This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Equations for a K3 Lehmer map

Simon Brandhorst, Noam D. Elkies Simon Brandhorst, Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik, Universität des Saarlandes, Campus E2.4, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany [email protected] Noam D. Elkies, Department of Mathematics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138 [email protected]
Abstract.

C.T. McMullen proved the existence of a K3 surface with an automorphism of entropy given by the logarithm of Lehmer’s number, which is the minimum possible among automorphisms of complex surfaces. We reconstruct equations for the surface and its automorphism from the Hodge theoretic model provided by McMullen. The approach is computer aided and relies on finite non-symplectic automorphisms, pp-adic lifting, elliptic fibrations and the Kneser neighbor method for \mathbb{Z}-lattices. It can be applied to reconstruct any automorphism of an elliptic K3 surface from its action on the Neron-Severi lattice.

Der erste Autor wird Gefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) – Projektnummer 286237555 – TRR 195. The first author was funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – Project-ID 286237555 – TRR 195.
00footnotetext: 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 37F80,11R06, 14J50, 14J27 14J28, 14Q1000footnotetext: Key words and phrases: elliptic K3 surface, dynamical degree, Lehmer’s number.

1. Introduction

The topological entropy h(g)h(g) of a biholomorphic map g:SSg\colon S\rightarrow S of a compact, connected complex surface SS is a measure for the disorder created by repeated iteration of gg. It is either zero or the logarithm of a so called Salem number.

That is, it is a real algebraic integer λ>1\lambda>1 which is conjugate to 1/λ1/\lambda and whose other conjugates lie on the unit circle. The smallest known Salem number is the root λ10=1.176280818\lambda_{10}=1.176280818\dots of

S10(x)=x10+x9x7x6x5x4x3+x+1S_{10}(x)=x^{10}+x^{9}-x^{7}-x^{6}-x^{5}-x^{4}-x^{3}+x+1

found by Lehmer in 1933. Conjecturally it is the smallest Salem number, even the smallest algebraic integer with Mahler measure >1>1.

In [McM07] C.T. McMullen showed that Lehmer’s conjecture holds for the set of entropies coming from automorphisms of surfaces, i. e. h(g)=logλ(g)h(g)=\log\lambda(g) is either zero or bounded below:

h(g)=0 orlogλ10h(g).h(g)=0\quad\mbox{ or}\quad\log\lambda_{10}\leq h(g).

This can be interpreted as a spectral gap since the dynamical degree λ(g)\lambda(g) is the largest eigenvalue of g|H2(S,)g^{*}|H^{2}(S,\mathbb{C}). If the entropy h(g)h(g) is non-zero, then the surface SS is birational to a rational surface, a complex torus, a K3 or an Enriques surface [Can01]. The bottom logλ10\log\lambda_{10} of the entropy spectrum can be attained only on a rational surface and on a K3 surface but not on an abelian surface (for trivial reasons) and not on Enriques surfaces [Ogu10].

Explicit equations for a rational surface and its automorphism of minimum entropy are given in [McM07]. The case of K3 surfaces was treated in a series of papers by C.T. McMullen [McM11] who first proved the existence of a non-projective K3 surface admitting an automorphism of entropy logλ10\log\lambda_{10} and then refined his methods to prove the following theorem.

Theorem 1.1.

[McM16] There exists a complex projective K3 surface SS and an automorphism l:SSl\colon S\rightarrow S with minimal topological entropy h(l)=logλ10h(l)=\log\lambda_{10}.

The proof proceeds by exhibiting a Hodge theoretic model for (S,l)(S,l), that is McMullen constructs a \mathbb{Z}-lattice HH and an isometry lO(H)l^{\prime}\in O(H) with spectral radius λ10\lambda_{10} and certain further properties. Then the strong Torelli-type theorem and the surjectivity of the period map for K3 surfaces guarantee that the Hodge theoretic model (H,l)(H,l^{\prime}) is induced by a K3 surface SS and lAut(S)l\in\operatorname{Aut}(S) via an isometry (more precisely a marking) H2(S,)HH^{2}(S,\mathbb{Z})\cong H. However the Torelli-type theorem is non-constructive, so this is a purely abstract existence result.

This work promotes computational methods to reconstruct equations of an automorphism from its Hodge theoretic model. A key ingredient is the constructive treatment of elliptic fibrations on a K3 surface as developed by the second author and A. Kumar [Elk08, Kum14, EK14]. They have the benefit of working in positive characteristic as well. Our motivating example is to derive explicit equations both for the surface SS and its Lehmer automorphism ll. For nn\in\mathbb{N} set ζn=exp(2πi/n)\zeta_{n}=\exp(2\pi i/n).

Theorem 1.2.

Let ww be a root of

w62w5+2w43w3+2w22w+1=0.w^{6}-2w^{5}+2w^{4}-3w^{3}+2w^{2}-2w+1=0.

Let S1S_{1} denote the minimal model of the following surface. {dgroup*}

y2=x3+ax+bt7+cwherey^{2}=x^{3}+ax+bt^{7}+c\quad\mbox{where}
a=(86471w519851w4116626w3+67043w2125502w+106947)/48a=(-86471w^{5}-19851w^{4}-116626w^{3}+67043w^{2}-125502w+106947)/48
b=7(w5+w4+2w33w2+3w1)b=7(-w^{5}+w^{4}+2w^{3}-3w^{2}+3w-1)
c=(141655682w565661512w4+230672148w3136877559w2+149096157w96818792)/864c=(141655682w^{5}-65661512w^{4}+230672148w^{3}-136877559w^{2}+149096157w-96818792)/864

Equations for a K3 surface S6S1=SS_{6}\cong S_{1}=S and an automorphism l:S6S6l\colon S_{6}\rightarrow S_{6} with entropy h(l)=logλ10h(l)=\log\lambda_{10} are given in Section 5 and the ancillary file to [BE21]. The coefficients lie in [ζ7,ω]\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7},\omega] which is a degree 22 extension of [ζ7]\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7}].

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1. The surface S1S_{1} admitting an automorphism of minimum entropy.
Remark 1.3.

Figure 1 shows the real locus of S1S_{1}. By [Zha, Thm. 2.16] Lehmer’s map is not defined over the reals. Therefore we cannot plot its orbits. Equations for S6S_{6} and ll are not printed here since the coefficients in the degree 1212 field are unwieldy. But see Section 6 for a (factored) representation of ll with coefficients modulo 2929.

As a corollary we obtain realizations of Lehmer’s number in almost all characteristics and on infinitely many supersingular K3 surfaces.

Corollary 1.4.

There exists a K3 surface S/𝔽¯pS/\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p} and an automorphism lAut(S/𝔽¯p)l\in\operatorname{Aut}(S/\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p}) of dynamical degreee λ10\lambda_{10} for all primes p2,3,7p\neq 2,3,7. For p1,2,4mod7p\equiv 1,2,4\mod 7, the suface is of height h=1,3,3h=1,3,3. For p3,5,6mod7p\equiv 3,5,6\mod 7 the surface is supersingular. If further p13p\neq 13 its Artin invariant is σ=3,3,1\sigma=3,3,1.

Proof.

Our model for the surface S6S_{6} over the ring of integers 𝒪K\mathcal{O}_{K}, K=[ζ7,ω]K=\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7},\omega] is of good reduction for all primes not dividing 4242. Further Lehmer’s map is defined by explicitly given rational functions fi/gif_{i}/g_{i} where the coefficients of fi,gif_{i},g_{i} lie in 𝒪K\mathcal{O}_{K}. One checks that the coefficient ideal of gig_{i} has prime factors dividing at most 2,3,72,3,7. Thus if P𝒪KP\leq\mathcal{O}_{K} does not divide 4242, then each gimodPg_{i}\mod P is nonzero, so that fi/gimodPf_{i}/g_{i}\mod P is a well defined rational function on the reduction of S6S_{6} modulo PP.

Since the transcendental lattice has rank 66 and SS has an automorphism acting by a primitive 77-th root of unity [Jan14, Thm. 2.3] applies and computes the height and Artin invariant. ∎

In what follows we sketch how we derived the equations. Since the Lehmer map has positive entropy, it does not preserve any polarization. This means that it is not linear, i.e. we cannot represent ll as an element of PGL(n,)=Aut(n)\operatorname{PGL}(n,\mathbb{C})=\operatorname{Aut}(\mathbb{P}^{n}) acting on the surface SnS\subseteq\mathbb{P}^{n}.

However, from the Hodge theoretic model one infers that SS has complex multiplication by [ζ7]\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7}] which, as we shall see in Section 3, comes from a non-symplectic automorphism σ\sigma of order 77. This automorphism in fact determines SS up to isomorphism. Since it preserves a polarization, the automorphism σ\sigma is linear, so it is much easier to write down. Indeed, we find a one dimensional maximal family of K3 surfaces with an automorphism of order 77 in [AST11] that must contain (S,σ)(S,\sigma).

We locate the sought for surface inside the family by first reducing it modulo a suitable prime pp and then lift the resulting surface to the pp-adic numbers with a multivariate Newton iteration in Section 4. The coefficients of SS are recovered as algebraic numbers in a degree 66 subfield of [ζ7]\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7}].

To derive the automorphism from its action on cohomology, we use the theory of elliptically fibered K3 surfaces. In fact the surface SS is already represented in terms of a Weierstrass model. K3 surfaces may carry more than one elliptic fibration. We view elliptic fibrations on our surface SS as vertices of a graph and the coordinate changes between them as edges. The resulting graph is in fact closely related to the Kneser neighbor graph of an integer quadratic form. See Section 2 for the details. Further we give an algorithm how to derive the change of coordinates corresponding to an edge of length 22.

Now the idea to get the Lehmer map ll is the following: let fNS(S)f\in\operatorname{NS}(S) be the class of a fiber. Then f=l(f)f^{\prime}=l_{*}(f) is the fiber class of another elliptic fibration on SS. Both classes are visible on the Hodge theoretic side. Charting a path in the neighbor graph from ff to its image ff^{\prime} yields a birational map WWW\dashrightarrow W^{\prime} between two Weierstrass models of SS. In fact they must (up to Weierstrass isomorphisms) be the same since we know that ll is an isomorphism. Thus this isomorphism (which on an affine chart is nothing but a change of coordinates) can be seen as an automorphism l~:SS\tilde{l}\colon S\rightarrow S. By construction (l~l1)(f)=f(\tilde{l}\circ l^{-1})_{*}(f)=f preserves the class of a fiber. Such automorphisms act on the base 1\mathbb{P}^{1} or are fiberwise translations. In any case they are easily controlled which leads us to a Lehmer map ll in Section 6.

The calculations were carried out using the computer algebra systems Pari-GP [The19], SageMath [The20], Singular [DGPS19].

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Banff International Research Station for Mathematical Innovation and Discovery (BIRS) for hosting the conference ’New Trends in Arithmetic and Geometry of Algebraic Surfaces’ in 2017 where the idea for this work was conceived. We thank Curtis T. McMullen and Matthias Schütt for comments and discussions.

2. Kneser’s neighbor method and fibration hopping.

In this section we review a connection between elliptic fibrations on a given K3 surface and the neighboring graph of the genus of a quadratic form found by the second author. It is described in [Kum14, Appendix], [EK14, Sect. 5] and used in [ES15], [Kum15]. In this work we take an algorithmic point of view.

2.1. The lattice story

A lattice ( or \mathbb{Z}-lattice) consists of a finitely generated free abelian group LL together with a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form

,:L×L.\langle\cdot\,,\cdot\rangle\colon\;\;L\times L\longrightarrow\mathbb{Z}.

If the bilinear form is understood, we omit it from notation and simply call LL a lattice. Further we abbreviate x,x=x2\langle x,x\rangle=x^{2} and x,y=x.y\langle x,y\rangle=x.y for x,yLx,y\in L. The lattice LL is called even if x22x^{2}\in 2\mathbb{Z} for all xLx\in L. Otherwise it is called odd. Vectors xLx\in L with x2=2x^{2}=-2 are called roots. For L=nL=\mathbb{Z}^{n} we denote the lattice by its gram matrix. For a subset ALA\subset L we denote by A={xL:x.A=0}A^{\perp}=\{x\in L:x.A=0\} the maximal submodule orthogonal to AA. An isometry of lattices is an isomorphism of abelian groups preserving the bilinear forms. We say that two lattices belong to the same genus, if their completions LνL\otimes\mathbb{Q}_{\nu} at all places ν\nu of \mathbb{Q} are isometric. The symbol p\mathbb{Z}_{p} denotes the pp-adic numbers. See [Kne02] for an introduction to quadratic forms and their neighbors.

In this section we review a constructive version of the following theorem. See [Dur77, 4.1] for a related proof.

Theorem 2.1.

Let U[0110]U\cong\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\ 1&0\end{smallmatrix}\right] be a hyperbolic plane. Two lattices LL, LL^{\prime} are in the same genus if and only if ULULU\oplus L\cong U\oplus L^{\prime}.

Definition 2.2.

Let L,LL,L^{\prime} be lattices in the same quadratic space VV and pp a prime number. We say that LL and LL^{\prime} have pp-distance nn if pn=[L:LL]=[L:LL]p^{n}=[L:L\cap L^{\prime}]=[L^{\prime}:L\cap L^{\prime}]. Then we call them pnp^{n}-neighbors.

Assumption.

For the rest of this section let pdetLp\nmid\det L be a prime and rkL3\operatorname{rk}L\geq 3.

Note that pp-neighbors have the same determinant. Indeed, since pdetLp\nmid\det L, both LpL\otimes\mathbb{Z}_{p} and LpL^{\prime}\otimes\mathbb{Z}_{p} are unimodular, of the same rank and determinant. Thus they are isometric if p2p\neq 2 and for p=2p=2 they are isometric if and only if both are odd or both are even. For primes qpq\neq p we have Lq=LqL\otimes\mathbb{Z}_{q}=L^{\prime}\otimes\mathbb{Z}_{q}. Thus any two even (resp. odd) pp-neighbors lie in the same genus. The following theorem works in the converse direction. At a first read the reader may ignore the difference between genus and the so called spinor genus since they usually agree.

Theorem 2.3.

Any two classes in the spinor genus of LL are connected by a sequence of pp-neighbors. If p=2p=2 and LL is even, then this sequence can be chosen to consist of even lattices only.

Proof.

This is a consequence of [Kne02, 28.4] which in fact works with weaker assumptions. ∎

For indefinite genera (of rank at least 33) the spinor genus consists of a single isometry class and the genus consists of 2s2^{s} (ss\in\mathbb{N}, usually s=0s=0) spinor genera. In the definite case, the number of isometry classes in a genus is still finite but in general one has to use algorithmic methods to enumerate them. The standard approach uses the previous theorem: it explores the neighboring graph by passing iteratively to neighors. This rests on the following explicit description of pp-neighbors.

Lemma 2.4.

[Kne02, 28.5] Let vLpLv\in L\setminus pL with v2p2v^{2}\in p^{2}\mathbb{Z}, then

L(v)=Lv+1pv with Lv={xLx.vp}L(v)=L_{v}+\mathbb{Z}\tfrac{1}{p}v\mbox{ with }L_{v}=\{x\in L\mid x.v\in p\mathbb{Z}\}

is a pp-neighbor and every pp-neighbor is of this form.

Neighbors turn out to be useful in the hyperbolic case as well. Let NN be a lattice. We call an element xNx\in N primitive, if for yNy\in N and nn\in\mathbb{Z}, x=nyx=ny implies that n=±1n=\pm 1.

Let f1Nf_{1}\in N be primitive with f12=0f_{1}^{2}=0. In the case that f1f_{1} can be completed to a hyperbolic plane by e1Ne_{1}\in N with e12=0e_{1}^{2}=0 and e1.f1=1e_{1}.f_{1}=1, then we have f1/f1{f1,e1}f_{1}^{\perp}/f_{1}\cong\{f_{1},e_{1}\}^{\perp}. Suppose that f1.f2=pf_{1}.f_{2}=p. Since pp detN\nmid\det N, we find eNe^{\prime}\in N with pf1.ep\nmid f_{1}.e^{\prime}. This implies that we can complete f2f_{2} to a hyperbolic plane.

Lemma 2.5.

