On the splitting principle for cohomological invariants of reflection groups

Christian Hirsch; Stefan Gille

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 23 references

On the splitting principle for cohomological invariants of reflection groups

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that a cohomological invariant of a finite orthogonal reflection group with values in a cycle module is trivial if and only if its restrictions to all elementary abelian 2-subgroups generated by reflections are trivial…

desk verdict A mostly solid proof of a significant splitting principle, but the specialization theorem has a real gap for inseparable residue fields that currently leaves the main theorem unproved over imperfect base fields. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.08146 v2 pith:FZTSPQLJ submitted 2019-08-21 math.AG

Stefan Gille , Christian Hirsch This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AG MSC 19D4520G10

keywords cohomologicalinvariantsreflectiongroupscyclemodulessplittingprincipleWittMilnor-WittK-theoryversaltorsorsorthogonal

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

Finite orthogonal reflection groups are generated by linear reflections, and their first Galois cohomology classifies objects such as Galois algebras and torsors. This paper establishes a splitting principle for them: under the hypothesis that the base field has characteristic coprime to the group order, a cohomological invariant taking values in any cycle module is zero if and only if it is zero on every elementary abelian 2-subgroup of the group that is generated by reflections. The same statement is proved for Witt invariants and for Milnor-Witt K-theory invariants. This matters because it turns the usually hard computation of invariants of a large reflection group into the much easier computation on small 2-torsion subgroups, and it supplies the technical foundation for computing invariants of Weyl groups with values in mod-2 cohomology theories.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the unramified-cohomology formalism for cycle modules: a cycle module assigns a graded abelian group to every finitely generated field extension and carries second residue and specialization maps satisfying axioms (R3a), (R3c), and (R3d). The proof combines three components. First, an explicit versal $W$-torsor is described as the $W$-Galois algebra $E/K$, where $K$ is the invariant subfield of the polynomial ring $S(V^\vee)$ under the reflection group $W$ acting on the dual of a faithful orthogonal representation $V$. Second, a specialization theorem shows that the value of any invariant on this versal torsor is unramified at every codimension-one point of the quotient $A(V)/W$. Third, the classical invariant-theory theorem that the invariant ring of a finite reflection group is a polynomial ring identifies $A(V)/W$ with affine space, and homotopy invariance of cycle modules forces the unramified value to be constant. The induction step uses the isotropy group $W_{\pm\alpha}=\langle s_\alpha\rangle W_\alpha\simeq \mathbb{Z}/2\times W_\alpha$ of a height-one prime and the root-system identity $\bigcup_{\alpha\in\Delta}\ker(\alpha^\vee)=\bigcup_{w\neq 1}\ker(w-\mathrm{id})$, which together control the ramification along the divisor where the versal torsor degenerates.

