Iwasawa Theory for K3 Surfaces over Finite Fields

Rikuto Ito; Sohei Tateno

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 32 references

Iwasawa Theory for K3 Surfaces over Finite Fields

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For a K3 surface over a finite field, the p-primary Brauer groups in the constant Z_p tower grow as p^{µ p^n + λ n + ν}, with µ = 0 and the characteristic ideal of the Iwasawa module equal to the transcendental L-factor.

desk verdict First real Iwasawa theory for K3 surfaces over finite fields; the growth formula is solid and independently derived, but the 'main conjecture' is more a formal identity than a genuine reciprocity law. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.25737 v2 pith:DZKHNNWF submitted 2026-06-24 math.NT

Rikuto Ito , Sohei Tateno This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.NT MSC 11R2311G3511G4014J2814J32

keywords IwasawatheoryK3surfacesBrauergroupsfinitefieldscontroltheoremmainconjectureL-functionsArtin–Tate

topics Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper starts Iwasawa theory for K3 surfaces over finite fields, proving that the sizes of p-primary Brauer groups in a constant Z_p tower follow the same kind of formula that governs ideal class groups in Z_p-extensions of number fields. Concretely, for each K3 surface X/F_q and prime p not dividing q, there exist unique integers µ, λ, ν such that #Br(X_n)[p^∞] = p^{µ p^n + λ n + ν} for all sufficiently large n. The paper also proves an analogue of the Iwasawa main conjecture: the characteristic ideal of the Pontryagin dual of Br(X_∞)[p^∞] is generated by the transcendental factor L_tr(X, 1+T) of the L-function. Two independent proofs of the growth formula are given, one via a control theorem and one via p-adic evaluation of the L-function, and the µ-invariant is shown to vanish.

What carries the argument

The argument runs through the Iwasawa algebra Λ = Z_p[[Γ]] for Γ = Gal(F_{q^{p^∞}}/F_q), acting on the Pontryagin dual of Br(X_∞)[p^∞]. A key intermediate object is the Λ-module Br(X)^{G_∞}[p^∞]^∨, shown to be finitely generated torsion and isomorphic to (T_pBr(X)^* ⊗ Λ)/(1 − F γ^{-1}), where F is the arithmetic Frobenius; the characteristic ideal is then computed as the determinant of 1 − F γ^{-1}. The bridge between the algebraic Brauer-group orders and the L-function is the Artin–Tate formula for K3 surfaces (a consequence of the Tate conjecture), combined with the fundamental evaluation formula for products of a power series over p-power roots of unity.

What would settle it

For a concrete K3 surface (e.g., a Kummer surface not covered by the examples), compute the p-adic valuations of #Br(X_n)[p^∞] for n = 0, 1, 2, ... by theoretical or computational means; if the sequence does not eventually take the form p^{λ n + ν} with λ equal to the λ-invariant of L_tr(X, 1+T), the main theorems are false. A simpler test: for a K3 surface with transcendental rank r, the formula predicts #Br(X_n)[p^∞] grows like p^{r n + O(1)}; observing a deviation from this growth for large n would refute the Iwasawa-type formula.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for a K3 surface X over a finite field F_q and a prime p ∤ q, the p-primary Brauer groups Br(X_n)[p^∞] in the constant Z_p-tower X_n = X ⊗ F_{q^{p^n}} are controlled by the transcendental part of the L-function. Specifically, the paper proves the Iwasawa-type formula #Br(X_n)[p^∞] = p^{µ p^n + λ n + ν} for large n, with µ = 0 and λ equal to the λ-invariant of L_tr(X, 1+T). It further establishes the main conjecture Char_Λ(Br(X_∞)[p^∞]^∨) = (L_tr(X, 1+T)), using an intermediate Λ-module Br(X)^{G_∞}[p^∞]^∨ whose characteristic ideal is computed from the determinant of 1 − F γ^{-1} acting on the Tate module of the Brauer group.