Let NN be a lattice and f1,f2Nf_{1},f_{2}\in N be primitive with f12=f22=0f_{1}^{2}=f_{2}^{2}=0 and f1.f2=pf_{1}.f_{2}=p. Denote by LiL_{i} the image of the orthogonal projection

fi/fi{f1,f2}.f_{i}^{\perp}/\mathbb{Z}f_{i}\longrightarrow\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}\otimes\mathbb{Q}.

Then L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} are pp-neighbors in the quadratic space {f1,f2}\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}\otimes\mathbb{Q}.

Proof.

The lattices L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} are pp-neighbors since their intersection is precisely {f1,f2}N\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}\subseteq N which is of index pp in each: we can compare the determinants of Lifi/fi{fi,ei}L_{i}\cong f_{i}^{\perp}/\mathbb{Z}f_{i}\cong\{f_{i},e_{i}\}^{\perp} and {f1,f2}\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}; the first one is detN\det N, and since pp does not divide detN\det N, the second one is p2detN-p^{2}\det N (use that the completions NpN\otimes\mathbb{Z}_{p} and qf1qf2\mathbb{Z}_{q}f_{1}\oplus\mathbb{Z}_{q}f_{2}, qpq\neq p are unimodular). ∎

In view of Lemma 2.4 we make this explicit.

Lemma 2.6.

Let L1L_{1} be an even lattice and vL1pL1v\in L_{1}\setminus pL_{1} with v22p2v^{2}\in 2p^{2}\mathbb{Z}. Fix a hyperbolic plane U1=e1f1U_{1}=\mathbb{Z}e_{1}\oplus\mathbb{Z}f_{1} with (e1,f1)=1(e_{1},f_{1})=1, e12=f12=0e_{1}^{2}=f_{1}^{2}=0 and consider N=U1L1N=U_{1}\oplus L_{1}. Set

f2=v22pf1+pe1+vf_{2}=-\frac{v^{2}}{2p}f_{1}+pe_{1}+v

and choose some e2U1L1e_{2}\in U_{1}\oplus L_{1} with e22=0e_{2}^{2}=0 and (e2,f2)=1(e_{2},f_{2})=1. Then the orthogonal complement L2L_{2} of U2=e2f2U_{2}=\mathbb{Z}e_{2}\oplus\mathbb{Z}f_{2} is isomorphic to the pp-neighbor L1(v)L_{1}(v) of L1L_{1}.

Proof.

By construction f2f_{2} is primitive, f22=0f_{2}^{2}=0 and f2.f1=pf_{2}.f_{1}=p, so Lemma 2.5 applies to give that the orthogonal complements are neighbors. Restricting the orthogonal projection to L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} gives the isometries

π1:L1{f1,f2},xxx.f2pf1,\pi_{1}\colon L_{1}\rightarrow\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}\otimes\mathbb{Q},\qquad x\mapsto x-\frac{x.f_{2}}{p}f_{1},

and

π2:L2{f1,f2},yyy.f1pf2.\pi_{2}\colon L_{2}\rightarrow\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}\otimes\mathbb{Q},\qquad y\mapsto y-\frac{y.f_{1}}{p}f_{2}.

Indeed, since f1f_{1} is isotropic and orthogonal to L1L_{1}, π1\pi_{1} preserves the bilinear form and likewise does π2\pi_{2}. To see that π1(L1(v))=π2(L2)\pi_{1}(L_{1}(v))=\pi_{2}(L_{2}), one can calculate that π1(v)\pi_{1}(v) is the image of π1(v)(e2.π1(v))f2L2\pi_{1}(v)-(e_{2}.\pi_{1}(v))f_{2}\in L_{2} under π2\pi_{2}. ∎

2.2. The geometric story

See [SS10] for a survey on elliptic fibrations. Let SS be a K3 surface over an algebraically closed field K=K¯K=\bar{K}. For simplicity we exclude the possibility of quasi-elliptic fibrations, by assuming that the characteristic of KK is not 22 or 33.

Definition 2.7.

A genus one fibration on SS consists of a morphism π:S1\pi\colon S\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} whose generic fiber is a smooth curve of genus one over the base. An elliptic fibration is a genus one fibration equipped with a distinguished section O:1SO\colon\mathbb{P}^{1}\rightarrow S with πO=id1\pi\circ O=\operatorname{id}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}.

Rational points of the generic fiber correspond to sections of the fibration and vice versa. The zero section OO defines a rational point on the genus one curve S/K(1)S/K(\mathbb{P}^{1}) over the function field K(1)K(\mathbb{P}^{1}) of 1\mathbb{P}^{1}. This turns the generic fiber into an elliptic curve with zero given by OO. Such a curve has a Weierstrass model

y2+a1xy+a3y=x3+a2x2+a4x+a6y^{2}+a_{1}xy+a_{3}y=x^{3}+a_{2}x^{2}+a_{4}x+a_{6}

with ai(t,s)K[1]a_{i}(t,s)\in K[\mathbb{P}^{1}] homogeneous of degree 2i2i. This defines a normal surface in weighted projective space (1,1,4,6)\mathbb{P}(1,1,4,6) whose minimal model is the K3 surface SS. Here s,ts,t have weight 11, xx has weight 44 and yy weight 66.

Denote by ff and oNS(S)o\in\operatorname{NS}(S) the algebraic equivalence classes of a fiber FF and the zero section OO. Their intersection numbers are e2=2e^{2}=-2, f2=0f^{2}=0 and e.f=1e.f=1. Thus they span a hyperbolic plane [0110][0112]UπNS(S)\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\ 1&0\end{smallmatrix}\right]\cong\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\ 1&-2\end{smallmatrix}\right]\cong U_{\pi}\subseteq\operatorname{NS}(S).

Definition 2.8.

We call UπU^{\perp}_{\pi} the frame lattice and Uπ(Uπ)U_{\pi}\oplus\mathcal{R}(U^{\perp}_{\pi}) the trivial lattice where (Uπ)\mathcal{R}(U^{\perp}_{\pi}) is the sublattice spanned by the roots of UπU_{\pi}^{\perp}.

The trivial lattice gives information on the reducible singular fibers. For instance the reducible fibers not meeting the zero section form a fundamental root system for the root lattice (Uπ)\mathcal{R}(U^{\perp}_{\pi}).

The Mordell-Weil group is the group of sections of the fibration. It comes equipped with the height pairing hh which is a \mathbb{Q}-valued bilinear form and turns it into the Mordell-Weil lattice MWL(π)\operatorname{MWL}(\pi). The Mordell-Weil lattice is isomorphic to the image of the orthogonal projection NS(S)(Triv(π))\operatorname{NS}(S)\rightarrow(\operatorname{Triv}(\pi)^{\perp})^{\vee} equipped with the negative of the intersection form (cf. [Shi90, Lemma 8.1]). In fact the Mordell-Weil group is isomorphic to NS(S)/Triv(π)\operatorname{NS}(S)/\operatorname{Triv}(\pi) (cf. [Shi90, Theorem 1.3]). Addition in the lattice indeed corresponds to the group law on the elliptic curve.

A K3 surface may admit several elliptic fibrations. They can be detected in the Néron-Severi lattice:

Theorem 2.9.

[PŠŠ71, Paragraph 3] Let SS be a K3 surface and fNS(S)f\in\operatorname{NS}(S) a primitive nef divisor class with f2=0f^{2}=0. Then the complete linear system |f||f| induces a genus one fibration π|f|:S1\pi_{|f|}\colon S\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}.

We call such a class an elliptic divisor class. If there is eNS(S)e\in\operatorname{NS}(S) with e2=2e^{2}=-2 and e.f=1e.f=1, then π|f|\pi_{|f|} is indeed an elliptic fibration.

{genus one fibrations π:S1}1:1{elliptic divisor classes fNS(S)}\{\mbox{genus one fibrations }\pi\colon S\to\mathbb{P}^{1}\}\xleftrightarrow{1:1}\{\mbox{elliptic divisor classes }f\in\operatorname{NS}(S)\}
Remark 2.10.

If fNS(S)f\in\operatorname{NS}(S) is merely primitive with f2=0f^{2}=0, then there is an element wW(NS(S))w\in W(\operatorname{NS}(S)) of the Weyl group with ±w(f)\pm w(f) nef. Hence Theorem 2.1 shows that every lattice in the genus of some frame lattice UπU_{\pi}^{\perp} is a frame lattice UπU_{\pi^{\prime}}^{\perp} for some elliptic fibration π:S1\pi^{\prime}\colon S\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}.

Example 2.11.

The class o+fo+f has square 0, but it is not nef since (o+f).o=2+1<0(o+f).o=-2+1<0.

Definition 2.12.

Let π1,π2\pi_{1},\pi_{2} be two elliptic fibrations with fiber classes f1f_{1}, f2f_{2}. We call the fibrations nn-neighbors if their frame lattices project to nn-neighbors in {f1,f2}\{f_{1},f_{2}\}^{\perp}.

Suppose that nn is coprime to detNS(S)\det\operatorname{NS}(S). By the previous section, two elliptic fibrations are nn-neighbors if f1.f2f_{1}.f_{2} equals nn.

Remark 2.13.

The traditional way to produce elliptic divisors, is to find a configuration of (2)(-2) curves on SS whose intersection graph is an extended Dynkin-diagram of type A~\tilde{A}, D~\tilde{D}, or E~\tilde{E}. The corresponding isotropic class is automatically nef. The isotropic class f2f_{2} constructed in Lemma 2.6 may not be nef. Often this can be compensated with an element ww of the Weyl group as in Remark 2.10. However in general f1.w(f2)f_{1}.w(f_{2}) may be different from f1.f2f_{1}.f_{2}.

2.3. Computing 22-neighboring fibrations

In this subsection we give an algorithm to compute the linear system |f||f^{\prime}| of an elliptic divisor starting from a Weierstrass model of a 22-neighbor ff.

Let π\pi be an elliptic fibration on SS, FF a fiber and DD a divisor on SS. Then DD is called vertical if F.D=0F.D=0. If DD is effective, this means that it is contained in some fiber of π\pi.

Lemma 2.14.

[Shi90, Lemma 5.1] Every divisor DD of an elliptic K3 surface is linearly equivalent to a divisor of the form

D(d1)O+P+VD\sim(d-1)O+P+V

for d=D.Fd=D.F, PP some section (possibly the zero section) and VV a vertical divisor.

Suppose FF^{\prime} is an elliptic divisor with F.F=2F.F^{\prime}=2. Then

FO+P+VF^{\prime}\sim O+P+V

with VV vertical but not necessarily effective. We want to compute this linear system.

Since VV is vertical, there is k0k\geq 0 such that the class of kFVkF-V is effective. To determine kk one uses extended Dynkin diagrams and their isotropic vectors to represent ff as a linear combination of fiber components of the respective reducible fibers. Our strategy is to first compute the larger linear system |O+P+kF||O+P+kF| and then to figure out the equations of the linear subspace |O+P+V||O+P+V| of |kF+O+P||kF+O+P|.

Let (X,Y)(X,Y) be affine coordinates of the ambient affine space of a Weierstrass model of E/K(t)E/K(t). We set degX=4\deg X=4 and degY=6\deg Y=6. Suppose that P=(PX,PY)EP=(P_{X},P_{Y})\in E is not a torsion section. (See [Kum14] for this case.) Then 11 and (Y+PY)/(XPX)(Y+P_{Y})/(X-P_{X}) are a basis of global sections of 𝒪E(F)\mathcal{O}_{E}(F^{\prime}). Thus every section of 𝒪S(F)\mathcal{O}_{S}(F^{\prime}) is of the form a(t)+b(t)(Y+PY)/(XPX)a(t)+b(t)(Y+P_{Y})/(X-P_{X}) for some a(t),b(t)K(t)a(t),b(t)\in K(t). The divisor VV gives conditions on the zeros and poles of aa and bb.

Remark 2.15.

The dimension of the linear system is predicted by the Riemann-Roch formula and Serre duality. Indeed, for an effective divisor DD on a K3 surface SS we have

h0(S,𝒪S(D))=h0(S,𝒪S(D))+h0(S,𝒪S(D))=2+12D2+h1(S,𝒪S(D)).h^{0}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(D))=h^{0}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(D))+h^{0}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(-D))=2+\tfrac{1}{2}D^{2}+h^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(D)).

The exact sequence 0𝒪S(D)𝒪S𝒪D00\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{S}(-D)\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{S}\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{D}\rightarrow 0 shows that h1(S,𝒪S(D))=h1(S,𝒪S(D))=dimh0(D,𝒪D)1h^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(D))=h^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(-D))=\dim h^{0}(D,\mathcal{O}_{D})-1 which is zero for D=O+P+lFD=O+P+lF since DD is numerically connected (cf. [SD74, Lem. 2.2 and 3.4]).

We regard K(t)K(S)K(t)\subseteq K(S) and write the elements eK(t)e\in K(t) in the form e=en/ede=e_{n}/e_{d} where the numerator ene_{n} and denominator ede_{d} are co-prime elements of the polynomial ring K[t]K[t]. For PP we write xn=(PX)nx_{n}=(P_{X})_{n} and xd=(PX)dx_{d}=(P_{X})_{d} and likewise yn=(PY)ny_{n}=(P_{Y})_{n}, yd=(PY)dy_{d}=(P_{Y})_{d}.

Lemma 2.16.

Let OPEO\neq P\in E be a section. Then

2O.P=deg(Xxdxn)4=23(deg(Yydyn)6)2O.P=\deg(Xx_{d}-x_{n})-4=\tfrac{2}{3}(\deg(Yy_{d}-y_{n})-6)
Proof.

For a start note that xd3=yd2x_{d}^{3}=y_{d}^{2}. The intersection multiplicity in the chart s0s\neq 0, is

deg(yd/xd)=12degxd.\deg(y_{d}/x_{d})=\tfrac{1}{2}\deg x_{d}.

We change to the chart given by X=X~/s4X=\tilde{X}/s^{4}, Y=Y~/s6Y=\tilde{Y}/s^{6}, t=1/st=1/s. In these coordinates the section PP is given by

(x~,y~)=(s4x(1s),s6y(1s)).(\tilde{x},\tilde{y})=(s^{4}x(\tfrac{1}{s}),s^{6}y(\tfrac{1}{s})).

Hence the valuation at ss is given by

νs(x~)=4+degxddegxn\nu_{s}(\tilde{x})=4+\deg x_{d}-\deg x_{n}

Similarly we have x~d3=y~d2\tilde{x}_{d}^{3}=\tilde{y}_{d}^{2} and so the intersection multiplicity at s=0s=0 is

max{0,νs(y~/x~)}=12max{0,degxndegxd4}.\max\{0,-\nu_{s}(\tilde{y}/\tilde{x})\}=\tfrac{1}{2}\max\{0,\deg x_{n}-\deg x_{d}-4\}.

Combined this results in

2O.P\displaystyle 2O.P =\displaystyle= degxd+max{0,degxndegxd4}\displaystyle\deg x_{d}+\max\{0,\deg x_{n}-\deg x_{d}-4\}
=\displaystyle= max{degxd+4,degxn}4=deg(Xxdxn)4.\displaystyle\max\{\deg x_{d}+4,\deg x_{n}\}-4=\deg(Xx_{d}-x_{n})-4.

Proposition 2.17.

Let FF be the divisor on SS given by {t=0}\{t=0\}, PP a non-torsion section and k0k\geq 0. Then the elements of H0(S,O+P+kF)H^{0}(S,O+P+kF) are given by

a(t)(Xxdxn)+b(t)(Yyd+yn)tkxd(Xxdxn)\frac{a(t)(Xx_{d}-x_{n})+b(t)(Yy_{d}+y_{n})}{t^{k}x_{d}(Xx_{d}-x_{n})}

with a,bK[t]a,b\in K[t], 2O.P=max(degxd,degxn4)2O.P=\max(\deg x_{d},\deg x_{n}-4) and

  1. (1)

    degak+2O.P\deg a\leq k+2O.P,

  2. (2)

    degbk+2O.P212degxd\deg b\leq k+2O.P-2-\tfrac{1}{2}\deg x_{d},

  3. (3)

    deg(axnbyn)k+2O.P+4+degxd\deg(ax_{n}-by_{n})\leq k+2O.P+4+\deg x_{d},

  4. (4)

    axnbyn0modxdax_{n}-by_{n}\equiv 0\mod x_{d}.

This results in a solution space of dimension h0(S,O+P+kF)=2k+O.Ph^{0}(S,O+P+kF)=2k+O.P.

Proof.

