format: text

text:
# A cup product in the Galois cohomology of number fields

## 1 Introduction

This paper is devoted to the consideration of a certain cup product in the Galois cohomology of an algebraic number field with restricted ramification. Let $`n`$ be a positive integer, let $`K`$ be a number field containing the group $`\mu _n`$ of $`n`$th roots of unity, and let $`S`$ be a finite set of primes including those above $`n`$ and all real archimedean places. Let $`G_{K,S}`$ denote the Galois group of the maximal extension of $`K`$ unramified outside $`S`$ (inside a fixed algebraic closure of $`K`$). We consider the cup product

$$H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _n)H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _n)H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2).$$
(1)
When the localization map

$$H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2)\underset{vS}{}H^2(G_v,\mu _n^2)$$
(2)
for the local absolute Galois groups $`G_v`$ is injective, the cup product is a direct sum over primes in $`S`$ of the corresponding local cup products, each of which may be expressed as the $`n`$th norm residue symbol on the completion of $`K`$ at that prime. However, we are interested in a situation that is inherently non-local: that is, in which the cup product of two elements lies in the kernel of the localization map. This kernel is isomorphic to $`C_{K,S}/nC_{K,S}`$, where $`C_{K,S}`$ denotes the $`S`$-class group of $`K`$. In Section 2, we develop a formula for the cup product in this case in terms of ideals in a Kummer extension of $`K`$ (Theorem 2.4).

Using Kummer theory, we can identify $`H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ with a subgroup of $`K^\times /K^{\times n}`$ containing the image of the units of the $`S`$-integers $`𝒪_{K,S}`$, and hence we have an induced pairing

$$𝒪_{K,S}^\times \times 𝒪_{K,S}^\times H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2).$$

Like the norm residue symbol, this pairing has the property that $`a`$ and $`b`$ pair trivially if $`a+b=1`$. Thus, we obtain a relationship between the cup product and the $`K`$-theory of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$, which is described in Section 3 and discussed further in Section 5 (see Conjecture 5.3).

When $`n=p`$, a prime number, the cup product yields information on the form of relations in the maximal pro-$`p`$ quotient $`𝒢=G_{K,S}^{(p)}`$ of $`G_{K,S}`$. It is well-known that $`𝒢`$ has a presentation

$$0𝒢0,$$
(3)
where $``$ is a free pro-$`p`$ group on a finite set $`X`$ of generators and $``$ is the smallest closed normal subgroup containing a finite set $`R`$ of relations in $``$. Choosing $`X`$ and $`R`$ of minimal order, we have

$$|X|=dim_{/p}H^1(𝒢,/p)\text{and}|R|=dim_{/p}H^2(𝒢,/p).$$

When the localization map (2) is injective, the relations can be understood in terms of relations in decomposition groups. On the other hand, it is quite difficult to say anything about relations corresponding to the kernel of the localization map.

Let us quickly review the precise relationship between $`H^i(𝒢,/p)`$, $`i=1,2`$, and the generators and relations for $`𝒢`$, as detailed in \[Lab67\] or \[NSW00, Section III.9\]. Let $`\mathrm{gr}^{}()`$ denote the sequence of graded quotients associated with the descending $`p`$-central series on $``$. The image of $`X`$ in $`\mathrm{gr}^1()=/^p[,]`$ forms a basis, which we also denote by $`X`$. With the choice of a linear ordering on $`X`$, the set

$$\{px,[x,x^{}]:x,x^{}X,x<x^{}\}$$

forms a basis for $`\mathrm{gr}^2()`$, where $`p:\mathrm{gr}^1()\mathrm{gr}^2()`$ is induced by the $`p`$th power map and $`[x,x^{}]`$ is (the image of) the commutator $`xx^{}x^1(x^{})^1`$. Now, any relation $`\rho R`$ has zero image in $`\mathrm{gr}^1()`$, and its image in $`\mathrm{gr}^2()/p\mathrm{gr}^1()`$ is

$$\underset{x<x^{}X}{}a_{x,x^{}}^\rho [x,x^{}],a_{x,x^{}}^\rho /p.$$
(4)
The quotient $`\mathrm{gr}^1()`$ and $`H^1(𝒢,/p)H^1(,/p)`$ are dual as vector spaces over $`𝔽_p`$, allowing us to define a basis $`X^{}`$ of $`H^1(𝒢,/p)`$ dual to $`X`$. Similarly, $`R`$ may be regarded as a basis for the dual to $`H^2(𝒢,/p)`$ via the transgression isomorphism $`H^1(,/p)^𝒢H^2(𝒢,/p)`$. With these identifications, the numbers $`a_{x,x^{}}^\rho `$ in (4) are given by

$$a_{x,x^{}}^\rho =\rho (x^{}x^{}),x<x^{},$$
(5)
where the cup refers to the cup product pairing

$$H^1(𝒢,/p)\times H^1(𝒢,/p)H^2(𝒢,/p).$$
(6)
Since $`K`$ contains $`\mu _p`$, we have natural isomorphisms

$$H^i(G_{K,S},\mu _p^j)H^i(𝒢,/p)\mu _p^j$$

for any $`i`$ and $`j`$, and so the cup product (6) is just (1) after a choice of isomorphism $`\mu _p/p`$.

Our primary focus in Sections 46 is a case in which the localization map (2) is zero: $`n=p`$, with $`p`$ an odd prime, $`K=(\mu _p)`$, and $`S`$ consisting of the unique prime above $`p`$. In this case there is a natural conjugation action of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{Gal}(K/)`$ on $`\mathrm{gr}^i()`$; let us suppose that generators and relations have been chosen so that each $`x`$ and each $`\rho `$ is an eigenvector for this action. Define $`a_{x,x^{}}^\rho `$ by equation (5) for any $`x,x^{}X`$. Suppose further that $`p`$ satisfies Vandiver’s conjecture. Then $`H^2(𝒢,/p)^{}`$, the subspace on which $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acts by an odd character, is trivial, and therefore the matrix $`A^\rho =(a_{x,x^{}}^\rho )`$ decomposes into blocks

$$A^\rho =\left(\begin{array}{cc}A^{\rho +}& 0\\ 0& A^\rho \end{array}\right)$$

where $`A^{\rho \pm }`$ contains all entries $`a_{x,x^{}}^\rho `$ corresponding to $`x,x^{}\mathrm{gr}^1()^\pm `$. The matrix $`A^{\rho +}`$ is related to the $`p`$-adic zeta-function (see Sect. 4) and can be shown to be nonzero when Vandiver’s conjecture holds and the $`\lambda `$-invariant of the $`p`$-part of the class group in the cyclotomic tower is equal to its index of irregularity (Proposition 4.2), in particular for $`p<12,000,000`$ \[BCE<sup>+</sup>01\].

The question of when $`A^\rho `$ is non-zero is more mysterious. In Section 5, we present a method for imposing linear conditions on $`A^\rho `$. The relations $`\rho R`$ correspond to nontrivial eigenspaces of the $`p`$-part of the class group of $`K`$. For all such eigenspaces for $`p`$ with $`p<10,000`$, the method specifies $`A^\rho `$ up to a scalar multiple (Theorem 5.1). Since the method works by imposing linear conditions, it is not capable of showing that

$$A^\rho 0.$$
(7)
In Sections 6 and 7, we consider conditions for the nontriviality in (7). In Section 6, we describe the relation between this nontriviality and the structure of class groups of Kummer extensions of $`K`$. In Section 7, we determine a formula for a certain projection of the cup product when it can be expressed as the corestriction of a cup product in an unramified Kummer extension $`L`$ of $`K`$ (Theorem 7.2). We then describe a computer calculation that uses this formula to verify the nontriviality of $`A^\rho `$ for $`p=37`$ (Theorem 7.5).

In Section 8, we describe, in detail, the relations in $`𝒢`$ that result from the nontriviality in (7) (Theorem 8.2) and, in particular, the explicit relation for $`p=37`$. In Section 9, we use this description to exhibit relations in a graded $`_p`$-Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ associated with the action of the absolute Galois group on the pro-$`p`$ fundamental group of $`^1\{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ (Theorem 9.1). For $`p=691`$, we explain how a conjecture of Ihara on the relationship between the structure of $`𝔤`$ and a certain Lie algebra of derivations implies (7) and, conversely, our calculations confirm Ihara’s conjecture in this case if (7) is satisfied (Theorem 9.11).

In Section 10, we consider an Iwasawa-theoretic consequence of the nontriviality in (7), namely, Greenberg’s pseudo-null conjecture in the case that the $`p`$-part of the class group of $`K`$ has order $`p`$ (Theorem 10.4).

Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank Ralph Greenberg, Yasutaka Ihara, and Barry Mazur for their support, encouragement, and useful comments, Robert Bond and Michael Reid for some corrections, John Cremona for his invaluable assistance with C++ (used to prove Theorem 5.1 up to $`6500`$), Claus Fieker for determining the structure of the maximal order of a degree $`37`$ number field as part of the computation for $`p=37`$ of Section 7, William Stein for his substantial contribution to this computation, and Kay Wingberg for his suggestion of the approach in Section 7. The first author was supported by NSF grant DMS-9624219 and by an AMS Bicentennial Fellowship and the second author by NSF VIGRE grant 9977116 and by an NSF Postdoctoral Research Fellowship.

## 2 A formula for the cup product

We consider the general setting for the cup product (1) of the introduction. First, we describe the groups $`H^i(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$, $`i=1,2`$. Let $`K_S`$ denote the maximal extension of $`K`$ unramified outside $`S`$. From the inflation-restriction exact sequence, $`H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ is the kernel of the restriction map from $`H^1(K,\mu _n)`$ to $`H^1(K_S,\mu _n)`$ and hence may be identified using Kummer theory with the kernel of $`K^\times /K^{\times n}K_S^\times /K_S^{\times n}`$. Thus

$$H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _n)D_K/K^{\times n},$$

where

$$D_K=K_S^{\times n}K^\times =\{xK^\times :n\mathrm{ord}_𝔮(x)\text{ for all }𝔮S\}.$$

The description of $`H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ involves the $`S`$-ideal class group $`C_{K,S}`$ of $`K`$. For an extension $`F/K`$, denote by $`𝒪_{F,S}`$ the ring of $`S`$-integers in $`F`$. For brevity, we set $`𝒪_S=𝒪_{K_S,S}`$. Since $`K_S`$ contains the Hilbert class field of $`K`$, any nonzero ideal $`𝔞`$ of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ becomes principal in $`𝒪_S`$—say $`𝔞=(\alpha )`$ for $`\alpha K_S^\times `$. Furthermore, since $`𝔞`$ is fixed by $`G_{K,S}`$, we have $`\alpha ^\sigma /\alpha 𝒪_S^\times `$ for $`\sigma G_{K,S}`$, and thus we can associate with $`𝔞`$ an element of $`H^1(G_{K,S},𝒪_S^\times )`$. Using Hilbert’s Theorem 90 and the exact sequence

$$1𝒪_S^\times K_S^\times P_S1,$$

where $`P_S`$ is the group of principal ideals of $`𝒪_S`$, it is easy to see that this induces an isomorphism

$$C_{K,S}H^1(G_{K,S},𝒪_S^\times ).$$

Also, if $`I_S`$ is the group of fractional ideals of $`𝒪_S`$, then, since $`K_S`$ contains the Hilbert class field of any of its subfields, $`I_S/P_S`$ is trivial. Hence, since $`I_S`$ is a direct sum of induced modules, we have

$$H^i(G_{K,S},P_S)H^i(G_{K,S},I_S)=0,i1.$$

It follows that $`H^2(G_{K,S},𝒪_S^\times )`$ is isomorphic to $`H^2(G_{K,S},K_S^\times )`$, the $`p`$-part of which, for those $`p`$ dividing $`n`$, may be identified with the $`p`$-part of the subgroup of the Brauer group of $`K`$ consisting of elements with zero invariant at all valuations $`vS`$ \[NSW00, Proposition 8.3.10\]. As $`S`$ contains all primes dividing $`n`$, the sequence

$$1\mu _n𝒪_S^\times \stackrel{𝑛}{}𝒪_S^\times 1$$
(8)
is exact. Taking its cohomology and tensoring with $`\mu _n`$, we obtain an exact sequence

$$1C_{K,S}/nC_{K,S}\mu _nH^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2)\stackrel{𝜋}{}\underset{vS}{}\mu _n\stackrel{}{}\mu _n1,$$
(9)
where $`\pi `$ is the twist by $`\mu _n`$ of the direct sum of the invariant maps. For future reference, we record that if the ideal $`𝔞`$ represents an element of $`C_{K,S}/nC_{K,S}`$, the corresponding element of $`H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ is the coboundary $`H^1(G_{K,S},𝒪_S^\times )H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ of the cocycle $`\alpha ^\sigma /\alpha `$, where $`𝔞𝒪_S=(\alpha )`$.

Now we consider the pairing

$$(,)_S=(,)_{n,K,S}:D_K\times D_KH^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2)$$

induced by the cup product. Let $`a,bD_K`$. The image of $`(a,b)_S`$ under $`\pi `$ as in (9) is given by the direct sum of the Hilbert pairings $`(a,b)_v`$ at $`vS`$. We determine a formula for $`(a,b)_S`$ with $`a,bD_K`$ in the case that $`\pi (a,b)_S`$ is trivial, obtaining an element of $`C_{K,S}/nC_{K,S}\mu _n`$.

