Pairs of commuting integer matrices

Tim Browning , Will Sawin and Victor Y. Wang IST Austria
Am Campus 1
3400 Klosterneuburg
Austria [email protected], [email protected] Princeton University
Fine Hall
304 Washington Rd
Princeton NJ 08540
USA [email protected]

(Date: September 26, 2024)

Abstract.

We prove upper and lower bounds on the number of pairs of commuting $n\times n$ matrices with integer entries in $[-T,T]$ , as $T\to\infty$ . Our work uses Fourier analysis and leads to an analysis of exponential sums involving matrices over finite fields. These are bounded by combining a stratification result of Fouvry and Katz with a new result about the flatness of the commutator Lie bracket.

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:

11D45 (11T23, 15B33, 15B36)

1. Introduction

Let $M_{n}$ denote the scheme of $n\times n$ matrices, for an integer $n\geqslant 2$ . Let $V_{n}\subset M_{n}$ denote the closed subscheme $\operatorname{tr}=0$ . The aim of this note is to count integral points of height $\leqslant T$ , as $T\to\infty$ , on the commuting variety

\mathfrak{C}_{n}=\{(X,Y)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{C})^{2}:XY=YX\},

viewed as an affine variety in $M_{n}(\mathbb{C})^{2}\cong\mathbb{C}^{2n^{2}}$ . Thus we are interested in the behaviour of the counting function

N(T)\colonequals\#\{(X,Y)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}:\lvert X\rvert,\lvert Y% \rvert\leqslant T,\;XY=YX\},

as $T\to\infty$ , where $\lvert X\rvert$ denotes the maximum modulus of any of the entries in a matrix $X\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})$ . It was shown by Motzkin and Taussky in the paragraph after [12, Thm. 6] that $\mathfrak{C}_{n}$ is irreducible and it follows from work of Basili [1, Thm. 1.2] that $\dim\mathfrak{C}_{n}=n^{2}+n$ . Furthermore, $\mathfrak{C}_{n}$ cannot be linear, since it contains $(X,0)$ and $(0,Y)$ , for any $X,Y\in M_{n}(\mathbb{C})$ , but does not always contain the point $(X,Y)$ . In fact, a recursive formula for the degree of $\mathfrak{C}_{n}$ has been provided by Knutson and Zinn-Justin [10].

Since $\mathfrak{C}_{n}$ is defined by a system of homogeneous quadratic equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{Q}$ , we can view $\mathfrak{C}_{n}$ as an affine cone over a non-linear irreducible variety in $\mathbb{P}^{2n^{2}-1}$ of dimension $n^{2}+n-1$ , which is definable over $\mathbb{Q}$ . Appealing to the resolution of the dimension growth conjecture by Salberger [14], it therefore follows that

N(T)\ll_{n,\varepsilon}T^{n^{2}+n-1+\varepsilon}

(1.1)

for any $\varepsilon>0$ , where the implied constant depends at most on $n$ and $\varepsilon$ . Moreover, the $\varepsilon$ can be removed if the variety has degree $\geqslant 5$ by [3], which is likely to be the case for $n\geqslant 3$ by the work in [10]. On the other hand, we have the lower bound

N(T)\geqslant\#\{(X,Y)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})\times\mathbb{Z}I_{n}:\lvert X% \rvert,\lvert Y\rvert\leqslant T\}\gg T^{n^{2}+1}

(1.2)

coming from the special subvariety of scalar matrices $Y$ . The following is our main result.

Theorem 1.1.

Let $T\geqslant 1$ . Then

N(T)\ll_{n}T^{n^{2}+2-\frac{2}{n+1}}.

Note that Theorem 1.1 improves on (1.1) for $n\geqslant 3$ . In fact our exponent is always within $1$ of that occurring in the lower bound (1.2), which we expect to be the truth. Our approach uses matrix identities and ideas from harmonic analysis, which will lead us to analyse the fibres of the commutator map

[\cdot,\cdot]\colon M_{n}^{2}\to V_{n},\quad(X,Y)\mapsto XY-YX,

(1.3)

where we recall that $V_{n}\subset M_{n}$ denotes the closed subscheme $\operatorname{tr}=0$ . In this way we have been led to prove the following result, the analogue of which was proved by Larsen and Lu [11] in the multiplicative setting.

Theorem 1.2.

The map

[\cdot,\cdot](\mathbb{C})\colon M_{n}(\mathbb{C})^{2}\to V_{n}(\mathbb{C}),% \quad(X,Y)\mapsto XY-YX

is flat over the open set $V_{n}(\mathbb{C})\setminus\{0\}$ .

Theorem 1.2 is equivalent to a pointwise bound on the dimensions of the fibres of the commutator map over $V_{n}(\mathbb{C})\setminus\{0\}$ . For comparison, earlier work has examined the dimensions of the fibres on average over certain small families of matrices in $V_{n}(\mathbb{C})\setminus\{0\}$ , such as diagonal matrices (Knutson [9]) or rank-one matrices (Neubauer [13]). Moreover, Young [19] proved a finer conjecture of Knutson [9] concerning the irreducible components of the diagonal commutator scheme. Our new methods may be capable of re-proving, and generalising to other families, some of these earlier results.

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to Alina Ostafe, Matthew Satriano and Igor Shparlinski for drawing their attention to this problem and for useful comments, and to Michael Larsen and Peter Sarnak for their helpful correspondence. While working on this paper the first author was supported by a FWF grant (DOI 10.55776/P36278), the second author by a Sloan Research Fellowship, and the third author by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No. 101034413.

2. Matrix exponential sums

We begin by recording the following consequence of Theorem 1.2.

Theorem 2.1.

For all primes $p\gg_{n}1$ , and for all points $M\in V_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})\setminus\{0\}$ , we have

\dim\left\{(U,V)\in M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})^{2}:UV-VU=M\right\}% \leqslant n^{2}+1.

