Rational points on \(X_0^+(125)\) (Q6080388)

Let \(N \geq 2\) be an integer, and let \(\omega_N\) be the Atkin-Lehner involution on the modular curve \(X_0(N).\) Then clearly, the finite group \(\langle \omega_N \rangle\) acts on \(X_0 (N)\), and hence, we may consider the quotient curve \(X_0^+ (N) = X_0(N)/\langle \omega_N \rangle\), which is called the \emph{Atkin-Lehner quotient of level \(N\)}. It is known that \(X_0(N)\) is a smooth projective curve over \(\mathbb{Q}.\) The curve \(X_0^+ (N)\) naturally attracts our attention in the sense that rational points on \(X_0^+(N)\) can be used to describe quadratic points on \(X_0(N).\) In this regard, the paper under review is mainly interested in computing the set of rational points \(X_0^+ (N)(\mathbb{Q})\) of the curve \(X_0^+(N).\) More specifically, in one of the main results of the paper under review, the authors computed the set \(X_0^+(125)(\mathbb{Q})\) showing that there are exactly 6 rational points on \(X_0^+(125)\), one of which is a cusp, 4 of which are CM points with discriminants \(-19, -16, -11, -4,\) and the rest of which is an exceptional point corresponding to a quadratic \(\mathbb{Q}\)-curve with the \(j\)-invariant that is explicitly given. (For a more detailed description on the \(j\)-invariant, see Proposition 1.2.) We note that all those non-cuspidal points in \(X_0^+ (125)(\mathbb{Q})\) were already known by \textit{S. D. Galbraith} [J. Théor. Nombres Bordx. 14, No. 1, 205--219 (2002; Zbl 1035.14008)], and the contribution of this paper under review is the confirmation of the fact that there are no other non-cuspidal rational points in \(X_0^+(125)(\mathbb{Q}).\) The proof is obtained by using the quadratic Chabauty method, together with Mordell-Weil sieve. \\ For another main result of the paper under review, we recall that there are no composite integers \(N\) such that \(2 \leq g_N^+ \leq 6\) (where \(g_N^+\) denotes the genus of the curve \(X_0^+(N)\)) and \(X_0^+(N)\) has an exceptional rational point, except for \(N=91, 125\) and possibly for \(N=169,\) which is due to work of \textit{F. Momose} [J. Math. Soc. Japan 39, 269--286 (1987; Zbl 0623.14009)], Galbraith [loc. cit.], and \textit{K. Arai} and \textit{F. Momose} [J. Number Theory 130, No. 10, 2272--2282 (2010; Zbl 1264.14037)]. Later, it was shown further that \(X_0^+(169)\) does not have any exceptional rational points. In this regard, the authors obtained the result that the only composite integers \(N\) such that \(2 \leq g_N^+ \leq 6\) and \(X_0^+(N)\) contains an exceptional rational point are \(N=91\) and \(N=125\), in which, the corresponding \(j\)-invariants are given explicitly. One interesting consequence of the aforementioned fact (together with the use of already known computational results) is that a conjecture of Galbraith saying that for integers \(N\) with \(2 \leq g_N^+ \leq 5\), the curve \(X_0^+(N)\) contains exceptional rational points if and only if \(N \in \{73, 91, 103, 125, 137, 191, 311 \}\) holds true.