Fix a primitive $`n`$th root of unity $`\zeta `$. Let $`\alpha K_S^\times `$ with $`\alpha ^n=a`$, and for $`\sigma G_{K,S}`$, let $`m_\sigma `$ denote the smallest nonnegative integer such that $`\sigma \alpha =\zeta ^{m_\sigma }\alpha `$. We start with a general cohomological lemma.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Consider the homomorphism $`G_{K,S}/n`$ associated with $`a`$ via Kummer theory and the isomorphism $`\mu _n/n`$ given by $`\zeta 1`$. Let $`ϵ`$ denote its coboundary in the cohomology sequence of

$$1/n/n^2/n1.$$

Then

$$(a,a)_S=\frac{n(n1)}{2}ϵ\zeta ^2.$$

###### Proof.

This is antisymmetry of the cup product if $`n`$ is odd, since in that case both sides are zero. For $`n`$ even, one can check directly that the difference of cocycles

$$(\sigma ,\tau )m_\sigma m_\tau (m_\sigma +m_\tau m_{\sigma \tau })/2(modn)$$

is the coboundary of

$$\sigma m_\sigma (1+m_\sigma )/2(modn).$$

(See also \[NSW00, Section III.9\].)

We proceed by considering the exact sequence of $`G_{K,S}`$-modules

$$1\mu _nSL_n(K_S)PSL_n(K_S)1.$$
(10)
We define a $`G_{K,S}`$-cocycle with values in $`PSL_n(K_S)`$, the coboundary of which, when computed in two different ways, yields the formula. (The choice of this cocycle was motivated by consideration of the cyclic algebra associated with $`a`$ and $`b`$.)

Let

$$M_b=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 1\\ b& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\end{array}\right].$$

Note that $`M_b^n=b`$, and choose $`\beta K_S^\times `$ such that

$$\beta ^n=detM_b=(1)^{n1}b.$$

We define a cochain with values in $`SL_n(K_S)`$ by

$$C_\sigma ^{a,b}=(\beta ^1M_b)^{m_\sigma },\sigma G_{K,S}.$$

The images of the $`C_\sigma ^{a,b}`$ in $`PSL_n(K_S)`$ define a cocycle, as each is fixed by $`G_{K,S}`$ and has order dividing $`n`$. We denote the class of this cocycle by $`C^{a,b}`$.

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`\delta `$ denote the coboundary in cohomology associated with (10). Then

$$\delta (C^{a,b})\zeta =(a,ab)_S.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`n_\sigma `$ be the smallest nonnegative integer such that $`\sigma \beta =\zeta ^{n_\sigma }\beta `$. The coboundary of $`C^{a,b}`$ in $`H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)`$ is represented by the 2-cocycle

$`(\sigma ,\tau )`$ $``$ $`(\beta ^1M_b)^{m_\sigma }(\beta ^1M_b)^{m_\tau \sigma }(\beta ^1M_b)^{m_{\sigma \tau }}`$
$`=\beta ^{(\sigma 1)m_\tau }(\beta ^1M_b)^{m_\sigma +m_\tau m_{\sigma \tau }}`$
$`=\zeta ^{n_\sigma m_\tau }(1)^{(n1)(m_\sigma +m_\tau m_{\sigma \tau })/n},`$
which, upon tensoring with $`\zeta `$ and applying Lemma 2.1, yields

$$((1)^{n1}b,a)_S+(a,a)_S=(a,ab)_S.$$

The following lemma is applicable to the case of interest that $`\pi (a,b)_S`$ is trivial.

###### Lemma 2.3.

Let $`B`$ be the class of a $`G_{K,S}`$-cocycle $`B_\sigma `$ with values in $`PSL_n(K_S)`$ such that $`\pi (\delta (B)\zeta )=0`$. Then there exists an $`AGL_n(K_S)`$ such that

$$A^\sigma A^1B_\sigma (modK_S^\times ).$$

For any such $`A`$, there is a fractional ideal $`𝔞`$ of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ such that

$$det(A)𝒪_S𝔞𝒪_S(modnI_S)$$

and

$$\delta (B)=𝔞(modnC_{K,S}).$$

###### Proof.

Consider the commutative diagram

We use $`\delta `$ (resp., $`\delta ^{}`$) to denote any coboundary in a long exact sequence of cohomology groups arising from a horizontal (resp., vertical) short exact sequence in this diagram. The map $`f_{}\mu _n`$, with

$$f_{}:H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)H^2(G_{K,S},K_S^\times ),$$

can be identified with $`\pi `$, so our assumption on $`B`$ is equivalent to $`f_{}(\delta (B))=0`$. Note that we have $`\delta (g_{}(B))=f_{}(\delta (B))`$, where $`g_{}`$ denotes the map

$$g_{}:H^1(G_{K,S},PSL_n(K_S))H^1(G_{K,S},PGL_n(K_S)).$$

Since $`H^1(G_{K,S},GL_n(K_S))=0`$, this implies $`g_{}(B)=0`$. Hence, there exist an element $`y(K_S^\times /K_S^{\times n})^{G_{K,S}}`$ such that $`B=\delta ^{}(y)`$ and so, by definition of $`\delta ^{}`$, an $`AGL_n(K_S)`$ satisfying both the first statement of the lemma and

$$y=det(A)(modK_S^{\times n}).$$
(11)
(Note that it suffices to check the remainder of the lemma for this choice of $`A`$.)

Since the coboundaries $`\delta `$ and $`\delta ^{}`$ anticommute,

$$\delta (B)=\delta (\delta ^{}(y))=\delta ^{}(\delta (y)).$$

Let $`𝔞`$ be a fractional ideal of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ such that

$$𝔞𝒪_Sy𝒪_S(modnI_S).$$
(12)
Choose $`\eta K_S^\times `$ such that $`\eta 𝒪_S=𝔞𝒪_S`$, and observe that $`y=\eta (modK_S^{\times n})`$. Thus, $`\delta (y)`$ is the image of the cocycle associated to $`\eta `$ under the map

$$H^1(G_{K,S},𝒪_S^\times )H^1(G_{K,S},K_S^{\times n}),$$

so $`\delta ^{}(\delta (y))`$ can be computed using the Kummer sequence (8). Hence, by the discussion following (9), $`\delta ^{}(\delta (y))`$ is the class modulo $`n`$ of $`𝔞`$, which, by (11) and (12), satisfies the conditions of the lemma.

Let $`N_{L/K}`$ denote the norm map for an extension $`L`$ of $`K`$. We denote the image of a (fractional) ideal $`𝔞`$ in $`C_{K,S}/nC_{K,S}`$ by $`[𝔞]`$. We remark that $`(n/2)[𝔞]`$ is always trivial if $`n`$ is odd. We now state our formula for the pairing.

###### Theorem 2.4.

Let $`a,bD_K`$ be such that the Hilbert pairing $`(a,b)_v`$ is trivial for all valuations $`vS`$. Choose $`\alpha K_S^\times `$ such that $`\alpha ^n=a`$, let $`L=K(\alpha )`$, and set $`d=[L:K]`$. Let $`𝔟`$ be the fractional ideal of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ such that $`b𝒪_{K,S}=𝔟^n`$. Write $`b=N_{L/K}\gamma `$ for some $`\gamma `$, and write

$$\gamma 𝒪_{L,S}=𝔠^{1\sigma }𝔟^{n/d},$$
(13)
for some fractional ideal $`𝔠`$ of $`𝒪_{L,S}`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$. Let $`\xi \mu _n`$ be such that $`\sigma \alpha =\xi \alpha `$. Then

$$(a,b)_S=([N_{L/K}(𝔠)]+\frac{n}{2}[𝔟])\xi .$$

###### Proof.

We have that $`b`$ is a norm from $`L_v`$ for all $`v`$, since the Hilbert pairing $`(a,b)_v`$ is trivial for $`vS`$ by assumption and for $`vS`$ by definition of $`D_K`$. Since, in a cyclic extension, an element that is a local norm everywhere is a global norm, we have $`b=N_{L/K}\gamma `$ with $`\gamma L^\times `$. It is easy to see that $`\gamma `$ has a decomposition as in (13). Without loss of generality, $`L/K`$ has degree $`n`$, and $`\xi `$ is the primitive $`n`$th root of unity $`\zeta `$ chosen in the construction of the cohomology class $`C^{a,b}`$.

We use $`\gamma `$ to construct a matrix $`A`$ as in Lemma 2.3. Let $`G`$ be the diagonal matrix with $`\gamma \gamma ^\sigma \mathrm{}\gamma ^{\sigma ^{i1}}`$ in the $`(i,i)`$ position. Let $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ be any $`K`$-basis for $`L`$, and let $`X`$ be the matrix with $`x_j^{\sigma ^{i1}}`$ in the $`(i,j)`$ position. Let $`A=GX`$, so that

$$A_{i,j}=\gamma \gamma ^\sigma \mathrm{}\gamma ^{\sigma ^{i1}}x_j^{\sigma ^{i1}},$$

and thus

$$\gamma A_{i,j}^\sigma =\{\begin{array}{cc}A_{i+1,j}\hfill & i<n\hfill \\ bA_{1,j}\hfill & i=n.\hfill \end{array}$$

From this, we see that $`\gamma A^\sigma =M_bA`$, that is,

$$A^\sigma A^1C_\sigma ^{a,b}(modK_S^\times ).$$

This induces an equality of cocycles, as $`\sigma `$ generates $`\mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$. Since

$$\gamma \gamma ^\sigma \mathrm{}\gamma ^{\sigma ^{i1}}𝒪_{L,S}=𝔠𝔠^{\sigma ^i}𝔟^i,$$

we have

$$det(G)𝒪_{L,S}=𝔠^n(N_{L/K}𝔠)^1𝔟^{n(n+1)/2}.$$

Thus, reducing exponents modulo $`n`$ and using Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3, we find

$$(a,ab)_S=\delta C^{a,b}\zeta =([N_{L/K}𝔠]+\frac{n}{2}[𝔟][det(X)𝒪_{K,S}])\zeta ,$$
(14)
where, by a slight abuse of notation, $`det(X)𝒪_{K,S}`$ denotes the ideal of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ whose extension to $`𝒪_S`$ is $`det(X)𝒪_S`$, which exists because $`det(X)^\sigma =\pm det(X)`$. As a special case, we take $`b=1`$, so $`𝔠=𝔟=1`$ and

$$(a,a)_S=[det(X)𝒪_{K,S}]\zeta .$$

Subtracting this from (14), we obtain the theorem.

We have the following corollaries (which are also easy to prove directly).

###### Corollary 2.5.

If $`a,b𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$, and if $`b`$ is the norm of an element of $`𝒪_{L,S}^\times `$, then $`(a,b)_S=1`$.

###### Corollary 2.6.

If $`a𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$ is such that $`1a𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$, then $`(a,1a)_S=1`$.

## 3 The cup product and $`K`$-theory

Corollary 2.6 may be rephrased in terms of $`K`$-theory. Recall the definition of the Milnor $`K_2`$-group of a commutative ring $`R`$:

$$K_2^M(R)=(R^\times R^\times )/a(1a):a,1aR^\times .$$

Then Corollary 2.6 says that the restriction of the cup product to the $`S`$-units induces a map

$$u:K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})/nH^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2).$$

On the other hand, since $`\mu _nK`$, the exact sequence of Tate \[Tat76, Theorem 6.2\] and (9) yield a (noncanonical) isomorphism

$$c:K_2(𝒪_{K,S})/n\stackrel{}{}H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n^2)$$

(see \[Sou79\], \[DF85\] and \[Keu89\] for generalizations). In \[Sou79\], a particular choice of the map $`c`$ is described as a Chern class map (for $`n`$ a power of a prime $`p`$). The two versions of $`K_2`$ are related by a map

$$\kappa :K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})K_2(𝒪_{K,S}),$$
(15)
which is constructed as follows. First, we may identify $`K_2^M(K)`$ with $`K_2(K)`$ by a classical result of Matsumoto. The group $`K_2(𝒪_{K,S})`$ may then be defined via the exact localization sequence

$$0K_2(𝒪_{K,S})K_2(K)\stackrel{𝑡}{}\underset{𝔮S}{}k_𝔮^\times 0,$$
(16)
where $`k_𝔮`$ denotes the residue field of $`K`$ at $`𝔮`$, and the map $`t`$ is given by tame symbols. Since two $`S`$-units pair trivially under the tame symbols, the sequence (16) yields the map $`\kappa `$ of (15). Let $`\kappa _n`$ denote the map induced by $`\kappa `$ on $`K`$-groups modulo $`n`$.

###### Proposition 3.1.

The maps $`u`$, $`c`$, and $`\kappa `$ are related by the commutative diagram

###### Proof.

This is a special case of \[Sou79, Theorem 1\] for $`n`$ a prime power, and the general case follows easily.

Thus, the question of whether the pairing $`(,)_S`$ is surjective on $`S`$-units is the question of surjectivity of $`\kappa _n`$. In Section 5, we make a conjecture on the surjectivity of $`\kappa _p`$ (Conjecture 5.3) for the ring of $`p`$-integers in $`(\mu _p)`$. In order for this conjecture to hold, $`\kappa _p`$ will often have to be injective as well. We now describe a necessary, general condition for this injectivity.

