F 2 -vector spaces, B = ( Sq 0 )d (B 1 (n)) = { z (P 1 ) m : X 2d 1 z 2d B 1 (n)} is a minimal set of A-generators for P 1 in degree m. Since y (P 1 ) m, we have y z 1 + z z s with z t monomials in B. Using Lemma 2.1, we have x φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )f i (y) 2d φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )f i ( z t ) 2d. 1 t s Since φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 )f i ( z t ) 2d = φ (i;i) (X 2d 1 z t 2d) and 1 z X2d t 2d [x] [P (n)]. Case If d, then [x] [P (n)] for all ȳ (P 1 ) m. B 1 (n), we get

13 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 13 We have ȳ = x a i f i(y) with a = ν i (ȳ) and y = p (i; ) (ȳ/x a i ) (P 1) m a. The proof proceeds by double induction on (i, a). If a = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P (n)] for any i. Suppose that a > 0 and this case is true for a 1 and any i. If i = 1 and either I I 1 or d >, then d r 1 1. Applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x1 a 1 f 1 (y), we get x φ (1;I j) (X 2d 1 )(x1 a 1 f 1 (x j 1 y)) 2d. 2 j From this and the inductive hypothesis, we obtain [x] [P (n)]. If I = I 1 and d =, then r = d 1. Using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x1 a 1 f 1 (y) and Lemmas 3.6, 2.1, we get x φ (2;I2)(X 2 1 )(x j y 0 ) 2 = Y 2 y0 2 φ (1;J) (X 2 1 )(x a 1f 1 (y)) 2, j=2 where the last sum runs over all J I 1. Hence, [x] [P (n)]. Suppose i > 1 and assume this case has been proved in the subcases 1, 2,..., i 1. Then, r + 1 i + 1 < d. Applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = xi a 1 f i (y), we obtain x φ (j;i i) (X 2d 1 )yj 2d + φ (i;i j) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 i f i (x j 1 y) 2d. 1 j<i i<j Using the inductive hypothesis, we have φ (j;i i) (X 2d 1 )yj 2d [P (n)] for j < i, and φ (i;i j) (X 2d 1 )(xi a 1 f i (x j 1 y) 2d [P (n)] for j > i. Hence, [x] [P (n)]. So, the proposition is proved for d. In the remaining part of the proof, we assume that d = 1. Case If I = I i, ȳ = f i 1 (y) with y (P 1 ) m, ν j (y) = 0 for j i 2, and 2 i, then [x] [P (n)]. Since y (P 1 ) m, we have y z 1 + z z s with z t monomials in B and ν j ( z t ) = 0 for j i 2. Using Lemma 2.1, we get x φ (i;ii)(x 2d 1 )f i 1 (y) 2d φ (i;ii)(x 2d 1 )f i 1 ( z t ) 2d. 1 t s If ν i 1 ( z t ) > 0, then φ (i;ii)(x 2d 1 )f i 1 ( z t ) 2d = φ (1;I1)(X 1 z 2d t 2d). If ν i 1( z t ) = 0, then f i 1 ( z t ) = f i ( z t ) and φ (i;ii)(x 2d 1 )f i 1 ( z t ) 2d = φ (i;ii)(x 2d 1 z t 2d ). Hence, [x] [P (n)]. Case If ȳ = x 2s i f i(y) with y (P 1 ) m 2 s, ν j (y) = 0 for j < i, r = l(i) < i 1 and i 2, then [x] [P (n)]. According to Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, x 2s i f i(y) 2d x i f i (z), where the sum runs over some monomials z P 1 with ν j (z) = 0, j < i. So, by using Lemma 2.1, we can assume s = 0. Let i = 1. Since r +1 < 1 = d, using Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = f 1 (y), we have x φ (1;I u) (X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x u 1 y)) 2d. u=2 Hence, by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P (n)].