The condition that

u=a~(t)+b~(t)(Y+Py)/(XPx)K(X,Y,t)u=\tilde{a}(t)+\tilde{b}(t)(Y+P_{y})/(X-P_{x})\in K(X,Y,t)

represents an element of H0(S,O+P+kF)H^{0}(S,O+P+kF) means that the denominator of uu is divisible at most by tk(Xxdxn)t^{k}(Xx_{d}-x_{n}). Writing uu as a reduced fraction yields the following form with a,bK[t]a,b\in K[t]

u\displaystyle u =\displaystyle= axdX+bydY(axnbyn)tkxd(Xxdxn).\displaystyle\frac{ax_{d}X+by_{d}Y-(ax_{n}-by_{n})}{t^{k}x_{d}(Xx_{d}-x_{n})}.

Conditions (1–3) assure that there is no pole at t=t=\infty: with degX=4\deg X=4, degY=6\deg Y=6 this means that degu0\deg u\leq 0. Condition (4) assures that we can reduce xdx_{d} from the fraction.

We compute the dimension of the linear system. Conditions (1) and (2) result in a space of dimension 2k+4O.P12degxd2k+4O.P-\tfrac{1}{2}\deg x_{d}. Let a~\tilde{a}, b~\tilde{b} be general elements of this space. The rank of condition (3) is

max{0,deg(a~xnb~yn)(k+2O.P+4+degxd)}\displaystyle\max\{0,\deg(\tilde{a}x_{n}-\tilde{b}y_{n})-(k+2O.P+4+\deg x_{d})\}
=\displaystyle= max{0,degxndegxd4,degyndegyd6)}\displaystyle\max\{0,\deg x_{n}-\deg x_{d}-4,\deg y_{n}-\deg y_{d}-6)\}
=\displaystyle= 32(2O.Pdegxd)\displaystyle\tfrac{3}{2}(2O.P-\deg x_{d})

Condition (4) is independent and has rank degxd\deg x_{d}.

This gives the total number of solutions

(2k+4O.P12degxd)32(2O.Pdegxd)degxd\displaystyle(2k+4O.P-\tfrac{1}{2}\deg x_{d})-\tfrac{3}{2}(2O.P-\deg x_{d})-\deg x_{d}
=\displaystyle= 2k+O.P\displaystyle 2k+O.P
=\displaystyle= 2+12(kF+O+P)2\displaystyle 2+\tfrac{1}{2}(kF+O+P)^{2}

as predicted by the Riemann-Roch formula. ∎

Next we have to cut down the linear system |kF+O+P||kF+O+P| to the smaller system |O+P+V||O+P+V|. To this end we recall some concepts from commutative algebra. For ideals I,JI,J of a Noetherian ring RR let I:J={xRxJI}I:J=\{x\in R\mid xJ\subseteq I\} be the ideal quotient. Recall that an ideal II is called primary if xyIxy\in I implies that xIx\in I or ynIy^{n}\in I for some nn. Let I(n)I^{(n)} be the nn-th symbolic power of II. For a prime ideal PP, the symbolic power P(n)P^{(n)} is the smallest PP-primary ideal containing PnP^{n}. The localization of RR at PP is denoted by RPR_{P}.

Lemma 2.18.

Let fRf\in R be an element of a Noetherian ring RR, 0w0\leq w\in\mathbb{Z}, PRP\leq R a prime ideal with RPR_{P} a discrete valuaton ring. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. (1)

    ordP(f)w\operatorname{ord}_{P}(f)\geq w,

  2. (2)

    f0modPwRPf\equiv 0\mod P^{w}R_{P},

  3. (3)

    f0modP(w)f\equiv 0\mod P^{(w)},

  4. (4)

    Pw:fRPP^{w}:fR\not\subseteq P.

Proof.

(1) \iff (2): RPR_{P} is a discrete valuation ring with valuation ordP\operatorname{ord}_{P}.

(2) \iff (3): Let fRf\in R with fPwRPf\in P^{w}R_{P}. This means that there is sRPs\in R\setminus P with sfPwsf\in P^{w}. Since PwP(w)P^{w}\subseteq P^{(w)} and the latter is PP-primary, this implies that fP(w)f\in P^{(w)}. Hence RPwRPP(w)R\cap P^{w}R_{P}\subseteq P^{(w)}. It remains to show that RPwRPR\cap P^{w}R_{P} is PP-primary. Then, by minimality, RPwRPP(w)R\cap P^{w}R_{P}\supseteq P^{(w)}. Let f,gRf,g\in R with fgRPwRPfg\in R\cap P^{w}R_{P}, i.e. there exists an sRPs\in R\setminus P with sfgPwsfg\in P^{w}. Since PP is prime and sPs\notin P, gPg\in P or fPf\in P. Thus fwPwf^{w}\in P^{w} or gwPwg^{w}\in P^{w}.

(3) \implies (4): Suppose that fP(w)=RPwRPf\in P^{(w)}=R\cap P^{w}R_{P}. Then there is rRPr\in R\setminus P with rfPwrf\in P^{w} which implies that rfRPwrfR\subseteq P^{w}. Hence rr is an element of Pw:fRP^{w}:fR not contained in PP.

(4) \implies (2): Take r(Pw:fR)Pr\in(P^{w}:fR)\setminus P, so rfRPwrfR\subseteq P^{w}. Since rr is a unit in RPR_{P}, this gives rfRP=fRPPwRPrfR_{P}=fR_{P}\subseteq P^{w}R_{P}. ∎

The following remark describes how to obtain linear equations for the subspace H0(S,O+P+V)H^{0}(S,O+P+V) in H0(S,kF+O+P)H^{0}(S,kF+O+P).

Remark 2.19.

Let DD be a vertical prime Weil divisor on SS. In practice we obtain DD as exceptional divisor coming from a blowup during a minimal resolution of the Weierstrass model (e.g. by Tate’s algorithm [Tat75]). Choose some chart USU\subset S intersecting DD. And let WSW\subset S be a Weiertrass chart. We represent DD as the pair (ψU,DU)(\psi_{U},D_{U}) where ψU:K(W)K(U)\psi_{U}\colon K(W)\rightarrow K(U) is the (rational) change of coordinates and PUK[U]P_{U}\leq K[U] is the prime ideal giving the Weil divisor D|UD|_{U}.

Let ϕ1,ϕn\phi_{1},\dots\phi_{n} be a basis of H0(S,kF+O+P)H^{0}(S,kF+O+P). The linear equations cutting out the subspace H0(S,O+P+V)H^{0}(S,O+P+V) are of the form ordD(ϕ)v\operatorname{ord}_{D}(\phi)\geq v\in\mathbb{Z}. To find them let ϕ=i=1nαiϕi\phi=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\alpha_{i}\phi_{i}, (αiK)(\alpha_{i}\in K) and write ψU(ϕ)=f/g\psi_{U}(\phi)=f/g for some fK[U]f\in K[U] depending linearly on the αi\alpha_{i} and gK[U]g\in K[U] some fixed common denominator of the ϕi\phi_{i}. In particular, gg does not depend on the αi\alpha_{i}. By Lemma 2.18 the condition ordD(f)v+ordD(g)=:w\operatorname{ord}_{D}(f)\geq v+\operatorname{ord}_{D}(g)=:w is equivalent to f0modPU(wv)f\equiv 0\mod P_{U}^{(w-v)}. This defines a linear map

H0(S,kF+O+P)k[U]/PU(wv),ϕ=f/gf+PU(wv)H^{0}(S,kF+O+P)\longrightarrow k[U]/P_{U}^{(w-v)},\quad\phi=f/g\mapsto f+P_{U}^{(w-v)}

whose kernel is H0(S,kF+O+P+V)H^{0}(S,kF+O+P+V).

The computation of H0(S,𝒪S(f))H^{0}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(f^{\prime})) allows us to explicitly give a morphism S1S\to\mathbb{P}^{1} whose generic fiber is a curve of genus one. In order to continue fibration hopping from the newly found fibration, one (searches and) chooses a point of small height and transforms the genus one curve to minimal Weierstrass form (see e.g. [Kum14] for formulas; most computer algebra systems have functionality for this).

To proceed we need generators of the Mordell-Weil group. Generators for NS(S)\operatorname{NS}(S) can be obtained via push forward from the previous model. However, they will in general not be sections but multi-sections, i.e. an irreducible curve CSC\subseteq S with C.F>1C.F>1. From a multi-section one obtains a section by taking the fiberwise trace.

Lemma 2.20.

Let 𝔭K(t)[x,y]\mathfrak{p}\leq K(t)[x,y] be the defining ideal of an irreducible multi-section in a Weierstrass chart given by y2f(x)y^{2}-f(x). Then 𝔭=(yh(x),g(x))\mathfrak{p}=(y-h(x),g(x)) or 𝔭=(y2f(x),g(x))\mathfrak{p}=(y^{2}-f(x),g(x)) for h(x),g(x)K(t)[x]h(x),g(x)\in K(t)[x].

Proof.

Let 𝔭K(t)[x]=(g(x))\mathfrak{p}\cap K(t)[x]=(g(x)). Then either 𝔭=(y2f(x),g(x))\mathfrak{p}=(y^{2}-f(x),g(x)) or we find r(x)yh~(x)𝔭r(x)y-\tilde{h}(x)\in\mathfrak{p} with r(x)r(x) and g(x)g(x) coprime. But then we find s,sK(t)[x]s,s^{\prime}\in K(t)[x] with sr+sg=1sr+s^{\prime}g=1 so that ysh~(x)=:yh(x)𝔭y-s\tilde{h}(x)=:y-h(x)\in\mathfrak{p}. Since (yh(x),g(x))(y-h(x),g(x)) is a prime ideal contained in 𝔭\mathfrak{p} and containing y2f(x)y^{2}-f(x), it must be equal to 𝔭\mathfrak{p}. ∎

If the ideal of the multi-section DD is 𝔭=(y2f(x),g(x))\mathfrak{p}=(y^{2}-f(x),g(x)), then the fiberwise trace is the zero section since DD is linearly equivalent to 2(degg(x))O2(\deg g(x))O. Otherwise it is computed by the following simple Algorithm 1.

Algorithm 1 Fiberwise trace
0:  a Weierstrass model y2f(x)y^{2}-f(x),a multi-section (g(x),yh(x))K(t)[x,y](g(x),y-h(x))\subset K(t)[x,y]
0:  (xx(t),y±y(t))(x-x(t),y\pm y(t)) a section which is up to sign the fiberwise trace
  h:=hmodgh:=h\mod g
  while degg>1\deg g>1 do
     g:=(h2f)/gg:=(h^{2}-f)/g
     h:=hmodgh:=h\mod g
  end while
  return  (g,h)(g,h)
Proof of Algorithm 1.

By assumption y2f(g,yh)y^{2}-f\in(g,y-h). Thus h2f(g)h^{2}-f\in(g) which means that (h2f)/gK(t)[x](h^{2}-f)/g\in K(t)[x]. Since the degree of (h2f)/g(h^{2}-f)/g is bounded by 2deghdegg<degg2\deg h-\deg g<\deg g, the procedure terminates. Let D1,D2D_{1},D_{2} be the divisors defined by (g,yh)(g,y-h) and ((h2f)/g,yh)((h^{2}-f)/g,y-h). The divisor D1+D22deg(h)OD_{1}+D_{2}-2\deg(h)O is linearly equivalent to zero. It is the divisor of the rational function (y/zh(x/z))(y/z-h(x/z)). Hence the output section PP satisfies a linear equivalence of the form D1±P+nO0D_{1}\pm P+nO\sim 0, i.e. it is up to sign the trace. ∎

2.4. A strategy for fibration hopping.

We summarize the method of fibration hoppping highlighting practical aspects. It is applied in Section 6 to obtain the Lehmer map. Start with the following data:

  • a minimal Weierstrass equation W:y2x3a2x2a4xa6W:y^{2}-x^{3}-a_{2}x^{2}-a_{4}x-a_{6} defining an elliptic fibration π:S1\pi\colon S\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} of a K3 surface with fiber class fNS(S)f\in\operatorname{NS}(S);

  • a \mathbb{Z}-basis BB of NS(S)\operatorname{NS}(S) consisting of sections and fiber components;

  • an elliptic divisor class fNS(S)f^{\prime}\in\operatorname{NS}(S) with f.f=2f.f^{\prime}=2 written as a linear combination of the basis.

Assume that ff^{\prime} admits a section, i.e. f.NS(S)=f^{\prime}.\operatorname{NS}(S)=\mathbb{Z}, otherwise stop at step (9).

  1. (1)

    Compute the intersection matrix of the basis and the height pairing of the sections.

  2. (2)

    Find a representative F=O+P+VfF^{\prime}=O+P+V\in f^{\prime} as in Lemma 2.14.

  3. (3)

    Compute PP using addition in the Mordell-Weil group.

  4. (4)

    Find kk\in\mathbb{N} with O+P+VO+P+kF=DO+P+V\leq O+P+kF=D.

  5. (5)

    Compute the linear system H0(S,D)H^{0}(S,D) as in Proposition 2.17.

  6. (6)

    Resolve the singularities of the Weierstrass model using Tate’s algorithm and represent fiber components by a pair (ϕU:k(W)K(U),PU)(\phi_{U}:k(W)\rightarrow K(U),P_{U}) with PUK[U]P_{U}\leq K[U] the defining ideal.

  7. (7)

    Cut out the linear subspace H0(S,O+P+V)H^{0}(S,O+P+V) of H0(S,D)H^{0}(S,D) using Remark 2.19.

  8. (8)

    Choose two elements ϕ0,ϕ1H0(S,O+P+V)\phi_{0},\phi_{1}\in H^{0}(S,O+P+V) and set u=ϕ0/ϕ1u=\phi_{0}/\phi_{1}.

  9. (9)

    Solve for y=y(u,x,t)y=y(u,x,t) (assuming that PP is not 22-torsion, see [Kum14, 39.1] for the general case), substitute into the Weierstrass equation, cancel a common factor and absorb square factors into xx, to obtain an equation of the form x2=g(u,t)x^{2}=g(u,t) of degree 33 or 44 in tt.

  10. (10)

    Search a K(u)K(u)-rational point of small height. This can be done by pushing forward suitable divisors from SS, or by exhaustive search modulo a prime and pp-adic lifting.

  11. (11)

    Use the point to obtain a Weierstrass model (see e.g. [Kum14, EK14]).

  12. (12)

    Use Tate’s algorithm to obtain a globally minimal Weierstrass model WW^{\prime} and its singular fibers.

  13. (13)

    Let ψW:WW\psi_{W}:W\dashrightarrow W^{\prime} be the birational change of coordinates between the Weierstrass charts. Push forward fiber components and sections, to obtain multi-sections of the new fibration π\pi^{\prime} and turn them into sections by taking the fiberwise trace with Algorithm 1.

  14. (14)

    Compute the height pairing and LLL-reduce the gram matrix to obtain a basis of short vectors and the corresponding sections of small height.

  15. (15)

    Choose a basis BB^{\prime} of NS(S)\operatorname{NS}(S^{\prime}) consisting of fiber components and sections.

  16. (16)

    Pushforward fiber components and sections of SS not contained in the indeterminacy locus of ψW\psi_{W} and compute the basis representation w.r.t to BB^{\prime} using the intersection pairing; stop when sufficient information to recover the matrix representation of the pushforward ψ:NS(S)NS(S)\psi_{*}\colon\operatorname{NS}(S)\rightarrow\operatorname{NS}(S^{\prime}) in the bases BB and BB^{\prime} is obtained. For efficiency this is best done over a finite field with subsequent pp-adic lifting.

Remark 2.21.

The following sanity checks may help the reader to avoid common errors when reproducing the strategy:

  • Make sure the labeling of the exceptional divisors in step (6) matches that of the basis BB.

  • If the linear subspace |O+P+V||O+P+V| in step (7) is zero, double check that the divisor ff^{\prime} is actually nef.

  • Use the formulas for the Jacobian of a genus 11 curve to obtain WW^{\prime} (this does not yield the transformation) and compare with your result.

  • Compute the singular fibers of WW^{\prime}, compare with the root sublattice of ff^{{}^{\prime}\perp}.

  • Push forward some extra sections of the fibration in step (16) using equations. Then compare with the matrix representation of ψ\psi_{*}.

3. Finding the surface

In this section we derive equations for the K3 surface SS carrying an automorphism of minimal entropy. We begin by fixing our notation for K3 surfaces.