What would settle it

A counterexample would be a finite orthogonal reflection group $W$ over a field $k_0$ with $\operatorname{char}(k_0)\nmid |W|$, a cycle module $M^*$, and a nonconstant invariant $a$ whose restriction to every elementary abelian 2-subgroup generated by reflections is zero. A concrete candidate to test computationally is the dihedral reflection group $I_2(4)$ over $\mathbb{Q}(i)$ with $M^*=H^*(-,\mathbb{Z}/2)$, using the paper's explicit versal torsor to compute the invariant group.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under the assumption that the base field has characteristic coprime to $|W|$, the paper proves that an invariant $a: H^1(-,W) o M^n(-)$ with values in a cycle module $M^*$ is trivial if and only if its restriction to every elementary abelian 2-subgroup of $W$ generated by reflections is trivial. The proof constructs an explicit versal $W$-torsor: the generic fiber of the quotient map from the complement of the reflection hyperplanes to the quotient affine space, whose function field is the invariant subfield of a polynomial ring. Using a specialization theorem for cycle modules, it shows that the value of any invariant on this versal torsor is unramified on the quotient affine space, hence constant by homotopy invariance; the vanishing on elementary abelian 2-reflection subgroups then forces that constant to be zero. The same argument, with the second residue map replaced by the first residue map, yields the analogous statement for Witt invariants, and via the pull-back description of Milnor-Witt K-theory, also for Milnor-Witt K-theory invariants.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the henselization of every discrete valuation ring built from a finitely generated field extension of the base field is excellent, so that a splitting of the residue field into the completion factors back through the henselization; the specialization theorem and the induction on $|W|$ both depend on this factorization.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every finite orthogonal reflection group $W$ with $\operatorname{char}(k_0)\nmid |W|$, the invariant group $\operatorname{Inv}_{k_0}(W,M^*)$ embeds into a direct sum of invariant groups of maximal elementary abelian 2-subgroups generated by reflections.
Checking whether an invariant is zero therefore requires only knowledge of the invariants of groups of the form $(\mathbb{Z}/2)^r$, which are far easier to compute than the original group.
The same reduction is valid for Witt invariants and for Milnor-Witt K-theory invariants, so computations of these invariants for reflection groups can be organized around elementary abelian 2-subgroups as well.
The explicit versal torsor description and the unramifiedness argument give a concrete route to computing invariants of Weyl groups with values in cycle modules annihilated by 2, the intended sequel of this work.
If the splitting principle is true, then invariants of reflection groups are detected on a very small family of subgroups, which also implies a strong rigidity property: a nontrivial invariant must already be nontrivial on some elementary abelian 2-reflection subgroup.

Reading between the lines

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

The proof's reliance on a faithful orthogonal representation suggests the splitting principle might be stated more generally for any finite group equipped with a representation in an orthogonal group; the paper itself only treats orthogonal reflection groups, but the versal-torsor construction would adapt if such a representation is supplied.
Because the specialization theorem works through the henselization rather than the completion, the same argument should carry over to invariants with values in any cohomology theory that satisfies the three residue axioms and homotopy invariance, not just cycle modules, Witt groups, and Milnor-Witt K-theory.
The theorem leaves open the pseudo-reflection case raised in the paper's final remarks; if the splitting principle holds there, the root-system identity would need a replacement, since the kernel of a pseudo-reflection need not be a reflection hyperplane.
For practical computation, the result suggests an algorithm: compute the invariants of a reflection group by first computing invariants of its maximal elementary abelian 2-reflection subgroups and then checking which combinations extend to the whole group; the proof shows the extension is unique when it exists.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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

Colleague,

Here's my read. The paper proves Serre's splitting principle for cohomological invariants of finite orthogonal reflection groups with values in arbitrary cycle modules, and then extends it to Witt and Milnor-Witt invariants. That is a real result: the proof is self-contained, generalizes Serre's announced Weyl-group case, and handles all reflection groups uniformly. The induction on |W| with reduction to W±α is clean, and the authors are honest about the prior flawed thesis and Ducoat's unpublished preprint.

The bad news is that the proof has a load-bearing gap in Theorem 3.5. The authors need a section j: k -> R^h of the residue map. They claim a Cohen splitting k -> \hat{R} factors through R^h because R^h is excellent and satisfies the approximation property. That is not generally true. Take k0 = F_p(s) and R = k0[x]_{(x^p - s)}. The residue field k = k0(s^{1/p}) is purely inseparable, and R^h admits no splitting at all: its fraction field is a filtered union of separable extensions of k0(x), so it cannot contain a root of T^p - s. The approximation property can lift solutions of polynomial equations with coefficients in R^h, but a coefficient field is not given by such equations unless the residue field is separable. This is not an edge case: after CSTB, the invariant ring is a polynomial algebra, and primes like (U^p - s) lie in U/W and have exactly this inseparable residue field. So the unramifiedness argument in Section 4.9 is not established for imperfect base fields of characteristic p. The main theorem may be true, but this proof does not cover it.