Proof assuming Theorem 1.2.

By spreading out, Theorem 1.2 implies the same flatness statement with $\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p}$ in place of $\mathbb{C}$ , for any sufficiently large prime $p$ . But then the statement of Theorem 2.1 follows, since $\dim M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})^{2}-\dim V_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p}% )=2n^{2}-(n^{2}-1)=n^{2}+1$ . ∎

In § 4, we will actually directly prove Theorem 2.1 by induction on $n$ for $p\geqslant n$ , by symmetry and point counting, before deriving Theorem 1.2 as a consequence. However, a direct proof of Theorem 1.2 by induction on $n$ is also possible using algebraic geometry, Grassmannians, symmetry, and dimension counting.

For the purposes of harmonic analysis to come, we observe that over any field $k$ , the pairing $\operatorname{tr}(XY)$ on $M_{n}(k)$ is perfect. The usual dot product on $X,Y\in M_{n}(k)\cong k^{n^{2}}$ is given by $\operatorname{tr}(X^{t}Y)=\sum_{i}\sum_{j}X_{ji}Y_{ji}$ , but it will be more convenient below to work with $\operatorname{tr}(XY)=\sum_{i}\sum_{j}X_{ij}Y_{ji}$ , which can be viewed as the usual dot product after an invertible linear change of variables $X\mapsto X^{t}$ .

Given $A,B\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})$ , our work will lead us to analyse the complete exponential sum

S(A,B;p)\colonequals\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(U,V)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})^{2% }\\ UV-VU=0\end{subarray}}e_{p}(\operatorname{tr}(AU+BV)),

(2.1)

for a sufficiently large prime $p$ . It follows from the point count of Feit–Fine [4] that

S(0,0;p)\ll_{n}p^{n^{2}+n}.

(2.2)

We seek to find conditions on $A,B$ under which we can show that cancellation occurs in $S(A,B;p)$ .

We begin by recording the observation that

S(A,B;p)=\frac{1}{\#M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})}\sum_{U,V,Z\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})% }e_{p}(\operatorname{tr}(Z(UV-VU)+AU+BV)).

(2.3)

Then, by the cyclic property of the trace, we can average over $U$ to conclude that

S(A,B;p)=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}V,Z\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})\\ VZ-ZV+A=0\end{subarray}}e_{p}(\operatorname{tr}(BV)).

In particular, it is clear that

|S(A,B;p)|\leqslant S(A,0;p)=\#\left\{(V,Z)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})^{2}:VZ-ZV% +A=0\right\},

(2.4)

for any $B\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})$ . We are now ready to prove the following result.

Lemma 2.2.

If $p\nmid A$ or $p\nmid B$ , then

S(A,B;p)\ll_{n}p^{n^{2}+1}\bm{1}_{p\mid(\operatorname{tr}(A),\operatorname{tr}% (B))}.

Proof.

We may assume that $p$ is sufficiently large in terms of $n$ , else the result is trivial. If $p\nmid A$ , then it follows from applying Theorem 2.1 and the Lang–Weil bound in (2.4) that

\displaystyle S(A,B;p)\ll_{n}p^{n^{2}+1}\bm{1}_{p\mid\operatorname{tr}(A)}.

Similarly, if $p\nmid B$ , then averaging over $V$ in (2.3) gives

S(A,B;p)\ll\#\left\{(U,Z)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})^{2}:ZU-UZ+B=0\right\}\ll_{n% }p^{n^{2}+1}\bm{1}_{p\mid\operatorname{tr}(B)}.

Combining these bounds, we arrive at the statement of the lemma. ∎

3. Fourier analysis and proof of the main result

In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 via harmonic analysis, by combining work of Fouvry and Katz [5] with our discussion in the previous section on exponential sums over finite fields. We shall assume throughout this section that $n\geqslant 2$ .

Let $p$ be an auxiliary prime in the interval $[T,T^{2}]$ whose size will be optimised later. Then

N(T)\leqslant\#\{(X,Y)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}:\lvert X\rvert,\lvert Y\rvert% \leqslant T,\;p\mid XY-YX\}.

Consider the function

w(X)\colonequals\prod_{1\leqslant i,j\leqslant n}\left(\frac{\sin\pi X_{ij}}{% \pi X_{ij}}\right)^{2},

for any $X\in M_{n}(\mathbb{R})$ . Identifying $M_{n}(\mathbb{R})$ with $\mathbb{R}^{n^{2}}$ , this has Fourier transform

\widehat{w}(A)=\int_{M_{n}(\mathbb{R})}w(X)e(\operatorname{tr}(AX))\mathrm{d}X% =\prod_{1\leqslant i,j\leqslant n}\max\{1-|A_{ij}|,0\},

(3.1)

where $\mathrm{d}X=\prod_{i,j}\mathrm{d}X_{ij}$ . Moreover it is clear that $(\frac{4}{\pi^{2}})^{n^{2}}\leqslant w(\frac{1}{2}X)\leqslant 1$ if $|X|\leqslant 1$ . It now follows that

	$\displaystyle N(T)$	$\displaystyle\ll_{n}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(X,Y)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}\\ p\mid XY-YX\end{subarray}}w\Big{(}\frac{1}{2T}X\Big{)}w\Big{(}\frac{1}{2T}Y% \Big{)}$
		$\displaystyle=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(U,V)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{p})^{2}\\ UV-VU=0\end{subarray}}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}X^{\prime}\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})% \end{subarray}}w\Big{(}\frac{U+pX^{\prime}}{2T}\Big{)}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c% }Y^{\prime}\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})\end{subarray}}w\Big{(}\frac{V+pY^{\prime}}{2T% }\Big{)}.$