Load-bearing premise

The argument leans on the Artin–Tate equality for K3 surfaces over finite fields—a known consequence of the Tate conjecture—which connects the order of the Brauer group to the special value of the L-function; if that formula or the stabilization of the Néron–Severi discriminant in the tower failed, the control theorem and the growth formula would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The sizes of p-primary Brauer groups of K3 surfaces in constant Z_p towers are eventual exponential-polynomial functions of n: p^{λ n + ν} with no µ-term.
The characteristic ideal of the dual Iwasawa module is completely determined by the transcendental L-factor, so the arithmetic of the tower is encoded in the Frobenius eigenvalues on transcendental cohomology.
The control theorem provides an analogue of Mazur's control theorem for elliptic curves, linking cohomological Brauer groups of finite-field K3 surfaces to the infinite tower.
The explicit Kummer surface examples yield computable invariants, e.g., a Kummer surface with #Br(X_n)[3^∞] = 3^{2n+2}, illustrating the formula in a concrete case.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same method likely extends to any smooth projective surface over F_q for which the Artin–Tate formula holds and the geometric Brauer group is finite, suggesting an Iwasawa-type formula for a broader class of surfaces.
The vanishing µ-invariant is a finite-field analogue of the Ferrero–Washington theorem; it raises the question of whether analogous µ = 0 statements hold in higher-dimensional Iwasawa theories over global fields.
A testable extension: compute the Iwasawa invariants for explicit families of K3 surfaces (quartics, Kummer surfaces with three-isogenies, etc.) and verify that λ matches the degree of L_tr(X, 1+T), which would provide independent numerical confirmation of the main conjecture.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

You should know about this paper because it is the first Iwasawa theory for K3 surfaces over finite fields, and the central growth formula is proven twice: once via a control theorem and once via Artin–Tate plus a p-adic evaluation lemma. The two proofs agree, which is a good sign. The Kummer surface examples are explicit and coherent, and the μ=0 result follows cleanly from the fact that the factors 1−β_i(1+T) have T-coefficient −1, so none lies in pZ_p[[T]].

The genuinely new content is the framework: the constant Z_p tower, the Iwasawa module Br(X_∞)[p^∞]^∨, and the control theorem comparing Br(X_n)[p^∞] to the Γ_n-invariants. That part holds up. The reliance on Artin–Tate for K3 surfaces is legitimate, since the Tate conjecture is known there (Madapusi Pera; Kim–Madapusi Pera), and the p-adic valuation form used is unaffected by q-powers because v_p(q)=0.

The soft spots are two, and both are minor. First, the Iwasawa main conjecture (Theorem 1.10) is close to a tautology: L_tr is defined as det(1−F^{−1}t), and the characteristic ideal of the Iwasawa module is computed by Proposition 6.4 as det(1−Fγ^{−1}), so after substituting γ ↦ 1+T the equality is the determinant of the same operator. It is a theorem, not a conjecture in the deep sense of Mazur–Wiles or Skinner–Urban. The authors are upfront about the formal nature, but the name overpromises.

Second, in Theorem 4.10 the 'In particular' assertion that the direct-limit map Br(X_∞)[p^∞] → Br(X̄)^{G_∞}[p^∞] has finite kernel and cokernel is stated without proof. The stress-test fills it in: the finite-level kernels are bounded and injectively nested, hence stabilize in the limit; same for cokernels. So this is a missing sentence, not a missing argument.

The module theory section uses standard facts from Ochiai's book, and the citations to the Tate conjecture, Lazda–Skorobogatov, and the evaluation formula look appropriate. I don't see a load-bearing flaw.

Who is this for? People working in Iwasawa theory or arithmetic of K3 surfaces. A serious referee should spend time on this; the growth formula deserves to be recorded, and the Kummer examples are useful. I would accept it for review. My only advice to the authors would be to rename or reframe the 'main conjecture' and add the colimit sentence.