The Steinberg symbol $`\{a,b\}`$, for $`a,bR^\times `$, is defined to be the image of $`ab`$ in $`K_2^M(R)`$. For any field $`F`$, the group $`K_2^M(F)`$ has the property that the Steinberg symbols are antisymmetric. This need not be true in an arbitrary ring $`R`$. On the other hand, in order that $`\kappa _n`$ be injective, it is necessary that antisymmetry hold in $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})/n`$, since $`K_2(𝒪_{K,S})K_2^M(K)`$. We now present one sufficient condition for this antisymmetry.

###### Lemma 3.2.

Fix $`\epsilon `$ relatively prime to $`n`$. Assume that $`R^\times /R^{\times n}`$ has a generating set with a set of representatives $`SR^\times `$ such that

$$\{1st^\epsilon :sS,tS\{1\},st\}R^\times .$$
(17)
Then $`\{a,b\}+\{b,a\}0(modn)`$ for any $`a,bR^\times `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`sS`$ and $`tS^\epsilon \{1\}`$ with $`st`$, and set $`x=st`$. By definition of $`K_2^M(R)`$, we have

$$\{x,x\}=\{x,\frac{1}{x}\}=\{x,\frac{x1}{x}\}=\{\frac{1}{x},\frac{x1}{x}\}=0.$$

Then

$$\{s,t\}+\{t,s\}=\{s,st\}+\{t,st\}=\{st,st\}=0.$$

In general, if $`a=x^n_{i=1}^Ma_i`$ and $`b=y^n_{j=1}^Nb_j`$ with $`a_i,b_jSS^1`$ and $`x,yR^\times ,`$ then

$$\{a,b\}+\{b,a\}\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}(\{a_i,b_j\}+\{b_j,a_i\})0(modn).$$

## 4 Pairing with a $`p`$th root of unity

We now focus on the case $`n=p`$, an odd prime, $`K=(\mu _p)`$ and $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$. Here, and for the remainder of the paper, we fix a choice $`\zeta `$ of a primitive $`p`$th root of unity. In this section, we will show that the cup product we are considering is nontrivial for many $`p`$. We assume Vandiver’s conjecture holds at $`p`$, i.e., that $`p`$ does not divide the class number of $`(\zeta +\zeta ^1)`$. Let $`𝒞`$ denote the group of cyclotomic $`p`$-units.

###### Lemma 4.1.

The symbol $`\{\zeta ,x\}K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})`$ is zero for all $`x𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$. In particular, $`\zeta `$ pairs trivially with $`𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$ under the cup product.

###### Proof.

This follows immediately from the properties of the symbol, since the elements $`1\zeta ^i`$ with $`1ip1`$ generate $`𝒞`$, which, by a well-known consequence of Vandiver’s conjecture, has index prime to $`p`$ in $`𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$.

Let $`A_K`$ denote the $`p`$-part of the class group $`C_K`$ of $`K`$. (Note that $`C_K=C_{K,S}`$.) We have an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_{K,S}^\times /𝒪_{K,S}^{\times p}H^1(G_{K,S},\mu _p)A_K[p]0,$$

in which the map on the right is induced by $`a𝔞`$, where $`a𝒪_{K,S}=𝔞^p`$. By Lemma 4.1, the map $`a(\zeta ,a)_S`$ factors through a map

$$\psi :A_K[p]A_K\mu _p.$$

Let $`K_{\mathrm{}}/K`$ be the cyclotomic $`_p`$-extension, and let $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the inverse limit of the $`p`$-parts of the ideal class groups under norm maps up the cyclotomic tower. The abelian group $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$ breaks up into eigenspaces $`A_{\mathrm{}}(\omega ^i)`$, on which $`\mathrm{Gal}(K/)`$ acts by the $`i`$th power of the Teichmüller character $`\omega :\mathrm{\Delta }_p^\times `$. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the Iwasawa algebra. Fix a topological generator $`\gamma `$ of $`\mathrm{Gal}(K_{\mathrm{}}/K)`$ such that $`\gamma `$ acts on $`\mu _{p^2}`$ by raising to the ($`1+p`$)th power, and let $`T=\gamma 1`$ be the corresponding variable in the Iwasawa algebra, so $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_p[[T]]`$. Since $`p`$ satisfies Vandiver’s conjecture, $`A_{\mathrm{}}(\omega ^i)\mathrm{\Lambda }/(f_i)`$, where $`f_i`$ is a characteristic power series \[Was97\].

We consider an $`i`$ for which $`A_K(\omega ^i)`$ is nontrivial. We often abuse notation by using the same symbol to denote both a (fractional) ideal and its ideal class.

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`𝔞A_K[p](\omega ^i)`$, and choose $`𝔞_0A_K(\omega ^i)`$ with $`𝔞_0^{f_i(0)/p}=𝔞`$. Then

$$\psi (𝔞)=𝔞_0^{f_i^{}(0)}\zeta .$$

###### Proof.

Let $`L=K(\mu _{p^2})`$, set $`f=f_i`$ and $`N=N_{L/K}`$, and let $`𝔞_1`$ be an ideal of $`𝒪_{L,S}`$ with norm $`𝔞_0`$. The ideal $`𝔞_1^{f(T)}`$ is principal, generated by an element $`y`$, and

$$(Ny)𝒪_{K,S}=N𝔞_1^{f(0)}=𝔞^p=a𝒪_{K,S}$$
(18)
for some $`aD_K`$. Since $`\zeta `$ pairs trivially with $`p`$-units by Lemma 4.1, we may assume that $`y`$ is the element we use to calculate $`(\zeta ,a)_S`$ in Theorem 2.4. In particular, we have that

$$y𝒪_{L,S}=𝔞_1^{f(T)}=𝔞𝔟^T$$
(19)
for $`𝔟`$ such that

$$(\zeta ,a)_S=N𝔟^1\zeta .$$

Let us make the identification

$$A_L(\omega ^i)_p[[T]]/(f(T),(1+T)^p1)$$

by mapping $`𝔞_1`$ to $`1`$. Then, using (18) and (19) and that $`N=((1+T)^p1)/T`$, we see that $`𝔟`$ may be identified with

$$\frac{1}{T}\left(f(T)\frac{(1+T)^p1}{pT}f(0)\right)f^{}(0)(mod(p,T)),$$

and hence

$$N𝔟𝔞_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{f^{}(0)}(modpA_K).$$

Thus if $`f_i^{}(0)`$ is nonzero modulo $`p`$, which is equivalent to saying that the $`\lambda `$-invariant of $`A_{\mathrm{}}(\omega ^i)`$ is $`1`$, then the pairing $`(,)_S`$ is nontrivial. This occurs for all irregular primes less than $`12,000,000`$ \[BCE<sup>+</sup>01\]. (We remark that for many purposes in this article, such as Proposition 4.2, the cyclicity of $`A_K(\omega ^i)`$ would be a sufficient assumption \[Kur93\], but we are content to assume the stronger condition of Vandiver’s conjecture.)

## 5 Restriction of the pairing to the cyclotomic $`p`$-units

We continue to assume $`K=(\mu _p)`$, $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$ and $`n=p`$, an odd prime satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. We consider the restriction of the pairing $`(,)_S`$ to the subgroup $`𝒞`$ of cyclotomic $`p`$-units.

A pair $`(p,r)`$, with $`r`$ even and $`2rp3`$, is called irregular if $`p`$ divides the numerator of the $`r`$th Bernoulli number $`B_r`$, that is, if the eigenspace $`A_K(\omega ^{pr})`$ is nontrivial. Given such a pair, we choose an isomorphism

$$A_K(\omega ^{pr})\mu _p/p(2r).$$
(20)
(We shall view the underlying group structure of $`A(i)`$ for a given $`G_{K,S}`$-module $`A`$ and twist $`i`$ as being canonically identified with that of $`A`$.) Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{Gal}(K/)`$, and consider the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-equivariant pairing

$$,_r:D_K\times D_K/p(2r)$$

arising via (20) from composition of $`(,)_S`$ with projection onto $`A_K(\omega ^{pr})\mu _p`$.

We consider the restriction of $`,_r`$ to $`𝒞\times 𝒞`$. In fact, since $`𝒞=\zeta 𝒞^+`$, we can by Lemma 4.1 focus attention on the restriction of the pairing to elements of $`𝒞^+`$. Eigenspace considerations put some restrictions on the elements that can pair nontrivially. For any integer $`i`$, consider the usual idempotent

$$ϵ_i=\frac{1}{p1}\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }}{}\omega (\sigma )^i\sigma ,$$

and choose $`\eta _i𝒞`$ with

$$\eta _i(1\zeta )^{ϵ_{pi}}(mod𝒞^p).$$

Then $`𝒞^+`$ is generated by $`\{\eta _i:i\text{ odd},1ip2\}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acts on $`(\eta _i,\eta _j)_S`$ via $`\omega ^{2ij}`$, we have

$$\eta _i,\eta _j_r=0\text{ if }i+jr(modp1).$$

Let

$$e_{i,r}=\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r,i\text{ odd, }1ip2.$$

We now impose many linear relations on the $`e_{i,r}`$ and, in the process, get bounds on the order of $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})/p`$. Lemma 4.1 and Corollary 2.6 imply that if $`\eta `$ is a cyclotomic unit and $`1\eta =\zeta ^j\eta ^{}`$ for some $`j`$ and cyclotomic unit $`\eta ^{}`$, then $`\{\eta ,\eta ^{}\}=0`$ in $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})`$, and hence $`(\eta ,\eta ^{})_S=1`$. Applying this observation to

$$\eta =\rho _a=\underset{j=0}{\overset{a1}{}}(\zeta )^j,$$

we get

$$\{\rho _a,\rho _{a1}\}=0,3ap1.$$

Note that, if $`a`$ is even,

$$\rho _a=\frac{1\zeta ^a}{1+\zeta }=\frac{(1\zeta ^a)(1\zeta )}{1\zeta ^2},\rho _{a1}=\frac{1+\zeta ^{a1}}{1+\zeta }=\frac{(1\zeta ^{2a2})(1\zeta )}{(1\zeta ^{a1})(1\zeta ^2)}.$$

If $`\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ satisfies $`\sigma \zeta =\zeta ^a`$, then $`\omega (\sigma )a(modp)`$. Thus

$$(1\zeta ^a)^{ϵ_{pi}}\eta _i^{a^{pi}}(mod𝒞^p).$$

Hence, the $`e_{i,r}`$ must be solutions $`x_i=e_{i,r}`$ over $`/p`$ to

$$\underset{\begin{array}{c}i\text{ odd}\\ 1ip2\end{array}}{}(1+a^{pi}2^{pi})(12^{pr+i})(1(a1)^{pr+i})x_i=0$$
(21)
for every even $`a`$ with $`4ap1`$. (These relations also hold for odd $`a`$ with $`3ap2`$, but we will not use those.)

###### Theorem 5.1.

For all irregular pairs $`(p,r)`$ with $`p<10,000`$, there exists a nontrivial, Galois equivariant, skew-symmetric pairing

$$,:𝒞\times 𝒞/p(2r)$$

satisfying (21) with $`x_i=\eta _i,\eta _{ri}`$. Furthermore, these properties uniquely define the pairing up to a scalar multiple.

###### Sketch of Proof.

The relations (21) and the antisymmetry relations, $`x_i+x_{ri}=0`$, put constraints on possible values of the pairing. We used a computer to calculate the nullspace of the matrix of coefficients in these relations.

We have computed the pairing of Theorem 5.1 for all $`(p,r)`$ with $`p<10,000`$. A table of the pairings and Magma routines that perform the computation are available at www.math.harvard.edu/~sharifi and www.math.arizona.edu/~wmc. The pairing $`,_r`$ must be a (possibly zero) scalar multiple of the computed pairing.

###### Corollary 5.2.

For all irregular pairs $`(p,r)`$ with $`p<10,000`$, one has

$$|(K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})/p)(\omega ^{2r})|p.$$

###### Proof.

The only point at issue here is whether the symbols in $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})/p`$ satisfy the skew-symmetry that was used in the proof of Theorem 5.1, as the other relations used in Theorem 5.1 arise directly from relations in $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})`$ and eigenspace considerations. Since $`𝒞`$ has index prime to $`p`$ in $`𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$, we need only remark that the set $`S`$ of generators of $`𝒞`$ given by $`1\zeta ^i`$ with $`1ip1`$ has the property (17) for $`\epsilon =1`$. Then, by Lemma 3.2, the image of $`ab+ba`$ is trivial in $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})_p`$ for any $`a,b𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$.

In fact, by performing modulo $`p^2`$ the same computations as in the proof of Theorem 5.1, we have verified that

$$|(K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})_p)(\omega ^{2r})|p$$

for all irregular pairs with $`p<3000`$. The authors suspect that the uniqueness in Theorem 5.1 fails for the irregular pair given by $`p=89209`$ and $`r=(p+3)/2`$, as the values $`x_1=x_{(p+1)/2}=1`$ and $`x_i=0`$ for $`i1,(p+1)/2`$ provide a solution to the equations in this case, since $`2^{pr+1}1(modp)`$. Corollary 5.2 may or may not still hold for this $`p`$, since we did not use all of the defining relations of $`K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})`$ in its proof. We do, however, conjecture that the pairing $`,_r`$ is nontrivial. Since the eigenspaces of $`K_2(𝒪_{K,S})/p`$ corresponding to regular pairs are trivial, this may be rephrased as follows.