There are also two smaller issues. The abstract and the theorem statement in the introduction say '2-subgroups' where the actual theorem and the proof require 'elementary abelian 2-subgroups'. This is a presentation slip, not a mathematical one—the induction steps work once you add 'elementary abelian' at each spot—but it should be fixed. The Witt extension in Section 5.2 is terse; it silently uses homotopy invariance for unramified I^n on affine space. That is standard but should be stated.

Who is this for? Specialists in cohomological invariants and quadratic forms. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to peer review, with instructions to scrutinize Theorem 3.5. If the authors can fix the inseparable-residue-field issue—or restrict the main theorem to fields where the relevant residue fields are separable—the paper would be a solid contribution. As written, I would not cite it for the theorem over arbitrary base fields.

Best.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proves a splitting principle for cohomological invariants with values in Rost cycle modules for finite orthogonal reflection groups W over a field k0 of characteristic coprime to |W|: an invariant is trivial if and only if its restrictions to all elementary abelian 2-subgroups generated by reflections are trivial. The proof combines an explicit versal W-torsor, a specialization/unramifiedness theorem for cycle-module invariants, and induction on |W|. In the final section the same principle is claimed for Witt invariants and Milnor-Witt K-theory invariants.

Significance. If correct, this is a valuable result. It extends Serre's splitting principle from Weyl groups and Galois cohomology to arbitrary orthogonal reflection groups and arbitrary cycle modules, and it provides a clean induction framework. The versal-torsor description and the reduction to elementary abelian subgroups are elegant. The paper also gives explicit transfer of the method to Witt and Milnor-Witt invariants. Both strengths and weaknesses are present, however: the specialization theorem (Theorem 3.5) is not established for imperfect base fields as written, and the induction in Theorem 4.6 uses a stronger subgroup hypothesis than the one stated.

major comments (3)

[Section 3.5] The proof of Theorem 3.5 asserts that the Cohen splitting j: k -> R^h of the residue map exists and is compatible with the k0-structure. This is not valid in general. The Cohen structure theorem gives a coefficient field of the completion R-hat, i.e., an isomorphism of abstract fields k -> K ⊂ R-hat, but this isomorphism need not be a k0-algebra homomorphism. For example, let k0 = F_p(s), p odd, and R = k0[x]_(x^p - s). The residue field k = k0(s^{1/p}) is purely inseparable over k0, and Frac(R^h) is a direct limit of separable extensions of Frac(R), so no k0-algebra section k -> R^h exists. The subsequent use of r_j on H^1(-,G) for an arbitrary linear algebraic group G, and the claim that the fields k_i are finitely generated over k0, require exactly that k0-linearity. Since Section 4.9 invokes Theorem 3.5 for all height-one primes Q in U/W, including primes of the form (T_0^p - s) when W has a trivial summand, this gap affects the proof of Theorem 4.6 as stated.
[Section 4.9] The induction in the Claim uses the assumption of triviality on elementary abelian 2-subgroups, but the proof repeatedly refers to arbitrary '2-subgroups generated by reflections.' In case (a), the subgroup H' = <s_alpha>.H is a 2-subgroup generated by reflections, but it is elementary abelian only if H is elementary abelian; for general H the assumption does not imply Res^{H'}_W(a) = 0. The same issue occurs in case (b), where 'H is a 2-subgroup of W_{±alpha} generated by reflections' is used to conclude Res^H_W(a) = 0. The argument is repairable by restricting H to elementary abelian 2-subgroups; then H' is elementary abelian because s_alpha commutes with W_alpha (Lemma 4.5(i)). As written, however, the induction step does not follow from the stated hypothesis.
[Introduction and Abstract] The abstract and the theorem in the introduction state the condition as triviality on 'all 2-subgroups of W generated by reflections,' while Theorem 4.6 states 'elementary abelian 2-subgroups.' This is not a cosmetic discrepancy: the proof only supports the elementary abelian version, and the stronger statement is not established. The authors should align the statements and indicate which formulation is intended.

minor comments (3)