14 1 NGUYỄN SUM Let i = 2. Since r + 1 < 2 < d, using Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = f 2 (y), one gets x φ (1;I 2) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I u) (X 2d 1 )(f 2 (x u 1 y)) 2d. Since ν 1 (y) = 0, f 2 (y) = f 1 (y) and l(i 2) < 2, from this equality, Case and Case 3.1. with i = 1, we obtain [x] [P (n)]. Example Let =, d 1 = 5, d 2 = d 3 = 3. Then, we have n = 5, m = 3 and ω = (3, 3, 3, 1, 1) is the minimal sequence. Let B 3 (n) be the set of all the admissible monomials of degree n in P 3. Then B 3 (m) is the set of all the admissible monomials of degree m in P 3. Let I =, y 0 = x 2 = f 1(x 2 3 ) = f 2(x 2 3 ) P. Denote A = φ (1; ) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, B = φ (2; ) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8 and z = φ (1;2) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8. From the proof of this case, we obtain u=3 A φ (1;2) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8 + φ (1;3) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 + φ (1;) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8, B z + φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 + φ (2;) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8, z φ (1;2) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8 + φ (1;(2,3)) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 + φ (1;(2,)) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8. Since x 2 y 0 = x 2 x 2, x 3 y 0 = x 3 x 2, x y 0 = x 3 are the admissible monomials, we get [A], [B], [x] [P (n)]. Furthermore, A x 1 x 7 2 x7 3 x30 + x 1x 7 2 x1 3 x23 + x 1x 1 2 x7 3 x23, B x 1 x 1 2 x7 3 x23 + x3 1 x5 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x1 3 x23 + x7 1 x 2x 7 3 x30 + x7 1 x 2x 1 3 x23. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last equalities are admissible. Case If ȳ = x 2s 3 f 3(y), with y (P 1 ) m 2 s, ν 1 (y) = ν 2 (y) = 0 and i = 3, then [x] [P (n)]. According to Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, we need only to prove this case for s = 0. Note that, since ν 1 (y) = ν 2 (y) = 0, we have x 3 f 3 (y) = f 2 (x 2 y). If I = I 3, then by Case with i = 3, [x] [P (n)]. Suppose I I 3. If d 2 > d 1, then ω (x) = ω 1 (y) + 1 = 2. Hence, α 0 (ν j (y)) = 1 for j = 3,..., 1. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we get x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (y)) 2d. Hence, by Case 3.1., [x] [P (n)]. Suppose that d 2 = d 1. If l(i) <, then using Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = f 3 (y) = f 1 (y) = f 2 (y), one gets x φ (1;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (y)) 2d + φ (3;I v) (X 2d 1 )(f 3 (x v 1 y)) 2d. From this equality and Cases 3.1.1, 3.1., we obtain [x] [P (n)]. If l(i) =, then I = (,..., û,..., ) with u. Since ω (x) = ω 1 (y) + 1 = 3, we have ω 1 (y) =. Hence, there exists uniquely 3 t < such that α 0 (ν t (y)) = 0. v=

15 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 15 If t = u 1, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we obtain x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (y)) 2d + φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )(f 3 (x t y)) 2d. By Cases and 3.1., we get [x] [P (n)]. If u = < t + 1, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we get x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (y)) 2d + φ (5;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x 5 f 3 (x t y/x )) 2d. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (x t y/x ) and Theorem 2.12, we have φ (5;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x 5 f 3 (x t y/x )) 2d φ (v;i5)(x 2d 1 )(x v f 3 (x t y/x )) 2d. 1 v 3 Since l(i 5 ) = 5 <, φ (3;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x 3 f 3 (x t y/x )) 2d [P (n)]. So, combining Case 3.1., the above equalities and the fact that x v f 3 (x t y/x ) = x v f v (x t y/x ) for v = 1, 2, one gets [x] [P (n)]. Suppose that < u t + 1. Using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we obtain x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (y)) 2d + φ (;I\) (X 2d 1 )(x f 3 (x t y/x 3 )) 2d. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 3 (x t y/x 3 ) and Theorem 2.12, we have φ (;I\) (X 2d 1 )(x f 3 (x t y/x 3 )) 2d φ (v;i\) (X 2d 1 )(x v f 3 (x t y/x 3 )) 2d. 1 v 3 Since l(i \ ) = 5 <, φ (3;I\) (X 2d 1 )(x 3 f 3 (x t y/x 3 )) 2d [P (n)]. So, from the above equalities, Case 3.1. and the fact that x v f 3 (x t y/x 3 ) = x v f v (x t y/x 3 ), for v = 1, 2, we get [x] [P (n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), A, B, y 0 be as in Example Then, C = φ (3; ) (X 15 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 A + B + φ (; ) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8. Since φ (; ) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8 = φ (1;I1)(X 7 x 2 3 ) and X7 x 2 3 = x7 1 x7 2 x31 3 B 3(n), one gets [C] [P (n)] and C x 1 x 7 2 x7 3 x30 + x 1x 7 2 x1 3 x23 + x3 1 x5 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x1 3 x23 + x 7 1 x 2x 7 3 x30 + x7 1 x 2x 1 3 x23 + x7 1 x7 2 x7 3 x2. Case If ν 1 (ȳ) = ν 2 (ȳ) = 0 and i =, then [x] [P (n)]. Since ν 1 (ȳ) = ν 2 (ȳ) = 0, we have ȳ = x b 3 xc f (y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m b c with ν j (y) = 0, j 3, and b = ν 3 (ȳ), c = ν (ȳ). Using Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, we assume that b = 2 s 1. We prove this case by induction on c. If c = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P (n)]. Suppose that c > 0 and this case holds for c 1 and all I I.