###### Conjecture 5.3.

Let $`p`$ be an odd prime satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. Let $`K=(\mu _p)`$ and let $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ denote the ring of $`p`$-integers in $`K`$. The natural map

$$K_2^M(𝒪_{K,S})_pK_2(𝒪_{K,S})_p$$

is surjective.

In Section 7, we verify this conjecture in the case $`p=37`$. In general, we have constructed many other relations similar to those of (21), and their solutions are consistent with the values of the calculated pairing of Theorem 5.1 in those cases that we have tested. As the example with $`p=89209`$ illustrates (or consider the regular pair $`(73,38)`$), we have no convincing evidence regarding whether or not the map in Conjecture 5.3 is always injective.

As further circumstantial evidence for the conjecture, we note that the nontrivial pairing of Theorem 5.1 has a property not obviously encoded in the relations above, namely that $`x_{pr}=0`$. The cup product pairing $`,_r`$ must itself satisfy this relation, since $`\eta _{pr}`$ provides a Kummer generator for the unramified extension of $`K`$ whose Galois group corresponds to $`(A_K/pA_K)(\omega ^{pr})`$ with respect to the Artin map. Thus the norm of an ideal from this extension always has trivial projection to the $`\omega ^{pr}`$ eigenspace of $`A_K/pA_K`$, and hence the pairing must be trivial by Theorem 2.4.

## 6 Relationship with the ideal class group

Let $`K`$ be a number field and $`S`$ a set of primes of $`K`$ that contains all real places of $`K`$. For a finite extension $`F`$ of $`K`$, we denote by $`I_{F,S}`$, $`P_{F,S}`$, and $`C_{F,S}`$ the ideals, principal ideals, and ideal class group, respectively, of the $`S`$-integers $`𝒪_{F,S}`$, and by $`H_{F,S}`$ the maximal unramified abelian extension of $`F`$ in which all primes above $`S`$ split completely.

First we review some genus theory. Let $`L/K`$ be a cyclic extension, unramified outside $`S`$, with Galois group $`G`$ generated by an element $`\sigma `$.

###### Lemma 6.1.

The norm map $`N_{L/K}:C_{L,S}C_{K,S}`$ induces a map

$$C_{L,S}/(\sigma 1)C_{L,S}C_{K,S},$$

which is a surjection if and only if $`LH_{K,S}=K`$, and is an injection if there is at most one prime in $`S`$ that does not split completely in $`L/K`$.

###### Proof.

By class field theory, $`C_{L,S}=\mathrm{Gal}(H_{L,S}/L)`$ and $`C_{K,S}=\mathrm{Gal}(H_{K,S}/K)`$. With these identifications, the norm map is restriction to $`H_{K,S}`$. Thus the image of the norm map is $`\mathrm{Gal}(H_{K,S}/(LH_{K,S}))`$, which immediately implies the first assertion. The kernel of the norm map is generated by the commutator subgroup and the intersection between $`\mathrm{Gal}(H_{L,S}/L)`$ and the subgroup of $`\mathrm{Gal}(H_{L,S}/K)`$ generated by decomposition groups of primes in $`S`$. If there is exactly one nontrivial decomposition group, then its contribution is trivial, since it maps injectively to $`\mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$. Furthermore, since $`G`$ is cyclic the commutator subgroup of $`\mathrm{Gal}(H_{L,S}/K)`$ is $`[\sigma ,\mathrm{Gal}(H_{L,S}/L)]=(\sigma 1)C_{L,S}`$.

Compare the following proposition with Theorem 2.4.

###### Proposition 6.2.

There is an isomorphism

$$C_{L,S}^G/\varphi (C_{K,S})\stackrel{}{}(𝒪_{K,S}^\times N_{L/K}L^\times )/N_{L/K}𝒪_{L,S}^\times $$

given by taking the class of an ideal $`𝔞`$ to an element $`b𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$ such that $`b=N_{L/K}y`$ with $`y𝒪_{L,S}=𝔞^{1\sigma }`$. If $`H_{K,S}L=K`$ and there is at most one prime in $`S`$ that does not split completely in $`L/K`$, the order of these groups is equal to the number of ideal classes in $`C_{K,S}`$ that define trivial classes in $`C_{L,S}`$.

###### Proof.

Consider the exact sequence

$$0P_{L,S}I_{L,S}C_{L,S}0.$$

Since $`L/K`$ is unramified outside $`S`$, $`I_{L,S}`$ is a direct sum of induced modules, so $`\widehat{H}^1(G,I_{L,S})=0`$. Thus we have a surjection

$$\widehat{H}^0(G,C_{L,S})\widehat{H}^1(G,P_{L,S}),$$

which takes the class of an ideal $`𝔞`$ to $`(1\sigma )𝔞`$. Since the map $`P_{L,S}^GI_{L,S}^G=I_{K,S}`$ has cokernel equal to the image of $`C_{K,S}`$ under the obvious map $`\varphi :C_{K,S}C_{L,S}`$, we therefore have an isomorphism

$$C_{L,S}^G/\varphi (C_{K,S})\widehat{H}^1(G,P_{L,S}).$$

Furthermore, using the exact sequence

$$0𝒪_{L,S}^\times L^\times P_{L,S}0$$

and the triviality of $`\widehat{H}^1(G,L^\times )`$, we obtain

$$\widehat{H}^1(G,P_{L,S})(𝒪_{K,S}^\times N_{L/K}L^\times )/N_{L/K}𝒪_{L,S}^\times ,$$

induced by $`N_{L/K}`$ on a generator of a representative principal ideal. This proves the first statement in the proposition.

Now, suppose that $`H_{K,S}L=K`$ and that there is at most one prime in $`S`$ that does not split completely in $`L/K`$. Then it follows from Lemma 6.1 that $`\varphi (C_{K,S})=N_G(C_{L,S})`$, where $`N_G`$ is the norm element in the group ring $`[G]`$. Thus

$$C_{L,S}^G/\varphi (C_{K,S})=\widehat{H}^0(G,C_{L,S}).$$

Furthermore, since $`C_{L,S}`$ is finite, we have

$$|\widehat{H}^0(G,C_{L,S})|=|\widehat{H}^1(G,C_{L,S})|.$$

Finally, using Lemma 6.1 again, we see that

$$\widehat{H}^1(G,C_{L,S})\mathrm{ker}(C_{K,S}C_{L,S}).$$

This proves the second assertion of the proposition.

Now we return to the situation of Section 2, fixing $`n`$ and letting $`K`$ contain the $`n`$th roots of unity and $`S`$ all primes above $`n`$ and real archimedean places. Let $`aD_K`$ and $`\alpha K_S^\times `$ with $`\alpha ^n=a`$ and take $`L=K(\alpha )`$. We let $`d=[L:K]`$.

###### Proposition 6.3.

Suppose $`aD_K`$ is such that $`H_{K,S}L=K`$ and there is at most one prime of $`S`$ that does not split completely in $`L/K`$. Then the map $`(n/d)N_{L/K}:C_{L,S}C_{K,S}`$ induces an isomorphism

$$C_{L,S}^G/((d,\sigma 1)C_{L,S})^G\mu _n\stackrel{}{}(a,𝒪_{K,S}^\times )_S(C_{K,S}\mu _n),$$
(22)
the intersection being taken in $`H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _n)\mu _n`$.

###### Proof.

Given $`𝔞C_{L,S}^G`$, we can find $`b𝒪_{K,S}^\times N_{L/K}L^\times `$ associated with $`𝔞`$ by the isomorphism in Proposition 6.2. Since $`b`$ is a global norm it is a local norm everywhere, and Theorem 2.4 applies. Conversely, given $`b𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$ such that $`(a,b)_v=1`$ for all $`vS`$, Theorem 2.4 supplies an ideal $`𝔞`$ with class in $`C_{L,S}^G`$ such that $`(a,b)_S=N_{L/K}𝔞\xi `$, with $`\xi `$ a fixed generator of $`\mu _d`$. Therefore, the map in (22) is surjective. By Lemma 6.1, the kernel of $`N_{L/K}`$ on $`C_{L,S}`$ is $`(\sigma 1)C_{L,S}`$ and $`N_{L/K}`$ is surjective. Thus, the kernel of the map $`C_{L,S}C_{K,S}\mu _n`$ given by $`𝔞N_{L/K}𝔞\xi `$ is $`(d,\sigma 1)C_{L,S}`$.

This has, for instance, the following corollary in the case $`n=p`$, a prime number. Let $`A_{F,S}`$ denote the $`p`$-part of the $`S`$-class group of $`F`$ for $`F/K`$ finite.

###### Corollary 6.4.

Assume that $`|A_{K,S}|=p`$ and $`S`$ consists of a single $`(`$unique$`)`$ prime above $`p`$. Let $`aD_K`$ be such that $`[L:K]=p`$. Then $`(a,𝒪_{K,S}^\times )_S0`$ if and only if $`|A_{L,S}|=p`$.

###### Proof.

If $`LH_{K,S}`$, then since $`A_{L,S}`$ is the commutator subgroup of a $`p`$-group that has maximal abelian quotient $`A_{K,S}/p`$, we must have $`A_{L,S}=0`$. Hence, we may assume $`H_{K,S}L=K`$.

By Lemma 6.1, the order of the quotient $`A_{L,S}/(\sigma 1)A_{L,S}`$ is $`p`$. By the assumption on $`S`$, the image of the pairing is contained in $`C_{K,S}\mu _p`$. Thus, using Proposition 6.3, we see that $`A_{L,S}^G`$ surjects onto the above quotient if and only if $`(a,𝒪_{K,S}^\times )_S`$ is nonzero. On the other hand, $`A_{L,S}^G`$ surjects onto the quotient if and only if $`(\sigma 1)A_{L,S}=0`$.

Again, let us consider the case $`n=p`$ odd, $`K=(\mu _p)`$ and $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$. Assume Vandiver’s conjecture, and let $`(p,r)`$ be an irregular pair. Recall the pairing $`,_r`$ of Section 5.

###### Lemma 6.5.

The image of the pairing $`,_r`$ is $`1\zeta ,𝒞^+_r`$.

###### Proof.

The image of the pairing is generated by $`\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r`$ for all odd $`i`$. Since $`\eta _i,\eta _j_r=0`$ for $`jrimodp1`$, we have

$$\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r=\eta _i,\underset{j=0}{\overset{p2}{}}(1\zeta )^{ϵ_j}_r=\eta _i,1\zeta _r.$$

Proposition 6.3 allows us to conclude the following.

###### Corollary 6.6.

Let $`\alpha ^p=1\zeta `$ and $`L=K(\alpha )`$. Then the image of the pairing $`,_r`$ is isomorphic to the $`\omega ^{pr}`$-eigenspace of $`A_L^G/((p,\sigma 1)A_L)^G`$, where $`A_L`$ denotes the $`p`$-part of the class group of $`L`$.

## 7 Relationship with local pairings

We restrict ourselves to the case $`n=p`$ and $`K`$ containing $`\mu _p`$. We assume that $`S`$ consists of a single, unique prime of $`K`$ above $`p`$ and, if $`p=2`$, that $`K`$ has no real places. In Theorem 7.2, we will derive a formula for (a projection of) the pairing $`(a,b)_S`$ as a norm residue symbol in a certain unramified cyclic extension $`L`$ of $`K`$ of degree $`p`$. The formula is similar to that of Theorem 2.4 in that its applicability amounts to the determination of an element $`cL^\times `$ such that $`c^{\sigma 1}bL^{\times p}`$, where $`\sigma `$ generates $`\mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$ (for a different field $`L`$). In this case, however, one must determine an embedding of $`c`$ in the multiplicative group modulo $`p`$th powers of the completion at $`L`$ at a prime above $`p`$, as opposed to determining the class modulo $`p`$ of an ideal of $`𝒪_{K,S}`$ that $`c`$ generates in $`L`$, again up to a $`p`$th power.

Let $`L/K`$ be an unramified cyclic extension of degree $`p`$, and set $`G=\mathrm{Gal}(L/K)`$. Consider the following commutative diagram, in which (9) has been used to obtain the top row and in which we have identified $`H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _p)`$ with $`C_{K,S}/pC_{K,S}`$ in the bottom row.

Here, the superscript 0 on the direct sum indicates the kernel of the map

$$\underset{𝔭|p}{}\mathrm{inv}_𝔭:\underset{𝔭|p}{}H^2(L_𝔭,\mu _p)/p$$

(under the obvious identification $`\frac{1}{p}//p`$). By class field theory, there is a natural isomorphism $`C_{K,S}/N_{L/K}C_{L,S}G`$. Let $`\sigma `$ be a generator of $`G`$. Choose a prime of $`L`$ above $`p`$, say $`𝔭_0`$, and for any other, let $`k_𝔭/p`$ be such that $`𝔭=\sigma ^{k_𝔭}𝔭_0`$. We need the following explicit description of the map $`f`$.

###### Lemma 7.1.

The map

$$f:\underset{𝔭|p}{\overset{0}{}}H^2(L_𝔭,\mu _p)C_{K,S}/N_{L/K}C_{L,S}$$

is given by

$$f(c)=\underset{𝔭p}{}k_𝔭\mathrm{inv}_𝔭(c)𝔠$$

for some ideal class $`𝔠`$ generating $`C_{K,S}/N_{L/K}C_{L,S}`$.