Let XX be a complex K3 surface and gg an automorphism. Write ω=H0(X,ΩX2)\mathbb{C}\omega=H^{0}(X,\Omega_{X}^{2}) with ω\omega a non-zero 22-form. Then gω=δ(g)ωg^{*}\omega=\delta(g)\omega for some δ(g)\delta(g)\in\mathbb{C}. If XX is projective, then δ(g)\delta(g) must be a root of unity. We call gg symplectic if δ(g)=1\delta(g)=1 and non-symplectic otherwise. Recall that we denote by NS(X)\operatorname{NS}(X) the Neron-Severi lattice and by T(X)T(X) the transcendental lattice of XX. Denote by Cn[x]C_{n}\in\mathbb{Z}[x] the nn-th cyclotomic polynomial.

Theorem 3.1 (The two prime construction).

[McM16, 7.2] There exists an automorphism l:SSl\colon S\rightarrow S of a complex projective K3 surface SS such that NS(S)\operatorname{NS}(S) has rank 1616 and discriminant 71327\cdot 13^{2},

λ(l)=λ10 and δ(l)=exp(2πi5/14).\lambda(l)=\lambda_{10}\mbox{ and }\delta(l)=\exp(2\pi i5/14).

The characteristic polynomial of ll^{*} on H2(S,)H^{2}(S,\mathbb{Z}) is given by

S10(x)C14(x)C4(x)(x21)2.S_{10}(x)C_{14}(x)C_{4}(x)(x^{2}-1)^{2}.
Remark 3.2.

From the proof one extracts the following: An even unimodular lattice HH and an isometry lO(H)l^{\prime}\in O(H) - both as 22×2222\times 22 integer matrices. We know that abstractly HH2(S,)22H\cong H^{2}(S,\mathbb{Z})\cong\mathbb{Z}^{22}. A Hodge structure on HH is given by setting H2,0(H)H^{2,0}(H_{\mathbb{C}}) as the eigenspace of ll_{\mathbb{C}} with eigenvalue δ(l)\delta(l). By Lefschetz’ theorem on (1,1)(1,1)-classes we recover NS(S)H2,0(H)H\operatorname{NS}(S)\cong H^{2,0}(H_{\mathbb{C}})^{\perp}\cap H.

In the following l:SSl\colon S\to S will continue to denote the Lehmer map as in Theorem 3.1. For an even lattice NN we denote by ANA_{N} the discriminant group equipped with the discriminant quadratic form. This is a finite group of order |det(N)||\det(N)|. Recall that we have a natural homomorphism O(N)O(AN)O(N)\rightarrow O(A_{N}). Assume that XX is projective. Then δ(g)\delta(g) is a root of unity. Let κ(g)\kappa(g) denote the kernel of

[δ(g)]End(ANS(X)),δ(g)(xg(x)).\mathbb{Z}[\delta(g)]\rightarrow\operatorname{End}(A_{\operatorname{NS}(X)}),\quad\delta(g)\mapsto(x\mapsto g_{*}(x)).

In particular κ(g)\kappa(g) is an ideal in a cyclotomic field.

Lemma 3.3.

If a complex K3 surface XX of Picard number ρ(X)=16\rho(X)=16 admits an automorphism gg of order 77 with δ(g)=δ(l2)\delta(g)=\delta(l^{2}) and κ(g)=κ(l2)\kappa(g)=\kappa(l^{2}) then XX is isomorphic to McMullen’s surface SS.

Proof.

We take l2l^{2} so that δ(l2)\delta(l^{2}) is a 77-th root of unity. Then [Bra19, Prop. 5.1] applies and yields the result. ∎

The next lemma shows that such an XX in fact exists. Let NN be a lattice and gO(N)g\in O(N) an isometry. The fixed lattice and the coinvariant lattice of gg are defined as

Ng={xNg(x)=x} and Ng=(Ng).N^{g}=\{x\in N\mid g(x)=x\}\quad\mbox{ and }\quad N_{g}=(N^{g})^{\perp}.

By [AST11] the fixed lattice of a prime order pp automorphism on a K3 surface is pp-elementary (i.e. pANg=0pA_{N^{g}}=0). Thus we cannot hope for NS(X)=H2(X,)g\operatorname{NS}(X)=H^{2}(X,\mathbb{Z})^{g}. The next best thing is to aim for H2(X,)gUE8H^{2}(X,\mathbb{Z})^{g}\cong U\oplus E_{8}. Then the coinvariant lattice H2(X,)g2UE8H^{2}(X,\mathbb{Z})_{g}\cong 2U\oplus E_{8}.

Lemma 3.4.

There exists a comple K3 surface XX which admits an action by a non-symplectic automorphism gg of order 77 with NS(X)gUE8\operatorname{NS}(X)^{g}\cong U\oplus E_{8} such that δ(g)=δ(l2)\delta(g)=\delta(l^{2}) and κ(g)=κ(l2)\kappa(g)=\kappa(l^{2}).

Proof.

We obtain gg in the style of McMullen [McM16] by equivariant glueing. See Figure 2 for an overview of the construction. Set (T,gT)=(T(S),l2|T(S))(T,g_{T})=(T(S),l_{*}^{2}|T(S)). We obtain (C,gC)(C,g_{C}) as a twist of the principal Φ7(x)\Phi_{7}(x)-lattice. By picking a suitable prime of [ζ7+ζ71]\mathbb{Z}[\zeta_{7}+\zeta_{7}^{-1}] above 1313 for the twist, one can assure that ACAT(1)A_{C}\cong A_{T}(-1) and that the characteristic polynomials of the actions on the glue groups (AC)q(AT(1))q(A_{C})_{q}\cong(A_{T}(-1))_{q}, q=7,13q=7,13 of CC and TT match.

(UE8,id)(U\oplus E_{8},\operatorname{id}), (1,9)(1,9)(C,gC)(C,g_{C}), (0,6)(0,6)AC𝔽7𝔽132A_{C}\cong\mathbb{F}_{7}\oplus\mathbb{F}_{13}^{2}(T,gT)(T,g_{T}), (2,4)(2,4)AT𝔽7𝔽132A_{T}\cong\mathbb{F}_{7}\oplus\mathbb{F}_{13}^{2}71327\cdot 13^{2}11
Figure 2. Gluing diagram for σ\sigma.

Thus CC and TT glue equivariantly to an even unimodular lattice of signature (2,10)(2,10) (cf. [McM16, Thm. 4.1]). Taking the orthogonal direct sum with UE8U\oplus E_{8} yields an even unimodular lattice HH of signature (3,19)(3,19). We obtain the isometry g=idgCgTO(H)g^{\prime}=\operatorname{id}\oplus g_{C}\oplus g_{T}\in O(H). Since CC has no roots, gg^{\prime} is unobstructed in the sense of McMullen. By construction it preserves the Hodge structure defined by H2,0(S)T(S)=TCH^{2,0}(S)\subseteq T(S)\otimes\mathbb{C}=T\otimes C. By surjectivity of the period map and the global Torelli theorem, we find an HH-marked K3 surface (X,η)(X,\eta) and an automorphism gAut(X)g\in\operatorname{Aut}(X) with ηgη1=g\eta g_{*}\eta^{-1}=g^{\prime}. By construction δ(g)=δ(l2)\delta(g)=\delta(l^{2}) and κ(g)=κ(l2)\kappa(g)=\kappa(l^{2}). ∎

Non-symplectic automorphisms of prime order on K3 surfaces are well understood. Their deformation type is determined by the fixed lattice and for each type we know a maximal family (cf. [AST11]). In our case Lemmas 3.4 and 3.3 imply that SS must be a member of the one dimensional family 𝒮\mathcal{S} of complex elliptic K3 surfaces given by

𝒮:y2=x3+ax+t7+1\mathcal{S}\colon\quad y^{2}=x^{3}+ax+t^{7}+1

found in [AST11, Example 6.1 11]. The automorphism gg is given by (x,y,t)(x,y,ζ7t)(x,y,t)\mapsto(x,y,\zeta_{7}t).

We want to find a member S1S_{1} of this family with NS(S)NS(S1)\operatorname{NS}(S)\cong\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}). Since Triv(S1)UE8\operatorname{Triv}(S_{1})\cong U\oplus E_{8} is unimodular, NS(S1)=Triv(S1)MWL(S1)(1)\operatorname{NS}(S_{1})=\operatorname{Triv}(S_{1})\oplus\operatorname{MWL}(S_{1})(-1), that is, the elements of CC give elements of the Mordell-Weil group of the fibration. Note that the minimum of the Mordell-Weil lattice MWL(S1)C(1)\operatorname{MWL}(S_{1})\cong C(-1) is 44, and in fact there are up to a change of sign exactly 77 minimal vectors.

C=[411001141100114110011411001141100114],gC=[000001100001010001001001000101000011]C=\begin{bmatrix}-4&1&1&0&0&1\\ 1&-4&1&1&0&0\\ 1&1&-4&1&1&0\\ 0&1&1&-4&1&1\\ 0&0&1&1&-4&1\\ 1&0&0&1&1&-4\end{bmatrix},\quad g_{C}=\begin{bmatrix}0&0&0&0&0&-1\\ 1&0&0&0&0&-1\\ 0&1&0&0&0&-1\\ 0&0&1&0&0&-1\\ 0&0&0&1&0&-1\\ 0&0&0&0&1&-1\end{bmatrix}

They lie in a single gg-orbit. In our case we are searching for a section PP of height h(P)=4h(P)=4. This means that P=(x(t),y(t))P=(x(t),y(t)) with x,yK[t]x,y\in K[t] of degree at most 44 resp. 66.

We reduce the family modulo a prime pp and look for the extra sections over 𝔽pn\mathbb{F}_{p^{n}}. We would like to take n=1n=1. Since 𝒮\mathcal{S} admits a non-symplectic automorphism of order 77 acting non-trivially on the extra sections, it seems likely that ζ7\zeta_{7} is involved in their equations (see [Tae17] for a quantitative statement on a field of definition of CM K3 surfaces). Thus we should assure that 𝔽p\mathbb{F}_{p} contains a 77-th root of unity. This is the case if and only if 77 divides p1p-1. Hence we continue with p=29p=29 and work over 𝔽29\mathbb{F}_{29}. For 𝒮/𝔽29\mathcal{S}/\mathbb{F}_{29} our search is a finite problem.

Since we do not work over an algebraically closed field, it is better to take the general form

𝒮a,b,c:y2=x3+ax+bt7+c\mathcal{S}_{a,b,c}\colon\quad y^{2}=x^{3}+ax+bt^{7}+c

instead. It can be normalized to the first one but only at the cost of a coordinate change involving roots of the coefficients. It is equivalent to 𝒮a,b,c\mathcal{S}_{a^{\prime},b^{\prime},c^{\prime}} with

  • (a,b,c)=(a,v7b,c)(a^{\prime},b^{\prime},c^{\prime})=(a,v^{7}b,c) for v𝔽29×v\in\mathbb{F}_{29}^{\times} (scale tt by vv),

  • (a,b,c)=(m4a,m6b,m6c)(a^{\prime},b^{\prime},c^{\prime})=(m^{4}a,m^{6}b,m^{6}c) (scale x by m2m^{2} and yy by m3m^{3} for m𝔽29×m\in\mathbb{F}_{29}^{\times}).

Note that we can assume b0b\neq 0 since otherwise the fibration is trivial. The case a=0a=0 is dealt with separately and we continue with a0a\neq 0. After a normalization we may assume that a=ba=b and vary cc in a set of representatives of 𝔽29/(±1)\mathbb{F}_{29}/(\pm 1). (Note that this comes at the price of taking a cube root which is harmless over 𝔽29\mathbb{F}_{29} but not over \mathbb{Q}.) We set

x(t)=x0+x1t+x2t2+x3t3+x4t4.x(t)=x_{0}+x_{1}t+x_{2}t^{2}+x_{3}t^{3}+x_{4}t^{4}.

Using the action on tt by a 77-th root of unity we may assume that x4x_{4} varies in a set of representatives of 𝔽29/(𝔽29×)4\mathbb{F}_{29}/(\mathbb{F}_{29}^{\times})^{4}. Further, the leading coefficient must be a square and the degree of x(t)x(t) even. But if degx2\deg x\leq 2, then degy3\deg y\leq 3 and we cannot cancel the at7at^{7} term. Thus degx(t)=4\deg x(t)=4 and we may continue with x4=±1x_{4}=\pm 1.

Given (a,c)(a,c) and x(t)x(t) we can compute x3+ax+at7+cx^{3}+ax+at^{7}+c and check whether or not is a square. If it is, we have found a section P=(x(t),y(t))P=(x(t),y(t)) and can compute its square root y(t)y(t). This leaves us with at most 229415282\cdot 29^{4}\cdot 15\cdot 28 combinations to check.

We can speed this up further by varying a𝔽29a\in\mathbb{F}_{29} and x𝔽29[t]4x\in\mathbb{F}_{29}[t]_{4}, then computing y𝔽29[t]6y\in\mathbb{F}_{29}[t]_{6} such that x3+ax+at7y2x^{3}+ax+at^{7}-y^{2} is of degree at most 66. If this difference is constant, it must be equal to cc and we have found a solution. We may assume x4=1x_{4}=1 using the coordinate change (x,y,t)(x,ζ43y,t)(x,y,t)\mapsto(-x,\zeta_{4}^{3}y,-t). This way there are only 2942829^{4}\cdot 28 cases to be checked.

To compute the candidate for yy, we use the first 6 terms of the power series expansion

v=1+u=1+15u+18u2+20u3+2u4+16u5+17u6+O(u7).v=\sqrt{1+u}=1+15u+18u^{2}+20u^{3}+2u^{4}+16u^{5}+17u^{6}+O(u^{7}).

Set g(t)=x3+ax+at7g(t)=x^{3}+ax+at^{7}, which is of degree 1212, and let 1+u=t12g(1/t)1+u=t^{12}g(1/t). Then set y=t6v(1/t)y=t^{6}v(1/t) and truncate to get a polynomial of degree 66.

The computation took about 12 minutes (20 seconds with an optimized implementation on 4 cores) resulting in the 6 fibrations (4 non-isomorphic ones) given by (a,c){(2,±11),(14,±1),(19,15),(19,26)}(a,c)\in\{(2,\pm 11),(14,\pm 1),(19,15),(19,26)\}.

Remark 3.5.

Imposing the existence of an extra section in the family 𝒮\mathcal{S} with given intersection pairing is a closed condition on the base. This gives an alternative approach. Indeed, write write y(t)2x(t)3+ax(t)+bt7+cy(t)^{2}-x(t)^{3}+ax(t)+bt^{7}+c which is a polynomial in tt of degree 12. Collect the coefficients of tit^{i} for 1i121\leq i\leq 12 to obtain a polynomial system of equations. They generate an ideal in k[a,b,c,x0,x4,y0,y6]k[a,b,c,x_{0},\dots x_{4},y_{0},\dots y_{6}] which can be solved using Gröbner basis computations.

In a second step we computed, for each candidate 𝒮(a,a,c)\mathcal{S}_{(a,a,c)} and PP, the Gram matrix of the height pairing with respect to the basis (P,σ(P),σ5(P))(P,\sigma^{*}(P),\dots\sigma^{*5}(P)). Then we tested if this Gram matrix defines a lattice isometric to CC. Since the only reducible fiber is of type IIII^{*}, i.e. E~8\tilde{E}_{8}, the height pairing is the negative of the intersection pairing. The height paring of two sections PQP\neq Q on our surface is given as follows: write (QyPyQxPx)=f(t)g(t)(\frac{Q_{y}-P_{y}}{Q_{x}-P_{x}})=\frac{f(t)}{g(t)} with f,gK[t]f,g\in K[t] coprime polynomials. Then h(P,Q)=degg2h(P,Q)=\deg g-2.

We obtain determinants 343343 and 448448 for 22 fibrations each. The remaining two have the desired determinant 1183=71321183=7\cdot 13^{2} and isomorphic Mordell-Weil lattices.

