Elliptic curves with maximal Galois action on their torsion points

Abstract: Given an elliptic curve E over a number field k, the Galois action on the torsion points of E induces a Galois representation, \rho_E : Gal(\bar{k}/k) \to GL_2(\hat{Z}). For a fixed number field k, we describe the image of \rho_E for a "random" elliptic curve E over k. In particular, if k\neq Q is linearly disjoint from the cyclotomic extension of Q, then \rho_E will be surjective for "most" elliptic curves over k.

\section{Introduction}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve defined over a number field $k$.  For each positive integer $m$, let $E[m]$ be the group of $m$-torsion points in $E(\kbar)$.    The group $E[m]$ is isomorphic to $(\ZZ/m\ZZ)^2$ and is acted on by the absolute Galois group $G_k:=\operatorname{Gal}(\kbar/k)$.  This action may be expressed in terms of a Galois representation,
\[
\rho_{E,m} \colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \Aut(E[m]) \cong \GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ).
\]
Taking the inverse limit over all $m$ (ordered by divisibility), we have a Galois representation
\[
\rho_E \colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \Aut(E(\kbar)_{\operatorname{tors}}) \cong \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ).
\]
In this paper, we will describe how large the image of $\rho_E$ is for a ``random'' elliptic curve over $k$.  \\

A renowned theorem of Serre (\cite{Serre-Inv72}*{Th\'eor\`eme~3}) says that if $E$ does not have complex multiplication, then $\rho_E(G_k)$ has finite index in $\GL_2(\widehat\ZZ)$.  In the same paper, Serre shows that $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)\neq \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ)$ for every elliptic curve $E$ over $\mathbb Q$.

The first example of a surjective $\rho_E$ was given in the doctoral thesis of A.~Greicius \cite{GThesis}.  Let $\alpha\in \Qbar$ be a root of the polynomial $x^3+x+1$, and let $E/\mathbb Q(\alpha)$ be the elliptic curve given by the Weierstrass equation $y^2+2xy+\alpha y = x^3 - x^2$.  In \cite{GThesis}*{\S3.3}, it is  shown that $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{\mathbb Q(\alpha)})=\GL_2(\widehat\ZZ)$.

\subsection{Statement of results}

Denote the ring of integers of $k$ by $\mathcal O_k$.  For $(a,b) \in \mathcal O_k^2$, define $\Delta_{a,b} = -16(4a^3+27b^2)$.  If $\Delta_{a,b}\neq 0$, then let $E(a,b)$ be the elliptic curve over $k$ defined by the Weierstrass equation
\[
Y^2=X^3+aX+b.
\]
Fix a norm $\norm{\cdot}$ on $\mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \mathcal O_k^2 \cong \mathbb R^{2[k:\mathbb Q]}$.   For each real number $x>0$, define the set
\[
B_k(x) = \{ (a,b) \in \mathcal O_k^2 : \Delta_{a,b} \neq 0,\, \norm{(a,b)}\leq x \}.
\]
Thus to each pair $(a,b)\in B_k(x)$, we can associate an elliptic curve $E(a,b)$ over $k$.
Note that
\begin{equation} \label{E:box asymptotics}
|B_k(x)|\sim \kappa x^{2[k:\mathbb Q]}
\end{equation}
as $x\to \infty$, where $\kappa>0$ is a constant which depends on $k$ and $\norm{\cdot}$.

The following theorem addresses a question of Greicius on the surjectivity of the $\rho_E$ (\cite{GThesis}*{\S3.4 Problem~3}).  Let $\mathbb Q^{\operatorname{cyc}}\subseteq \kbar$ be the cyclotomic extension of $\mathbb Q$.
\begin{thm} \label{T:main theorem 1}
Suppose that $k\cap \mathbb Q^{{\operatorname{cyc}}} =\mathbb Q$ and $k\neq \mathbb Q$.  Then
\[
\lim_{x\to \infty} \frac{ |\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :  \rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) = \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ) \}| }{ |B_k(x)| } = 1.
\]
\end{thm}
Intuitively, the theorem says that for a randomly chosen pair $(a,b)\in \mathcal O_k^2$, the corresponding elliptic curve $E(a,b)$ satisfies $\rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=\GL_2(\widehat\ZZ).$  \\

Let $\chi_k\colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \widehat\ZZ^\times$ be the cyclotomic character of $k$.  For each elliptic curve $E$ over $k$, we have $\det \circ \rho_E=\chi_k$.  In particular, the assumption $k\cap \mathbb Q^{{\operatorname{cyc}}} =\mathbb Q$ (equivalently $\chi_k(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=\widehat\ZZ^\times$) is necessary for Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 1}.  For a number field $k$, define the group
\[
H_k := \{ A \in \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ) : \det(A) \in \chi_k(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\}.
\]
Given an elliptic curve $E$ over $k$, we certainly have $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\subseteq H_k$.   Our main theorem, which generalizes Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 1}, shows that this is the only general constraint for $k\neq \mathbb Q$.
\begin{thm} \label{T:main theorem 2}
Let $k\neq \mathbb Q$ be a number field.  Then
\[
 \frac{ |\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :  \rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \neq H_k \}| }{ |B_k(x)| }
\ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \frac{\log x}{\sqrt{x}}.
\]
\end{thm}

\begin{remark}
Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 2} shows that the proportion of $(a,b)$ in $B_k(x)$ with $\rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=H_k$, as a function of $x$,  quickly approaches $1$.  The implicit constant in the theorem is effective and depends only on $k$ and the fixed norm.
\end{remark}