Best.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper initiates Iwasawa theory for the p-primary Brauer groups of a K3 surface X over a finite field F_q, studied in the constant Z_p-tower X_n = X ⊗ F_{q^{p^n}}. The main results are: (i) a control theorem (Theorem 1.8/4.13) comparing Br(X_n)[p^∞] with Br(X_∞)^{Γ_n}[p^∞]; (ii) an Iwasawa-type formula #Br(X_n)[p^∞] = p^{μ p^n + λ n + ν} for all sufficiently large n (Theorem 1.7), proved twice — once module-theoretically and once by applying the fundamental evaluation formula to the transcendental L-function L_tr(X,1+T); (iii) the vanishing μ=0 (Corollary 5.3); and (iv) an Iwasawa main conjecture Char_Λ(Br(X_∞)[p^∞]^∨) = (L_tr(X,1+T)) (Theorem 1.10). The proofs rely on the Artin–Tate theorem for K3 surfaces, which is now a theorem via the Tate conjecture, and on Lazda–Skorobogatov's finiteness theorem for geometric Brauer groups.

Significance. If the stated results are correct, this is a clean and complete Iwasawa-theoretic analogue for K3 surfaces over finite fields: the growth of p-primary Brauer groups in a constant Z_p-tower is governed by ordinary Iwasawa invariants, and the characteristic ideal is read off directly from the Frobenius action on the transcendental Tate module. The two independent proofs of the growth formula are a strength, and the explicit Kummer-surface computations make the theory testable. The paper is also honest about its external input: Artin–Tate is imported as a theorem, not as a conjecture, and no fitted parameters appear. The main weakness is that the final 'main conjecture' is largely formal — the L-function is defined as a determinant and the Iwasawa module as the corresponding cokernel — and a sign/convention issue in Section 6 appears to affect the exact ideal equality.

major comments (3)

[Section 6, proof of Theorem 6.5] The determinant chain in the proof of Theorem 6.5 is not correct as written. Under the fixed isomorphism γ ↦ 1+T, one has det(1−Fγ^{-1} : TpBr(X)^*⊗Z_p[[T]]) = det(1−F(1+T)^{-1} : TpBr(X)^*) = L_tr(X,(1+T)^{-1}), not L_tr(X,1+T). The displayed step moving from (1+T)^{-1} to (1+T) while passing from the dual module to the original module is algebraically unjustified; the determinant of a dual operator 1−f^*u equals det(1−f^{-1}u), so the inverse on the group element is not removed. Either Theorem 1.10 should state (L_tr(X,(1+T)^{-1})), or the isomorphism convention should be γ^{-1} ↦ 1+T. This is load-bearing because the stated main conjecture is one of the paper's central claims.
[Theorem 4.13, final paragraph] The proof that f^{Γ_n} has bounded cokernel contains an inclusion in the wrong direction. The text asserts that coker(f^{Γ_n}) is a quotient of Br(X)^G_n[p^∞]/im(f)^{Γ_n}; in fact im(f^{Γ_n}) ⊆ im(f)^{Γ_n}, so the natural map is Br(X)^G_n/im(f^{Γ_n}) → Br(X)^G_n/im(f)^{Γ_n}, and the cokernel of f^{Γ_n} surjects onto the latter, not conversely. The boundedness can likely be repaired using the finiteness of ker f and the boundedness of H^1(Γ_n, ker f), but as written the argument has a gap. Since Theorem 1.8 is a stated main result, this needs a corrected proof.
[Theorem 4.10, 'In particular' assertion] The assertion that the canonical Γ-homomorphism Br(X_∞)[p^∞] → Br(X)^{G_∞}[p^∞] has finite kernel and cokernel is stated without proof. It is used later to obtain the pseudo-isomorphism in Theorem 6.5 and Corollary 4.11. The claim is plausible and can be justified because each K_n maps to K_0 in the direct limit, so bounded orders imply finite direct limits; the same argument works for cokernels. Please add this colimit argument explicitly.

minor comments (3)

[Example 5.7] The induction 'v_3(d_n)=n+1' omits the verification that the displayed bracket is not divisible by 3 at each step. Since the bracket contains a term -3·29^{3^{n-1}} and a sum of Frobenius traces, a one-line congruence check would make the example fully rigorous.
[Corollary 5.3] The phrase 'p ∤ (1−β_i−T+T^2−...)' is potentially confusing: this does not mean the power series is a unit, only that it is not in pZ_p[[T]], which is the condition needed for μ=0. A short clarification would prevent a natural misreading.
[Throughout] There are numerous OCR-type typos, e.g., 'Iw asa w a theory' in the running headers and 'coke' for 'cokernel' in the reader's summary (though not in the paper). The authors should run a careful proofreading pass.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Main conjecture is a formal cokernel-determinant identity because L_tr is defined from the same Frobenius operator whose cokernel is the Iwasawa module.