(1) 𝒮19,19,15:y2\displaystyle\mathcal{S}_{19,19,15}\colon\;\;y^{2} =\displaystyle= x3+19x+19t7+15\displaystyle x^{3}+19x+19t^{7}+15
(2) x(t)\displaystyle x(t) =\displaystyle= t4+7t3+7t2+27t+16\displaystyle t^{4}+7t^{3}+7t^{2}+27t+16
(3) y(t)\displaystyle y(t) =\displaystyle= t6+25t5+18t4+25t3+15t2+20t+23\displaystyle t^{6}+25t^{5}+18t^{4}+25t^{3}+15t^{2}+20t+23
𝒮19,19,26:y2\displaystyle\mathcal{S}_{19,19,26}\colon\;\;y^{2} =\displaystyle= x3+19x+19t7+26\displaystyle x^{3}+19x+19t^{7}+26
x(t)\displaystyle x(t) =\displaystyle= t4+17t3+4t2+22t+17\displaystyle t^{4}+17t^{3}+4t^{2}+22t+17
y(t)\displaystyle y(t) =\displaystyle= t6+11t5+2t4+18t3+23t2+23t+19\displaystyle t^{6}+11t^{5}+2t^{4}+18t^{3}+23t^{2}+23t+19

Since gg is tame, we know a priori, that the pairs (𝒮19,19,15,g)(\mathcal{S}_{19,19,15},g) and (𝒮19,19,26,g)(\mathcal{S}_{19,19,26},g) lift to characteristic zero (cf. [Jan17]). Each lift supports a map with entropy logλ10\log\lambda_{10}. In the next section we carry out the lift for 𝒮19,19,15\mathcal{S}_{19,19,15}.

4. A lift to characteristic zero

Using a pp-adic multivariate Newton iteration we lift the the surface and its section to characteristic zero as follows.

Regard equation (1) and its parts (2-3) as a solution of

g(z):=g(x,y,a,c)=y2x3axat7c=0modpg(z):=g(x,y,a,c)=y^{2}-x^{3}-ax-at^{7}-c=0\mod p

with x,yp[t]x,y\in\mathbb{Z}_{p}[t] monic of degree 44 and 66. Let z0z_{0} be defined by (1-3). We calculate dg=2ydy(3x2a)dx(x+t7)dadcdg=2ydy-(3x^{2}-a)dx-(x+t^{7})da-dc. Define zn+1z_{n+1} recursively as the unique solution of the 12×1212\times 12 linear system of equations 0=g(zn)+dg(zn)(zn+1zn)0=g(z_{n})+dg(z_{n})(z_{n+1}-z_{n}). We continue with the solution z10z_{10} modulo p2048p^{2048}.

The function algdep in pari [The19] discovers an integer polynomial of degree 1818 with root aa and a polynomial of degree 66 with root cc. In fact a3[c]a^{3}\in\mathbb{Q}[c] which reflects that our normalization a=ba=b required taking a cube root. After a change of coordinates (allowing for aba\neq b) we can get rid of the cube root. Using the function polredabs we find the defining polynomial

w62w5+2w43w3+2w22w+1=0w^{6}-2w^{5}+2w^{4}-3w^{3}+2w^{2}-2w+1=0

of discriminant 74137^{4}13 and containing the cubic field [ζ7+ζ71]\mathbb{Q}[\zeta_{7}+\zeta_{7}^{-1}] of discriminant 49. Then [w][b]\mathbb{Q}[w]\cong\mathbb{Q}[b], which is the number field 6.2.31213.1. With further coordinate changes we arrive at the following equation for S=S1S=S_{1}.

{dgroup}
S1:y2=x3+ax+bt7+cwhereS_{1}\colon y^{2}=x^{3}+ax+bt^{7}+c\quad\mbox{where}
a=(86471w519851w4116626w3+67043w2125502w+106947)/48a=(-86471w^{5}-19851w^{4}-116626w^{3}+67043w^{2}-125502w+106947)/48
b=7(w5+w4+2w33w2+3w1)b=7(-w^{5}+w^{4}+2w^{3}-3w^{2}+3w-1)
c=(141655682w565661512w4+230672148w3136877559w2+149096157w96818792)/864c=(141655682w^{5}-65661512w^{4}+230672148w^{3}-136877559w^{2}+149096157w-96818792)/864

The section P=(x,y)P=(x,y) is given by

x\displaystyle x =\displaystyle= (w52w4+w+1)t4\displaystyle(w^{5}-2w^{4}+w+1)t^{4}
+\displaystyle+ (10w5+12w42w3+14w22w+6)t3\displaystyle(-10w^{5}+12w^{4}-2w^{3}+14w^{2}-2w+6)t^{3}
+\displaystyle+ (22w5+42w441w3+53w225w+39)t2\displaystyle(-22w^{5}+42w^{4}-41w^{3}+53w^{2}-25w+39)t^{2}
+\displaystyle+ (22w5+26w441w3+89w221w+68)t\displaystyle(-22w^{5}+26w^{4}-41w^{3}+89w^{2}-21w+68)t
+\displaystyle+ (400w5+493w4+98w3+639w2+178w+557)/12\displaystyle(-400w^{5}+493w^{4}+98w^{3}+639w^{2}+178w+557)/12

and

y\displaystyle y =\displaystyle= (3w5+7w46w3+7w27w+4)t6\displaystyle(-3w^{5}+7w^{4}-6w^{3}+7w^{2}-7w+4)t^{6}
+\displaystyle+ (6w518w4+9w39w2+21w+9)t5\displaystyle(6w^{5}-18w^{4}+9w^{3}-9w^{2}+21w+9)t^{5}
+\displaystyle+ (159/2w5+201/2w451w3+153w245/2w+63)t4\displaystyle(-159/2w^{5}+201/2w^{4}-51w^{3}+153w^{2}-45/2w+63)t^{4}
+\displaystyle+ (206w5+374w4365w3+537w2289w+377)t3\displaystyle(-206w^{5}+374w^{4}-365w^{3}+537w^{2}-289w+377)t^{3}
+\displaystyle+ (519/2w5+249w4389/2w3+1203/2w214w+1205/2)t2\displaystyle(-519/2w^{5}+249w^{4}-389/2w^{3}+1203/2w^{2}-14w+1205/2)t^{2}
+\displaystyle+ (1213/2w5+861w41153/2w3+1276w2367/2w+775)t\displaystyle(-1213/2w^{5}+861w^{4}-1153/2w^{3}+1276w^{2}-367/2w+775)t
+\displaystyle+ (773/2w5+1553/2w4745w3+2423/2w2961/2w+1347/2)\displaystyle(-773/2w^{5}+1553/2w^{4}-745w^{3}+2423/2w^{2}-961/2w+1347/2)
Remark 4.1 (The Coxeter construction).

McMullen constructs a second automorphism l~\tilde{l} of a projective K3 surface S~\tilde{S} of dynamical degree λ10\lambda_{10}. This time δ(l~)\delta(\tilde{l}) is a 2222nd root of unity and NS(S~)\operatorname{NS}(\tilde{S}) has discriminant 1123211\cdot 23^{2}. As before we find that S~\tilde{S} lies in a one dimensional family of automorphisms of order 1111, we reduced modulo 2323, found S~/𝔽23\tilde{S}/\mathbb{F}_{23} and lifted the surface modulo 23819223^{8192}. However, this time we were unable to find an algebraic relation up to degree 100100. Later, using Gröbner bases as in Remark 3.5 and the msolve package [BES21], we found relations of degree 900900. Probably the degree can be lowered by further coordinate changes.

Now that we have found equations for the surface, we want to find an expression for the Lehmer automorphism. At this point we have a basis for NS(S1)\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}) and can compute the corresponding intersection matrix. On the other hand McMullen’s construction provides a lattice NN abstractly isometric to NS(S1)\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}) and an isometry lO(N)l^{\prime}\in O(N) preserving some chamber of the positive cone. Our next task is to find a concrete isometry NNS(S1)N\cong\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}) and to reconstruct the Lehmer map ll from its cohomological shadow ll^{\prime}.

5. Finding a good fibration.

Equations for Lehmer’s automorphism ll depend on the coordinates we choose on the surface. In order to get manageable equations, we need to choose suitable coordinates. We decided to work with Weierstrass models of elliptic fibrations. Let tt be a coordinate on the base 1\mathbb{P}^{1} of the fibration. The intersection l(F).Fl_{*}(F).F gives the degree of l(t)l(t) on the generic fiber. Hence our first step is to search a “nef divisor” f6Nf_{6}\in N with l(f6).f6l^{\prime}(f_{6}).f_{6} as small as possible. Here “nef” means that f6f_{6} is a ray of a chamber preserved by ll. Geometrically this means that f6f_{6} should be moved as little as possible by ll^{\prime}. On the hyperbolic model of the positive cone, ll^{\prime} acts as a translation along a geodesic with start and endpoints the eigenvectors with eigenvalue 1/λ101/\lambda_{10} and λ10\lambda_{10}. These eigenvectors are isotropic but not rational. Thus it is reasonable to search for f6f_{6} as a point of small height close to these endpoints. By a computer search we found f6f_{6} with l(f6).f6=4l^{\prime}(f_{6}).f_{6}=4.

We know that NN and NS(S1)\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}) are abstractly isomorphic since they lie in the same genus II(1,15)71132\textup{II}_{(1,15)}7^{-1}13^{-2} which consists of a single isometry class. To find equations for ll, we search a sequence of 22-neighbor steps connecting f6f_{6} with f1f_{1}. In particular this gives an explicit isometry NS(S1)N\operatorname{NS}(S_{1})\rightarrow N.

We choose some e6e_{6} with e62=2e_{6}^{2}=-2 and e6.f6=1e_{6}.f_{6}=1. This results in a hyperbolic plane U6U_{6} spanned by e6e_{6} and f6f_{6} whose orthogonal complement has the root sublattice (U6)=A3A43A1\mathcal{R}(U_{6}^{\perp})=A_{3}\oplus A_{4}\oplus 3A_{1}. The complement U6NU_{6}^{\perp}\subseteq N is a negative definite lattice in the genus II(0,14)71132\textup{II}_{(0,14)}7^{-1}13^{-2}. This genus has mass

15589726949525753/172164671078400=90.5515589726949525753/172164671078400=90.55...

which is quite big. Hence it is better to first exhibit an E8E_{8} lattice inside NN by hand. This is carried out in a sequence of three 22-neighbor steps with root sublattices (U5)=A3D5A1\mathcal{R}(U_{5}^{\perp})=A_{3}\oplus D_{5}\oplus A_{1}, (U4)=D8A1\mathcal{R}(U_{4}^{\perp})=D_{8}\oplus A_{1} and finally (U3)=E8A2\mathcal{R}(U_{3})^{\perp}=E_{8}\oplus A_{2}. Giving U3E8C3=NU_{3}\oplus E_{8}\oplus C_{3}=N for some lattice C3C_{3} in the genus II(1,7)71132\textup{II}_{(1,7)}7^{-1}13^{-2}.

We continue on our path of 22-neighbor steps on the orthogonal complement of E8E_{8}, which is easier since the mass of the genus of C3C_{3} is only 2669/20162669/2016 and the dimension of the lattices in question is only 66. Indeed the Kneser neighboring algorithm returns 2323 representatives for this genus almost instantly. One of them is isomorphic to CC - the Mordell-Weil lattice of the fibration on S1S_{1}. We are searching for a hyperbolic plane UE8NU\subseteq E_{8}^{\perp}\subset N with UU^{\perp} isomorphic to the frame lattice E8CE_{8}\oplus C of the fibration. With Lemma 2.6 we chart a 22-neighbor path with two steps connecting U3U_{3}^{\perp} and U1U_{1}^{\perp} using reflections where necessary to guarantee nefness.

The path from U1U_{1} to U6U_{6} yields a sequence of coordinate changes between the Weierstrass models S1,S6S_{1},\dots S_{6} of the corresponding fibrations. We display the final equation S6S_{6}. A list of the intermediate fibrations is found in the ancillary files. Since one needs a primitive 77th root of unity to get all of NS(S1)\operatorname{NS}(S_{1}), we worked with the degree 1212 number field F=(w,ζ7)(z)F=\mathbb{Q}(w,\zeta_{7})\cong\mathbb{Q}(z) where {dgroup}

(4) 0=z123z11+z10+7z98z84z7+13z64z58z4+7z3+z23z+10=z^{12}-3z^{11}+z^{10}+7z^{9}-8z^{8}-4z^{7}+13z^{6}-4z^{5}-8z^{4}+7z^{3}+z^{2}-3z+1
(5) w=z11z103z9+4z8+5z76z62z5+7z4+z34z2+z+2w=z^{11}-z^{10}-3z^{9}+4z^{8}+5z^{7}-6z^{6}-2z^{5}+7z^{4}+z^{3}-4z^{2}+z+2
(6) ζ7=2z114z103z9+14z84z716z6+16z5+8z414z3+2z2+6z2.\zeta_{7}=2z^{11}-4z^{10}-3z^{9}+14z^{8}-4z^{7}-16z^{6}+16z^{5}+8z^{4}-14z^{3}+2z^{2}+6z-2.