###### Proof.

Corestriction is equivariant with respect to $`G`$, and hence so is the map $`f`$. Furthermore, $`^0H^2(L_𝔭,\mu _p)`$ is a cyclic $`_p[G]`$-module, and

$$C_{K,S}/N_{L/K}C_{L,S}/p,$$

so there is only one non-zero map up to scalar multiple. Since $`G_{K,S}`$ has cohomological dimension at most 2 \[NSW00, Proposition 8.3.17\], corestriction is surjective by \[NSW00, Proposition 3.3.8\], and hence so is $`f`$. So all we need to do is verify that the formula we have given for $`f`$ is equivariant with respect to $`G`$. Note that $`k_{\sigma 𝔭}=k_𝔭1`$. Hence, since $`\mathrm{inv}_𝔭(\sigma c)=\mathrm{inv}_{\sigma ^1𝔭}(c)`$, we have

$$f(\sigma c)=f(c)\underset{𝔭p}{}\mathrm{inv}_𝔭(c)𝔠=f(c).$$

For a prime $`𝔭`$ of $`L`$ above $`p`$, denote by $`(,)_𝔭`$ the Hilbert pairing on $`L_𝔭^\times `$ into $`\mu _p`$. Let $`\pi _L`$ denote the projection map

$$\pi _L:H^2(G_{K,S},\mu _p^2)C_{K,S}/N_{L/K}C_{L,S}\mu _p.$$

###### Theorem 7.2.

Let $`𝔭_0`$ be a prime of $`L`$ above $`p`$, and let $`𝔠`$ be as in Lemma 7.1. Let $`a,b𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$ and suppose that $`b=N_{L/K}b^{}`$ for some $`b^{}𝒪_{L,S}^\times `$. Then

$$\pi _L(a,b)_S=𝔠(a,N^{}b^{})_{𝔭_0},N^{}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}k\sigma ^k.$$
(23)
###### Proof.

As a standard property of the cup product, we have

$$(a,b)_S=\mathrm{cor}_{L/K}(\mathrm{res}_{L/K}a,b^{})_{L,S}.$$

We evaluate $`\pi _L(a,b)_S`$ by taking the image of $`(a,b^{})_{L,S}`$ in $`_𝔭H^2(L_𝔭,\mu _p^2)`$, namely $`_𝔭(a,b^{})_𝔭`$, and applying the map $`f\mu _p`$ to it. By Lemma 7.1, the result of this is

$$\pi _L(a,b)_S=𝔠\underset{𝔭p}{}(a,b^{})_𝔭^{k_𝔭}.$$
(24)
Now, $`(\sigma x,\sigma y)_{\sigma 𝔭}=(x,y)_𝔭`$ for any $`x,yL^\times `$. Thus (23) follows from (24) and the facts that $`\sigma a=a`$ and $`\sigma ^{k_𝔭}𝔭_0=𝔭`$.

We make the following observation on the applicability of Theorem 7.2.

###### Lemma 7.3.

If $`|A_{K,S}|=p`$, then $`N_{L/K}𝒪_{L,S}^\times =𝒪_{K,S}^\times `$.

###### Proof.

By Proposition 6.2, we must show that $`A_{L,S}^G/\varphi (A_{K,S})=0`$ (where $`\varphi `$ is the natural map). Since $`A_{L,S}`$ is finite and $`G`$ is cyclic, we have

$$|A_{L,S}^G|=|A_{L,S}/(\sigma 1)|,$$

and it follows from Lemma 6.1 that this latter group has order $`|A_{K,S}|/p=1`$.

We now focus on our main interest: $`K=(\mu _p)`$ and $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$, with $`p`$ an irregular prime satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. We consider the pairing $`,_r`$, where $`p`$ divides $`B_r`$. Now let $`\alpha _{pr}^p=\eta _{pr}`$, and set $`L=K(\alpha _{pr})`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acts on $`G`$ with eigenvalue $`\omega ^{pr}`$. Then $`\pi _L`$ amounts to the application of the idempotent $`ϵ_{2r}`$.

We can exploit the action of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to simplify the computation of $`(N^{}b^{})_{𝔭_0}`$ as follows. Let $`\iota _𝔭:LK_p=_p(\mu _p)`$ be the embedding corresponding to $`𝔭`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ be the inertia group of $`𝔭_0`$, which we identify with $`\mathrm{Gal}(K_p/_p)`$ via the projection onto $`\mathrm{Gal}(K/)`$.

###### Proposition 7.4.

Let $`3ip2`$ be odd such that $`p`$ does not divide $`B_{pi}`$. Assume that $`b=\eta _{ri}`$ is the norm of an $`S`$-unit $`b^{}𝒪_{L,S}^\times `$, and choose $`b^{}`$ to have image in the $`\omega ^{pr+i}`$-eigenspace of $`𝒪_{L,S}^\times /𝒪_{L,S}^{\times p}`$. Then $`\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r0`$ if and only if $`\iota _{𝔭_0}(N^{}b^{})K_p^{\times p}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }_0`$. We see that

$$\delta (N^{}b^{})=\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\delta \sigma ^k(b^{})^k=\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\sigma ^{k\omega ^{pr}(\delta )}\delta (b^{})^k.$$

Modulo $`𝒪_{L,S}^{\times p}`$, this is congruent to

$$\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\sigma ^{k\omega ^{pr}(\delta )}(b^{})^{k\omega ^{pr+i}(\delta )}\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\sigma ^k(b^{})^{k\omega ^i(\delta )}(N^{}b^{})^{\omega ^i(\delta )}.$$

Hence $`N^{}b^{}`$ has image in the $`\omega ^i`$-eigenspace of $`𝒪_{L,S}^\times /𝒪_{L,S}^{\times p}`$ under $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$.

By Theorem 7.2, $`\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r=0`$ if and only if $`(\eta _i,N^{}b^{})_{𝔭_0}=1`$. Since $`p`$ does not divide $`B_{pi}`$, the element $`\eta _i`$ is not locally a $`p`$th power. Furthermore, we have seen that the elements $`\eta _i`$ and $`N^{}b^{}`$ have image in the $`\omega ^{1i}`$ and $`\omega ^i`$ eigenspaces of $`K_p^\times /K_p^{\times p}`$, respectively. These eigenspaces have dimension $`1`$ since $`i0,1(modp1)`$, and hence the result follows from the non-degeneracy and Galois equivariance of the norm residue symbol.

For $`p=37`$, the condition of Proposition 7.4 is computationally verifiable.

###### Theorem 7.5.

The pairing $`,_{32}`$ for $`p=37`$ is nontrivial. Thus, Conjecture 5.3 is true for $`p=37`$.

###### Sketch of Proof.

Consider the fixed field $`F`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$. This is generated by the trace $`x`$ of a $`p`$th root $`\alpha _{pr}`$ of (a choice of) $`\eta _{pr}`$. With the help of William Stein, we determined a minimal polynomial for $`x`$ by considering small primes $`l`$ that are primitive roots modulo $`p`$, computing the minimal polynomial of the image of $`x`$ in $`𝔽_{l^{p1}}[X]/(X^p\eta _{pr})`$, and using the Chinese Remainder Theorem to find a $``$-polynomial that $`x`$ satisfies. Given this polynomial, Claus Fieker used Magma routines to compute the maximal order of $`F`$ and then a polynomial for $`F`$ with smaller discriminant (by far the most time-intensive steps), which made it possible to compute the $`p`$-unit group of $`F`$ (by first computing the class group to “sufficient precision”). Now $`F`$ has two prime ideals above $`p`$, and the prime of $`F`$ below $`𝔭_0`$ embeds $`F`$ into $`_p`$. We chose a $`p`$-unit that generates this prime, and this provided an element $`b^{}`$ as in Proposition 7.4 with $`p=N_{L/K}b^{}`$. We then computed the embeddings of $`x`$ at the primes $`𝔭_k`$ from the embeddings of $`\alpha _{pr}`$, which we obtained by factoring $`X^p\eta _{pr}`$ over $`_p(\zeta )`$. Writing $`b^{}`$ as a $``$-polynomial in $`x`$, we then computed the image

$$\iota _𝔭(N^{}b^{})=\underset{k=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\iota _{𝔭_k}(b^{})^k$$

to verify the condition of Proposition 7.4. The Magma code is currently available at www.math.harvard.edu/~sharifi and www.math.arizona.edu/~wmc.

Using the results of Section 6, we obtain the following corollary, which implies, for example, that $`(\sqrt[37]{37})`$ has class number prime to $`37`$, answering a question of Ralph Greenberg’s.

###### Corollary 7.6.

Let $`p=37`$, and let $`L/K`$ be a cyclic extension of degree $`37`$ that is unramified outside $`37`$. Then $`|A_{L,S}|=37`$ if and only if $`L`$ is not contained in $`(\zeta _{37^2},\alpha _5,\alpha _{27})`$, where $`\alpha _i^{37}=\eta _i`$ for any odd $`i`$.

###### Proof.

The values of the pairing $`,_{32}`$ tell us that the subgroup of $`D_K`$ consisting of elements that pair trivially with all $`37`$-units of $`K`$ is $`Q=\zeta ,\eta _5,\eta _{27}D_K^{37}`$. By Corollary 6.4, $`|A_{L,S}|=37`$ if and only if $`L=K(\alpha )`$ with $`\alpha ^{37}Q`$. The result now follows via Kummer theory.

## 8 Relations in the Galois group

Let us return to the general situation and notation of the introduction with $`n=p`$, considering a free presentation (3) of $`𝒢=G_{K,S}^{(p)}`$. The image of an arbitrary relation $`\rho R`$ in $`\mathrm{gr}^2()/p\mathrm{gr}^1()`$ was given by (4). In $`\mathrm{gr}^2()`$ itself, the relation must have the form

$$\underset{xX}{}a_x^\rho px+\underset{x<x^{}X}{}a_{x,x^{}}^\rho [x,x^{}].$$
(25)
To describe $`a_x^\rho /p`$, we use the Bockstein homomorphism

$$B:H^1(𝒢,/p)H^2(𝒢,/p),$$

which is the coboundary in the long exact cohomology sequence of

$$0/p\stackrel{𝑝}{}/p^2/p0.$$

For $`xX`$ and $`\rho R`$ we have \[NSW00, Proposition 3.9.14\]

$$a_x^\rho =\rho (B(x^{})),$$
(26)
where $`x^{}X^{}`$ is the dual to $`x`$.

###### Lemma 8.1.

Let $`K`$ be a number field containing $`\mu _p`$ and $`S`$ a set of primes containing those above $`p`$. For $`aD_K`$ the homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }=B\mathrm{id}_{\mu _p}`$ is given, abusing notation, by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(a)\zeta =𝔞\zeta (\zeta ,a)_S,$$

where $`𝔞^p=a𝒪_{K,S}`$.

###### Proof.

By comparison with the Kummer sequence (8) for $`n=p`$, the coboundary map $`B^{}`$ in the cohomology of the short exact sequence

$$1\mu _p\mu _{p^2}\stackrel{𝑝}{}\mu _p1,$$

is seen to be given by $`B^{}(a)=𝔞(modp)`$. We compute $`B(B^{}j)`$, where $`j`$ is the identity map on $`\mu _p^{(1)}`$, in terms of cocycles.

On the one hand, for $`fH^1(𝒢,/p)`$, we have that $`B(f)`$ is the class of

$$(\sigma ,\tau )\frac{1}{p}(\stackrel{~}{f}(\tau )+\stackrel{~}{f}(\sigma )\stackrel{~}{f}(\sigma \tau ))$$

for an arbitrary lift of $`f`$ to a map $`\stackrel{~}{f}:𝒢/p^2`$. On the other hand, $`B^{}j`$ takes $`f`$ to the class of

$$(\sigma ,\tau )\frac{1}{p}(\chi (\sigma )\stackrel{~}{f}(\tau )+\stackrel{~}{f}(\sigma )\stackrel{~}{f}(\sigma \tau )),$$

where $`\chi :𝒢(/p^2)^\times `$ is the cyclotomic character associated with a root of unity of order $`p^2`$. The difference of these cocycles is

$$(\sigma ,\tau )\frac{\chi (\sigma )1}{p}f(\tau ),$$

and here $`\sigma \zeta ^{(\chi (\sigma )1)/p}`$ is the Kummer character associated with $`\zeta `$. By the well-known formula for the cup product of two homomorphisms as their product, we have the result.

Again, let us focus on $`K=(\zeta _p)`$ and $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$, with $`p`$ satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. We describe a minimal generating set $`X`$ of $`𝒢`$. Let $`M`$ denote the set of integers $`m`$ with $`2mp`$ and either $`m`$ odd or $`(A_K/p)(\omega ^{pm})`$ nontrivial. (We take the given interval, instead of $`1mp1`$, for compatibility with Section 9.) We let $`M_\mathrm{o}`$ and $`M_\mathrm{e}`$ denote the odd and even elements of $`M`$, respectively. For each $`mM\{0\}`$, we choose an element $`x_m𝒢`$ with image generating the $`\omega ^m`$-eigenspace of $`\mathrm{gr}^1(𝒢)`$, subject to the following normalizations. For $`mM_\mathrm{o}`$, we assume that $`x_m\alpha _m=\zeta \alpha _m`$ for $`\alpha _m`$ a $`p`$th root of $`\eta _m`$, the cyclotomic unit defined in Section 5. For $`mM_\mathrm{e}`$, let $`𝔟_mA_K(\omega ^{pm})`$ be such that $`𝔟_m\zeta `$ maps to $`1`$ under the isomorphism (20) (chosen in defining the pairing $`,_m`$), and let $`f_{pm}`$ be the Iwasawa power series for $`A_{\mathrm{}}(\omega ^{pm})`$ with

$$f_{pm}((1+p)^s1)=L_p(\omega ^m,s),$$

for $`s_p`$, where $`L_p(\omega ^m,s)`$ is the $`p`$-adic $`L`$-function. Choose $`b_mD_K`$ with image in $`(D_K/D_K^p)(\omega ^{pm})`$ such that

$$b_m𝔟_m^{f_{pm}(0)/p}\text{under }D_KA_K[p].$$
(27)
Writing $`b_m=\beta _m^p`$, we require that $`x_m(\beta _m)=\zeta \beta _m`$. Finally, for $`m=0`$, we let $`x_0=\gamma `$ satisfy $`\gamma (\xi )=\xi ^{1+p}`$ for all $`\xi \mu _p^{\mathrm{}}`$.

