<p>In 2016 Tafazolian et al. [<CitationRef CitationID="CR31">31</CitationRef>] introduced new families of <InlineEquation ID="IEq1"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathbb {F}_{q^{2n}}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mi mathvariant="double-struck">F</mi> <msup> <mi>q</mi> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msup> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation>-maximal function fields <InlineEquation ID="IEq2"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {Y}_{n,s}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">Y</mi> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and <InlineEquation ID="IEq3"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {X}_{n,s,a,b}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">X</mi> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>a</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> arising as subfields of the first generalized GK function field (GGS). In this way the authors found new examples of maximal function fields that are not isomorphic to subfields of the Hermitian function field. In this paper we construct analogous function fields <InlineEquation ID="IEq4"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\tilde{\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mover accent="true"> <mi mathvariant="script">Y</mi> <mo stretchy="false">~</mo> </mover> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and <InlineEquation ID="IEq5"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\tilde{\mathcal {X}}_{n,s,a,b}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mover accent="true"> <mi mathvariant="script">X</mi> <mo stretchy="false">~</mo> </mover> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>a</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> as subfields of the second generalized GK function field (BM) and determine their automorphism groups. Using that the automorphism group is an invariant under isomorphism, we show that the function fields <InlineEquation ID="IEq6"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\tilde{\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mover accent="true"> <mi mathvariant="script">Y</mi> <mo stretchy="false">~</mo> </mover> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and <InlineEquation ID="IEq7"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\({\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">Y</mi> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation>, as well as <InlineEquation ID="IEq8"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\tilde{\mathcal {X}}_{n,s,a,b}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mover accent="true"> <mi mathvariant="script">X</mi> <mo stretchy="false">~</mo> </mover> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>a</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and <InlineEquation ID="IEq9"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {X}_{n,s,a,b}\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">X</mi> <mrow> <mi>n</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>s</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>a</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </msub> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation>, are not isomorphic unless <i>m</i>/<i>s</i> divides <InlineEquation ID="IEq10"> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(q^2-q+1\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <msup> <mi>q</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msup> <mo>-</mo> <mi>q</mi> <mo>+</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and 3 divides <i>n</i>. In other words, the difference between the BM and GGS function fields can be found again at the level of the subfields that we consider.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Non-isomorphic subfields of the BM and GGS maximal function fields

  • Peter Beelen,
  • Tobias Drue,
  • Maria Montanucci,
  • Giovanni Zini

摘要

In 2016 Tafazolian et al. [31] introduced new families of \(\mathbb {F}_{q^{2n}}\) F q 2 n -maximal function fields \(\mathcal {Y}_{n,s}\) Y n , s and \(\mathcal {X}_{n,s,a,b}\) X n , s , a , b arising as subfields of the first generalized GK function field (GGS). In this way the authors found new examples of maximal function fields that are not isomorphic to subfields of the Hermitian function field. In this paper we construct analogous function fields \(\tilde{\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\) Y ~ n , s and \(\tilde{\mathcal {X}}_{n,s,a,b}\) X ~ n , s , a , b as subfields of the second generalized GK function field (BM) and determine their automorphism groups. Using that the automorphism group is an invariant under isomorphism, we show that the function fields \(\tilde{\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\) Y ~ n , s and \({\mathcal {Y}}_{n,s}\) Y n , s , as well as \(\tilde{\mathcal {X}}_{n,s,a,b}\) X ~ n , s , a , b and \(\mathcal {X}_{n,s,a,b}\) X n , s , a , b , are not isomorphic unless m/s divides \(q^2-q+1\) q 2 - q + 1 and 3 divides n. In other words, the difference between the BM and GGS function fields can be found again at the level of the subfields that we consider.