self definitional [Theorem 1.10 / Theorem 6.5, using Definition 4.4 and Proposition 6.4]
"Ltr(X, t) := det(1− F −1t : TpBr(X)) [Def. 4.4]; Br(X)G∞[p∞]∨ ∼= (TpBr(X)∗⊗Zp Λ)/(1− F γ−1)(TpBr(X)∗⊗Zp Λ) [Prop. 6.4]; CharΛ(Br(X)G∞[p∞]∨) = (det(1− F γ−1 : TpBr(X)∗⊗Zp Λ)) = ... = (Ltr(X, 1 + T )). [Thm. 6.5 proof]"

The claimed main conjecture equates CharΛ(Br(X∞)[p∞]∨) with (Ltr(X,1+T)). But the module whose characteristic ideal is computed is, by Proposition 6.4, exactly the cokernel of 1−Fγ^{-1} acting on TpBr(X)∗⊗Λ, while Ltr(X,1+T) is defined in Definition 4.4 as det(1−F^{-1}(1+T)) on TpBr(X). Under the identification γ↔1+T, the equality Char(coker(1−Fγ^{-1})) = (det(1−Fγ^{-1})) = (Ltr(X,1+T)) is the standard determinant-of-a-cokernel identity. Thus the 'main conjecture' does not compare two independently constructed arithmetic objects; it is true by construction. It is a renaming of a formal characteristic-ideal identity rather than an independent p-adic main conjecture. The Iwasawa-type formula itself is not affected by this circularity.

full rationale

The growth formula (Theorem 1.7) and control theorem (Theorem 1.8) are not circular: they are derived from the external Artin–Tate theorem for K3 surfaces, the stabilization of NS(Xn), and the classical Weierstrass evaluation formula, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citation. The only circular step is the 'Iwasawa main conjecture' (Theorem 1.10): Ltr(X,1+T) is defined as the characteristic determinant of the same Frobenius operator whose cokernel is the Iwasawa module Br(X)G∞[p∞]∨, so the characteristic-ideal equality is a formal consequence of the definitions. This is a partial, localized circularity: the headline formula and its μ=0 corollary retain independent content, but the main conjecture is a tautological determinant-of-cokernel identity rather than an independent verification of an analogue of Mazur–Swinnerton-Dyer.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new free parameters or postulates; all constants are fixed by the geometry and the external theorems cited. The main external inputs are the Tate/Artin–Tate theorems for K3 surfaces, the Lazda–Skorobogatov finiteness theorem, and a characteristic-ideal/determinant formula from [30] with an overlapping author.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Tate conjecture for K3 surfaces over finite fields, and the Artin–Tate formula as a consequence
Invoked in Theorem 3.6 for finiteness of Br(X_n)[p^∞] and in Theorem 4.7 / Step 2 of Theorem 4.10 to equate valuations of #Br and L-function products. Not proved in the paper; external published results [14], [11], [29].
domain assumption Lazda–Skorobogatov finiteness of Br(\bar X)^{G_n}[p^∞]
Used in Proposition 3.10 to prove that Br(\bar X)^{G_∞}[p^∞]^∨ is a finitely generated torsion Λ-module via Nakayama. External result [12].
domain assumption Characteristic-ideal determinant formula for coker(1−Fγ^{−1})
Central to the main conjecture in Theorem 6.5; cited from [30, Proposition 4.3], a paper with overlapping authorship, and not machine-checked or reproduced in this work.
standard math Structure theorem for finitely generated torsion modules over Λ, Weierstrass preparation, and the fundamental evaluation formula
Background from Washington [31] and Ochiai [22] used throughout Sections 2, 5, and 6; the paper supplies a proof of the evaluation formula in Theorem 2.3.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Iwasawa Theory for K3 Surfaces over Finite Fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DZKHNNWF