Let

$$X=\{x_m:mM\{0\}\}.$$

Then $`X`$ provides a dual basis to the basis of $`H^1(𝒢,\mu _p)`$ given by the elements $`\eta _m`$ for $`mM_\mathrm{o}`$, $`b_m`$ for $`mM_\mathrm{e}`$, and $`\zeta `$ (under the isomorphism $`\mu _p\stackrel{}{}/p`$ provided by $`\zeta `$).

Now fix $`rM_\mathrm{e}`$. Recall that $`e_{i,r}`$ was defined to be $`\eta _i,\eta _{ri}_r`$ for $`iM_\mathrm{o}`$. If $`iM_\mathrm{e}`$ and the least positive residue $`j`$ of $`ri`$ modulo $`p1`$ is also in $`M_\mathrm{e}`$ (so that $`p`$ divides $`B_i`$, $`B_j`$ and $`B_r`$!) we then set $`e_{i,r}=b_i,b_j_r`$.

Identify $`1+T`$ with the restriction of $`\gamma `$ to $`K_{\mathrm{}}=(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})`$. Define $`g_{pr}\mathrm{\Lambda }_p[[T]]`$ by the relation

$$g_{pr}((1+p)^s1)=f_{pr}((1+p)^{1s}1)$$
(28)
for every $`s_p`$.

###### Theorem 8.2.

For $`rM_\mathrm{e}`$ with $`p`$ satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture, there is a relation in $`\mathrm{gr}^2(𝒢)`$ of the form

$$g_{pr}(0)x_r+g_{pr}^{}(0)[\gamma ,x_r]+\underset{\begin{array}{c}i<jM\\ i+jr(modp1)\end{array}}{}e_{i,r}[x_i,x_j]=0.$$

###### Proof.

Choose a relation $`\rho `$ such that the map $`H^2(𝒢,/p)/p`$ corresponding to $`\rho `$ factors through the negative of the isomorphism (20) used in defining $`,_r`$. By the expression (25) for $`\rho `$, the identities (5) and (26), and eigenspace considerations, we see that

$$\rho a_{x_r}^\rho px_r+a_{\gamma ,x_r}^\rho [\gamma ,x_r]+\underset{\begin{array}{c}i<jM\\ i+jr(modp1)\end{array}}{}a_{x_i,x_j}^\rho [x_i,x_j](mod\mathrm{Fil}^3),$$

with $`a_{x_i,x_j}^\rho =e_{i,r}`$.

Let $`f=f_{pr}`$ and $`g=g_{pr}`$. We claim that

$`a_{x_r}^\rho =g(0)/p(modp)`$ $`\mathrm{and}`$ $`a_{\gamma ,x_r}^\rho =g^{}(0)(modp).`$
Recalling the notation and statement of (27), Proposition 4.2 and Lemma 8.1 imply that

$`B(x_r^{})\zeta =𝔟_r^{f(0)/p+f^{}(0)}`$ $`\mathrm{and}`$ $`(\zeta ,b_r)_S=𝔟_r^{f^{}(0)}\zeta .`$
Applying $`\rho `$, we obtain by (26) and (5) that

$`a_{x_r}^\rho =f(0)/p+f^{}(0)(modp)`$ $`\mathrm{and}`$ $`a_{\gamma ,x_r}^\rho =f^{}(0)(modp).`$
That these agree with $`g(0)/p`$ and $`g^{}(0)`$ follows from the definition (28) of $`g`$ in terms of $`f`$.

From our table of the pairings and some basic Bernoulli number computations, we obtain the following corollary of Theorem 7.5 (for a particular choice of $`x_{32}`$).

###### Corollary 8.3.

For $`p=37`$ and $`r=32`$, there is a relation in $`\mathrm{gr}^2(𝒢)`$ of the form

$$\begin{array}{c}37y3[\gamma ,y]11[x_3,x_{29}][x_7,x_{25}]+[x_9,x_{23}]2[x_{11},x_{21}]6[x_{13},x_{19}]\hfill \\ \hfill 3[x_{15},x_{17}][x_{31},x_{37}]+11[x_{33},x_{35}]=0\end{array}$$

with $`y=x_{32}^c`$ for some $`c(/37)^\times `$.

###### Proof.

The coefficients of all but the first two terms are obtained from the table of calculated pairings. It is easy to check that (see the proof of \[Was97, Corollary 10.17\])

$$pf_{pr}^{}(0)\frac{B_r}{r}\frac{B_{r+p1}}{r1}16p(modp^2)$$

and

$$f_{pr}(0)=\frac{r2}{r}B_rB_{r+p1}14p(modp^2),$$

in order to compute the first two coefficients (up to a scalar relative to the others).

## 9 Relationship with pro-$`p`$ fundamental groups

We consider the curve $`V=^1\{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ over $``$, and let $`\overline{V}=V\times _{}\overline{}`$. The natural identification of the absolute Galois group $`G_{}`$ with $`\mathrm{Aut}(\overline{V}/V)`$ induces a representation

$$\varphi :G_{}\mathrm{Out}(\pi _1^{(p)}(\overline{V}))$$

where $`\pi _1^{(p)}(\overline{V})`$ denotes the pro-$`p`$ fundamental group. As before, let $`K=(\mu _p)`$ and $`S=\{(1\zeta )\}`$. Then $`\varphi `$ factors through $`𝒢`$, and one can put a “weight” filtration $`F^m𝒢`$ on $`𝒢`$, consisting of the subgroups corresponding to the fixed fields of the various induced representations

$$\varphi _m:𝒢\mathrm{Out}(\pi _1/\pi _1(m+1)),$$

where $`\pi _1=\pi _1^{(p)}(\overline{V})`$ and $`\pi _1(m+1)`$ is the $`(m+1)`$th term in the descending central series of $`\pi _1`$. In particular, the fixed field of $`\varphi _1`$ is $`K_{\mathrm{}}=(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})`$. Consider the graded $`_p`$-Lie algebra

$$𝔤=_{m=1}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤,\mathrm{where}\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤=F^m𝒢/F^{m+1}𝒢.$$

Then $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$ is torsion-free of finite $`_p`$-rank, and $`G_{}`$ acts on it by the $`m`$th power of the $`p`$-adic cyclotomic character \[Iha86\].

Let $`G`$ denote the closed normal subgroup of $`𝒢`$ with fixed field $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Note that $`F^mG=F^m𝒢`$ for $`m1`$. For odd $`m1`$, let $`\kappa _m:G_p(m)`$ denote the $`\mathrm{Gal}(K_{\mathrm{}}/)`$-equivariant homomorphism dual to an appropriate sequence of cyclotomic $`p`$-units as defined in \[Iha02\] and known to be nontrivial by \[Sou84\]. Then $`\kappa _m`$ induces a nontrivial map $`\kappa _m:\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤_p`$ for odd $`m3`$ \[Iha89, Proposition 1\]. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_m`$ denote an element of $`F^mG`$ such that $`v_p(\kappa _m(\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_m))`$ is minimal. Then $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_m`$ restricts to a nontrivial element $`\sigma _m\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$.

Let $`𝔥`$ denote the Lie subalgebra of $`𝔤`$ generated by the $`\sigma _m`$. Hain and Matsumoto have proven a conjecture of Deligne that $`𝔤𝔥_p`$ \[HM\] (see also \[Gon01, Section 3.7\] for a description of motivic arguments of Beilinson and Deligne that lead to this result). Deligne has further conjectured that $`𝔤_p`$ is free on the $`\sigma _m`$. On the other hand, Sharifi \[Sha02, Theorem 1.3\] has shown that Greenberg’s conjecture, as described in Section 10, implies that $`𝔤`$ itself is not free on the $`\sigma _m`$ if $`p`$ is irregular. Deligne’s conjecture would then imply that $`𝔥𝔤`$. In this section, we describe relations in $`𝔤`$, conjecturally nontrivial, in terms of the cup product $`(,)_S`$ (Theorem 9.1). Taking $`p=691`$ as an example, we see in Theorem 9.11 that the nontriviality of $`,_{12}`$ is, in fact, equivalent to $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$.

Let $`𝔰`$ the free $`_p`$-Lie algebra on generators $`s_i`$ with $`i3`$ odd, and let $`\psi :𝔰𝔤`$ denote the map given by $`s_i\sigma _i`$ for each $`i`$. Deligne’s conjecture is equivalent to the statement that $`\psi `$ is injective. We say that Deligne’s conjecture holds in degree $`i`$ if $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is injective.

Assume $`p`$ satisfies Vandiver’s Conjecture for the remainder of the section. Recall the notation of Section 8. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a choice of lift of $`\mathrm{Gal}(K/)`$ to a subgroup of $`𝒢`$ of order $`p1`$. We may choose $`x_m`$ for each $`mM\{0\}`$ such that

$$\delta x_m\delta ^1=x_m^{\omega (\delta )^m}$$

for each $`\delta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ by \[Sha02, Lemma 2.1\], which immediately forces $`x_mF^mG`$ for $`mM`$. Furthermore, for $`mM_\mathrm{o}`$, we may take $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_m=x_m`$. For each $`mM`$, we let $`\overline{x}_m`$ denote the image of $`x_m`$ in $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$, which for even $`m`$ may or may not be trivial.

Recall that $`\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢`$ was defined as the descending $`p`$-central series of $`𝒢`$. We define the induced filtration on $`𝔤`$:

$$\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^k𝔤=\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢F^mG}{\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢F^{m+1}G},$$

which differs from the descending central $`p`$-series on $`𝔤`$.

###### Theorem 9.1.

Let $`mM_\mathrm{e}`$ for $`p`$ satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. Then there is a relation in $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$ of the form

$$B_m\overline{x}_mm\underset{\begin{array}{c}i<jM\\ i+j=m\end{array}}{}e_{i,m}[\overline{x}_i,\overline{x}_j](mod\mathrm{gr}^m\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^3𝔤),$$
(29)
where the $`e_{i,m}`$ are as defined in Section 8.

###### Proof.

We note that for $`xF^iG`$, we have

$$x^{\gamma 1}x^{(1+p)^i1}modF^{i+1}G,$$
(30)
since $`\mathrm{gr}^i𝔤`$ has Tate twist $`i`$. Let $`g=g_{pm}`$ be as in (28). Since

$$g((1+p)^m1)=L_p(\omega ^m,1m)=(p^m1)\frac{B_m}{m},$$

applying (30), we obtain

$$x_m^{g(T)}x_m^{(p^m1)B_m/m}(modF^{m+1}G).$$

The result now follows from Theorem 8.2 by reducing its relation modulo the image of $`F^{m+1}G`$ in $`\mathrm{gr}^2(𝒢)`$.

We derive some consequences of this result regarding the freeness and generation of $`𝔤`$. In order to do so, we must compare the filtration $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^{}𝔤`$ on $`𝔤`$ with the descending central $`p`$-series on the simpler Lie algebra $`𝔥`$. This will proceed in several steps. We begin with the following lemma.

###### Lemma 9.2.

Let $``$ be the pro-$`p`$ subgroup of $`𝒢`$ generated by the $`x_i`$ for $`iM_\mathrm{o}\{0\}`$. Let $`H`$ be the pro-$`p`$ subgroup of $`G`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$ for odd $`i3`$. Then $``$ and $`H`$ are freely generated as pro-$`p`$ groups on these sets of elements.

###### Proof.

Hain and Matsumoto \[HM, Theorems 7.3, 7.4\] have demonstrated the existence of a filtration on $`G`$ with graded quotient a $`_p`$-Lie algebra that injects into a free graded $`_p`$-Lie algebra on the images of the $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$ in degree $`i`$. As remarked by Ihara \[Iha02, Section 6\], this implies that $`H`$ must be free on the $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$. By \[Sha02, Lemma 3.1c\] (as in the proof of Theorem 1.3 therein), this implies the desired freeness on the generators of $``$.

For $`Z`$ a pro-$`p`$ group or $`_p`$-Lie algebra, we let $`Z(k)`$ denote the $`k`$th term in its descending central series and $`\mathrm{Fil}^kZ`$ the $`k`$th term in its descending central $`p`$-series. Next, we compare $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}𝔥`$ with the filtration induced on $`𝔥`$ by $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}H`$. Note that we use $`H`$, as opposed to $``$ (at this point), since the weight filtration is defined by a filtration on $`H`$.

