Broadhurst (arXiv:0807.2976, 2008) reduced the complete elliptic integral and the singular modulus at square-free discriminants to radicals and -values by means of two new level-48 class invariants , , built from Weber's eta-quotient value through nested radicals whose three signs (the signature ) are fixed by the residue of modulo 64, together with the Chowla–Selberg factor . Every arithmetic property on which this construction rests was left conjectural: that is a unit of the Hilbert class field for prime ; that and are algebraic integers whose minimal polynomials generate the Hilbert class field (at least one of for every such , both for ) and, for , have degree ; why the signature and the asymptotic prefactor of depend only on ; and when rather than is a unit at composite discriminants.
Background
This problem sits in explicit class field theory for imaginary quadratic fields, as it enters the exact evaluation of complete elliptic integrals.
For a positive square-free integer , the -th singular value (or singular modulus) is the algebraic number defined by , where is the arithmetic–geometric mean, obtained by iterating . The associated complete elliptic integral is a period of an elliptic curve with complex multiplication (CM) — meaning that the curve's endomorphism ring is an order in the imaginary quadratic field rather than just . CM theory makes and related quantities algebraic: they lie in the Hilbert class field , the maximal unramified abelian extension of , whose degree over is the class number — the size of the ideal class group, equivalently of the group of classes of primitive binary quadratic forms of discriminant under Gauss composition.
The Dedekind eta function , a holomorphic function on the upper half-plane transforming with weight under , is the building block of the classical class invariants: values of eta quotients at CM points , such as the Weber functions, whose minimal polynomials over have degree and generate far more economically than the -invariant (Schertz 2002; Enge–Schertz 2004). A modular function 'of level ' is one invariant under a congruence subgroup of level ; smaller level generally means smaller height of the resulting class polynomial. The standard tool for proving that such a value is a class invariant is Shimura reciprocity, the theorem describing the Galois action on CM values of modular functions of level through the ray class group of conductor .
At discriminants with , the Weber-type value has minimal polynomial of degree rather than — the classical 'trebling' obstruction, which made this residue class unattractive from Weber's time until it was set aside in early elliptic-curve primality proving. Broadhurst (2008) overcame it empirically: with a signature of three signs determined by through an eight-line table (Eq. (23) of the source; e.g. for , for , for ), he formed and found that and appear to be algebraic integers generating — both, with minimal polynomials of degree , for — so that can be recovered from degree- rather than degree- polynomials. The invariant is a level-48 modular function with the slow growth , where the prefactor ( odd, ) is again fixed by ; this halving of the exponential rate is the source of the observed economy — for the height of the minimal polynomial of is less than the cube root of the height of the polynomial produced by the double eta-quotient method underlying PARI/GP's quadhilbert.
The construction also interacts with the evaluation of itself. For square-free , , the eta form of the Chowla–Selberg formula (Selberg–Chowla 1967), (with the Kronecker symbol), reduces to -values and the algebraic Chowla–Selberg factor Broadhurst conjectured that is a unit (an invertible algebraic integer, i.e. of norm ) of the Hilbert class field .
All of this was established numerically — degrees of the minimal polynomials of and checked for , generated fields compared with quadhilbert output for all square-free coprime to 3 below 3500 and for primes below 6000, unit status of checked for the 155 primes at 15000 digits of precision, and the case at 40000 digits — and left unproved. Even the mod-64 rule was discovered empirically. Those conjectures are the problem below.
Problem Statement
Prove, or refute by explicit counterexample, the conjectures on which Broadhurst's 2008 evaluation of the complete elliptic integral and the singular modulus at discriminants rests. Throughout, , is its Hilbert class field, is the class number, is the group of classes of primitive binary quadratic forms of discriminant , and , , , , are as defined in the Background, with the signature fixed by through the eight-line table. The parts, which jointly give the construction a rigorous arithmetic foundation, are:
(a) Unit conjecture (Conjecture 1 of the source). Prove that for every prime with (equivalently, for every in the domain of the Chowla–Selberg formula above with odd class number ), the Chowla–Selberg factor is a unit of the Hilbert class field .