Finally a minimal Weierstrass equation for S6S_{6} is given by

S6:y2=x3+ax+bS_{6}\colon y^{2}=x^{3}+ax+b

where aa and bb are as follows: {dgroup*}

a=((486z11+1620z10513z93888z8+4077z7+2565z65616z5+1269z4+3591z31620z2675z+567)t8+(6696z11+17712z10+432z944712z8+30024z7+36720z653352z52808z4+39960z310800z210368z+7344)t7+(2808z11+10044z1017172z91080z8+52488z764044z629484z5+84024z435208z337044z2+32076z+5832)t6+(11016z11+48384z1063288z965664z8+222696z781648z6238248z5+201960z4+56376z3164592z2+7560z+45360)t5+(12690z11+93150z10118260z9171990z8+411750z7+44280z6487890z5+222750z4+287820z3247590z290180z+76680)t4+(1296z11+37800z1041256z986832z8+139320z7+98280z6151200z5+20088z4+151632z323760z250112z+7776)t3+(13284z11+39204z10+19224z9132732z8+37260z7+183384z6110052z578516z4+152928z3+25272z241796z+9180)t2+(6048z11+2808z10+28944z930240z846656z7+59184z6+11664z563072z4+15336z3+28296z27776z2592)t+297z111026z10+3456z82889z73699z6+5562z581z44590z3+1782z2+1242z756),a=((-486z^{11}+1620z^{10}-513z^{9}-3888z^{8}+4077z^{7}+2565z^{6}-5616z^{5}+1269z^{4}+3591z^{3}-1620z^{2}-675z+567)t^{8}+(-6696z^{11}+17712z^{10}+432z^{9}-44712z^{8}+30024z^{7}+36720z^{6}-53352z^{5}-2808z^{4}+39960z^{3}-10800z^{2}-10368z+7344)t^{7}+(-2808z^{11}+10044z^{10}-17172z^{9}-1080z^{8}+52488z^{7}-64044z^{6}-29484z^{5}+84024z^{4}-35208z^{3}-37044z^{2}+32076z+5832)t^{6}+(-11016z^{11}+48384z^{10}-63288z^{9}-65664z^{8}+222696z^{7}-81648z^{6}-238248z^{5}+201960z^{4}+56376z^{3}-164592z^{2}+7560z+45360)t^{5}+(-12690z^{11}+93150z^{10}-118260z^{9}-171990z^{8}+411750z^{7}+44280z^{6}-487890z^{5}+222750z^{4}+287820z^{3}-247590z^{2}-90180z+76680)t^{4}+(-1296z^{11}+37800z^{10}-41256z^{9}-86832z^{8}+139320z^{7}+98280z^{6}-151200z^{5}+20088z^{4}+151632z^{3}-23760z^{2}-50112z+7776)t^{3}+(-13284z^{11}+39204z^{10}+19224z^{9}-132732z^{8}+37260z^{7}+183384z^{6}-110052z^{5}-78516z^{4}+152928z^{3}+25272z^{2}-41796z+9180)t^{2}+(-6048z^{11}+2808z^{10}+28944z^{9}-30240z^{8}-46656z^{7}+59184z^{6}+11664z^{5}-63072z^{4}+15336z^{3}+28296z^{2}-7776z-2592)t+297z^{11}-1026z^{10}+3456z^{8}-2889z^{7}-3699z^{6}+5562z^{5}-81z^{4}-4590z^{3}+1782z^{2}+1242z-756),
b=((7722z11+22086z103240z950652z8+38502z7+40500z659562z54482z4+45576z38856z215012z+6804)t12+(98496z11+212544z10+90072z9555336z8+109512z7+583200z6423144z5344088z4+430272z3+70632z2174960z+44064)t11+(223560z11733536z1090072z9+2659716z82026620z73154464z6+4465044z5+323352z43957336z3+1499148z2+1261980z763992)t10+(3447576z117511184z104469040z9+24927480z88393328z728239408z6+28654992z5+10934352z425684344z3+5006664z2+8851896z3840912)t9+(3403296z113695868z1011826648z9+21801312z8+9769248z733295536z6+15361812z5+25153416z419040832z32238678z2+8672670z812592)t8+(4041576z11+18718128z1016985376z932168016z8+60015816z7+7663248z664441656z5+30965328z4+37784232z326276400z28659872z+11021184)t7+(18053280z11+49242816z103374784z9119968128z8+88202520z7+97750800z6151035192z59475704z4+111685392z332377968z236442224z+19078416)t6+(17546544z11+38331792z10+13155048z999952056z8+34218288z7+90345456z689199792z539875328z4+68240880z31063368z224871536z+5820336)t5+(1819098z1111564532z10+6563106z9+34937082z842080796z740589748z6+69748452z54833270z464619694z3+25145964z2+20500938z14105664)t4+(8464824z1119295928z108678016z9+58692600z820930616z764744704z6+63535752z5+26203392z458450032z3+7671024z2+20609856z8338032)t3+(1602828z111830924z104247964z9+7142256z8+4926420z79102456z6+1647540z5+8908056z42494800z32839860z2+1512432z+366768)t2+(200232z11+598752z1012960z91662768z8+1236384z7+1578528z62214864z597848z4+1799496z3498960z2505440z+283824)t6534z11+10422z10+17712z945144z89180z7+67824z636072z545360z4+49248z3+3996z219440z+6480).b=((-7722z^{11}+22086z^{10}-3240z^{9}-50652z^{8}+38502z^{7}+40500z^{6}-59562z^{5}-4482z^{4}+45576z^{3}-8856z^{2}-15012z+6804)t^{12}+(-98496z^{11}+212544z^{10}+90072z^{9}-555336z^{8}+109512z^{7}+583200z^{6}-423144z^{5}-344088z^{4}+430272z^{3}+70632z^{2}-174960z+44064)t^{11}+(223560z^{11}-733536z^{10}-90072z^{9}+2659716z^{8}-2026620z^{7}-3154464z^{6}+4465044z^{5}+323352z^{4}-3957336z^{3}+1499148z^{2}+1261980z-763992)t^{10}+(3447576z^{11}-7511184z^{10}-4469040z^{9}+24927480z^{8}-8393328z^{7}-28239408z^{6}+28654992z^{5}+10934352z^{4}-25684344z^{3}+5006664z^{2}+8851896z-3840912)t^{9}+(3403296z^{11}-3695868z^{10}-11826648z^{9}+21801312z^{8}+9769248z^{7}-33295536z^{6}+15361812z^{5}+25153416z^{4}-19040832z^{3}-2238678z^{2}+8672670z-812592)t^{8}+(-4041576z^{11}+18718128z^{10}-16985376z^{9}-32168016z^{8}+60015816z^{7}+7663248z^{6}-64441656z^{5}+30965328z^{4}+37784232z^{3}-26276400z^{2}-8659872z+11021184)t^{7}+(-18053280z^{11}+49242816z^{10}-3374784z^{9}-119968128z^{8}+88202520z^{7}+97750800z^{6}-151035192z^{5}-9475704z^{4}+111685392z^{3}-32377968z^{2}-36442224z+19078416)t^{6}+(-17546544z^{11}+38331792z^{10}+13155048z^{9}-99952056z^{8}+34218288z^{7}+90345456z^{6}-89199792z^{5}-39875328z^{4}+68240880z^{3}-1063368z^{2}-24871536z+5820336)t^{5}+(1819098z^{11}-11564532z^{10}+6563106z^{9}+34937082z^{8}-42080796z^{7}-40589748z^{6}+69748452z^{5}-4833270z^{4}-64619694z^{3}+25145964z^{2}+20500938z-14105664)t^{4}+(8464824z^{11}-19295928z^{10}-8678016z^{9}+58692600z^{8}-20930616z^{7}-64744704z^{6}+63535752z^{5}+26203392z^{4}-58450032z^{3}+7671024z^{2}+20609856z-8338032)t^{3}+(1602828z^{11}-1830924z^{10}-4247964z^{9}+7142256z^{8}+4926420z^{7}-9102456z^{6}+1647540z^{5}+8908056z^{4}-2494800z^{3}-2839860z^{2}+1512432z+366768)t^{2}+(-200232z^{11}+598752z^{10}-12960z^{9}-1662768z^{8}+1236384z^{7}+1578528z^{6}-2214864z^{5}-97848z^{4}+1799496z^{3}-498960z^{2}-505440z+283824)t-6534z^{11}+10422z^{10}+17712z^{9}-45144z^{8}-9180z^{7}+67824z^{6}-36072z^{5}-45360z^{4}+49248z^{3}+3996z^{2}-19440z+6480).

6. Equations for Lehmer’s map

In this section we factor the Lehmer automorphism of SS into a sequence of isomorphisms between elliptic K3 surfaces. Since birational maps of K3 surfaces are isomorphisms, it suffices to define the map on an open subset.

We will now confirm that the map we constructed has dynamical degree given by Lehmer’s number λ10\lambda_{10}. As confirming the computations over the degree 1212 field is impractical, we work modulo a prime. This leaves ll_{*} unchanged and gives us the opportunity to display human readable equations again to illustrate the methods by which we found equations for the Lehmer map. We reduce modulo the prime P=(29,z+12)P=(29,z+12) of norm 2929 and work over the residue field k𝔽29k\cong\mathbb{F}_{29}. The neighbor steps were really carried out over a number field of degree 1212 (with intermediate steps modulo PP). The corresponding equations are found in the ancillary files.

6.1. Preliminaries

After a few neighbor steps we have reached an elliptic fibration given by {dgroup}

S6:y2=x3+(3t8+10t7+6t6+17t5+25t4+4t3+23t2+9t+14)x+5t12+25t11+2t10+28t9+28t8+19t7+3t6+17t5+19t4+12t3+25t2+12t+6S_{6}\colon\;y^{2}=x^{3}+(3t^{8}+10t^{7}+6t^{6}+17t^{5}+25t^{4}+4t^{3}+23t^{2}+9t+14)x+5t^{12}+25t^{11}+2t^{10}+28t^{9}+28t^{8}+19t^{7}+3t^{6}+17t^{5}+19t^{4}+12t^{3}+25t^{2}+12t+6

with four sections {dgroup}

P1(t)=(12t4+21t3+5t2+12t+18,23t5+7t4+22t3+13t2),P_{1}(t)=(12t^{4}+21t^{3}+5t^{2}+12t+18,\phantom{=}23t^{5}+7t^{4}+22t^{3}+13t^{2}),
P2(t)=(12t4+20t3+22t2+27t+18,15t4+12t3+12t),P_{2}(t)=(12t^{4}+20t^{3}+22t^{2}+27t+18,\phantom{=}15t^{4}+12t^{3}+12t),
P3(t)=(12t4+20t3+27t2+11t+18,13t4+5t3+26t2+5t),P_{3}(t)=(12t^{4}+20t^{3}+27t^{2}+11t+18,\phantom{=}13t^{4}+5t^{3}+26t^{2}+5t),
P4(t)=(4t4+5t3+5t2+6t+13,9t6+21t5+17t4+12t2+3t+61)P_{4}(t)=(4t^{4}+5t^{3}+5t^{2}+6t+13,\phantom{=}9t^{6}+21t^{5}+17t^{4}+12t^{2}+3t+61)

generating its Mordell-Weil group. Together with the zero section and the reducible fibers they form a basis of NS(S6)\operatorname{NS}(S_{6}). Its intersection matrix is the following (the basis elements coming from the fibers can be inferred from the matrix):

N6=(0100000000001111120000000000000000210000000001100012100000001000000120000000000000000210000000000000012100000100000000121000001000000001200010000000000002001110000000000020000100000000000200101001000011002002101000100100020210100001010100221000000000102222)N_{6}=\left(\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{16}\begin{matrix}0&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&1&1&1\\ 1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&1&0\\ 0&0&1&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&1&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&1&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&1&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&-2&0&0&0&1&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&0&1&1&1&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&0&0&0&1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&0&1&0\\ 1&0&0&1&0&0&0&0&1&1&0&0&-2&0&0&2\\ 1&0&1&0&0&0&1&0&0&1&0&0&0&-2&0&2\\ 1&0&1&0&0&0&0&1&0&1&0&1&0&0&-2&2\\ 1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&2&2&2&-2\end{matrix}\right)

In this basis the pushforward of Lehmer’s map ll is given by the following matrix.

l=(80044101260661418400220101303302920011001020210043002100102022016200110010101201410001100010110021000210001010002310121001202101530021100120220261000100001011012000000000010000120011000110221141001000001001012201100001101201410001000110100020000000000000001)l_{*}=\left(\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{16}\begin{matrix}8&0&0&4&4&1&0&1&2&6&0&6&6&1&4&18\\ 4&0&0&2&2&0&1&0&1&3&0&3&3&0&2&9\\ -2&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&-1&0&-2&0&-2&-1&0&0&-4\\ -3&0&0&-2&-1&0&0&-1&0&-2&0&-2&-2&0&-1&-6\\ -2&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&-1&0&-1&0&-1&-2&0&-1&-4\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&0&-1&0&-1&-1&0&0&-2\\ -1&0&0&0&-2&-1&0&0&0&-1&0&-1&0&0&0&-2\\ -3&1&0&-1&-2&-1&0&0&-1&-2&0&-2&-1&0&-1&-5\\ -3&0&0&-2&-1&-1&0&0&-1&-2&0&-2&-2&0&-2&-6\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&0&-1&0&-1&-1&0&-1&-2\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&0&0&-1\\ -2&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&0&-1&-1&0&-2&-2&-1&-1&-4\\ -1&0&0&-1&0&0&0&0&0&-1&0&0&-1&0&-1&-2\\ 2&0&1&1&0&0&0&0&1&1&0&1&2&0&1&4\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-1&-1&0&-1&0&0&0&-2\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-1\end{matrix}\right)

We work with column vectors so that lTN6l=N6l_{*}^{T}N_{6}l_{*}=N_{6}. One may note that l(f6).f6=4l_{*}(f_{6}).f_{6}=4. Instead of performing a (complicated) 44-neighbor step, we shall perform two 22-neigbor steps. An intermediate fibration is given by the following vector:

f7=(6,3,1,2,1,1,1,2,2,1,0,1,1,1,1,0).f_{7}=(6,3,-1,-2,-1,-1,-1,-2,-2,-1,0,-1,-1,1,-1,0).

Indeed f7f_{7} is nef and f6.f7=2f_{6}.f_{7}=2, l(f6).f7=2l_{*}(f_{6}).f_{7}=2.

6.2. The first neighbor step

The fibration on S6S_{6} is our starting point. We want to find equations for the fibration S7S_{7} corresponding to f7f_{7}. We now follow the strategy for fibration hopping given in Section 2.4.

(1-8) The new elliptic parameter

We calculate the linear system H0(S,f7)={ϕ(c0,c1)c0,c1𝔽29}H^{0}(S,f_{7})=\{\phi(c_{0},c_{1})\mid c_{0},c_{1}\in\mathbb{F}_{29}\} and choose ϕ(0,1)/ϕ(1,0)=u\phi(0,1)/\phi(1,0)=u with

u=(13t7+5t6+9t511xt33t411t35xt+yt6t2+2x7y+8t7)(10t6+10t5+3t4+xt28t314xt7t29x+12t12)u=\frac{(-13t^{7}+5t^{6}+9t^{5}-11xt^{3}-3t^{4}-11t^{3}-5xt+yt-6t^{2}+2x-7y+8t-7)}{(-10t^{6}+10t^{5}+3t^{4}+xt^{2}-8t^{3}-14xt-7t^{2}-9x+12t-12)}

as new elliptic parameter.

(9) A curve of genus one

Solve for y=y(x,t,u)y=y(x,t,u) and set xyx\mapsto y^{\prime}, txt\mapsto x^{\prime} and yy(y,x,u)y\mapsto y(y^{\prime},x^{\prime},u). We rename (x,y,t)=(x,y,u)(x,y,t)=(x^{\prime},y^{\prime},u) and view the resulting change of coordinates 𝔽29(x,y,t)𝔽29(x,y,t)\mathbb{F}_{29}(x,y,t)\rightarrow\mathbb{F}_{29}(x,y,t) as a bi-rational map of the ambient affine space 𝔸3\mathbb{A}^{3}, {dgroup}

xy,x\mapsto y,
y(13x7+10x6t+5x610x5t+9x53x4t3x411x3y+8x3tx2yt11x3+7x2t+14xyt6x25xy12xt+9yt+8x+2y+12t7)/(x+7),y\mapsto(-13x^{7}+10x^{6}t+5x^{6}-10x^{5}t+9x^{5}-3x^{4}t-3x^{4}-11x^{3}y+8x^{3}t-x^{2}yt-11x^{3}+7x^{2}t+14xyt-6x^{2}-5xy-12xt+9yt+8x+2y+12t-7)/(-x+7),
tx,t\mapsto x,

which leads us to the following equation of a curve of genus 11 over 𝔽29(t)\mathbb{F}_{29}(t):

0=x8+(26t+24)x7+(19t2+19t+3)x6+(10t2+11t+2)x5+24x4y+(3t2+6t+1)x4+(22t+27)x3y+(21t2+22t+6)x3+(t2+11)x2y+(22t2+12t+7)x2+(15t2+10t+26)xyy2+(12t2+13t+21)x+(20t2+25t+17)y+17t2+14t+18.0=x^{8}+(26t+24)x^{7}+(19t^{2}+19t+3)x^{6}+(10t^{2}+11t+2)x^{5}+24x^{4}y+(3t^{2}+6t+1)x^{4}+(22t+27)x^{3}y+(21t^{2}+22t+6)x^{3}+(t^{2}+11)x^{2}y+(22t^{2}+12t+7)x^{2}+(15t^{2}+10t+26)xy-y^{2}+(12t^{2}+13t+21)x+(20t^{2}+25t+17)y+17t^{2}+14t+18.

Next, we complete the square and absorb square factors into yy. This transforms it to a hyperelliptic curve (of genus 11) over 𝔽29(t)\mathbb{F}_{29}(t): {dgroup}

xx,x\mapsto x,
y12x4+11x3t14x2t2x37xt29x2+xy+5xt+10t2+13x7y2t6,y\mapsto 12x^{4}+11x^{3}t-14x^{2}t^{2}-x^{3}-7xt^{2}-9x^{2}+xy+5xt+10t^{2}+13x-7y-2t-6,
tt,t\mapsto t,
y2=(7t2+26t+20)x4+(11t3+26t2+7t+3)x3+(22t4+2t2+15t+18)x2+(11t4+5t3+10t2+19t+5)x+5t4+27t3+11t2+28t+23.y^{2}=(7t^{2}+26t+20)x^{4}+(11t^{3}+26t^{2}+7t+3)x^{3}+(22t^{4}+2t^{2}+15t+18)x^{2}+(11t^{4}+5t^{3}+10t^{2}+19t+5)x+5t^{4}+27t^{3}+11t^{2}+28t+23.