An application of Poisson summation reveals that

	$\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}X^{\prime}\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})\end{% subarray}}w\Big{(}\frac{U+pX^{\prime}}{2T}\Big{)}$	$\displaystyle=\sum_{A\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})}\int_{M_{n}(\mathbb{R})}w\Big{(}% \frac{U+pX^{\prime}}{2T}\Big{)}e(\operatorname{tr}(AX^{\prime}))\mathrm{d}X^{\prime}$
		$\displaystyle=\left(\frac{2T}{p}\right)^{n^{2}}\sum_{A\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})}e_% {p}(-\operatorname{tr}(AU))\widehat{w}\left(\frac{2T}{p}A\right),$

on making an obvious change of variables. We have a similar identity for the sum over $Y^{\prime}$ , all of which leads to the expression

\displaystyle N(T)

\displaystyle\ll_{n}\left(\frac{T}{p}\right)^{2n^{2}}\sum_{(A,B)\in M_{n}(% \mathbb{Z})^{2}}\widehat{w}\left(\frac{2T}{p}A\right)\widehat{w}\left(\frac{2T% }{p}B\right)S(A,B;p),

in the notation of (2.1).

Appealing to (3.1), we finally deduce that

\displaystyle N(T)

\displaystyle\ll_{n}\left(\frac{T}{p}\right)^{2n^{2}}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}% (A,B)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}\\ |A|,|B|\leqslant\frac{1}{2}p/T\end{subarray}}|S(A,B;p)|.

If $p\mid(A,B)$ then only $A=B=0$ contribute to the sum. Thus it follows from (2.2) that

N(T)\ll_{n}\left(\frac{T}{p}\right)^{2n^{2}}\left(p^{n^{2}+n}+U(p,T)\right),

(3.2)

where

U(p,T)=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(A,B)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}\\ |A|,|B|\leqslant\frac{1}{2}p/T\\ p\nmid(A,B)\end{subarray}}|S(A,B;p)|.

We now appeal to a stratification result by Fouvry and Katz [5, Thm. 1.1] to estimate $U(p,T)$ . This produces subschemes $V_{2n^{2}}\subset V_{2n^{2}-1}\subset\cdots\subset V_{2}\subset V_{1}\subset% \mathbb{A}_{\mathbb{Z}}^{2n^{2}}$ , with $\dim V_{j}\leqslant 2n^{2}-j$ for $1\leqslant j\leqslant 2n^{2}$ , such that

S(A,B;p)\ll_{n}p^{\frac{n^{2}+n}{2}+\frac{j-1}{2}},

whenever the reduction modulo $p$ of $(A,B)$ corresponds to vector in $\mathbb{A}^{2n^{2}}(\mathbb{F}_{p})\setminus V_{j}(\mathbb{F}_{p})$ , under the isomorphism $M_{n}^{2}\cong\mathbb{A}^{2n^{2}}$ . It is convenient to put $V_{0}=\mathbb{A}_{\mathbb{Z}}^{2n^{2}}$ and $V_{2n^{2}+1}=\emptyset$ . Combining this with Lemma 2.2, we therefore deduce that

\displaystyle U(p,T)

\displaystyle\ll_{n}\sum_{j=1}^{2n^{2}+1}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(A,B)\in R_{% j}\end{subarray}}\min\left\{p^{\frac{n^{2}+n}{2}+\frac{j-1}{2}}~{},~{}p^{n^{2}% +1}\right\},

where $R_{j}$ denotes the set of $(A,B)\in M_{n}(\mathbb{Z})^{2}$ with $|A|,|B|\leqslant\frac{1}{2}p/T$ for which the reduction of $(A,B)\bmod{p}$ is non-zero and belongs to the set $V_{j-1}(\mathbb{F}_{p})\setminus V_{j}(\mathbb{F}_{p})$ . Since $p\geqslant T$ , it now follows from [2, Lemma 4] that

\#R_{j}\ll_{n}\left(\frac{p}{T}\right)^{2n^{2}-j+1}.

But then we may conclude that

\displaystyle U(p,T)

\displaystyle\ll_{n}\left(\frac{p}{T}\right)^{2n^{2}+1}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n^{2}% -n+3}\left(\frac{T}{\sqrt{p}}\right)^{j}p^{\frac{n^{2}+n-1}{2}}+\sum_{j=n^{2}-% n+4}^{2n^{2}+1}\left(\frac{T}{p}\right)^{j}p^{n^{2}+1}\right).

Since $p\in[T,T^{2}]$ we see that the first term is maximised at the largest value of $j$ , while the second term is maximised when $j$ is least. This leads to the expression

	$\displaystyle U(p,T)$	$\displaystyle\ll_{n}\left(\frac{p}{T}\right)^{2n^{2}+1}\left(T^{n^{2}-n+3}p^{n% -2}+T^{n^{2}-n+4}p^{n-3}\right)$
		$\displaystyle\ll_{n}\left(\frac{p}{T}\right)^{2n^{2}}\cdot T^{n^{2}-n+2}p^{n-1},$

since $p>T$ .

Returning to (3.2), we have now established that

N(T)\ll_{n}\frac{T^{2n^{2}}}{p^{n^{2}-n}}+T^{n^{2}-n+2}p^{n-1}.

This is optimised at $p^{n^{2}-1}\asymp T^{n^{2}+n-2}$ , which leads to the final bound for $N(T)$ recorded in Theorem 1.1.

Remark 3.1.

The idea of choosing an auxiliary modulus $p$ and using harmonic analysis has been applied to other varieties in the past, such as by Fujiwara [6, 7], and by Shparlinski and Skorobogatov [15, 16]. Moreover, using finer geometric information, Heath-Brown [8] has given stronger results in many cases by working with a composite modulus $pq$ . Once combined with Fouvry–Katz stratification [5], the simplest version of Fujiwara’s method gives the following general result.