(b) Class-invariant conjecture (Conjecture 2 of the source). Prove that for every square-free with : the numbers and obtained from the mod-64 signature are algebraic integers, and is generated over by at least one of ; and that for : is generated over by both and , and their minimal polynomials over have degree (for there are seven cases in which one of the two generates only a proper subfield, e.g. the minimal polynomial of is while ).
(c) Conceptual explanation of the mod-64 rule. Establish from CM theory — for instance through the explicit Shimura-reciprocity action of the ray class group of conductor dividing 48 on the eta quotients entering and on the nested radicals defining — why the admissible signature , and the asymptotic prefactor in , depend only on the residue of modulo 64, thereby replacing the empirical table by a theorem.
(d) Composite unit criterion. Prove that is a unit of for every composite square-free that is a product of distinct primes greater than 3, and find a criterion determining for which such composite discriminants itself is a unit — the source's data being that yields as a unit, while requires .
An answer may resolve any part by proof or by explicit counterexample (a counterexample to a stated claim refutes that part); the problem as a whole is settled when each part is proved or refuted. For (c) a derivation from CM theory establishing the mod-64 dependence suffices; for (d) an explicit criterion deciding for which composite discriminants is a unit suffices. The source's further remark that the computational advantages of persist uniformly at large is an empirical performance observation expected to follow from (b) and (c), and is not part of the completion boundary.
References
- David Broadhurst, "Solutions by radicals at singular values k_N from new class invariants for N ≡ 3 mod 8", arXiv:0807.2976 (2008). DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.0807.2976, https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.2976
- Henri Cohen, "On the Argument of the Lerch, Chowla–Selberg Formula and CM Values of η(τ)", arXiv:2606.02904 (2026). https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.02904
- Elisavet Konstantinou, Aristides Kontogeorgis, "Ramanujan invariants for discriminants congruent to 5 (mod 24)", International Journal of Number Theory 8 (2012) 265–287. DOI: 10.1142/S1793042112500157, https://arxiv.org/abs/1107.0413
- Elisavet Konstantinou, Aristides Kontogeorgis, "Ramanujan's class invariants and their use in elliptic curve cryptography", Computers & Mathematics with Applications 59 (2010) 2901–2917. DOI: 10.1016/j.camwa.2010.02.008, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2010.02.008
- Ick Sun Eum, Ja Kyung Koo, Dong Hwa Shin, "Ring class invariants over imaginary quadratic fields", Forum Mathematicum 28 (2016) 201–217. DOI: 10.1515/forum-2014-0007, https://arxiv.org/abs/1007.2309
- Andreas Enge, Reinhard Schertz, "Constructing elliptic curves over finite fields using double eta-quotients", Journal de Théorie des Nombres de Bordeaux 16 (2004) 555–568. DOI: 10.5802/jtnb.460, https://doi.org/10.5802/jtnb.460
- Farshid Hajir, Fernando Rodriguez Villegas, "Explicit elliptic units, I", Duke Mathematical Journal 90 (1997) 495–521. DOI: 10.1215/s0012-7094-97-09013-x, https://doi.org/10.1215/s0012-7094-97-09013-x
- Atle Selberg, Sarvadaman Chowla, "On Epstein's zeta-function", Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik 227 (1967) 86–110. DOI: 10.1515/crll.1967.227.86, https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.1967.227.86
- Sarth Chavan, "On discriminants of minimal polynomials of the Ramanujan t_n class invariants", Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society 108 (2023) 264–275. DOI: 10.1017/S0004972723000278, https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.00681
- Reinhard Schertz, "Weber's class invariants revisited", Journal de Théorie des Nombres de Bordeaux 14 (2002) 325–343. DOI: 10.5802/jtnb.361, https://doi.org/10.5802/jtnb.361
- Reinhard Schertz, "Construction of ray class fields by elliptic units", Journal de Théorie des Nombres de Bordeaux 9 (1997) 383–394. DOI: 10.5802/jtnb.209, https://doi.org/10.5802/jtnb.209