(10-11) A Weierstrass model

To reach a Weierstrass model, we choose the point (x,y)=(0,11t2+8t+9)(x,y)=(0,-11t^{2}+8t+9) as zero section and move it to infinity: {dgroup}

xx/y,x\mapsto x/y,
y(6x3t414x3t312xyt43y2t410x3t2+4x2t3+13xyt3+7y2t37x3tx2t23xyt2+5y2t213x3+11x2t+3xyt11y2tx2+13xy8y2)/(5y2t2y2t12y2),y\mapsto(6x^{3}t^{4}-14x^{3}t^{3}-12xyt^{4}-3y^{2}t^{4}-10x^{3}t^{2}+4x^{2}t^{3}+13xyt^{3}+7y^{2}t^{3}-7x^{3}t-x^{2}t^{2}-3xyt^{2}+5y^{2}t^{2}-13x^{3}+11x^{2}t+3xyt-11y^{2}t-x^{2}+13xy-8y^{2})/(5y^{2}t^{2}-y^{2}t-12y^{2}),
tt,t\mapsto t,
0=(t8+5t7+15t6+28t5+20t4+14t3+11t2+26t+20)x3+(11t7+3t6+28t5+3t4+26t3+26t2+15t+12)x2+(25t8+4t7+2t6+4t5+25t4+9t3+26t2+25t+18)xy+(28t8+24t7+14t6+t5+9t4+15t3+18t2+3t+9)y2+(27t6+3t5+27t4+28t3+25t2+19t+3)x+(5t7+24t6+t5+13t4+20t3+10t+5)y,0=(t^{8}+5t^{7}+15t^{6}+28t^{5}+20t^{4}+14t^{3}+11t^{2}+26t+20)x^{3}+(11t^{7}+3t^{6}+28t^{5}+3t^{4}+26t^{3}+26t^{2}+15t+12)x^{2}+(25t^{8}+4t^{7}+2t^{6}+4t^{5}+25t^{4}+9t^{3}+26t^{2}+25t+18)xy+(28t^{8}+24t^{7}+14t^{6}+t^{5}+9t^{4}+15t^{3}+18t^{2}+3t+9)y^{2}+(27t^{6}+3t^{5}+27t^{4}+28t^{3}+25t^{2}+19t+3)x+(5t^{7}+24t^{6}+t^{5}+13t^{4}+20t^{3}+10t+5)y,

(12) Tate’s algorithm

We move two reducible fibers to 0 and \infty, {dgroup}

xx,x\mapsto x,
yy,y\mapsto y,
t(6t11)/t,t\mapsto(-6t-11)/t,
0=(28t4+4t3+23t2+4t+28)x3+(4t6+22t5+3t4+28t2+t)x2+(12t5+8t4+16t3+16t2+2t+4)xy+(t4+25t3+6t2+25t+1)y2+(25t8+27t7+5t6+12t5+26t4+4t3+12t2)x+(5t7+17t6+8t5+28t4+4t3+14t2+11t)y.0=(28t^{4}+4t^{3}+23t^{2}+4t+28)x^{3}+(4t^{6}+22t^{5}+3t^{4}+28t^{2}+t)x^{2}+(12t^{5}+8t^{4}+16t^{3}+16t^{2}+2t+4)xy+(t^{4}+25t^{3}+6t^{2}+25t+1)y^{2}+(25t^{8}+27t^{7}+5t^{6}+12t^{5}+26t^{4}+4t^{3}+12t^{2})x+(5t^{7}+17t^{6}+8t^{5}+28t^{4}+4t^{3}+14t^{2}+11t)y.

Finally, we reach a globally minimal elliptic fibration: {dgroup}

x(t4+9t38t24x9t11)/(t22t+1),x\mapsto(-t^{4}+9t^{3}-8t^{2}-4x-9t-11)/(t^{2}-2t+1),
y(11t614t5+7t45xt213t3+xt+14t28x+9y+12t+7)/(t33t2+3t1),y\mapsto(-11t^{6}-14t^{5}+7t^{4}-5xt^{2}-13t^{3}+xt+14t^{2}-8x+9y+12t+7)/(t^{3}-3t^{2}+3t-1),
tt,t\mapsto t,
S7:y2=x3+(11t8+15t7+26t6+7t5+14t4+4t3+17t2+15t+19)x+20t12+4t11+9t10+15t9+14t8+14t7+16t6+23t4+8t3+5t2+5t+1.S_{7}\colon\;y^{2}=x^{3}+(11t^{8}+15t^{7}+26t^{6}+7t^{5}+14t^{4}+4t^{3}+17t^{2}+15t+19)x+20t^{12}+4t^{11}+9t^{10}+15t^{9}+14t^{8}+14t^{7}+16t^{6}+23t^{4}+8t^{3}+5t^{2}+5t+1.

(13-14) The new basis

Next we have to find a basis for NS(S7)\operatorname{NS}(S_{7}), that is, generators of the Mordell-Weil group of the new fibration. Let us call f76:S7S6f_{76}:S_{7}\rightarrow S_{6} the map induced by the composition of the rational maps above. We calculate (f761)(D)(f_{76}^{-1})_{*}(D) for DD in our basis of NS(S6)\operatorname{NS}(S_{6}) (since we worked with Weil-Divisors, we cannot simply calculate f76f_{76}^{*}). The resulting divisors are either fibers or multisections. We take the fiberwise trace of each multisection with Algorithm 1 turning it into a section, compute the Mordel-Weil lattice in this basis and LLL-reduce it to obtain the following sections of small height:

{dgroup}
B1=(25t4+13t3+16t2+23t+15,17t6+3t5+16t4+15t3+5t2+25t+6),B_{1}=(25t^{4}+13t^{3}+16t^{2}+23t+15,\phantom{=}17t^{6}+3t^{5}+16t^{4}+15t^{3}+5t^{2}+25t+6),
B2=(25t4+26t3+23t2+4t+15,12t6+6t5+17t3+9t2+4t+6),B_{2}=(25t^{4}+26t^{3}+23t^{2}+4t+15,\phantom{=}12t^{6}+6t^{5}+17t^{3}+9t^{2}+4t+6),
B3=(9t4+4t3+25t2+24t+21,23t6+27t5+2t4+7t3+28t2+17t+27),B_{3}=(9t^{4}+4t^{3}+25t^{2}+24t+21,\phantom{=}23t^{6}+27t^{5}+2t^{4}+7t^{3}+28t^{2}+17t+27),
B4=(7t4+24t3+27t2+5t+19,18t6+27t5+21t4+26t2+t),B_{4}=(7t^{4}+24t^{3}+27t^{2}+5t+19,\phantom{=}18t^{6}+27t^{5}+21t^{4}+26t^{2}+t),
B5=(21t4+20t3+23t2+9t+19,19t5+19t4+17t3+21t2+11t).B_{5}=(21t^{4}+20t^{3}+23t^{2}+9t+19,\phantom{=}19t^{5}+19t^{4}+17t^{3}+21t^{2}+11t).
Remark 6.1.

Calculating (f761)(D)(f_{76}^{-1})_{*}(D) in the degree 1212 field is expensive since f76f_{76} has large coefficients. So instead we lifted the sections BiB_{i} to characteristic zero by a multivariate Newton iteration.

(15) The intersection matrix

The intersection matrix N7N_{7} of our chosen basis of NS(S7)\operatorname{NS}(S_{7}) is the following:

N7=(0100000000011111120000000000000000210000000000000012000000000011000021000000000100001210000000000000012100000000000000120000000000000000200010110000000002010001000000000020010010000000010222101000000010022220100000000012222210010000100122201001100011000202).N_{7}=\left(\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{16}\begin{matrix}0&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&1&1&1&1\\ 1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&1\\ 0&0&0&0&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1\\ 0&0&0&0&1&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&1&-2&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&0&0&1&0&1&1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&1&0&0&0&1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&0&0&1&0&0\\ 1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&-2&2&2&1&0\\ 1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&2&-2&2&2&0\\ 1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&2&2&-2&2&2\\ 1&0&0&1&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&1&2&2&-2&0\\ 1&0&0&1&1&0&0&0&1&1&0&0&0&2&0&-2\end{matrix}\right)_{.}

As before one can infer the ordering of fiber components in our basis from the intersection matrix.

(16) The transformation matrix

Next, we calculated (the basis representation of) the pushforward

(f76):NS(S7)NS(S6).(f_{76})_{*}\colon\quad\operatorname{NS}(S_{7})\longrightarrow\operatorname{NS}(S_{6}).
(f76)=(600140022601410102083010200113075510410001000020222312100100102033352100010010102223110011000010322311001210001032231200120111205346220011001120434621000100001021241000000000010000010001000110222311000000101022242100000011102123110001000110312310000000000000100).(f_{76})_{*}=\left(\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{16}\begin{matrix}6&0&0&1&4&0&0&2&2&6&0&14&10&10&20&8\\ 3&0&1&0&2&0&0&1&1&3&0&7&5&5&10&4\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&0&-2&0&-2&-2&-2&-3&-1\\ -2&1&0&0&-1&0&0&-1&0&-2&0&-3&-3&-3&-5&-2\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&-1&0&-1&0&-2&-2&-2&-3&-1\\ -1&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&0&0&-1&0&-3&-2&-2&-3&-1\\ -1&0&0&-1&-2&1&0&0&0&-1&0&-3&-2&-2&-3&-1\\ -2&0&0&-1&-2&0&1&-1&-1&-2&0&-5&-3&-4&-6&-2\\ -2&0&0&-1&-1&0&0&-1&-1&-2&0&-4&-3&-4&-6&-2\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&0&-1&0&-2&-1&-2&-4&-1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&0&0&0\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-1&-1&0&-2&-2&-2&-3&-1\\ -1&0&0&0&0&0&0&-1&0&-1&0&-2&-2&-2&-4&-2\\ 1&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&1&1&0&2&1&2&3&1\\ -1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-1&-1&0&-3&-1&-2&-3&-1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0\end{matrix}\right)_{.}

Note that (f76)TN6(f76)=N7(f_{76})_{*}^{T}N_{6}(f_{76})_{*}=N_{7}.

Remark 6.2.

We represented f76f_{76} as a morphism of some open subset of S7S_{7} (defined as the complement of the hypersurface of the denominators) to some affine chart of S6S_{6}. Many of the basis divisors will not meet the chart used to define f76f_{76}. However only finitely many do. Thus instead of only pushing forward the basis, we push forward elements of the Mordel-Weil group until we have reached a \mathbb{Q}-basis. The basis representation of a divisor on S6S_{6} was obtained by calculating the intersection numbers with our given basis.

6.3. The second factor

Using the basis representation we calculate

f8=(f76)1l(f6)=(9,4,1,2,2,2,2,1,1,1,0,0,1,0,1,2).f_{8}=(f_{76})^{-1}_{*}l_{*}(f_{6})=(9,4,-1,-2,-2,-2,-2,-1,-1,-1,0,0,1,0,-1,-2).

This is the target elliptic divisor for the second neighbor step.

(1-8) The next elliptic parameter

The elliptic parameter turns out to be

(7) (5t11+2t10+13t93xt75t8xt6+7t7+6xt56yt510t62xt45yt47t55xt311yt3+7t49xt2+3yt25t3+5xt+4yt13t2+7x+14t+10)/(10t11+7t1013t9+6xt713t8+7xt6+14t7+xt57t6xt46yt4+7t5+10xt35yt36t413xt211yt2+10t3+2xt+3yt11t2+9x+4y10t4).(5t^{11}+2t^{10}+13t^{9}-3xt^{7}-5t^{8}-xt^{6}+7t^{7}+6xt^{5}-6yt^{5}-10t^{6}-2xt^{4}-5yt^{4}-7t^{5}-5xt^{3}-11yt^{3}+7t^{4}-9xt^{2}+3yt^{2}-5t^{3}+5xt+4yt-13t^{2}+7x+14t+10)/(-10t^{11}+7t^{10}-13t^{9}+6xt^{7}-13t^{8}+7xt^{6}+14t^{7}+xt^{5}-7t^{6}-xt^{4}-6yt^{4}+7t^{5}+10xt^{3}-5yt^{3}-6t^{4}-13xt^{2}-11yt^{2}+10t^{3}+2xt+3yt-11t^{2}+9x+4y-10t-4).

(9) A curve of genus one

As before we use it to derive the coordinate change to the new fibration: {dgroup}

xy,x\mapsto y,
y(10x11t+5x117x10t+2x10+13x9t+13x9+13x8t6x7yt5x83x7y14x7t7x6yt+7x7x6y+7x6tx5yt10x6+6x5y7x5t+x4yt7x52x4y+6x4t10x3yt+7x45x3y10x3t+13x2yt5x39x2y+11x2t2xyt13x2+5xy+10xt9yt+14x+7y+4t+10)/(6x56x4t+5x45x3t+11x311x2t3x2+3xt4x+4t),y\mapsto(10x^{11}t+5x^{11}-7x^{10}t+2x^{10}+13x^{9}t+13x^{9}+13x^{8}t-6x^{7}yt-5x^{8}-3x^{7}y-14x^{7}t-7x^{6}yt+7x^{7}-x^{6}y+7x^{6}t-x^{5}yt-10x^{6}+6x^{5}y-7x^{5}t+x^{4}yt-7x^{5}-2x^{4}y+6x^{4}t-10x^{3}yt+7x^{4}-5x^{3}y-10x^{3}t+13x^{2}yt-5x^{3}-9x^{2}y+11x^{2}t-2xyt-13x^{2}+5xy+10xt-9yt+14x+7y+4t+10)/(6x^{5}-6x^{4}t+5x^{4}-5x^{3}t+11x^{3}-11x^{2}t-3x^{2}+3xt-4x+4t),
tx,t\mapsto x,
0=(3t2+3t+27)x10+(8t2+11t+26)x9+(10t2+8t+20)x8+(26t2+15t+26)x7+(4t2+4t+4)x6y+(26t2+16t+11)x6+(22t2+3t+5)x5y+(26t2+t+22)x5+(4t2+11t+28)x4y+(9t2+4t+8)x4+(18t2+24t+26)x3y+25x2y2+(23t2+23t+20)x3+(14t2+3t+22)x2y+8txy2+(15t+25)x2+(14t2+26t+10)xy+25t2y2+(19t2+6t+3)x+(27t2+12t+5)y+14t+30=(3t^{2}+3t+27)x^{10}+(8t^{2}+11t+26)x^{9}+(10t^{2}+8t+20)x^{8}+(26t^{2}+15t+26)x^{7}+(4t^{2}+4t+4)x^{6}y+(26t^{2}+16t+11)x^{6}+(22t^{2}+3t+5)x^{5}y+(26t^{2}+t+22)x^{5}+(4t^{2}+11t+28)x^{4}y+(9t^{2}+4t+8)x^{4}+(18t^{2}+24t+26)x^{3}y+25x^{2}y^{2}+(23t^{2}+23t+20)x^{3}+(14t^{2}+3t+22)x^{2}y+8txy^{2}+(15t+25)x^{2}+(14t^{2}+26t+10)xy+25t^{2}y^{2}+(19t^{2}+6t+3)x+(27t^{2}+12t+5)y+14t+3

. Transform to a hyperelliptic curve over K(t)K(t): {dgroup}

xx,x\mapsto x,
y(4x6t2+4x6t7x5t2+4x6+3x5t+4x4t2+5x5+8x4y+11x4t11x3t2x43x3y5x3t+14x2t23x3+5x2y+3x2t+14xt27x24xy3xt2t2+10x+14y+12t+5)/(8x2+13xt+8t2),y\mapsto(4x^{6}t^{2}+4x^{6}t-7x^{5}t^{2}+4x^{6}+3x^{5}t+4x^{4}t^{2}+5x^{5}+8x^{4}y+11x^{4}t-11x^{3}t^{2}-x^{4}-3x^{3}y-5x^{3}t+14x^{2}t^{2}-3x^{3}+5x^{2}y+3x^{2}t+14xt^{2}-7x^{2}-4xy-3xt-2t^{2}+10x+14y+12t+5)/(8x^{2}+13xt+8t^{2}),
tt,t\mapsto t,
y2=(22t4+15t3+16t2+23t+7)x4+(12t4+2t3+9t2+22t+16)x3+(28t4+28t3+4t2+21t+3)x2+(11t4+24t3+3t2+26t+18)x+16t4+8t3+21t2+16t+13.y^{2}=(22t^{4}+15t^{3}+16t^{2}+23t+7)x^{4}+(12t^{4}+2t^{3}+9t^{2}+22t+16)x^{3}+(28t^{4}+28t^{3}+4t^{2}+21t+3)x^{2}+(11t^{4}+24t^{3}+3t^{2}+26t+18)x+16t^{4}+8t^{3}+21t^{2}+16t+13.

(10) A rational point

We change the chart of the hyperelliptic curve and thus find a section which was previously at infinity and invisible to us. {dgroup}

x1/x,x\mapsto 1/x,
yy/x2,y\mapsto y/x^{2},
tt,t\mapsto t,
y2=(16t4+8t3+21t2+16t+13)x4+(11t4+24t3+3t2+26t+18)x3+(28t4+28t3+4t2+21t+3)x2+(12t4+2t3+9t2+22t+16)x+22t4+15t3+16t2+23t+7.y^{2}=(16t^{4}+8t^{3}+21t^{2}+16t+13)x^{4}+(11t^{4}+24t^{3}+3t^{2}+26t+18)x^{3}+(28t^{4}+28t^{3}+4t^{2}+21t+3)x^{2}+(12t^{4}+2t^{3}+9t^{2}+22t+16)x+22t^{4}+15t^{3}+16t^{2}+23t+7.