Let $V\subseteq\mathbb{A}^{N}$ be an affine variety of dimension $D$ , cut out by polynomials with integer coefficients. Assume that for all primes $p$ and for all non-zero vectors $c\in\mathbb{F}_{p}^{N}$ , we have

\sum_{x\in V(\mathbb{F}_{p})}e_{p}(c_{1}x_{1}+\dots+c_{N}x_{N})\ll_{V}p^{D-L},

(3.3)

for some $L$ such that $2L\in\mathbb{Z}$ . Then for $T\geqslant 1$ , we have

\#\{x\in V(\mathbb{Z})\cap[-T,T]^{N}\}\ll_{V}T^{D-L+\frac{L^{2}}{N-D+L}}.

(3.4)

This would improve on the dimension growth bound $O_{\varepsilon,V}(T^{D-1+\varepsilon})$ of Salberger [14] and Vermeulen [18] (when it applies), provided only that $N-D\geqslant 4$ and $L\geqslant\frac{3}{2}$ in (3.3). (Note that (3.4) recovers the bound in Theorem 1.1 when $N=2n^{2}$ , $D=n^{2}+n$ and $L=n-1$ .)

4. Flatness of the commutator map

In this section we shall prove Theorem 1.2, which we first reduce to Theorem 2.1. For this, we broadly follow [11]*§ 5.

Proof of Theorem 1.2 assuming Theorem 2.1.

Let $V_{n}-0$ be the open subscheme of $V_{n}$ with zero section removed, over $\mathbb{Z}$ . Let $\mathscr{C}_{n}\subseteq M_{n}^{2}$ be the commuting scheme $XY=YX$ , over $\mathbb{Z}$ . Let $f\colon M_{n}^{2}-\mathscr{C}_{n}\to V_{n}-0$ be the commutator map in (1.3), restricted to $M_{n}^{2}-\mathscr{C}_{n}$ . Let $O\subseteq M_{n}^{2}-\mathscr{C}_{n}$ be the flat locus of $f$ over $\mathbb{Z}$ . Then $O$ is open by [17, Tag 0399]. Thus $M_{n}^{2}-O$ is closed. By miracle flatness, Theorem 2.1 implies that for all $p\gg_{n}1$ , the map $f\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{p}$ is flat, whence $(M_{n}^{2}-O-\mathscr{C}_{n})\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{F}_{p}=\emptyset$ . By the Lang–Weil estimate, the locally closed variety $(M_{n}^{2}-O-\mathscr{C}_{n})\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{C}$ must be empty. We conclude that $f\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{C}$ is flat, as desired. ∎

The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 2.1. Let $p$ be any prime. (Eventually, we will assume $p\geqslant n$ .) Fix a non-zero $M\in V_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})$ . Note that

\dim\{(U,V)\in M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})^{2}:UV-VU=M\}=-1+\dim\mathcal{% X},

where

\mathcal{X}\colonequals\{(U,V,\lambda)\in M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p})^{2}% \times\mathbb{G}_{m}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p}):UV-VU=\lambda M\}.

We shall bound $\dim\mathcal{X}$ via point counting on $\mathcal{X}$ . We take $q=p^{m}\to\infty$ , with $m\in\mathbb{N}$ sufficiently large so that $M\in V_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ and the variety $\mathcal{X}$ has an irreducible component that is invariant under $\operatorname{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{p}/\mathbb{F}_{q})$ . It will suffice to estimate the quantity

\displaystyle\Sigma(M)

\displaystyle=\frac{1}{q}\sum_{U,V\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\sum_{\lambda\in% \mathbb{G}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\bm{1}_{UV-VU=\lambda M},

since then

\Sigma(M)\geqslant(1+O_{n}(q^{-1/2}))\,q^{\dim\{(U,V)\in M_{n}(\overline{% \mathbb{F}}_{p})^{2}:UV-VU=M\}}

(4.1)

by the Lang–Weil estimate for the variety $\mathcal{X}$ .

Let $\psi(\cdot)\colonequals e_{p}(\operatorname{tr}_{\mathbb{F}_{q}/\mathbb{F}_{p}% }(\cdot))$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . We proceed by noting that

	$\displaystyle\Sigma(M)$	$\displaystyle=\frac{1}{q\cdot\#M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\sum_{U,V,Z\in M_{n}(% \mathbb{F}_{q})}\sum_{\lambda\in\mathbb{G}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\psi(% \operatorname{tr}(Z(UV-VU-\lambda M)))$
		$\displaystyle=\frac{1}{\#M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\sum_{U,V,Z\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}% _{q})}\psi(\operatorname{tr}(Z(UV-VU)))\,(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(ZM)=0}-q^{% -1})$
		$\displaystyle=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}V,Z\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\\ VZ-ZV=0\end{subarray}}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(ZM)=0}-q^{-1}),$

where in the last step we average over $U$ using the cyclic property of the trace function. We now exploit the linearity of the equations $VZ-ZV=0$ and $\operatorname{tr}(ZM)=0$ in the coordinates of $Z$ . Since the hyperplane $\operatorname{tr}(ZM)=0$ has codimension either $0$ or $1$ in the linear space $C(V)\colonequals\{Z\in M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}):VZ-ZV=0\}$ , we find that

\begin{split}\Sigma(M)&=\sum_{V\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}q^{\dim C(V)}(q^{-1}% \bm{1}_{C(V)\not\subseteq M^{\perp}}+\bm{1}_{C(V)\subseteq M^{\perp}}-q^{-1})% \\ &=\sum_{V\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}q^{\dim C(V)}(1-q^{-1})\bm{1}_{C(V)% \subseteq M^{\perp}},\end{split}

where $M^{\perp}\colonequals\{A\in M_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}):\operatorname{tr}% (AM)=0\}$ . Then, since $\dim C(V)$ depends only on the conjugacy class of $V$ , we find on averaging over conjugates of $V$ that

\Sigma(M)=\sum_{V\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}q^{\dim C(V)}(1-q^{-1})L(V,M),

(4.2)

where

L(V,M)\colonequals\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1% }_{C(gVg^{-1})\subseteq M^{\perp}})\leqslant 1.