@misc{pith2026260625737,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Iwasawa Theory for K3 Surfaces over Finite Fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DZKHNNWF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.25737}
}

read the original abstract

In this paper, we initiate Iwasawa theory for K3 surfaces over finite fields. First, using the Artin-Tate conjecture, which is known to hold for K3 surfaces, we prove an analogue of Mazur's control theorem for elliptic curves over number fields. Second, we prove an analogue of Iwasawa's class number formula for Brauer groups in two different ways. We also give explicit examples in the case of Kummer surfaces. Finally, we establish an analogue of the Iwasawa main conjecture for Brauer groups.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references

[1]

J. W. S. Cassels and A. Fröhlich., ed, Algebraic Number Theory , second edition, London Mathematical Society, 2010

2010
[2]

Ferrero and L

B. Ferrero and L. C. Washington, The Iwasawa Invariant µp Vanishes for Abelian Number Fields , Ann. Math. 109, No. 2, 377–395, 1979

1979
[3]

Greenberg, Iwasawa Theory for elliptic curves , Lecture Notes in Math

R. Greenberg, Iwasawa Theory for elliptic curves , Lecture Notes in Math. 1716, Springer, 1999

1999
[4]

Grothendieck, et al., SGA 4 (with M

A. Grothendieck, et al., SGA 4 (with M. Artin and J. L. Verd ier) Théorie des Topos et Cohomologie Etale des Schémas , Lecture Notes in Math. 270, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 1 972
[5]

Grothendieck, Le groupe de Brauer

A. Grothendieck, Le groupe de Brauer. II. Théorie cohomo logique. in Dix Exposés sur la Cohomologie des Schémas, 88–188, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968

1968
[6]

Hartshorne, Algebraic Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol

R. Hartshorne, Algebraic Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 52, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977

1977
[7]

Huybrechts, Lectures on K3 surfaces , volume 158 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics

D. Huybrechts, Lectures on K3 surfaces , volume 158 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. C am- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016

2016
[8]

Iwasawa, On Γ-extensions of algebraic number ﬁelds , Bull

K. Iwasawa, On Γ-extensions of algebraic number ﬁelds , Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 65, 183–226, 1959

1959

Show all 32 references

[9]

Iwasawa, On the µ-invariants of Zl-extensions, Number theory, algebraic geometry and commutative algebra, in honor of Yasuo Akizuki, 1–11, 1973

K. Iwasawa, On the µ-invariants of Zl-extensions, Number theory, algebraic geometry and commutative algebra, in honor of Yasuo Akizuki, 1–11, 1973

1973
[10]

Kato, p-adic Hodge theory and values of zeta functions of modular fo rms, Astérisque, 295, 117–290, 2004

K. Kato, p-adic Hodge theory and values of zeta functions of modular fo rms, Astérisque, 295, 117–290, 2004

2004
[11]

Kim and K

W. Kim and K. Madapusi Pera, 2-adic integral canonical models , Forum Math. Sigma 4 (2016), e28, 34

2016
[12]

C. D. Lazda and A. N. Skorobogatov, Boundedness of the p-primary torsion of the Brauer groups of K3 surfaces, to appear in Algebra & Number Theory
[13]

The L-functions and mo dular forms database

The LMFDB Collaboration (2026). The L-functions and mo dular forms database

2026
[14]

Madapusi Pera, The Tate conjecture for K3 surfaces in odd characteristic , Invent

K. Madapusi Pera, The Tate conjecture for K3 surfaces in odd characteristic , Invent. Math. 205 (2015), no.2, 625–668

2015
[15]

Matsumura, Commutative Algebra, second edition, The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Compan y, Inc., 1980

H. Matsumura, Commutative Algebra, second edition, The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Compan y, Inc., 1980

1980
[16]

Mazur, Rational Points of Abelian Varieties with Values in Towers o f Number Fields , Invent

B. Mazur, Rational Points of Abelian Varieties with Values in Towers o f Number Fields , Invent. math. 18, 183-266 (1972)

1972
[17]

Mazur and P

B. Mazur and P. Swinnerton-Dyer, Arithmetic of Weil Curves , lnvent. math. 25, 1–61, 1974

1974
[18]

Mazur and A

B. Mazur and A. Wiles, Class ﬁelds of Abelian extensions of Q, Invent. math. 76, 179–330, 1984

1984
[19]