[Section 4.9] In case (a), the sentence beginning 'Let H subset W_alpha be a 2-subgroup generated by reflections' should read 'elementary abelian 2-subgroup' to match the induction hypothesis.
[Section 4.10] There is a typo: 'orthgonal' should be 'orthogonal'.
[Section 3.5] The notation T_K is used for the generic fiber of a torsor T over X, but it is not defined in the text; a short definition would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the splitting principle is derived from cycle-module axioms, the CSTB theorem, and external EGA/BLR results, with self-citations explicitly non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.6, is proved by an induction on |W| that uses an explicit versal torsor, the specialization theorem (Theorem 3.5), the Chevalley-Shephard-Todd-Bourbaki theorem quoted from Bourbaki, and Rost's cycle-module axioms together with Rost's homotopy invariance and injectivity results. None of these inputs is the statement being proved. The self-references are [11] and [12]: [11] is the prior Diploma thesis whose proof of the splitting principle is explicitly said to have 'gaps and flaws', so it is not used as support, and [12] is a sequel that is not invoked in the proof of the main theorem. The only potentially questionable step, the factorization of the Cohen splitting through the henselization in Theorem 3.5, rests on external deep results cited to EGA IV and Bosch-Lutkebohmert-Raynaud; even if that implication failed for inseparable residue fields, as the skeptic's attack suggests, that would be a mathematical correctness gap in the proof, not a circular reduction of the theorem to its own assumptions. The theorem's conclusion is not assumed in any input, no parameter is fitted and later called a prediction, and no load-bearing claim is justified solely by a self-citation. Accordingly, there is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted parameters or invented entities appear. The paper is a theorem-with-proof that imports standard results from Bourbaki, EGA IV, SGA, and Rost's cycle-module theory. The historical self-citations concern a flawed diploma thesis and a sequel, not the proof itself.

assumptions (8)

standard math Rost's cycle modules satisfy the residue axioms (R3a), (R3c), (R3d) and the homotopy invariance property (Rost [20, Prop. 8.6]).
Used throughout Sections 3 and 4 to prove specialization and to identify unramified cohomology of affine space.
standard math Chevalley-Shephard-Todd-Bourbaki theorem: for a finite orthogonal reflection group W with char(k0) not dividing |W|, the invariant ring S(V^vee)^W is polynomial, and isotropy groups of linear forms are reflection groups.
Quoted from Bourbaki [6] as Theorem 4.3; used in Lemma 4.5, Section 4.8, and in the induction steps of Theorem 4.6.
standard math The henselization R^h of a discrete valuation ring R essentially of finite type over a field is excellent, and the residue-field splitting of the completion factors through R^h via the approximation property.
Used in the proof of Theorem 3.5 to construct the coefficient fields k_i inside R_i; cited to EGA IV [10, Cor. 18.7.6] and [4, Sect. 3.6, Cor. 9].
standard math For a henselian local ring R^h with residue field k, the map H^1_et(R^h, G) to H^1(k, G) is bijective, and H^1 commutes with filtered direct limits of rings.
Used in Theorem 3.5; cited to SGA3 [7, Chap. XXIV, Prop. 8.1] and SGA4 [2, Chap. VII, Thm. 5.7].
standard math Arason's theorem: the second residue map for Witt groups sends I^n(F) into I^{n-1}(F(v)).
Used in Section 5.2 to adapt the specialization arguments to Witt invariants; cited to Arason [1, Satz 3.1].
domain assumption The base field k0 has characteristic not equal to 2 and characteristic coprime to |W|.
Hypotheses of Theorem 4.6; needed for the existence of regular symmetric bilinear forms and for the CSTB theorem.
domain assumption W is an orthogonal reflection group, i.e., a finite subgroup of O(V,b) for a regular symmetric bilinear space over k0, generated by reflections.
Definition 4.2; the versal torsor construction in Section 4.7 uses the explicit orthogonal representation.
domain assumption M* is a Rost cycle module over k0, or a Witt group / Milnor-Witt K-theory functor for the final sections.
The proof of the specialization and detection principles applies only to these coefficient theories.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the splitting principle for cohomological invariants of reflection groups." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FZTSPQLJ