16 16 NGUYỄN SUM If I I, then applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x b 3 xc 1 f (y), we have x φ (1;I ) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 2x c 1 3 y)) 2d + φ (2;I ) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 2x c 1 3 y)) 2d + φ (3;I ) (X 2d 1 )(x 2s 3 f 3(x c 1 3 y)) 2d + u=5 φ (;I u) (X 2d 1 )(x b 3 xc 1 f (x u 1 y)) 2d. Combining this equality, Cases 3.1., and the inductive hypothesis gives [x] [P (n)]. If I = I, then applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 3 xc 1 f (y) and using Cases 3.1., 3.1.5, we obtain x φ (1;I)(X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 2 xc 1 3 y)) 2d + φ (2;I)(X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 2 xc 1 3 y)) 2d + φ (3;I)(X 2d 1 )(x 2s 3 f 3 (x c 1 3 y)) 2d + Y 5 y 2d 0 Y 5 y 2d 0 mod(p (n)). By Lemmas 3.6 and 2.1, Y 5 y 2d 0 φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 ) ( x j x b 3 xc 1 f (y) ) 2 d, where the sum runs over all (j, J) with 1 j < 5, J I and J I. Since J I, [φ (;J) (X 2d 1 ) ( x b 3 xc f (y) ) 2 d ] [P (n)]. By Case 3.1., [φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 ) ( x j x b 3x c 1 f (y) ) 2 d ] = [φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 ) ( x j f j (x b 2x c 1 3 y) ) 2 d ] [P (n)], for j = 1, 2. By Case 3.1.5, [φ (3;J) (X 2d 1 ) ( x 3 x b 3 xc 1 f (y) ) 2 d ] = [φ (3;J) (X 2d 1 ) ( x 2s 3 f 3(x c 1 3 y) ) 2 d ] [P (n)]. Hence, [x] [P (n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), C be as in Example Let I =, y 0 = x 3 x, ȳ = x y 0 = x 3 x 2. From the proof of this case, we obtain D = φ (; ) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8 x + y + φ (3; ) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8, where x = φ (1; ) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, y = φ (2; ) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8. Since x 3 y 0 = x 2 3x x 3 x 2, φ (3; ) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 C. By Case 3.1., [x], [y] [P (n)]. Hence, [D] = [C] + [x] + [y] [P (n)]. By a computation analogous to the previous one, we obtain D x 1 x 7 2x 7 3x 30 + x 1 x 7 2x 15 3 x 22 + x 3 1x 5 2x 7 3x 30 + x 3 1x 5 2x 15 3 x 22 + x 7 1x 2 x 7 3x 30 + x 7 1x 2 x 15 3 x 22 + x 7 1x 7 2x 7 3x 2. Case If ν 1 (ȳ) = ν 2 (ȳ) = 0 and i = 3, then [x] [P(n)]. We have ȳ = x b 3 f 3(y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m b with ν 1 (y) = ν 2 (y) = 0, and b = ν 3 (ȳ). We prove [x] [P(n)] by induction on b. If b = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P(n)]. Suppose b > 0 and this case holds for b 1. If α 0 (b) = 0, then ȳ = Sq 1 (x b 1 3 f 3 (y)) + x b 1 3 f 3 (Sq 1 (y)) x b 1 3 f 3 (Sq 1 (y)). Hence, using Lemma 2.1 and the inductive hypothesis, one gets [x] [P(n)]. Now, assume that α 0 (b) = 1.

