An integer quadratic form is a function $Q(x,y) = ax^2 + bxy + cy^2$ where the numbers $a,b,c \in \mathbb Z$.

Call the set of values a quadratic forms takes on $V(Q) = \{ Q(x,y) \in \mathbb Z | x,y \in \mathbb Z \}$.

Two quadratic forms $Q,R$ are said to be equivalent if there is a $SL_2(\mathbb Z)$ matrix $M$ such that $R(x,y) = Q((x,y)M)$.

This is the definition used in for example, 1.1 page 4 of http://www.rzuser.uni-heidelberg.de/~hb3/publ/bf.pdf . Under that definition two quadratic forms maybe be "opposite" but not equal, and take on the same set of values.

I'm interested in the equivalence we get with $GL_2(\mathbb Z)$ matrices, We'll say $R \sim Q$ if there is a $GL_2(\mathbb Z)$ matrix $M$ such that $R(x,y) = Q((x,y)M)$.

Let $Q,R$ be two integer quadratic forms: Does $V(Q) = V(R)$ imply $Q \sim R$? If it's true how would it be proved? If false when does it fail?

I'm not assuming that the QFs have the same discriminant or are positive definite.

  • $\begingroup$ M would be a 2x2 matrix acting on the 2-vector (u,v). $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 17:34
  • $\begingroup$ M need not have determinant 1, it could have determinant -1. $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ Are you assuming the forms are positive definite? $\endgroup$ – rogerl Nov 24 '15 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ no not assuming they are positive definite forms. $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 19:44
  • $\begingroup$ See also math.stackexchange.com/questions/1088886 $\endgroup$ – Bart Michels Jun 4 '17 at 14:44

As you mentioned on Chat, Kap and I wrote a note on forms of different discriminants (but positive definite forms, meaning negative discriminants). This was corrected and extended by John Voight, now at Dartmouth; also published.

The best known examples are the pair $x^2 + xy + y^2$ and $x^2 + 3 y^2.$ The proof that these represent the same numbers is some 2 by 2 matrices, some things mod 2. Same for the indefinite pair $x^2 + xy - y^2$ and $x^2 - 5 y^2.$

Probably worth pointing out that the forms $x^2 + xy + 2ky^2$ and $x^2 + (8k-1)y^2$ represent all the same odd numbers, including any odd primes. The latter form does not represent $2$ or $-2,$ if you can say the same about the former form they agree on primes. We called these "Trivial Pairs." Um; as with Gauss, we discard these if the discriminant is square, meaning we demand $8k - 1 \neq -w^2,$ or $k \neq \frac{1 - w^2}{8}.$

The question changes if you allow square discriminants.

There may be infinitely many other indefinite pairs, we did not check.

If the discriminant is not a square, two forms of the same discriminant that share even a single prime are $GL_2 \mathbb Z$ equivalent. In traditional terms, they are either equivalent or opposite.

Forms with square discriminant, such as $xy$ or $x^2 - y^2,$ are unusual in representing entire arithmetic progressions. Primes do not control things.

For self study, I recommend Buell, Binary Quadratic Forms. I find it easier reading than Buchmann and Vollmer. I also recommend L. E. Dickson Introduction to the Theory of Numbers. For just the first section, I also like Cox, Primes of the Form $x^2 + n y^2.$ Cox does a good job on positive forms, genera, composition. No indefinite forms, though, no Pell. As you can see from my answers, I like the first chapter in Conway, The Sensual Quadratic Form. The wonderful thing there is the "Topograph" construction. I have written a bunch of software to tell me how to avoid arithmetic mistakes in drawing those. These give the best way for talking about a fixed indefinite form $A x^2 + B x y + C y^2$ with $B^2 - 4 AC > 0 $ but not a square. The "cycle" method of Lagrange does not do well when $|n|$ is too large, in finding all solutions to $A x^2 + B x y + C y^2 = n.$ Lagrange's method gives all answers when $|n| < \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{B^2 - 4 AC};$ this result is Theorem 85 in Dickson. Oh, both Lagrange and Conway are talking about primitive representations, $\gcd(x,y) = 1.$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you so much! It was especially surprising to get a negative answer. $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 20:27

Since we know how the old components of a base change $B$ are given by $v_{new}=B^{-1}v_{old}$ we use it on the quadratic form $v\mapsto v^{\top}Qv$.

But let us note that $$v^{\top}Qv=(BB^{-1}v)^{\top}Q(BB^{-1}w)=(B^{-1}v)^{\top}(B^{\top}QB)(B^{-1}w)=v'^{\top}\overline Q v'.$$

Then $\overline Q=B^{\top}QB$ would be the matrix in the new coordinates.


$ ax^2+bxy+cy^2= (x,y)\left( \begin{array}{cc}a&\frac{b}{2}\\ \frac{b}{2}&c\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} x\\y\end{array}\right) =(BB^{-1}{\mathbf v})^{\top}Q(BB^{-1}{\mathbf v})=(u,v)B^{\top}QB \left(\begin{array}{c}u\\v\end{array}\right) $

$\qquad \qquad\qquad=(u,v)\left( \begin{array}{cc}m&\frac{n}{2}\\ \frac{n}{2}&r\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} u\\v\end{array}\right)=mu^2+nuv+rv^2$

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I don't have a base change to start with, I am starting with the fact that the forms represent the same set and want to prove that there exists a base change (or not). $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 17:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ note that one of your quadratic form can be written as $ ax^2+bxy+cy^2=(x,y)\left( \begin{array}{cc}a&\frac{b}{2}\\\frac{b}{2}&c\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c}x\\y\end{array} \right) $, so, you can obtain other quadratics (with de same value) simply by choosing any other non singular matrix $B$ $\endgroup$ – janmarqz Nov 24 '15 at 17:52
  • $\begingroup$ The unique way to have a coordinates change on terms of only integers used, is to take $B\in GL_2{\Bbb Z}$, which is admitted by my algorithm, right?... if b is even : ) $\endgroup$ – janmarqz Nov 24 '15 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your input. You assume B exists, but my question is to prove B exists. $\endgroup$ – Brennan.Tobias Nov 24 '15 at 18:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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