Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I need some help in solving the following problem:

Suppose $K$ is a number field and $K=\mathbb{Q}(\theta)$ where $\theta\in\mathfrak{O}_K$, the ring of integers of $K$. Now among the elements in $\mathfrak{O}_K$ of the form $$\frac{1}{d}(a_0+\cdots+a_i\theta^i)$$($0\ne a_i$; $a_0,\ldots a_i\in\mathbb{Z})$, where $d$ is the discriminant of $K$, pick one with the minimum value of $|a_i|$ and call it $x_i$. Do this for $i=1,\ldots ,n=\dim_{\mathbb{Q}}K$. I need to show that $\lbrace x_1,\ldots ,x_n\rbrace$ is an integral basis for $K$.

Here are my thoughts: If we can show that the discriminant of $\lbrace x_1,\ldots ,x_n\rbrace$, which can be shown to be a $\mathbb{Q}$-basis, is less than or equal to $d$ then we are done; I tried to show this but have not succeed. I have to somehow use the fact that $|a_i|$ is the minimum which I am unable to see how. Any help will be appreciated.

share|cite|improve this question
It seems to me that something is wrong. Consider the case $\theta=8i$, $K=\mathbb{Q}[i]$. We know that $d=4$, so the algebraic integer $i=\theta/8$ cannot be written in the prescribed form. I suspect that the polynomial discriminant of the minimal polynomial of $\theta$ has to enter the game here in some role? – Jyrki Lahtonen May 22 '13 at 19:03
@JyrkiLahtonen The problem is badly worded in Ian Stewart's Algebraic Number Theory, but I believe that $d$ is meant to be the discriminant with respect to $1,\theta,\dots,\theta^{n-1}$ as you said. – Warren Moore May 23 '13 at 0:37

Can you show that $|\Delta(x_1,\dots,x_n)|$ is minimal amongst all integers? If so, suppose that this isn't an integral basis, so that there is some $\alpha\in\mathfrak{O}_K$ such that $\alpha=b_1x_1+\cdots+b_nx_n$, for $b_1,\dots,b_n\in\mathbb{Q}$, but at least one is not in $\mathbb{Z}$, say $b_1\notin\mathbb{Z}$. Then $b_1=b+r$, where $b\in\mathbb{Z}$, and $0<r<1$, and we can construct a new set of integers, $y_1=\alpha-bx_1$, and $y_i=x_i$, for $i=2,\dots,n$. Can you then show that $|\Delta(y_1,\dots,y_n)|<|\Delta(x_1,\dots,x_n)|$?

Edit. Sorry, scratch the method I was thinking of. Although I still think that you can do it that way, it would be considerably more involved than I think is necessary.

Let $G=\mathbb{Z}x_1+\cdots+\mathbb{Z}x_n\subseteq\mathfrak{O}$. Clearly $x_1,\dots,x_n$ span $K/\mathbb{Q}$, so we can write $\alpha=b_1x_1+\cdots+b_nx_n$, for some $b_1,\dots,b_n\in\mathbb{Q}$. Write each $b_i=c_i+r_i$, where $c_i\in\mathbb{Z}$, and $0\le r_i<1$. Then $$ \alpha-\underbrace{c_1x_1+\cdots+c_nx_n}_{\in~G}=r_1x_1+\cdots+r_nx_n $$ Now look at the coefficients of the powers of $\theta$, and don't forget that $[\mathfrak{O}_K/\mathbb{Z}[\theta]]$ divides $d$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Can you give some hint how to show that $|\Delta (x_1,\ldots ,x_n)|$ is minimal? The rest actually I knew :) I can compute this in terms of $\Delta ({1,\theta ,\ldots ,\theta^{n-1}})$ but I dont think that will help because we don't know any thing abot the latter. – pritam May 22 '13 at 17:45
@pritam Sorry, I later realised that that method is probably far too long. I've edited my answer with the start of a much better method! – Warren Moore May 23 '13 at 0:25

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.