17 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 17 Since x b 3 f 3(y) = f 2 (x b 2 y), if I = I 3, then by Case 3.1.3, [x] [P(n)]. If l(i) <, then applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (y), we obtain x φ (1;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + v= φ (3;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x b 1 3 f 3 (x v 1 y)) 2d. Using Case 3.1. and the inductive hypothesis, one gets [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that l(i) =. Then I = (,..., û,..., ), with u. If d 2 > d 1, then ω (x) = ω 1 (y) + α 0 (b) = 2. Hence, α 0 (ν j (y)) = 1 for j = 3,..., 1. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we get x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d. Hence, by Case 3.1., we obtain [x] [P(n)]. Suppose d 2 = d 1. Since ω (x) = ω 1 (y)+α 0 (b) = 3, we have ω 1 (y) =. Hence, there exists uniquely 3 t 1 such that α 0 (ν t (y)) = 0. If t = u 1, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we have x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )(x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y)) 2d. From this equality, Case 3.1. and 3.1.6, we get [x] [P(n)]. If u = < t + 1, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we obtain x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (5;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y)) 2d. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y/x ) and Theorem 2.12, we have φ (5;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y)) 2d 1 v 3 φ (v;i5)(x 2d 1 )(x v x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y/x )) 2d. Since l(i 5 ) = 5 <, φ (3;I5)(X 2d 1 )(x b 3 f 3(x t y/x )) 2d [P(n)]. Hence, combining the above equalities, Case 3.1. and the fact that x v x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y/x ) = x v f v (x b 1 2 x t y/x ), for v = 1, 2, one gets [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that < u t + 1. Using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x b 1 3 f 3 (y) and Theorem 2.12, we obtain x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (;I\) (X 2d 1 )(x b 1 3 f 3 (x t y)) 2d. From the above equalities, Cases 3.1. and 3.1.6, we get [x] [P(n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), D be as in Example Let I =, y 0 = x 2 3 = x 2 3f 3 (x 0 3) P. This case is entry with b = 3, u =, t = 3 = u 1. Then, E = φ (3; ) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 x + y + φ (; ) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8, where x = φ (1; ) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, y = φ (2; ) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8. Since x y 0 = x 2 3x x 3 x 2, we have φ (; ) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8 D.

18 18 NGUYỄN SUM By Case 3.1., [x], [y] [P (n)]. Hence, [E] = [D] + [x] + [y] [P (n)]. By a computation analogous to the previous one, we obtain E x 1 x 7 2x 7 3x 30 + x 1 x 7 2x 30 3 x 7 + x 3 1x 5 2x 7 3x 30 + x 3 1x 5 2x 30 3 x 7 + x 7 1x 2 x 7 3x 30 + x 7 1x 2 x 30 3 x 7 + x 7 1x 7 2x 7 3x 2. Here, the monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If ȳ = x 2s 2 f 2 (y) for y (P 1 ) m 2 s with ν 1 (y) = 0 and i = 2, then [x] [P(n)]. It suffices to prove this case for s = 0. If l(i) < 3, then by Case 3.1., [x] [P(n)]. Since x 2 f 2 (y) = f 1 (x 1 y), if I = I 2, then by Case 3.1.3, [x] [P(n)]. Suppose l(i) = 3. Then, I = (3,..., û,..., ) with 3 u. If u = 3, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 2 (y), we get x φ (1;I3)(X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (3;I3)(X 2d 1 )(f 2 (x 2 y)) 2d + φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )(f 2 (x v 1 y)) 2d. If u > 3, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 2 (y), we get x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (y)) 2d + φ (3;I v\3) (X 2d 1 )(f 2 (x v 1 y)) 2d. v= 3 v Since ν 1 (f 2 (x v 1 y)) = ν 2 (f 2 (x v 1 y)) = 0, for 3 v, combining the above equalities, Cases 3.1.3, 3.1., and 3.1.7, we obtain [x] [P(n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), E be as in Example Let I = (3), y 0 = x 2 3 = x2 2 f 3(x 0 3 ) P. This case is entry with u =, t = 3 = u 1. Then, F = φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8 x + E + y, where x = φ (1;3) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, y = φ (3;) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8. Since x y 0 = x 2 3 x x 3 x 2, we have y φ (1;I 1)(X 7 (x 2 x 2 3 )8 ) = x 7 1 x7 2 x9 3 x22. By Case 3.1., [x] [P (n)]. Hence, [F] = [x] + [E] + [y] [P (n)]. By a computation analogous to the previous one, we obtain F x 1 x 7 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x30 3 x7 + x3 1 x7 2 x13 3 x22 + x3 1 x13 2 x22 3 x7 + x 7 1 x 2x 7 3 x30 + x7 1 x 2x 30 3 x7 + x7 1 x7 2 x7 3 x2 + x7 1 x7 2 x9 3 x22. Here, the monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If ν 1 (ȳ) = 0 and i = 3, then [x] [P(n)]. We have ȳ = x a 2 xb 3 f 3(y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m a b with ν 1 (y) = ν 2 (y) = 0, a = ν 2 (ȳ), b = ν 3 (ȳ). Using Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, we can assume that a = 2 s 1. We prove this case by induction on b. If b = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, this case is true. Suppose that b > 0 and this case is true for b 1. If I I 3, then using Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x a 2 xb 1 3 f 3 (y), we get x φ (1;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1x b 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I 3) (X 2d 1 )(x 2s 2 f 2 (x b 1 2 y)) 2d + v= φ (3;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x a 2 xb 1 3 f 3 (x v 1 y)) 2d. From this equality, Case 3.1. and the inductive hypothesis we obtain [x] [P(n)].