(4.3)

The orbit of $V$ under the conjugation action of $\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ has cardinality

\mathscr{O}(V)=\frac{\#\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}{\#(\operatorname% {GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\cap C(V))}\ll_{n}q^{n^{2}-\dim C(V)}

by the orbit-stabiliser theorem and the Lang–Weil estimate, since $\dim\operatorname{GL}_{n}=n^{2}$ and $\dim(\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q})\cap C(V))=\dim C(V)$ . Therefore, if $K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\subseteq M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ denotes a complete set of representatives for the conjugation action, then breaking (4.2) into orbits gives

\begin{split}\Sigma(M)&=\sum_{V\in K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\mathscr{O}(V)q^{\dim C% (V)}(1-q^{-1})L(V,M)\\ &\ll_{n}q^{n^{2}}\sum_{V\in K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}L(V,M).\end{split}

(4.4)

Lemma 4.4 will non-trivially bound $L(V,M)$ . The proof inducts on $n$ and uses an auxiliary averaging result, Lemma 4.3. First, we define some useful projection maps. Given integers $1\leqslant k\leqslant n-1$ and a matrix $M\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , define block matrices $p_{ij}(M)$ so that

M=\left[\begin{smallmatrix}p_{11}(M)&p_{12}(M)\\ p_{21}(M)&p_{22}(M)\end{smallmatrix}\right],

where $p_{ij}(M)$ has $k\bm{1}_{i=1}+(n-k)\bm{1}_{i=2}$ rows and $k\bm{1}_{j=1}+(n-k)\bm{1}_{j=2}$ columns.

Lemma 4.3 concerns some averages over $\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ . First we study averages over a certain subgroup. Let

E\colonequals\{N\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q}):p_{11}(N)=0,\;p_{21}(N)=0,\;p_{22}(N% )=0\}\cong\mathbb{F}_{q}^{k\times(n-k)}.

Then $E$ is a vector space such that $N_{1}N_{2}=0$ for all $N_{1},N_{2}\in E$ . In particular,

1+E\colonequals\{1+N:N\in E\}

is an abelian subgroup of $\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , where $(1+N)^{-1}=1-N$ for all $N\in E$ .

Lemma 4.1.

Let $M\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , not necessarily with trace zero. Suppose $M\neq 0$ . Let $1\leqslant k\leqslant n-1$ . Then the following hold:

(1)

We have

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)=0})\leqslant q^{-k}+\min_{h\in 1% +E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21})(h^{-1}Mh)=0}).

(2)

We have

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})\leqslant q^{-(n-1)% }+\min_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0}).

(3)

We have

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{12},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})\leqslant q^% {-(n-1)}.

Proof.

First we record a general calculation: for $N\in E$ we have

\begin{split}&(1-N)M(1+N)\\ &=(1-N)(M+MN)\\ &=M+MN-NM-NMN\\ &=M+\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&p_{11}(M)p_{12}(N)\\ 0&p_{21}(M)p_{12}(N)\end{smallmatrix}\right]-\left[\begin{smallmatrix}p_{12}(N% )p_{21}(M)&p_{12}(N)p_{22}(M)\\ 0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right]-\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&p_{12}(N)p_{21}(M)p_{12% }(N)\\ 0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right].\end{split}

(4.5)

(1): Both sides of (1) are invariant under conjugation of $M$ by any element of $1+E$ . Moreover, if $p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)$ is never zero, then (1) is trivial. Thus, after conjugating $M$ if necessary, we may assume that $p_{11}(M)=0$ . Then, writing $h=1+N$ , we get

	$\displaystyle p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)$	$\displaystyle=-p_{12}(N)p_{21}(M),$		(4.6)
	$\displaystyle p_{21}(h^{-1}Mh)$	$\displaystyle=p_{21}(M),$		(4.7)

by (LABEL:NMN). In particular, by (4.6),

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)=0})=\mathbb{E}_{N\in E}(\bm{1}_% {p_{12}(N)p_{21}(M)=0}).

Given a matrix $N\in E$ , the condition $p_{12}(N)p_{21}(M)=0$ holds if and only if each row of $p_{12}(N)$ lies in the left kernel $\mathscr{L}\subseteq\mathbb{F}_{q}^{n-k}$ of the $(n-k)\times k$ matrix $p_{21}(M)$ . If $p_{21}(M)\neq 0$ , then $\mathscr{L}$ is orthogonal to a non-zero column of $p_{21}(M)$ . Hence, one of the coordinates of $\mathscr{L}$ is a linear function of the others. Thus, one of the columns of $p_{12}(N)$ is uniquely determined by others. Since each column of $p_{12}(N)$ has $k$ entries, it follows that

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)=0})\leqslant q^{-k}.

On the other hand, if $p_{21}(M)=0$ , then

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(h^{-1}Mh)=0})=1

and $(p_{11},p_{21})(h^{-1}Mh)=0$ for all $h\in 1+E$ , by (4.6) and (4.7). Now (1) follows.