J. S. Milne, Abelian Varieties in Arithmetic Geometry ed by G. Cornell and J. H. Silverman, Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1986, 103–150

1986
[20]

J. S. Milne, Étale Cohomology , Princeton Mathematical Series, 33, Princeton University Press, 1980

1980
[21]

Neukirch, A

J. Neukirch, A. Schmidt, and K. Wingberg, Cohomology of Number Fields , Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 323, Springer, 2000

2000
[22]

Ochiai, Iwasawa Theory and its perspective I , Iwanami Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Iwanami Shoten, 2014

T. Ochiai, Iwasawa Theory and its perspective I , Iwanami Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Iwanami Shoten, 2014

2014
[23]

L. S. Pontryagin, Topological Groups, Gordon and Breach, New York, London, Paris 1966

1966
[24]

main conjectures

K. Rubin, The “main conjectures” of Iwasawa theory for imaginary quad ratic ﬁelds, Invent. math. 103, 25–68 (1991)

1991
[25]

J. P. Serre, Corps Locaux, Hermann Paris, 1962

1962
[26]

J. H. Silverman, The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves , second ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 106, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2009

2009
[27]

Skinner and E

C. Skinner and E. Urban, The Iwasawa Main Conjecture for GL2, Invent. Math. 195, 1, 1–277, 2014

2014
[28]

The Stacks Project Authors, Stacks Project, https://stacks.math.columbia.edu, 2018

2018
[29]

Tate, On the conjectures of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer and a geomet ric analog , Séminaire Bourbaki, Exposé 306, 1964/1966

J. Tate, On the conjectures of Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer and a geomet ric analog , Séminaire Bourbaki, Exposé 306, 1964/1966. 415–440, Société Mathématique de Fr ance, 1995

1964
[30]

Tateno and J

S. Tateno and J. Ueki, The Iwasawa invariants of Zd p-covers of links , Journal of the London Mathematical Society, volume 111, issue 6, 2025

2025
[31]

L. C. Washington, Introduction to Cyclotomic Fields , second ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 83, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997

1997
[32]

Wiles, The Iwasawa conjecture for totally real ﬁelds , Ann

A. Wiles, The Iwasawa conjecture for totally real ﬁelds , Ann. Math. (2) 131, No. 3, 493–540, 1990. Rikuto Ito GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS, NAGOYA UNIVERSITY, FURO-C HO, CHIKUSA- KU, NAGOYA, 464-8602, JAP AN Email address : ito.rikuto.g7@s.mail.nagoya-u.ac.jp 24 RIKUTO ITO ...

1990

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

J. W. S. Cassels and A. Fröhlich., ed, Algebraic Number Theory , second edition, London Mathematical Society, 2010

2010

[2] [2]

Ferrero and L

B. Ferrero and L. C. Washington, The Iwasawa Invariant µp Vanishes for Abelian Number Fields , Ann. Math. 109, No. 2, 377–395, 1979

1979

[3] [3]

Greenberg, Iwasawa Theory for elliptic curves , Lecture Notes in Math

R. Greenberg, Iwasawa Theory for elliptic curves , Lecture Notes in Math. 1716, Springer, 1999

1999

[4] [4]

Grothendieck, et al., SGA 4 (with M

A. Grothendieck, et al., SGA 4 (with M. Artin and J. L. Verd ier) Théorie des Topos et Cohomologie Etale des Schémas , Lecture Notes in Math. 270, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 1 972

[5] [5]

Grothendieck, Le groupe de Brauer

A. Grothendieck, Le groupe de Brauer. II. Théorie cohomo logique. in Dix Exposés sur la Cohomologie des Schémas, 88–188, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968

1968

[6] [6]

Hartshorne, Algebraic Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol

R. Hartshorne, Algebraic Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 52, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977

1977

[7] [7]

Huybrechts, Lectures on K3 surfaces , volume 158 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics

D. Huybrechts, Lectures on K3 surfaces , volume 158 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. C am- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016

2016

[8] [8]

Iwasawa, On Γ-extensions of algebraic number ﬁelds , Bull

K. Iwasawa, On Γ-extensions of algebraic number ﬁelds , Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 65, 183–226, 1959

1959