19 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 19 If I = I 3, then using Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x a 2 xb 1 3 f 3 (y), and Case 3.1., we have x φ (1;I3)(X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1 xb 1 2 y)) 2d + φ (2;I3)(X 2d 1 )(x 2s 2 f 2(x b 1 2 y)) 2d + Y y 2d 0 Y y 2d 0 mod(p(n)). Using Lemmas 3.6 and 2.1, we get Y y0 2d φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 )(x j x a 2x b 1 3 f 3 (y)) 2d, (j;j) where the last sum runs over some (j; J) with 1 j <, J I 3 and J I 3. Since J I 3, φ (3;J) (X 2d 1 )(x a 2 xb 3 f 3(y)) 2d [P(n)]. By Cases 3.1. and 3.1.8, φ (1;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 x a 2x b 1 3 f 3 (y)) 2d = φ (1;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1x b 1 2 y)) 2d [P(n)], φ (2;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 x a 2 xb 1 3 f 3 (y)) 2d = φ (2;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 2s 2 f 2(x b 1 2 y)) 2d [P(n)]. This case is proved. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), F be as in Example Let I = I 3 = (), y 0 = x 2 x, ȳ = x 3 y 0. Since I = I 3, G = φ (3;) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 Y +Z+Y y0, 8 where Y = φ (1;) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, Z = φ (2;) (X 7 )(x 2 2 x ) 8. By Case 3.1., [Y ], [Z] [P (n)]. Since Y y0 8 = φ (; )(X 7 )(x 2 x 2 )8, we have Y y0 8 y + z + w, where y = φ (1; ) (X 7 )(x 1 x 2 x ) 8, z = φ (2; ) (X 7 )(x 2 2x ) 8, w = φ (3; ) (X 7 )(x 2 x 3 x ) 8. By Case 3.1., [y], [z] [P (n)]. We have w φ (1;3) (X 7 )(x 1 x 2 x ) 8 + φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 2 2x ) 8 + φ (3;) (X 7 )(x 2 x 2 ) 8. Using Cases and 3.1., one gets [w] [P (n)]. Hence, [x] = [Y ] + [Z] + [y] + [z] + [w] [P (n)]. By a computation analogous to the previous one, we obtain G = x 7 1 x15 2 x9 3 x1 x3 1 x15 2 x13 3 x1 + x7 1 x7 2 x9 3 x22 + x3 1 x7 2 x13 3 x22 + x 3 1 x15 2 x5 3 x22 + x7 1 x15 2 x 3x 22 + x7 1 x7 2 x 3x 30 + x3 1 x7 2 x5 3 x30. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Now, let I =, y 1 = x 2 x 3, ȳ = x 3 y 1. Then, H = φ (3; ) (X 7 )(x 3 y 1 ) 8 a + F + G, where a = φ (1;3) (X 7 )(x 1 y 1 ) 8. By Case 3.1., [a] [P (n)]. Hence, [H] = [a]+[f]+ [G] [P (n)]. By a computation analogous to the previous one, we obtain H = x 1 x 7 2x 7 3x 30 + x 1 x 15 2 x 22 3 x 7 + x 3 1x 5 2x 7 3x 30 + x 3 1x 5 2x 30 3 x 7 + x 3 1x 7 2x 5 3x 30 + x 3 1x 15 2 x 5 3x 22 + x 7 1x 2 x 7 3x 30 + x 7 1x 2 x 30 3 x 7 + x 7 1x 7 2x 3 x 30 + x 7 1x 7 2x 7 3x 2 + x 7 1x 15 2 x 3 x 22. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If ν 1 (ȳ) = 0 and i = 2, then [x] [P(n)]. We have ȳ = x a 2 f 2(y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m a with ν 1 (y) = 0 and a = ν 1 (ȳ). We prove [x] [P(n)] by induction on a. If a = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that a > 0 and this case holds for a 1.