@misc{pith2026190808146,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the splitting principle for cohomological invariants of reflection groups},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FZTSPQLJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.08146}
}

abstract

Let $\mathrm{k}_{0}$ be a field and $W$ a finite orthogonal reflection group over $\mathrm{k}_{0}$. We prove Serre's splitting principle for cohomological invariants of $W$ with values in Rost's cycle modules (over $\mathrm{k}_{0}$) if the characteristic of $\mathrm{k}_{0}$ is coprime to $|W|$. We then show that this principle for such groups holds also for Witt- and Milnor-Witt $K$-theory invariants.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

[1]

Arason, Kohomologische Invarianten quadratischer Formen , J

J. Arason, Kohomologische Invarianten quadratischer Formen , J. Algebra 36 (1975), 448–491

work page 1975
[2]

Artin, A

M. Artin, A. Grothendieck, J. Verdier, Th´ eorie des Topos et Cohomologie ´Etale des Sch´ emas. Tome 2, S´ eminaire de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique du Bois Marie 1963/64 (SGA 4). Dirig´ e par M. Artin, A. Grothendieck, J. Verdier. Lectu re Notes in Mathematics, 270, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1972

work page 1963
[3]

Berhuy, An introduction to Galois cohomology and its applications

G. Berhuy, An introduction to Galois cohomology and its applications. With a fore- word by Jean-Pierre Tignol , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 377, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010

work page 2010
[4]

Bosch, W

S. Bosch, W. L¨ utkebohmert, M. Raynaud, N´ eron models, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) 21, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990

work page 1990
[5]

Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique

N. Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique. Alg` ebre. Chapitres 4 ` a 7, Masson, Paris, 1981

work page 1981
[6]

Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique

N. Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique. Groupes et alg` ebres de Lie. Chapitres 4, 5 et 6 , Masson, Paris, 1981

work page 1981
[7]

Demazure, A

M. Demazure, A. Grothendieck, Sch´ emas en groupes. III: Structure des sch´ emas en groupes ´ eductifs, S´ eminaire de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique du Bois Marie 1962/64 (SGA 3). Dirig´ e par M. Demazure et A. Grothendieck. Lecture Note s in Mathematics, 153, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1970

work page 1962
[8]

Cohomological invariants of finite Coxeter groups

J. Ducoat, Cohomological invariants of ﬁnite Coxeter groups , Preprint, 2011; available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6283

work page Pith review arXiv 2011

Show all 23 references

[9]

Garibaldi, A

S. Garibaldi, A. Merkurjev, J.-P. Serre, Cohomological invariants in Galois cohomol- ogy, University Lecture Series, 28, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003

2003
[10]

Grothendieck, J

A. Grothendieck, J. Dieudonne´ e, ´El´ ements de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique IV.´Etude Locale des Sch´ emas et des Morphismes de Sch´ emas (Quatri` eme Part ie), Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. 32 (1967), 5–343. 20 STEF AN GILLE AND CHRISTIAN HIRSCH

1967
[11]

Hirsch Cohomological invariants of reﬂection groups , Diplomarbeit, LMU Munich, 2010

C. Hirsch Cohomological invariants of reﬂection groups , Diplomarbeit, LMU Munich, 2010

2010
[12]

Hirsch, On the decomposability of cohomological invariants mod 2 of W eyl groups, Preprint 2019

C. Hirsch, On the decomposability of cohomological invariants mod 2 of W eyl groups, Preprint 2019

2019
[13]

Kane, Reﬂection groups and invariant theory , Springer-Verlag, New York Berlin Heidelberg 2001

R. Kane, Reﬂection groups and invariant theory , Springer-Verlag, New York Berlin Heidelberg 2001

2001
[14]

M. Knus, A. Merkurjev, M. Rost, J.-P. Tignol, The book of involutions. With a preface in French by J. Tits , American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, 44, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1998