(11) A Weierstrass model

Use the section (x,y)=(0,14t214t6)(x,y)=(0,-14t^{2}-14t-6) to obtain a Weierstrass form. (Note that a different choice of section will result in a different final map!) {dgroup}

xx/y,x\mapsto x/y,
y(x3t35x3t2+12xyt314y2t3+8x3t+7x2t2+9xyt212y2t210x314x2t+7xyt4y2t9x2+14xy+5y2)/(y2t+4y2),y\mapsto(-x^{3}t^{3}-5x^{3}t^{2}+12xyt^{3}-14y^{2}t^{3}+8x^{3}t+7x^{2}t^{2}+9xyt^{2}-12y^{2}t^{2}-10x^{3}-14x^{2}t+7xyt-4y^{2}t-9x^{2}+14xy+5y^{2})/(y^{2}t+4y^{2}),
tt,t\mapsto t,
0=(28t6+19t5+20t4+2t3+10t2+15t+16)x3+(14t5+13t4+20t3+13t2+9t+23)x2+(24t6+22t5+28t4+20t3+5t2+3t+19)xy+(t6+10t5+9t4+27t3+19t2+14t+13)y2+(16t6+20t5+2t4+15t3+t2+21t+11)x+(11t6+2t5+t4+21t3+t2+5t+18)y.0=(28t^{6}+19t^{5}+20t^{4}+2t^{3}+10t^{2}+15t+16)x^{3}+(14t^{5}+13t^{4}+20t^{3}+13t^{2}+9t+23)x^{2}+(24t^{6}+22t^{5}+28t^{4}+20t^{3}+5t^{2}+3t+19)xy+(t^{6}+10t^{5}+9t^{4}+27t^{3}+19t^{2}+14t+13)y^{2}+(16t^{6}+20t^{5}+2t^{4}+15t^{3}+t^{2}+21t+11)x+(11t^{6}+2t^{5}+t^{4}+21t^{3}+t^{2}+5t+18)y.

(12) Tate’s algorithm

Next, we reach a short Weierstrass model (up to scaling): {dgroup}

x(4xt48xt3+10t4+5xt212t3+9xt+12t2+4x3t3)/(t4+2t3+6t2+5t1),x\mapsto(-4xt^{4}-8xt^{3}+10t^{4}+5xt^{2}-12t^{3}+9xt+12t^{2}+4x-3t-3)/(t^{4}+2t^{3}+6t^{2}+5t-1),
y(10xt6+9yt62xt52yt5+5t610xt47yt4+6t5xt3yt3+3t4+10xt23yt24t36xt+2yt9t214x8y+2t+10)/(t6+3t54t413t310t23t+12),y\mapsto(-10xt^{6}+9yt^{6}-2xt^{5}-2yt^{5}+5t^{6}-10xt^{4}-7yt^{4}+6t^{5}-xt^{3}-yt^{3}+3t^{4}+10xt^{2}-3yt^{2}-4t^{3}-6xt+2yt-9t^{2}-14x-8y+2t+10)/(t^{6}+3t^{5}-4t^{4}-13t^{3}-10t^{2}-3t+12),
tt,t\mapsto t,
0=(t12+6t11+t10+8t9+5t8+9t7+23t6+8t5+24t4+9t3+t2+15t+28)x3+(28t12+23t11+28t10+21t9+24t8+20t7+6t6+21t5+5t4+20t3+28t2+14t+1)y2+(3t12+18t11+6t10+7t9+4t8+10t7+11t6+26t5+23t4+25t3+11t2+10t+14)x+25t12+17t11+2t10+t9+20t8+8t7+28t6+t5+13t4+8t3+4t2+7t.0=(t^{12}+6t^{11}+t^{10}+8t^{9}+5t^{8}+9t^{7}+23t^{6}+8t^{5}+24t^{4}+9t^{3}+t^{2}+15t+28)x^{3}+(28t^{12}+23t^{11}+28t^{10}+21t^{9}+24t^{8}+20t^{7}+6t^{6}+21t^{5}+5t^{4}+20t^{3}+28t^{2}+14t+1)y^{2}+(3t^{12}+18t^{11}+6t^{10}+7t^{9}+4t^{8}+10t^{7}+11t^{6}+26t^{5}+23t^{4}+25t^{3}+11t^{2}+10t+14)x+25t^{12}+17t^{11}+2t^{10}+t^{9}+20t^{8}+8t^{7}+28t^{6}+t^{5}+13t^{4}+8t^{3}+4t^{2}+7t.

Then we produce a globally minimal Weierstrass model: {dgroup}

xx/(t4+2t3+6t2+5t1),x\mapsto x/(t^{4}+2t^{3}+6t^{2}+5t-1),
yy/(t6+3t54t413t310t23t+12),y\mapsto y/(t^{6}+3t^{5}-4t^{4}-13t^{3}-10t^{2}-3t+12),
tt,t\mapsto t,
S8:y2=x3+(3t8+12t7+22t6+21t5+5t4+8t3+27t2+7t+15)x+25t12+17t11+2t10+t9+20t8+8t7+28t6+t5+13t4+8t3+4t2+7t.S_{8}\colon\;y^{2}=x^{3}+(3t^{8}+12t^{7}+22t^{6}+21t^{5}+5t^{4}+8t^{3}+27t^{2}+7t+15)x+25t^{12}+17t^{11}+2t^{10}+t^{9}+20t^{8}+8t^{7}+28t^{6}+t^{5}+13t^{4}+8t^{3}+4t^{2}+7t.

Matching S8S_{8} and S6S_{6}

By construction the fibered surfaces S8S_{8} and S6S_{6} are isomorphic. Since we are working with Weierstrass models, one can give such an isomorphism in two steps. First we apply an automorphism of the base 1\mathbb{P}^{1} to match the singular fibers with those of S6S_{6}: {dgroup}

xx,x\mapsto x,
yy,y\mapsto y,
t(8t10)/(t13),t\mapsto(-8t-10)/(t-13),
0=(t12+18t11+18t10+3t9+21t8+4t7+7t6+9t5+3t4+2t3+27t2+10t+23)x3+(28t12+11t11+11t10+26t9+8t8+25t7+22t6+20t5+26t4+27t3+2t2+19t+6)y2+(14t12+5t11+4t10+3t9+27t8+9t7+8t6+11t5+5t4+23t3+24t2+18t+19)x+6t12+t11+14t10+22t9+22t8+17t7+21t6+3t5+17t4+26t3+t2+26t+13.0=(t^{12}+18t^{11}+18t^{10}+3t^{9}+21t^{8}+4t^{7}+7t^{6}+9t^{5}+3t^{4}+2t^{3}+27t^{2}+10t+23)x^{3}+(28t^{12}+11t^{11}+11t^{10}+26t^{9}+8t^{8}+25t^{7}+22t^{6}+20t^{5}+26t^{4}+27t^{3}+2t^{2}+19t+6)y^{2}+(14t^{12}+5t^{11}+4t^{10}+3t^{9}+27t^{8}+9t^{7}+8t^{6}+11t^{5}+5t^{4}+23t^{3}+24t^{2}+18t+19)x+6t^{12}+t^{11}+14t^{10}+22t^{9}+22t^{8}+17t^{7}+21t^{6}+3t^{5}+17t^{4}+26t^{3}+t^{2}+26t+13.

Then the resulting elliptic curve is isomorphic to S6/𝔽29(t)S_{6}/\mathbb{F}_{29}(t). An isomorphism is given by {dgroup}

x(13x)/(t4+6t3t2t4),x\mapsto(-13x)/(t^{4}+6t^{3}-t^{2}-t-4),
y(6y)/(t6+9t5+12t45t32t27t9),y\mapsto(-6y)/(t^{6}+9t^{5}+12t^{4}-5t^{3}-2t^{2}-7t-9),
tt,t\mapsto t,
S6:y2=x3+(3t8+10t7+6t6+17t5+25t4+4t3+23t2+9t+14)x+5t12+25t11+2t10+28t9+28t8+19t7+3t6+17t5+19t4+12t3+25t2+12t+6.S_{6}\colon\;y^{2}=x^{3}+(3t^{8}+10t^{7}+6t^{6}+17t^{5}+25t^{4}+4t^{3}+23t^{2}+9t+14)x+5t^{12}+25t^{11}+2t^{10}+28t^{9}+28t^{8}+19t^{7}+3t^{6}+17t^{5}+19t^{4}+12t^{3}+25t^{2}+12t+6.

We denote by f67:S6S7f_{67}\colon S_{6}\rightarrow S_{7} the map induced by the composition of the rational maps above.

Remark 6.3.

Our construction assures that (f76)(f67)(f6)=l(f6)=f8(f_{76})_{*}(f_{67})_{*}(f_{6})=l_{*}(f_{6})=f_{8}. However, it may happen that (f76)(f67)(o6)(f_{76})_{*}(f_{67})_{*}(o_{6}) is not l(o6)l_{*}(o_{6}) but rather another section. This can be compensated by a translation, or by choosing a different zero section when forming the Weierstrass model. Indeed this is the reason for the change of charts in (6). Once fiber and zero section have the desired pushforward, the number of automorphisms fixing both is finite. They come from automorphisms of the elliptic curve (fixing the zero section) and automorphisms of the base.

(13-16) The pushforward

As before we compute the pushforward (f67):NS(S6)NS(S7)(f_{67})_{*}\colon\operatorname{NS}(S_{6})\rightarrow\operatorname{NS}(S_{7}).

(f67)=(904500040009102420402200020004512910100011000121022020010100024104203010000002510420300000000241042120000000023103101000000002210210100001100120021010000001013112000000000010000100110000000010101010000000013102000000000000000110010001000100022031000000026104)(f_{67})_{*}=\left(\setcounter{MaxMatrixCols}{16}\begin{matrix}9&0&4&5&0&0&0&4&0&0&0&9&10&2&4&20\\ 4&0&2&2&0&0&0&2&0&0&0&4&5&1&2&9\\ -1&0&-1&0&0&0&1&-1&0&0&0&-1&-2&-1&0&-2\\ -2&0&-2&0&0&1&0&-1&0&0&0&-2&-4&-1&0&-4\\ -2&0&-3&0&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&-5&-1&0&-4\\ -2&0&-3&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&-4&-1&0&-4\\ -2&1&-2&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&-3&-1&0&-3\\ -1&0&-1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&-2&-1&0&-2\\ -1&0&-1&0&0&0&0&-1&1&0&0&-1&-2&0&0&-2\\ -1&0&-1&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&-1&-3&-1&-1&-2\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&0&0&0&-1\\ 0&0&1&-1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&0&-1&0\\ 1&0&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&1&3&1&0&2\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-1\\ -1&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-1&0&0&0&-2\\ -2&0&-3&1&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-2&-6&-1&0&-4\end{matrix}\right)

Note that (f67)TN7(f67)=N6(f_{67})_{*}^{T}N_{7}(f_{67})_{*}=N_{6}.

Lehmer’s map

We confirm that (f76)(f67)=l(f_{76})_{*}(f_{67})_{*}=l_{*}, on NS(S6)\operatorname{NS}(S_{6}). Thus the composite map f76f67f_{76}\circ f_{67} has dynamical degree equal to Lehmer’s number.

References

  • [AST11] Michela Artebani, Alessandra Sarti, and Shingo Taki. K3K3 surfaces with non-symplectic automorphisms of prime order. Math. Z., 268(1-2):507–533, 2011. With an appendix by Shigeyuki Kondō.
  • [BE21] Simon Brandhorst and Noam D. Elkies. Equations for a K3 Lehmer map. arXiv:2103.15101, 2021.
  • [BES21] Jérémy Berthomieu, Christian Eder, and Mohab Safey El Din. msolve: A Library for Solving Polynomial Systems. In 2021 International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, 46th International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, Saint Petersburg, Russia, July 2021.
  • [Bra19] Simon Brandhorst. The classification of purely non-symplectic automorphisms of high order on K3K3 surfaces. J. Algebra, 533:229–265, 2019.
  • [Can01] Serge Cantat. Dynamique des automorphismes des surfaces K3K3. Acta Math., 187(1):1–57, 2001.
  • [DGPS19] Wolfram Decker, Gert-Martin Greuel, Gerhard Pfister, and Hans Schönemann. Singular 4-1-2 — A computer algebra system for polynomial computations. http://www.singular.uni-kl.de, 2019.
  • [Dur77] Alan H. Durfee. Bilinear and quadratic forms on torsion modules. Adv. Math., 25:133–164, 1977.
  • [EK14] Noam Elkies and Abhinav Kumar. K3 surfaces and equations for Hilbert modular surfaces. Algebra Number Theory, 8(10):2297–2411, 2014.
  • [Elk08] Noam D. Elkies. Shimura curve computations via K3K3 surfaces of Néron-Severi rank at least 19. In Algorithmic number theory. 8th international symposium, ANTS-VIII Banff, Canada, May 17–22, 2008 Proceedings, pages 196–211. Berlin: Springer, 2008.
  • [ES15] Noam D. Elkies and Matthias Schütt. Genus 1 fibrations on the supersingular K3K3 surface in characteristic 2 with Artin invariant 1. Asian J. Math., 19(3):555–582, 2015.
  • [Jan14] Junmyeong Jang. Some remarks on non-symplectic automorphisms of K3 surfaces over a field of odd characteristic. East Asian Math. J., 30(3):321–326, 2014.
  • [Jan17] Junmyeong Jang. A lifting of an automorphism of a K3K3 surface over odd characteristic. Int. Math. Res. Not., 2017(6):1787–1804, 2017.
  • [Kne02] Martin Kneser. Quadratische Formen. Neu bearbeitet und herausgegeben in Zusammenarbeit mit Rudolf Scharlau. Berlin: Springer, 2002.
  • [Kum14] Abhinav Kumar. Elliptic fibrations on a generic Jacobian Kummer surface. J. Algebr. Geom., 23(4):599–667, 2014.
  • [Kum15] Abhinav Kumar. Hilbert modular surfaces for square discriminants and elliptic subfields of genus 2 function fields. Res. Math. Sci., 2:46, 2015. Id/No 24.
  • [McM07] Curtis T. McMullen. Dynamics on blowups of the projective plane. Publ. Math., Inst. Hautes Étud. Sci., 105:49–89, 2007.
  • [McM11] Curtis T. McMullen. K3K3 surfaces, entropy and glue. J. Reine Angew. Math., 658:1–25, 2011.
  • [McM16] Curtis T. McMullen. Automorphisms of projective K3 surfaces with minimum entropy. Invent. Math., 203(1):179–215, 2016.
  • [Ogu10] Keiji Oguiso. The third smallest Salem number in automorphisms of K3 surfaces. In Algebraic geometry in East Asia – Seoul 2008., pages 331–360. Tokyo: Mathematical Society of Japan, 2010.
  • [PŠŠ71] I. I. Pjateckiĭ-Šapiro and I. R. Šafarevič. Torelli’s theorem for algebraic surfaces of type K3{\rm K}3. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat., 35:530–572, 1971.
  • [SD74] B. Saint-Donat. Projective models of K3K-3 surfaces. Amer. J. Math., 96:602–639, 1974.
  • [Shi90] Tetsuji Shioda. On the Mordell-Weil lattices. Comment. Math. Univ. St. Pauli, 39(2):211–240, 1990.
  • [SS10] Matthias Schütt and Tetsuji Shioda. Elliptic surfaces. In Algebraic Geometry in East Asia — Seoul 2008, pages 51–160. Tokyo: Mathematical Society of Japan, 2010.
  • [Tae17] Lenny Taelman. Complex multiplication and shimura stacks. arXiv:1707.01236, 2017.
  • [Tat75] J. Tate. Algorithm for determining the type of a singular fiber in an elliptic pencil. In Modular functions of one variable. IV. Proc. int. summer school, Univ. of Antwerp, RUCA, 1972, pages 33–52. Berlin: Springer, 1975.
  • [The19] The PARI Group, Univ. Bordeaux. PARI/GP version 2.11.2, 2019. available from http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/.
  • [The20] The Sage Developers. SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 9.1.0), 2020. https://www.sagemath.org.
  • [Zha] Sheng Yuan Zhao. Nombres de salem et automorphismes á entropie positive de surfaces ab éliennes et de surfaces K3. (Mémoire de Master 2), https://perso.univ-rennes1.fr/serge.cantat/Documents/Zhao-Salem.pdf.