(2): As in the proof of (1), we may assume that $(p_{11},p_{22})(M)=0$ . Then

p_{22}(h^{-1}Mh)=p_{21}(M)p_{12}(N)

(4.8)

for $h=1+N$ , by (LABEL:NMN). The map

\Phi\colon\mathbb{F}_{q}^{k\times(n-k)}\to M_{k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\times M_{n-k}% (\mathbb{F}_{q}),\quad A\mapsto(Ap_{21}(M),p_{21}(M)A)

(4.9)

is linear in the entries of $A$ . By (4.6) and (4.8), we have

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})=\mathbb{E}_{N\in E% }(\bm{1}_{p_{12}(N)\in\ker\Phi}),

If $A\in\ker\Phi$ , then the rows of $A$ lie in the left kernel of $p_{21}(M)$ , and the columns of $A$ lie in the right kernel of $p_{21}(M)$ . If $p_{21}(M)\neq 0$ and $A\in\ker\Phi$ , then it follows that there exist a column $C$ and row $R$ of $A$ such that the entries of $A$ are uniquely determined by the entries in $A\setminus(C\cup R)$ . Since $\#(C\cup R)=k+(n-k)-1=n-1$ , it follows that

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})\leqslant q^{-(n-1)}

(4.10)

if $p_{21}(M)\neq 0$ . On the other hand, if $p_{21}(M)=0$ , then

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})=1

and $(p_{11},p_{21},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0$ for all $h\in 1+E$ , by (4.6), (4.7), and (4.8). Hence (2) follows.

(3): As in the proof of (1), we may assume that $(p_{11},p_{12},p_{22})(M)=0$ . Then

p_{12}(h^{-1}Mh)=-p_{12}(N)p_{21}(M)p_{12}(N)

(4.11)

for $h=1+N$ , by (LABEL:NMN). By (4.6), (4.11), and (4.8), we have

\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{12},p_{22})(h^{-1}Mh)=0})=\mathbb{E}_% {N\in E}(\bm{1}_{p_{12}(N)\in\ker\Phi}),

where $\Phi$ is defined as in (4.9). However, since $M\neq 0$ , we must have $p_{21}(M)\neq 0$ . Therefore, (3) follows from (4.10). ∎

Henceforth, assume $p\geqslant n$ , so that the following simple combinatorial lemma holds.

Lemma 4.2.

Let $1\leqslant k\leqslant n-1$ . Suppose $x\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{n}$ is non-zero. Then $\sum_{i\in I}x_{i}\neq 0$ for some $k$ -element subset $I\subseteq\{1,2,\dots,n\}$ .

Proof.

If $x_{n-1}\neq x_{n}$ , say, then either $x_{1}+\dots+x_{k-1}+x_{n-1}$ or $x_{1}+\dots+x_{k-1}+x_{n}$ must be non-zero. By symmetry, it remains to consider the case $x_{1}=\dots=x_{n}$ . Then $x_{1}\neq 0$ , since $x\neq 0$ . Thus $x_{1}+\dots+x_{k}=kx_{1}\neq 0$ , because $p\geqslant n>k$ . ∎

Lemma 4.3.

Let $M\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , not necessarily with trace zero. Suppose $M\neq 0$ . Let $1\leqslant k\leqslant n-1$ . Then the following hold:

(1)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21})% (g^{-1}Mg)=0})\ll_{n}q^{-k}$ .
(2)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(g^{-1}Mg% )=0})\ll_{n}q^{-k}$ .
(3)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{12},% p_{22})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})\ll_{n}q^{-(n-1)}$ .
(4)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21},% p_{22})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})\ll_{n}q^{-(n-1)}$ .
(5)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})% (g^{-1}Mg)=0})\ll_{n}q^{-(n-1)}$ .
(6)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{p_{22}(g^{-1}Mg% )=0})\ll_{n}q^{-(n-k)}$ .
(7)

$\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{% tr}(p_{11}(g^{-1}Mg))=0})\ll_{n}q^{-1}$ .

Proof.

Although (2) is stronger than (1), and (5) is stronger than both (3) and (4), it turns out that proving (1) first will help in proving (2), and likewise for (3) and (4).

(1): Let $e_{1},\dots,e_{n}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{n}$ be the usual coordinate basis vectors. The condition $(p_{11},p_{21})(M)=0$ holds if and only if $Me_{j}=0$ for all $1\leqslant j\leqslant k$ . Thus

\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21})% (g^{-1}Mg)=0})=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{% g^{-1}Mge_{1}=\dots=g^{-1}Mge_{k}=0}).

Note that $(ge_{1},\dots,ge_{k})$ is equally likely to be any list of $k$ linearly independent vectors. Since the right kernel of $M$ has dimension $\leqslant n-1$ , and the number of lists of $k$ linearly independent vectors in $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{d}$ is $\mathscr{V}(d)=\prod_{1\leqslant i\leqslant k}(q^{d}-q^{i-1})\leqslant(q^{d})^% {k}$ , it follows that

\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21})% (g^{-1}Mg)=0})\leqslant\frac{\mathscr{V}(n-1)}{\mathscr{V}(n)}\leqslant\prod_{% 1\leqslant i\leqslant k}\frac{q^{n-1}}{q^{n}-q^{i-1}}\ll_{n}q^{-k}.

(2): We have

\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}(g^{-1}Mg% )=0})=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\mathbb{E}_{h\in 1% +E}(\bm{1}_{p_{11}((gh)^{-1}Mgh)=0}).

(4.12)

Applying Lemma 4.1(1) with $g^{-1}Mg$ in place of $M$ , we get

\begin{split}\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{p_% {11}(g^{-1}Mg)=0})&\leqslant q^{-k}+\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(% \mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})\\ &\ll_{n}q^{-k},\end{split}

by (1).

(3): Mimicking (4.12), we have

\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{12},% p_{22})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}% \mathbb{E}_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{12},p_{22})((gh)^{-1}Mgh)=0}).

Applying Lemma 4.1(3) with $g^{-1}Mg$ in place of $M$ , we get (3).

(4): Immediate from (3) with $(M^{t},g^{t})$ in place of $(M,g)$ .

(5): Mimicking (4.12), we have

\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})% (g^{-1}Mg)=0})=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\mathbb{E% }_{h\in 1+E}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{22})((gh)^{-1}Mgh)=0}).

Applying Lemma 4.1(2) with $g^{-1}Mg$ in place of $M$ , we get

\begin{split}\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p% _{11},p_{22})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})&\leqslant q^{-(n-1)}+\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname% {GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{(p_{11},p_{21},p_{22})(g^{-1}Mg)=0})\\ &\ll_{n}q^{-(n-1)},\end{split}

by (4).

