On binary cubic forms: II

From MaRDI portal





Let \(f(x,y)\) denote a homogeneous polynomial in two variables with integer coefficients. When the degree of such a binary form exceeds \(2\) a considerable body of literature deals with the problem of showing that, of the numbers representable by the form and not exceeding a large number \(n\), almost all are representable in an essentially unique way. Many of the papers in this subject area deal with forms of a rather special type, frequently diagonal ones (an interesting relatively recent reference is [\textit{T. D. Wooley}, Int. Math. Res. Not. 1995, No. 4, 181-185 (1995; Zbl 0821.11049)]), but in an important memoir [\textit{C. Hooley} J. Reine Angew. Math. 226, 30-87 (1967; Zbl 0163.04605)] written rather more than thirty years ago, the author dealt with a large class of binary cubics in this way. Indeed, the only restriction on the cubic was that a certain determinant should not be of the shape \(-3\Delta^2\), so that the form should not be Abelian. In the paper under review the author handles the case where the form is both Abelian and irreducible. This leaves untouched the case where the form splits into rational linear factors, a situation which is to be dealt with for forms of arbitrary degree in a later publication. The methods of the paper are different from those previously used to deal with the non-Abelian case, but the author remarks that his earlier result could now be improved by using some of the ideas used in the new paper. The estimate that is derived for the size of the exceptional set of genuinely multiply representable numbers is now of the shape \(n^{2/3}/\log^\gamma n\) for a certain positive exponent \(\gamma\). By contrast, in the earlier paper dealing with the non-Abelian case a factor \((\log\log n)^{1/600}\) appeared in the place now occupied by a power of a logarithm. The methods employed include use of exponential sums and of a version of Selberg's \(\lambda^2\) sieve as a large sieve, in which the function \(\lambda\) is supported only at \(1\) and the primes. Many other ideas are invoked as the proof proceeds.











This page was built for publication: On binary cubic forms: II

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4953854)