###### Lemma 9.3.

Let $`m`$ and $`k`$ be positive integers. If $`\mathrm{gr}^m\psi `$ is injective for $`i<m`$ then

$$\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥(k)\frac{H(k)F^mG}{H(k)F^{m+1}G}$$

and

$$\mathrm{gr}^m\mathrm{Fil}^k𝔥\frac{\mathrm{Fil}^kHF^mG}{\mathrm{Fil}^kHF^{m+1}G}.$$

###### Proof.

By definition of $`𝔥`$, we may lift any element of $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥(k)`$ to an element of $`H(k)F^mG`$. We must show that, conversely, an element of $`H(k)F^mG`$ projects to an element of $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥(k)`$. By the injectivity of $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ in weights $`i<m`$, the group $`H/(HF^mG)`$ is isomorphic to the free pro-$`p`$ subgroup on the $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$ modulo the pro-$`p`$ subgroup generated by commutators $`[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_1},\mathrm{}[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_{j1}},\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_j}]\mathrm{}]`$ with $`m_im`$ \[Iha02, Section 6\]. Using the freeness of $`H`$ in Lemma 9.2, $`H(k)F^mG`$ is then the normal pro-$`p`$ subgroup of $`H`$ generated by those among the above commutators with $`j=k`$, which clearly project to elements of $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥(k)`$. The same arguments hold with the descending central series terms replaced by descending central $`p`$-series terms.

Now we compare the filtration $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^{}𝔤`$ induced by $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}𝒢`$ with the filtration on $`𝔥`$ induced by $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}`$, since $`𝒢`$ is more closely related to $``$ than to $`H`$.

###### Lemma 9.4.

Let $`m`$ and $`k`$ be positive integers with $`mp+r2`$, with $`r`$ the minimal element of $`M_\mathrm{e}`$. If $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is surjective for $`im`$, then

$$\mathrm{gr}^m\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^k𝔤\frac{\mathrm{Fil}^kF^mG}{\mathrm{Fil}^kF^{m+1}G}.$$

###### Proof.

We first show that $`x_r[H,H]F^{m+1}G`$ if $`rM_\mathrm{e}`$ with $`rm`$. Note that since $`r`$ is even, $`\mathrm{gr}^r𝔥=\mathrm{gr}^r[𝔥,𝔥]`$ by definition. Since $`x_rF^rG`$ and $`\mathrm{gr}^r\psi `$ is surjective, we have $`\overline{x}_r\mathrm{gr}^r[𝔥,𝔥]`$. Thus, we obtain $`x_r[H,H]F^{r+1}G`$. Now assume that $`x_r[H,H]F^lG`$ for some $`lr(modp1)`$ with $`lm`$. We remark that

$$\frac{[H,H]F^lG}{[H,H]F^{l+1}G}\frac{F^lG}{([H,H]F^lG)F^{l+1}G}\mathrm{gr}^l𝔥^{\mathrm{ab}},$$

and $`\mathrm{Gal}(K_{\mathrm{}}/)`$ acts on the latter group by the $`l`$th power of the cyclotomic character. On the other hand,

$$\delta x_r\delta ^1=x_r^{\omega (\delta )^r}\text{ for }\delta \mathrm{\Delta },$$

and this forces $`x_r[H,H]F^{l+1}G`$. By recursion, since $`m<r+p1`$, we have $`x_r[H,H]F^{m+1}G`$.

For a tuple $`𝐦=(m_1,\mathrm{},m_j)`$ with $`m_iM\{0\}`$ for each $`i`$, and $`m_{j1}<m_j`$ if $`j2`$, let

$$x_𝐦=[x_{m_1},\mathrm{},[x_{m_{j1}},x_{m_j}]\mathrm{}].$$

Then $`\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢`$ is generated as a normal subgroup by those elements of the form $`p^{kj}x_𝐦`$, with $`𝐦`$ a tuple of length $`jk`$. Since $`x_r[H,H]F^{m+1}G`$ for $`rM_\mathrm{e}`$, the images of those elements $`p^{kj}x_𝐦`$ with some $`m_iM_\mathrm{e}`$ are redundant as elements of the induced generating set of $`\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢/(\mathrm{Fil}^k𝒢F^{m+1}G)`$, and hence $`\mathrm{Fil}^k`$ surjects onto the latter quotient, finishing the proof.

In the following proposition, we conclude our discussion of filtrations by filling in the intermediate comparison between the filtrations on $`𝔥`$ induced by $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}H`$ and $`\mathrm{Fil}^{}`$. Note that these filtrations will always disagree in sufficiently large weight, since for each $`k`$, there exists $`i`$ sufficiently large such that $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i\mathrm{Fil}^k`$.

###### Proposition 9.5.

Let $`m`$ and $`k`$ be positive integers with $`mp+1`$. If $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is bijective for $`im`$, then

$$\mathrm{gr}^m\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Fil}}^k𝔤=\mathrm{gr}^m\mathrm{Fil}^k𝔥.$$

###### Proof.

By the second isomorphism in Lemma 9.3 and the isomorphism of Lemma 9.4, it suffices to show that

$$\frac{\mathrm{Fil}^kHF^mG}{\mathrm{Fil}^kHF^{m+1}G}\frac{\mathrm{Fil}^kF^mG}{\mathrm{Fil}^kF^{m+1}G}.$$

We clearly have that $`\mathrm{Fil}^kH\mathrm{Fil}^k`$, and we are left to verify that

$$(\mathrm{Fil}^kF^mG)F^{m+1}G(\mathrm{Fil}^kHF^mG)F^{m+1}G$$
(31)
From the generating set $`\{x_i:iM_\mathrm{o}\{0\}\}`$ of $``$, we may define a generating set $`\{x_{i,n}:iM_\mathrm{o},n0\}`$ of $`H`$, taking $`x_{i,0}=x_i`$ and

$$x_{i,n+1}=\gamma x_{i,n}\gamma ^1x_{i,n}^{(1+p)^{i+n(p1)}}.$$

By \[Sha02, Lemma 3.1b\], the $`x_{i,n}`$ freely generate $`H`$ as a pro-$`p`$ group. Note that $`x_{i,n}\mathrm{Fil}^{n+1}\mathrm{Fil}^{n+2}`$ by Lemma 9.2. Thus $`H\mathrm{Fil}^k`$ is generated as a normal pro-$`p`$ subgroup by those elements of the form

$$p^{kJ}[x_{m_1,n_1},\mathrm{},[x_{m_{j1},n_{j1}},x_{m_j,n_j}]\mathrm{}]$$

with $`m_tM_\mathrm{o}`$, $`n_t0`$, and $`J=j+n_t`$ for $`1tj`$. Furthermore, it follows as in \[Sha02, Lemma 2.2\], that the elements $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i`$ with $`i3`$ odd may be chosen such that

$$x_{i,n}\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{i+n(p1)}^1[H,H]\mathrm{Fil}^{n+1}.$$

Therefore, $`H\mathrm{Fil}^k`$ is generated as a normal pro-$`p`$ subgroup by the elements

$$p^{kJ}[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_1+n_1(p1)},\mathrm{},[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_{j1}+n_{j1}(p1)},\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_j+n_j(p1)}]\mathrm{}],$$

with $`m_t`$, $`n_t`$ and $`J`$ as before. Since $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{i+n(p1)}F^{m+1}G`$ if $`n1`$, to show (31), it suffices to verify that

$$p^{kj}[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_1},\mathrm{},[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_{j1}},\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_{m_j}]\mathrm{}]\mathrm{Fil}^kH,$$

but this is true by definition.

Combining Proposition 9.5 with Theorem 9.1, we obtain the following.

###### Proposition 9.6.

Assume that $`e_{i,m}`$ is nonzero for some $`iM_\mathrm{o}`$ with $`i<m/2`$ and $`mM_\mathrm{e}`$. Then $`𝔤`$ is not freely generated by the elements $`\sigma _i`$. In fact, there is an $`im`$ for which $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is not is an isomorphism.

###### Proof.

Assume that $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is bijective for all $`im`$, so the relation (29) holds modulo $`\mathrm{gr}^m\mathrm{Fil}^3𝔥`$ by Proposition 9.5. Then $`B_m\overline{x}_mp\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥`$ by the surjectivity of $`\mathrm{gr}^m\psi `$. Furthermore, for any $`rM_\mathrm{e}`$ with $`r<m`$, we have $`\overline{x}_r[𝔥,𝔥]`$ by the surjectivity of $`\mathrm{gr}^r\psi `$, as in the proof of Lemma 9.4. Since some $`e_{i,m}0`$, reducing (29) modulo $`p𝔥+𝔥(3)`$ exhibits a contradiction of the injectivity of $`\mathrm{gr}^m\psi `$.

This can be improved as follows, when $`m`$ is the smallest positive even integer such that $`p`$ divides $`B_m`$.

###### Theorem 9.7.

Let $`m`$ be the minimal element of $`M_\mathrm{e}`$ for an irregular prime $`p`$ satisfying Vandiver’s conjecture. Assume that Deligne’s conjecture holds in degrees $`im`$. Then $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤=_p\overline{x}_m+\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥`$ and $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is generated by the image of $`\overline{x}_m`$. Furthermore, if $`e_{i,m}`$ is nonzero for some $`iM_\mathrm{o}`$ with $`i<m/2`$, then in fact $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$ and $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is nontrivial.

###### Proof.

First, we remark that $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is not only injective, but bijective in degrees $`i<m`$ by \[Iha02, Theorem I.2(ii)\]. From this, it is easy to see that $`\overline{x}_m`$ and $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥`$ generate $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤`$. That is, $`\mathrm{gr}^m[𝔤,𝔤]=\mathrm{gr}^m[𝔥,𝔥]`$ by the bijectivity in lower degrees, and $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is generated by the image of $`\overline{x}_m`$ as shown, e.g, in the proof of \[Sha02, Theorem 4.1\]. By Proposition 9.6, we know that $`\mathrm{gr}^m\psi `$ is not bijective, hence not surjective, finishing the proof.

Let $`𝒟`$ denote Ihara’s stable derivation algebra \[Iha02\], which is a graded Lie algebra over $``$. More specifically, it is a Lie algebra of derivations of the free graded Lie algebra $``$ on two variables $`x`$ and $`y`$ over $``$ and consists of $`D\mathrm{gr}^m𝒟`$ such that $`D(x)=0`$ and $`D(y)=[y,f_D]`$ with $`f_D\mathrm{gr}^m`$ satisfying certain relations.

Ihara has shown that there is an injection of graded $`_p`$-Lie algebras \[Iha89\]

$$\iota :𝔤𝒟_p.$$

He has also made the following conjecture.

###### Conjecture 9.8 (Ihara).

The map $`\mathrm{gr}^m\iota `$ is an isomorphism for $`m<p`$.

Consider the map

$$\lambda _m:\mathrm{gr}^m𝒟$$

(denoted $`\mathrm{gr}^m(c)`$ in \[Iha02\]) given by

$$f_D\lambda _m(D)[x,[x,\mathrm{}[x,y]\mathrm{}]](mod\mathrm{terms}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{degree}2\mathrm{in}y).$$

We remark that $`\lambda _m=0`$ if $`m`$ is even or $`m=1`$. Extending $`\lambda _m`$ $`_p`$-linearly, we may precompose with $`\mathrm{gr}^m\iota `$ to obtain a map $`\lambda _m^{(p)}`$ satisfying the formula \[Iha89, Iha02\]

$$\kappa _m=(p^{m1}1)(m1)!\lambda _m^{(p)}$$
(32)
for odd $`m3`$.

###### Lemma 9.9.

For $`mM_\mathrm{o}`$, there exists $`D_m\mathrm{gr}^m𝒟`$ such that $`\lambda _m(D_m)`$ is the positive generator of the image of $`\lambda _m`$ and

$$D_m(m1)!\lambda _m(D_m)\iota (\sigma _m)(modp𝒟_p).$$
(33)
###### Proof.

We need only show that the two defining properties of $`D_m`$ are consistent. If $`mp`$, we have

$$\lambda _m^{(p)}(\sigma _m)1/(m1)!(modp)$$

by equation (32), and consistency follows from applying $`\lambda _m`$ to both sides of (33).

Ihara has conjectured the existence of $`p`$-torsion in the $`m`$th graded piece of $`𝒟^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ when $`p`$ divides $`B_m`$ \[Iha02, Conjecture II.2\]. We will focus on a case in which the stable derivation algebra has been calculated sufficiently to allow comparison with the relation in Theorem 9.1. That is, when $`p=691`$ and $`m=12`$, Ihara has exhibited a relation

$$691\delta =2[D_3,D_9]27[D_5,D_7]$$
(34)
for some $`\delta \mathrm{gr}^{12}𝒟`$. On the other hand, Matsumoto has shown that $`[D_3,D_9]`$ and $`[D_5,D_7]`$ form a basis of $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝒟`$ and generate $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}[𝒟,𝒟]`$ \[Mat95, Appendix A\], which implies that $`\delta [𝒟,𝒟]`$. Furthermore, he has verified that the image of $`\delta `$ generates $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝒟^{\mathrm{ab}}`$.

###### Proposition 9.10.

For $`p=691`$, Conjecture 9.8 in degree $`m=12`$ is equivalent to the statement that $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$.