(6): This follows from (2) after replacing $k$ with $n-k$ , and conjugating $M$ by a suitable permutation matrix.

(7): Assume $q\gg_{n}1$ . By the $k=1$ case of (2), we may conjugate $M$ to assume that its top left entry is non-zero. Then by Lemma 4.2, there exist $k$ diagonal entries of $M$ whose total is non-zero. By a further conjugation, we may assume $\operatorname{tr}(p_{11}(M))\neq 0$ . Therefore, the subvariety $\operatorname{tr}(p_{11}(g^{-1}Mg))=0$ of $\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q})$ is either empty or of codimension one, since $\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q})$ is irreducible. The Lang–Weil bound now implies (7). ∎

We are finally ready to bound the quantity $L(V,M)$ from (4.3).

Lemma 4.4.

Let $V,M\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , not necessarily with trace zero. Let $f_{V}(t)\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[t]$ be the radical of the characteristic polynomial of $V$ . Then

L(V,M)\ll_{n}q^{1-\deg f_{V}}\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(M)=0}+\bm{1}_{M=0}.

Proof.

In this proof, we relinquish the previous definition of $V_{n}$ from the introduction, in order to allow for some convenient notation. We use strong induction on $n\geqslant 1$ . Since $1\in C(gVg^{-1})$ for all $g$ , we may assume $\operatorname{tr}(M)=0$ , or else $L(V,M)=0$ . Moreover, if $\deg f_{V}=1$ or $M=0$ , then the trivial bound $L(V,M)\leqslant 1$ suffices. Therefore, we may assume from now on that $\operatorname{tr}(M)=0$ , $M\neq 0$ , and $\deg f_{V}\geqslant 2$ .

By the Lang–Weil estimate applied to the constructible set

	$\displaystyle\{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}):C(gVg^{-1}% )\subseteq M^{\perp}\}$
	$\displaystyle=\bigcup_{0\leqslant d\leqslant n^{2}}\{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}% (\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}):\dim(C(gVg^{-1}))=\dim(C(gVg^{-1})\cap M^{\perp})=% d\},$

we may assume that $q\gg_{V}1$ such that $f_{V}$ splits completely in $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . By conjugation, we may assume that $V$ is in rational canonical form, which coincides with Jordan normal form because $f_{V}$ splits completely. Since $\deg f_{V}\geqslant 2$ , the matrix $V$ has at least $2$ distinct eigenvalues. After permuting Jordan blocks if necessary, we may assume that

V=\left[\begin{smallmatrix}V_{1}&0\\ 0&V_{2}\end{smallmatrix}\right],

where $V_{1}\in M_{k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ and $V_{2}\in M_{n-k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , with $1\leqslant k\leqslant n-1$ , such that $V_{1}$ and $V_{2}$ share no eigenvalues. Then, in particular,

C(V)=\left[\begin{smallmatrix}C(V_{1})&0\\ 0&C(V_{2})\end{smallmatrix}\right].

(4.13)

Let $p_{1}\colonequals p_{11}$ and $p_{2}\colonequals p_{22}$ . Let

H\colonequals\left[\begin{smallmatrix}\operatorname{GL}_{k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})&0% \\ 0&\operatorname{GL}_{n-k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\end{smallmatrix}\right]\subseteq% \operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q}).

(4.14)

Since $C(ghVh^{-1}g^{-1})=gC(hVh^{-1})g^{-1}$ , and $g^{-1}M^{\perp}g=(g^{-1}Mg)^{\perp}$ by the conjugation-invariance of $\operatorname{tr}(\cdot)$ , we have

\begin{split}L(V,M)&=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}% \mathbb{E}_{h\in H}(\bm{1}_{C(ghV(gh)^{-1})\subseteq M^{\perp}})\\ &=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}\mathbb{E}_{h\in H}(% \bm{1}_{C(hVh^{-1})\subseteq(g^{-1}Mg)^{\perp}})\\ &=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}L(V_{1},p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg% ))L(V_{2},p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg)),\end{split}

(4.15)

where the last step uses (4.13), (4.14), and the block matrix identity

\operatorname{tr}(\left[\begin{smallmatrix}A&0\\ 0&B\end{smallmatrix}\right]M)=\operatorname{tr}(Ap_{1}(M))+\operatorname{tr}(% Bp_{2}(M))

for $(A,B)\in M_{k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\times M_{n-k}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ . By the inductive hypothesis applied to the two factors of $L$ in (4.15), we get

\begin{split}L(V,M)&\ll_{n}\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q% })}\prod_{1\leqslant i\leqslant 2}(q^{1-\deg f_{V_{i}}}\bm{1}_{\operatorname{% tr}(p_{i}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}+\bm{1}_{p_{i}(g^{-1}Mg)=0})\\ &\leqslant q^{2-\deg f_{V}}\mathcal{P}_{0}+q^{1-\deg f_{V_{1}}}\mathcal{P}_{1}% +q^{1-\deg f_{V_{2}}}\mathcal{P}_{2}+\mathcal{P}_{3},\end{split}

where

\begin{split}\mathcal{P}_{0}&\colonequals\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}% (\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}\bm{1}_{% \operatorname{tr}(p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}),\\ \mathcal{P}_{1}&\colonequals\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{% q})}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}\bm{1}_{p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}),% \\ \mathcal{P}_{2}&\colonequals\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{% q})}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}\bm{1}_{p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}),% \\ \mathcal{P}_{3}&\colonequals\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{% q})}(\bm{1}_{p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}\bm{1}_{p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}).\\ \end{split}

