#13253: galois_action on cusps has a bug and incorrect documentation
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
       Reporter:  mderickx         |         Owner:  craigcitro    
           Type:  defect           |        Status:  closed        
       Priority:  major            |     Milestone:  sage-5.3      
      Component:  modular forms    |    Resolution:  fixed         
       Keywords:                   |   Work issues:                
Report Upstream:  N/A              |     Reviewers:  Marco Streng  
        Authors:  Maarten Derickx  |     Merged in:  sage-5.4.beta0
   Dependencies:                   |      Stopgaps:                
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------

Comment (by cremona):

 I was using this function recently and unfortunately the documentation
 makes incorrect claims for its applicability!    Being based on Steven's
 book, it works for *some* congruence subgroups of level N, but *not all*
 of them.

 The example I have is this.  I have a subgroup of level 13, index 91,
 consisting of matrices in PSL(2,Z) whose mod-13 reduction lie in a
 subgroup of PSL(2,13) isomorphic to A4.  Under the action of A4 the 84
 cusps of Gamma(13) form 7 orbits of size 12 each.    But the action of (t
 mod 13) is only well-defined for t=1,5,8,12 (i.e. the cubes mod 13).  I
 could give examples of 2 cusps c1,c2 which are A4-equivalent but the
 results of c.galois_action(2,13) for c=c1,c2 are not A4-equivalent.  This
 can be explained by looking carefully at Stevens' proof of his
 proposition, which relies on the field of modular functions for the group
 in question being generated by by functions whose Q-expansions have
 rational coefficients.  This is true for Gamma(N), Gamma0(N), Gamma1(N),
 but not in general.  In my case the field of coefficients required is the
 cubic subfield of Q(zeta13), which explains why Stevens's formula is only
 valid when t is a cube.

 I think that the way to fix this is to change the documentation so that
 the function does not claim to do more than it does.  A complete fix would
 require something really new, with input more than just the level N and an
 invertible residue class t mod N.  I was able to work out my specific
 example, but a general implementation would be quite hard.  [For the
 record, the 7 cusps consist of 2 Galois orbits, of size 3 and 4.  Using
 Sage's function restricted to t=5 (which generates the cubes mod 13) I
 found a 4-cycle and 3 fixed points, including infinity, and as I already
 knew that infinity was in an orbit of size 3 that was sufficient!]

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13253#comment:11>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to