20 20 NGUYỄN SUM Since x a 2 f 2(y) = f 1 (x a 1 y), if I = I 2, then by Case 3.1.3, [x] [P(n)]. If l(i) < 3, then applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x a 1 2 f 2 (y), we have x φ (1;I 2) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1 1 y)) 2d + v=3 φ (2;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 2 f 2 (x v 1 y)) 2d. Using Case 3.1. and the inductive hypothesis, we get [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that l(i) = 3. Then I = (3,..., û,..., ) with 3 u. If u = 3, then I = I 3. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x a 1 2 f 2 (y), we obtain x φ (1;I3)(X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1 1 y)) 2d + φ (3;I3)(X 2d 1 )(x a 1 2 f 2 (x 2 y)) 2d + v= Applying Lemma 3.6 and Lemma 2.1, one gets v= φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )(x v x2 a 1 f 2 (y)) 2d = Y y0 2d (j;j) φ (;I)(X 2d 1 )(x v x a 1 2 f 2 (y)) 2d. φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 )(x j x a 1 2 f 2 (y)) 2d, where the last sum runs over some (j; J) with 1 j <, J I 3 and J I 3. Since l(j) < l(i 3 ) = 3, from the above equalities and Cases 3.1., 3.1.9, we have [x] [P(n)]. If u > 3, applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x a 1 2 f 2 (y), we get x φ (1;I) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 f 1 (x a 1 1 y)) 2d + v=3 φ (3;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 2 f 2 (x v 1 y)) 2d. From the last equality, Cases 3.1. and 3.1.9, we have [x] [P(n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), H be as in Example Let I = I 3 = (3), y 0 = x 2 2, ȳ = x 2 y 0 = x 3 2. Then, K := φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 2 y 0 ) 8 a + H + b, where a = φ (1;3) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, b = φ (3;) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8. By Cases and 3.1., [a], [b] [P (n)]. Hence, [K] = [a] + [H] + [b] [P (n)]. By a simple computation, we have K = x 1 x 7 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x7 3 x30 + x3 1 x5 2 x30 3 x7 + x3 1 x7 2 x5 3 x30 + x3 1 x29 2 x6 3 x7 + x 7 1 x 2x 7 3 x30 + x7 1 x 2x 30 3 x7 + x7 1 x7 2 x 3x 30 + x7 1 x7 2 x7 3 x2. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If ȳ = x 2s 1 f 1(y) with y (P 1 ) m 2 s and i = 1, then [x] [P(n)]. By Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, we need only to prove this case for s = 0. Note that r = l(i) < d = 1. If r < 2, then by Case 3.1., [x] [P(n)]. If r = 2, then I = (2,..., û,..., ) with 2 u. If u = 2, then I = I 2. Applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 1 (y), one gets x φ (2;I2)(X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x 1 y)) 2d + φ (3;I3)(X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x v 1 y)) 2d. v=3

21 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 21 By Case 3.1.3, φ (2;I2)(X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x 1 y)) 2d [P(n)]. Since ν 1 (f 1 (x 1 y)) 2d = 0, by Case 3.1.9, φ (3;I3)(X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x v 1 y)) 2d [P(n)]. Hence, x [P(n)]. If u > 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = f 1 (y), we obtain x φ (2;I\2) (X 2d 1 )(f 1 (x v 1 y)) 2d. 2 v Since ν 1 (f 1 (x v 1 y)) = 0, this equality and Case imply [x] [P(n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), K be as in Example and let H be as in Example Let I = I 3 = (2, 3), y 0 = x 2 2, ȳ = x 1y 0 = x 1 x 2 2. Then, L := φ (1;(2,3)) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8 K + F + a, where a = φ (2;I2)(X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8 φ (1;I1)(X 7 (x 1 x 2 3 )8 ). Hence, [L] = [K] + [F] + [a] [P (n)]. By a simple computation, we have L = x 3 1x 7 2x 5 3x 30 + x 3 1x 7 2x 13 3 x 22 + x 3 1x 13 2 x 22 3 x 7 + x 3 1x 29 2 x 6 3x 7 + x 7 1x 7 2x 3 x 30 + x 7 1x 7 2x 9 3x 22 + x 7 1x 11 2 x 5 3x 22. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If i = 2, then [x] [P(n)]. We have ȳ = x a 1 xb 2 f 2(y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m a b with ν 1 (y) = 0, and a = ν 1 (ȳ), b = ν 2 (ȳ). We prove this case by induction on b. By using Lemmas 3.8 and 2.1, we can assume that a = 2 s 1. If b = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that b > 0 and this case is true for b 1. If I I 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x a 1 xb 1 2 f 2 (y), we get x φ (1;I 2) (X 2d 1 )(x 2s 1 f 1(x b 1 1 y)) 2d + φ (2;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1x b 1 2 f 2 (x v 1 y)) 2d. 3 v This equality, Case and the inductive hypothesis imply [x] [P(n)]. If I = I 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x a 1x b 1 2 f 2 (y) and using Case 3.1., we get x φ (1;I2)(X 2d 1 )(x 2s 1 f 1(x b 1 1 y)) 2d + Y 3 y 2d 0 Y 3y 2d 0 mod(p(n)). By Lemmas 3.6 and 2.1, we have Y 3 y0 2d φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 )(x j x a 1x b 1 2 f 2 (y)) 2d, (j;j) where the last sum runs over some (j; J) with j = 1, 2, J I 2 and J I 2. Since J I 2, φ (2;J) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1x b 2f 2 (y)) 2d [P(n)]. By Case , φ (1;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 1 x a 1 xb 1 2 f 2 (y)) 2d = φ (1;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 2s 1 f 1(x b 1 1 y)) 2d [P(n)]. This case is proved. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n) be as in Example 3.1. and let H be as in Example Let I = I 3 =, y 0 = x 1 x 3, ȳ = x 2 y 0 = x 1 x 2 x 3. Then, M := φ (2; ) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8 a + b + c, where a = φ (1;2) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8, b = φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8,

22 22 NGUYỄN SUM c = φ (2;) (X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8. By Cases and 3.1., [a], [b], [c] [P (n)]. Hence, [M] [P (n)]. By a simple computation, we have M = x 1 x 1 2 x23 3 x7 + x3 1 x5 2 x15 3 x22 + x3 1 x5 2 x30 3 x7 + x15 1 x 2 x22 3 x7 + x15 1 x1 2 x15 3 x1. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case If i = 1, then [x] [P(n)]. We have ȳ = x a 1 f 1(y) for suitable y (P 1 ) m a and a = ν 1 (ȳ). We prove this case by induction on a. If a = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that a > 0 and this case holds for a 1. Note that r = l(i) d 1 = 2. If r < 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = x1 a 1 f 1 (y), we get x v=2 φ (1;I v) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 1 f 1 (x v 1 y)) 2d. Hence, by the inductive hypothesis, we obtain [x] [P(n)]. Suppose that r = 2. Then, I = (2,..., û,..., ) with 2 u. If u = 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x1 a 1 f 1 (y), Lemma 2.1 and Case , we get x φ (2;I2)(X 2d 1 )(x1 a 1 f 1 (x 1 y)) 2d + Y 3 y0 2d Y 3y0 2d mod(p (n)). By Lemmas 3.6 and 2.1, we have Y 3 y0 2d φ (j;j) (X 2d 1 )(x j x1 a 1 f 1 (y)) 2d, (j;j) where the last sum