We now wish to bound the probabilities $\mathcal{P}_{i}$ . Since

0=\operatorname{tr}(M)=\operatorname{tr}(g^{-1}Mg)=\operatorname{tr}(p_{1}(g^{% -1}Mg))+\operatorname{tr}(p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg)),

the probabilities $\mathcal{P}_{i}$ for $0\leqslant i\leqslant 2$ simplify as follows:

\begin{split}\mathcal{P}_{0}&=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}% _{q})}(\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg))=0}),\\ \mathcal{P}_{1}&=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}% _{p_{2}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}),\\ \mathcal{P}_{2}&=\mathbb{E}_{g\in\operatorname{GL}_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(\bm{1}% _{p_{1}(g^{-1}Mg)=0}).\end{split}

By parts (7), (6), (2), and (5) of Lemma 4.3, respectively, we have $\mathcal{P}_{0}\ll_{n}q^{-1}$ , $\mathcal{P}_{1}\ll_{n}q^{-(n-k)}\leqslant q^{-\deg f_{V_{2}}}$ , $\mathcal{P}_{2}\ll_{n}q^{-k}\leqslant q^{-\deg f_{V_{1}}}$ , and $\mathcal{P}_{3}\ll_{n}q^{1-n}\leqslant q^{1-\deg f_{V}}$ . Thus

\begin{split}L(V,M)&\ll_{n}q^{1-\deg f_{V}}+q^{1-\deg f_{V_{1}}}q^{-\deg f_{V_% {2}}}+q^{1-\deg f_{V_{2}}}q^{-\deg f_{V_{1}}}+q^{1-\deg f_{V}}\\ &=4q^{1-\deg f_{V}},\end{split}

since $f_{V_{1}}f_{V_{2}}=f_{V}$ . ∎

Plugging Lemma 4.4 into (4.4), we get

\Sigma(M)\ll_{n}q^{n^{2}}\sum_{V\in K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})}(q^{1-\deg f_{V}}\bm% {1}_{\operatorname{tr}(M)=0}+\bm{1}_{M=0}).

But $K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ is in bijection with the set of rational canonical forms on $M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ , where we recall that the rational canonical form of $M\in M_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ consists of a partition $\lambda_{\phi}=(\lambda_{\phi,1}\geqslant\lambda_{\phi,2}\geqslant\cdots% \geqslant 0)$ for each monic irreducible polynomial $\phi\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[t]$ , such that the action of $M$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{n}$ is isomorphic to multiplication by $t$ on the vector space $\bigoplus_{\phi}\bigoplus_{i}(\mathbb{F}_{q}[t]/\phi^{\lambda_{\phi,i}}\mathbb% {F}_{q}[t])$ , where $\sum_{\phi}\deg(\phi)\lvert\lambda_{\phi}\rvert=n$ . Thus, by the prime number theorem in $\mathbb{F}_{q}[t]$ and the fact that $n$ has only finitely many partitions, we deduce that

\#\{V\in K_{n}(\mathbb{F}_{q}):\deg f_{V}=d\}\ll_{n}q^{d}

for $1\leqslant d\leqslant n$ . Summing over $1\leqslant d\leqslant n$ , we get

\Sigma(M)\ll_{n}q^{n^{2}+1}\bm{1}_{\operatorname{tr}(M)=0}+q^{n^{2}+n}\bm{1}_{% M=0}.

Finally, we conclude from (4.1) that Theorem 2.1 holds.

References

[1] R. Basili, On the irreducibility of varieties of commuting matrices. Pure and Applied Algebra 149 (2000), 107–120.
[2] T. D. Browning and D. R. Heath-Brown, Rational points on quartic hypersurfaces. J. reine angew. Math. 629 (2009), 37–88.
[3] W. Castryck, R. Cluckers, P. Dittmann and K. H. Nguyen, The dimension growth conjecture, polynomial in the degree and without logarithmic factors. Algebra & Number Theory 14 (2020), 2261–2294.
[4] W. Feit and N. J. Fine, Pairs of commuting matrices over a finite field. Duke Math. J. 27 (1960), 91–94.
[5] E. Fouvry and N. Katz, A general stratification theorem for exponential sums, and applications. J. reine angew. Math. 540 (2001), 115–166.
[6] M. Fujiwara, Upper bounds for the number of lattice points on hypersurfaces. Number theory and combinatorics (Japan, 1984), 89–96, World Scientific, 1985.
[7] M. Fujiwara, Distribution of rational points on varieties over finite fields. Mathematika 35 (1988), 155–171.
[8] D. R. Heath-Brown, The density of rational points on non-singular hypersurfaces. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Math. Sci.) 104 (1994), 13–29.
[9] A. Knutson, Some schemes related to the commuting variety. J. Algebraic Geom. 14 (2005), 283–294.
[10] A. Knutson and P. Zinn-Justin, A scheme related to the Brauer loop model. Advances in Math. 214 (2007), 40–77.
[11] M. Larsen and Z. Lu, Flatness of the commutator map over $\operatorname{SL}_{n}$ . IMRN (2021), 5605–5622.
[12] T. S. Motzkin and O. Taussky, Pairs of matrices with property $L$ , II. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 80 (1955), 387–401.
[13] M. G. Neubauer, The variety of pairs of matrices with $\operatorname{rank}(AB-BA)\leqslant 1$ . Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 105 (1989), 787–792.
[14] P. Salberger, Counting rational points on projective varieties. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 126 (2023), 1092–1133.
[15] I. E. Shparlinski and A. N. Skorobogatov, Exponential sums and rational points on complete intersections. Mathematika 37 (1990), 201–208.
[16] A. N. Skorobogatov, Exponential sums, the geometry of hyperplane sections, and some Diophantine problems. Israel J. Math. 80 (1992), 359–379.
[17] T. Stacks project authors, The Stacks project. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu, 2024.
[18] F. Vermeulen, Dimension growth for affine varieties. IMRN (2024), 11464–11483.
[19] H.-W. V. Young, On matrix pairs with diagonal commutators. J. Algebra 570 (2021), 437–451.