1998
[15]

Milne, ´Etale cohomology , Princeton Mathematical Series, 33, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1980

J. Milne, ´Etale cohomology , Princeton Mathematical Series, 33, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1980

1980
[16]

Milnor, Algebraic K-theory and quadratic forms , Invent

J. Milnor, Algebraic K-theory and quadratic forms , Invent. Math. 9, (1969/1970), 318–344

1969
[17]

Morel, Sur les puissances de l’id´ eal fondamental de l’anneau de Wi tt, Comment

F. Morel, Sur les puissances de l’id´ eal fondamental de l’anneau de Wi tt, Comment. Math. Helv. 79 (2004), 689–703

2004
[18]

Morel, A1-algebraic topology over a ﬁeld , Lect

F. Morel, A1-algebraic topology over a ﬁeld , Lect. Notes Math. 2052, Springer, Hei- delberg, 2012

2012
[19]

Raynaud, Anneaux locaux Hens´ elien, Springer Lect

M. Raynaud, Anneaux locaux Hens´ elien, Springer Lect. Notes Math. 169, Springer- Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York
[20]

Rost, Chow groups with coeﬃcients , Doc

M. Rost, Chow groups with coeﬃcients , Doc. Math. 1 (1996), 319–393

1996
[21]

Scharlau, Quadratic and hermitian forms , Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New- York Tokyo, 1985

W. Scharlau, Quadratic and hermitian forms , Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New- York Tokyo, 1985

1985
[22]

Serre, Galois cohomology, Translated from the French by Patrick Ion and revised by the author, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997

J.-P. Serre, Galois cohomology, Translated from the French by Patrick Ion and revised by the author, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997

1997
[23]

Serre, Cohomological invariants mod 2 of W eyl groups, Preprint, 2018; available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.07172

J.-P. Serre, Cohomological invariants mod 2 of W eyl groups, Preprint, 2018; available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.07172. E-mail address : gille@ualberta.ca Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, Unive rsity of Alberta, Ed- monton T6G 2G1, Canada E-mail address...

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Arason, Kohomologische Invarianten quadratischer Formen , J

J. Arason, Kohomologische Invarianten quadratischer Formen , J. Algebra 36 (1975), 448–491

work page 1975

[2] [2]

Artin, A

M. Artin, A. Grothendieck, J. Verdier, Th´ eorie des Topos et Cohomologie ´Etale des Sch´ emas. Tome 2, S´ eminaire de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique du Bois Marie 1963/64 (SGA 4). Dirig´ e par M. Artin, A. Grothendieck, J. Verdier. Lectu re Notes in Mathematics, 270, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1972

work page 1963

[3] [3]

Berhuy, An introduction to Galois cohomology and its applications

G. Berhuy, An introduction to Galois cohomology and its applications. With a fore- word by Jean-Pierre Tignol , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 377, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010

work page 2010

[4] [4]

Bosch, W

S. Bosch, W. L¨ utkebohmert, M. Raynaud, N´ eron models, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) 21, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990

work page 1990

[5] [5]

Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique

N. Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique. Alg` ebre. Chapitres 4 ` a 7, Masson, Paris, 1981

work page 1981

[6] [6]

Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique

N. Bourbaki, ´El´ ements de math´ ematique. Groupes et alg` ebres de Lie. Chapitres 4, 5 et 6 , Masson, Paris, 1981

work page 1981

[7] [7]

Demazure, A

M. Demazure, A. Grothendieck, Sch´ emas en groupes. III: Structure des sch´ emas en groupes ´ eductifs, S´ eminaire de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique du Bois Marie 1962/64 (SGA 3). Dirig´ e par M. Demazure et A. Grothendieck. Lecture Note s in Mathematics, 153, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1970

work page 1962

[8] [8]

Cohomological invariants of finite Coxeter groups

J. Ducoat, Cohomological invariants of ﬁnite Coxeter groups , Preprint, 2011; available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6283

work page Pith review arXiv 2011