runs over some (j; J) with j = 1, 2, J I 2 and J I 2. By Case , φ (2;J) (X 2d 1 )(x 2 x1 a 1 f 1 (y)) 2d [P(n)]. Since J I 2, we have φ (1;J) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 f 1(y)) 2d [P(n)]. Hence, x [P(n)]. If u > 2, then applying Lemma 3.5(i) with y 0 = x1 a 1 f 1 (y), we get x φ (2;I v\2) (X 2d 1 )(x1 a 1 f 1 (x v 1 y)) 2d. 2 v From the last equality and Case , we obtain [x] [P(n)]. Example Let =, n, m, B 3 (n), L be as in Example Let I = I 3 = (2, 3), y 0 = x 2 1, ȳ = x 1 y 0 = x 3 1. Then, N := φ (1;(2,3)) (X 7 )(x 1 y 0 ) 8 L + a + b, where a = φ (2;3) (X 7 )(x 3 y 0 ) 8 φ (1;I1)(X 7 (x 1 x 2 3 )8 ) and b = φ (2;I2)(X 7 )(x y 0 ) 8 φ (1;I1)(X 7 (x 1 x 2 ) 8 ). Hence, [N] = [L]+[a]+[b] [P (n)]. By a simple computation, we have N = x 3 1 x7 2 x5 3 x30 + x3 1 x7 2 x13 3 x22 + x3 1 x13 2 x22 3 x7 + x3 1 x29 2 x6 3 x7 + x 7 1 x7 2 x 3x 30 + x7 1 x7 2 x9 3 x22 + x7 1 x11 2 x5 3 x22 + x15 1 x 2 x22 3 x7 + x15 1 x3 2 x5 3 x22. All monomials in the right hand sides of the last relation are admissible. Case [x] [P(n)] for all ȳ (P 1 ) m. We have ȳ = x a i f i(y) with a = ν i (ȳ) and y = p (i; ) (ȳ/x a i ) (P 1) m a. We prove this case by double induction on (i, a). If a = 0, then by Case 3.1.1, [x] [P(n)] for all i. Suppose a > 0 and this case holds for a 1 and all i.

23 ON THE PETERSON HIT PROBLEM 23 If i = 1, 2, then by Cases and , [x] [P(n)] for all a. Suppose i > 2 and assume this case already proved in the subcases 1, 2,..., i 1. Then, r + 1 i + 1 < 1 = d. Applying Lemma 3.5(ii) with y 0 = xi a 1 f i (y), we obtain x φ (j;i i) (X 2d 1 )yj 2d + φ (i;i j) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 i f i (x j 1 y) 2d. 1 j<i i<j Using the inductive hypothesis, we have φ (j;i i) (X 2d 1 )yj 2d [P(n)] for j < i, and φ (i;i j) (X 2d 1 )(x a 1 i f i (x j 1 y) 2d [P(n)] for j > i. Hence, [x] [P(n)]. Now we prove that the set [B (n)] is linearly independent in QP. Suppose there is a linear relation S = γ (i;i),z φ (i;i) (z) 0, (3.) ((i;i),z) N B 1 (n) where γ (i;i),z F 2. If d, then by induction on l(i), we can show that γ (i;i),z = 0, for all (i; I) N and z B 1 (n) (see [33] for the case d > ). Suppose that d = 1. By Lemma 3.7, the homomorphism p j = p (j; ) sends the relation (3.) to z B 1 (n) γ (j; ),zz 0. This relation implies γ (j; ),z = 0 for any 1 j and z B 1 (n). Suppose 0 < l(j) < 3 and γ (i;i),z = 0 for all (i; I) N with l(i) < l(j), 1 i and z B 1 (n). Then, using Lemma 3.7 and the relation (3.3), we see that the homomorphism p (j,j) sends the relation (3.) to z B 1 (n) γ (j;j),zz 0. Hence, we get γ (j;j),z = 0 for all z B 1 (n). Now, let (j; J) N with l(j) = 3. If J I 3, then using Lemma 3.7, we have p (j;j) (φ (i;i) (z)) 0 for all z B 1 (n) and (i; I) N with (i; I) (j; J). So, we get p (j;j) (S) γ (j;j),z z 0. z B 1 (n) Hence, γ (j;j),z = 0, for all z B 1 (n). According to Lemma 3.7, p (j;i3)(φ (1;I1)(z)) 0 for z C and p (j;i3)(φ (1;I1)(z)) E for z D E. Hence, we obtain p (j;i3)(s) γ (j;i3),zz 0 mod E. z C D So, we get γ (j;i3),z = 0 for all z C D. Now, let (j; J) N with l(j) = 2. Suppose that I 3 J. Then, using Lemma 3.7, we have p (j;j) (φ (1;I1)(z)) 0 for all z B. Hence, we get p (j;j) (S) z B γ (j;j),z z 0. From this, we obtain γ (j;j),z = 0 for all z B. Suppose that I 3 J. Then, either J = I 2, j = 1, 2 or J = I 3 2, j = 1. According to Lemma 3.7, p (j;i2)(φ (1;I1)(z)) D E for all z B, p (j;i3 2)(φ (1;I1)(z)) 0 for