###### Proof.

We remark that $`\mathrm{gr}^i\psi `$ is injective for $`i11`$, as follows directly from the main results of \[Iha89\]. By Theorem 9.7, the top row of the commutative diagram

is exact and $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is nonzero if and only if $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$. The bottom row is exact by definition. Since $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}[𝒟,𝒟]`$ is generated by $`[D_3,D_9]`$ and $`[D_5,D_7]`$, Lemma 9.9 implies that the leftmost vertical arrow is a surjection. Since $`\iota `$ is injective, the rightmost vertical arrow is now forced to be an injection as well. Furthermore, noting (34) and Matsumoto’s results discussed after it, we have that $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝒟^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is cyclic of order $`691`$. Therefore, $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}\iota `$ is an isomorphism if and only if $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is nonzero, hence the result.

By Proposition 9.10, the following shows that Conjectures 5.3 and 9.8 are equivalent for the irregular pair $`(691,12)`$.

###### Theorem 9.11.

The pairing $`,_{12}`$ is nontrivial for $`p=691`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$. In this case, there is a relation in $`gr^{12}𝔤`$,

$$[\sigma _3,\sigma _9]50[\sigma _5,\sigma _7](mod691).$$
(35)
###### Proof.

According to \[Iha02\], we have $`\lambda _m(D_m)=1,2,16,144`$ for $`m=3,5,7,9`$ respectively. If $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$, then the injectivity of $`\iota `$ implies that $`\delta `$ is contained in $`\iota (\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤)`$. By Theorem 9.7 and Lemma 9.9, equation (34) becomes

$$691c\overline{x}_{12}190[\sigma _3,\sigma _9]+174[\sigma _5,\sigma _7](mod691[𝔤,𝔤])$$
(36)
in $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$ for some $`c0(mod691)`$. This yields (35). By the linear independence of $`[\sigma _3,\sigma _9]`$ and $`[\sigma _5,\sigma _7]`$, this equation must agree with that of (29) (noting Proposition 9.5, and after multiplication by an appropriate scalar). Therefore, by Theorem 9.1, the pairing $`,_{12}`$ is nontrivial.

On the other hand, the coefficients in equation (36) of $`[\sigma _i,\sigma _{12i}]`$ equal the values of the pairing $`e_{i,12}`$ up to a constant scalar multiple by the computation yielding Theorem 5.1. Hence, by Theorem 9.7, nontriviality of $`,_{12}`$ implies that $`\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔥\mathrm{gr}^{12}𝔤`$.

In general, we expect that for $`m`$ minimal such that $`p`$ divides $`B_m`$, a determination of the structure of $`\mathrm{gr}^i𝒟`$ with $`im`$, together with a computation of a unique possibility for the pairing $`,_m`$ on $`𝒞\times 𝒞`$ up to possibly trivial scalar (to show $`e_{i,m}0`$ for some $`iM_\mathrm{o}`$ with $`i<m/2`$ if $`𝒞,𝒞_m0`$), would yield (in essence) that Conjectures 5.39.8, and the statement that $`\mathrm{gr}^m𝔤\mathrm{gr}^m𝔥`$, are equivalent as well.

## 10 Relationship with Greenberg’s conjecture

Let $`K`$ be a number field, $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ the compositum of all $`_p`$-extensions of $`K`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}=\mathrm{Gal}(K_{\mathrm{}}/K)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=_p[[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}]]`$. Let $`L_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the maximal abelian unramified pro-$`p`$ extension of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$, and let $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the maximal abelian $`p`$-ramified pro-$`p`$ extension of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Then $`X_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{Gal}(L_{\mathrm{}}/K_{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`Y_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{Gal}(M_{\mathrm{}}/K_{\mathrm{}})`$ are $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-modules. We say that a $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-module is pseudo-null if its annihilator has height at least $`2`$. Greenberg has made the following conjecture \[Gre01, Conjecture 3.5\].

###### Conjecture 10.1 (Greenberg).

$`X_{\mathrm{}}`$ is pseudo-null as a $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-module.

For a prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`K`$ lying above $`p`$, let $`r_𝔭`$ be the integer such that the decomposition group $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_𝔭\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ is isomorphic to $`_p^{r_𝔭}`$. In certain cases, Greenberg’s conjecture has an equivalent form in terms of the torsion in $`Y_{\mathrm{}}`$. For example, we have the following theorem, which is \[McC01, Corollary 14\] (see also \[LNQD00\]).

###### Theorem 10.2 (McCallum).

Assume that $`r_𝔭2`$ for all primes $`𝔭`$ above $`p`$ and that $`\mu _p^{\mathrm{}}K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Then Greenberg’s conjecture holds if and only if $`Y_{\mathrm{}}`$ is $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$-torsion free.

Let $`𝒢`$ be the Galois group of the maximal $`p`$-ramified pro-$`p`$ extension of $`K`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{G}𝒢`$ be the Galois group of the same extension over $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Let $`I(𝒢)`$ denote the augmentation ideal of $`_p[[𝒢]]`$. Then the module $`Z=H_0(\stackrel{~}{G},I(𝒢))`$ has torsion subgroup isomorphic to that of $`Y_{\mathrm{}}`$ (see \[McC01, Theorem 10\]).

Consider a free presentation of $`𝒢`$ as in (3) with minimal sets of generators and relations $`X`$ and $`R`$ as in Section 1. The presentation gives rise to an exact sequence \[NQD84, McC01\]

$$0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^s\stackrel{\mathit{\varphi }}{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^gZ0,$$
(37)
where $`s=|R|`$ and $`g=|X|`$. Let $`h`$ denote the $`_p`$-rank of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ (so $`hgs`$). Write $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=_p[[T]]`$, where $`T=(T_1,\mathrm{},T_h)`$ and $`1+T_i`$ is the restriction of a generator $`x_iX`$. Furthermore, we choose the remaining elements $`x_iX`$ with $`h+1ig`$ such that the image of $`x_i`$ in $`𝒢^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ is torsion. If

$$f=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_g)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^g,$$

we also use the notation

$$f=\underset{i=1}{\overset{g}{}}f_idx_i.$$

We briefly describe the map $`\varphi `$ in (37) (see \[NQD84\] for details). Fox \[Fox53\] defines a derivative (extended to pro-$`p`$ groups in \[NQD84\])

$$D:_p[[]]I()$$

satisfying $`D(x)=x1`$ for $`xX`$ and a certain non-abelian Leibniz condition that yields, for example,

$$D[x,y]=(1xyx^1)(x1)+(x[x,y])(y1)$$

and

$$Dx^q=\left(\underset{i=0}{\overset{q1}{}}x^i\right)(x1)$$

for $`q`$ a power of $`p`$. We also have the map

$$\theta :I()=_p[[]](x_i1)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}dx_i=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^g.$$

We remark that the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\theta D`$ factors through $`_p[[/^{\prime \prime }]]`$ (where $`N^{}=[N,N]`$ for a group $`N`$). The map $`\varphi `$ in the presentation (37) is then obtained on basis elements of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^s`$ by identifying them with elements of $`R`$, considering these as elements of $``$ via the presentation (1), and then composing with $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Roughly speaking, the map $`\varphi `$ is the Jacobian matrix of the relations.

We choose $`R`$ such that each $`r_kR`$ has the form

$$r_k\left(\underset{1i<jg}{}[x_i,x_j]^{f_{i,j}^k}\right)x_k^{l_k}(mod^{\prime \prime }),$$
(38)
with $`gs+1kg`$, where $`l_k`$ is a power of $`p`$ for $`k>h`$ and $`l_k=0`$ for $`kh`$ and where $`f_{i,j}^k_p[[^{\mathrm{ab}}]]`$. Each $`f_{i,j}^k`$ may be chosen not to involve any $`x_a`$ with $`i<a<j`$ in order to make the expression unique. Via the surjection $`_p[[^{\mathrm{ab}}]]\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, we obtain elements $`f_{i,j}^k(T)`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, in which $`x_i`$ is replaced by $`1+T_i`$ if $`1ih`$ and $`1`$ otherwise. We find

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(r_k)=\underset{1i<jh}{}f_{i,j}^k(T)(T_jdx_i+T_idx_j)+\underset{1ih<jg}{}f_{i,j}^k(T)T_idx_j+l_kdx_k.$$
(39)
Let us assume from now on that $`p`$ is odd. We require the following lemma.

###### Lemma 10.3.

Let $`K`$ be a number field containing $`\mu _p`$, and let $`\alpha K^\times `$ be a universal norm from the extension $`K(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})/K`$. Then the torsion in $`𝒢^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ acts trivially on any $`p`$th root of $`\alpha `$.

###### Proof.

We may assume that $`\alpha \mu _p^{\mathrm{}}K^{\times p}`$. Let $`K_n=K(\mu _{p^n})`$, and let $`\alpha _nK_n^\times `$ be the elements of a norm-compatible sequence with $`\alpha _1=\alpha `$. Set

$$\alpha _n^{}=\underset{\sigma \mathrm{Gal}(K_n/K)}{}\sigma (\alpha _n)^{i_{\sigma ,n}},$$

with $`i_{\sigma ,n}`$ the minimal nonnegative integer satisfying $`\sigma (\zeta _{p^n})=\zeta _{p^n}^{i_{\sigma ,n}^1}`$. Then $`\alpha _1^{}=\alpha `$, and

$$\alpha _{n+1}^{}\alpha _n^{}{}_{}{}^{1}K_{n+1}^{\times p^n}.$$

Since $`\alpha \mu _p^{\mathrm{}}K^{\times p}`$, we have that $`\alpha _n^{}K(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})^{\times p}`$. By Kummer theory, the sequence $`(\alpha _n^{})`$ defines a nontrivial element of $`H^1(G,\underset{}{lim}\mu _{p^n})`$, with $`G`$ as in Section 9, on which

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{Gal}(K(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})/K)$$

acts by the cyclotomic character. Hence, by a choice of isomorphism

$$\lambda :_p(1)\stackrel{}{}\underset{}{lim}\mu _{p^n}$$

of $`𝒢`$-modules and the fact that $`G`$ acts trivially on $`_p(1)`$, it defines an element of $`H^1(G,_p)^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has cohomological dimension $`1`$, this element is the image under restriction of an element $`\kappa \mathrm{Hom}(𝒢,_p)`$. Furthermore, the map induced by the quotient $`_p/p`$ takes $`\kappa `$ to the Kummer character associated with $`\alpha `$, viewed as an element of $`\mathrm{Hom}(𝒢,/p)`$ via $`\lambda `$ (as $`K`$ contains $`\mu _p`$). Since $`\kappa `$ has torsion-free image, the lemma is proven.

We remark that all universal norms for the cyclotomic $`_p`$-extension are $`p`$-units. We are now ready to prove the following consequence of nontriviality of the pairing.

###### Theorem 10.4.

Let $`K`$ be a number field containing $`\mu _p`$ for an odd prime $`p`$, and let $`S`$ be the set of primes above $`p`$ and any real archimedean places. Suppose that

$$dim_{/p}H^2(G_{K,S},/p)=1.$$

If the pairing $`(\alpha ,\beta )_S`$ is nontrivial on two universal norms $`\alpha ,\beta `$ for the extension $`K(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})/K`$, then Greenberg’s conjecture holds for $`K`$.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 10.3 and equation (5), the nontriviality of the cup product implies that

$$f_{a,b}^g(0)0(modp),$$

with $`f_{a,b}^g`$ as in (38) for some $`a`$ and $`b`$ with $`1a<bh`$. Set $`𝔪=(p,T)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. From equation (39), we see that

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Phi }(r_g)\underset{1i<jh}{}f_{i,j}^g(0)(T_jdx_i+T_idx_j)\hfill \\ \hfill +\delta (l_g+\underset{1ig1}{}f_{i,g}^g(0)T_i)dx_g(mod𝔪^2),\end{array}$$
(40)
where $`\delta =1`$ if $`h=g1`$ and $`\delta =0`$ if $`h=g`$. Equation (40) therefore shows that the coefficients of $`dx_a`$ and $`dx_b`$ in $`\mathrm{\Phi }(r_g)`$ are both nontrivial modulo $`𝔪^2`$, with only the latter involving a linear term in $`T_a`$ that is nonzero modulo $`p`$. Hence, one cannot factor a non-unit polynomial out of $`\mathrm{\Phi }(r_g)`$, and $`Z`$ has no torsion.

Let us specialize to the case $`K=(\mu _p)`$ by way of example. Assume that $`A_K`$ has order $`p`$. In \[McC01, Theorem 1\] (see also \[Mar\]), it is shown that Greenberg’s conjecture holds if $`f(0)pf^{}(0)(modp^2)`$, where $`f`$ denotes a characteristic power series of the $`p`$-part of the class group of $`(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})`$. Essentially, this is a condition on the last term in the expression (40). (By the discussion in Section 8, it is exactly that $`l_g0(modp^2)`$.) Since that term involves only $`dx_g`$, the method of analysis in Theorem 10.4 seems incapable of giving an alternate proof of McCallum’s result. On the other hand, since cyclotomic $`p`$-units are universal norms, we have the following variation on McCallum’s result which replaces the condition on the characteristic power series with a condition on the pairing.

###### Corollary 10.5.

Let $`K=(\mu _p)`$, and assume that $`A_K`$ is a cyclic group. If the restriction of $`(,)_S`$ to the cyclotomic $`p`$-units is nontrivial, then Greenberg’s conjecture holds for $`K`$.

Using Theorem 7.5, this gives another proof of Greenberg’s conjecture for $`(\mu _{37})`$.