Before continuing, let us introduce some more notation.  Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over a field $k$.  For each positive integer $m$,
denote the fixed field in $\kbar$ of $\ker(\rho_{E,m})$ by $k(E[m])$.

\subsection{The rationals} \label{SS:rationals}
For completeness, we now discuss the case $k=\mathbb Q$ which was excluded from Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 2}.  Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over $\mathbb Q$, and let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of some Weierstrass model of $E$ over $\mathbb Q$.   There exists an integer $n\geq 1$ such that $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{\Delta}) \subseteq \mathbb Q(\mu_n)$, where $\mu_n$ is the set of $n$-th roots of unity (the assumption $k=\mathbb Q$ is important here!).

Using that the field $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{\Delta})$ lies in both $\mathbb Q(E[2])$ and $\mathbb Q(\mu_n)\subseteq \mathbb Q(E[n])$, Serre deduced that the index $[\GL_2(\ZZ/2n\ZZ): \rho_{E,2n}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)]$ is \emph{even} (for details, see \cite{Serre-Inv72}*{pp.~310-311}) and in particular $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)\neq \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ)$.  Following Lang and Trotter, we make the following definition.
\begin{definition}
An elliptic curve $E$ over $\mathbb Q$ is a \emph{Serre curve} if $[\GL_2(\widehat\ZZ) : \rho_{E}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q) ]=2$.
\end{definition}

A Serre curve is thus an elliptic curve $E$ over $\mathbb Q$ for which $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)$ is as large as possible.  For a Serre curve $E/\mathbb Q$, the group $\rho_{E}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)$ can be described explicitly in terms of the field $\mathbb Q(\sqrt{\Delta})$.

N.~Jones \cite{Jones} (building on work of Duke \cite{Duke}) has shown that ``most'' elliptic curves over $\mathbb Q$ are Serre curves.  The analogue of Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 2} is then the following.
\begin{thm}[Jones]  \label{T:Jones-Serre curves} There is a constant $\beta>0$ such that
\[
 \frac{ |\{ (a,b) \in B_\mathbb Q(x) : E(a,b) \text{ is not a Serre curve} \}| }{ |B_\mathbb Q(x)| } \ll_{\norm{\cdot}} \frac{(\log x)^\beta}{\sqrt{x}}.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}
Theorem~\ref{T:Jones-Serre curves} is a special case of \cite{Jones}*{Theorem~4} and will be proven in \S\ref{SS:Serre curves}.    Unlike Jones' version, the constants in our proof will be effective.
\end{remark}

\subsection{Overview of proof}
Suppose that $E$ is an elliptic curve over a number field $k\neq \mathbb Q$.  There is an exact sequence
\[
1\to \operatorname{SL}_2(\widehat\ZZ) \to \GL_2(\widehat\ZZ) \stackrel{\det}{\to} \widehat\ZZ^\times \to 1,
\]
and the representation $\det \circ \rho_E\colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \widehat\ZZ^\times$ is the cyclotomic character $\chi_k$ of $k$.  Therefore,
\[
\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \cap \operatorname{SL}_2(\widehat\ZZ)  = \rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}).
\]
Thus the equality $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=H_k$ is equivalent to $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}) = \operatorname{SL}_2(\widehat\ZZ)$.  A group theoretic argument will show that this in turn is equivalent to having $\rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$ whenever $m$ is equal to $4$, $9$, or a prime $\geq5$.

For a prime $m=\ell\geq 5$, the condition $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ is equivalent to $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k})\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ).$   By considering the Frobenius endomorphism for the reduction of $E$ modulo several primes $\mathfrak p\subseteq \mathcal O_k$, we can determine which conjugacy classes of $\GL_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ meet $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)$.    Combining this modulo $\mathfrak p$ information together, we will use the large sieve to give an asymptotic upper bound for the growth of
\[
|\{(a,b) \in B_k(x) : \rho_{E(a,b),\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\not\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ) \}|
\]
as a function of $x$; see \S\ref{S:exceptional primes}.  To understand the distribution of reductions modulo $\mathfrak p$, we will use a recent result of Jones; see \S\ref{S:over finite fields}.  Of significant importance is a theorem of Masser and W{\"u}stholz, which is needed to bound the number of $\ell$'s that must be considered.

The conditions at $m=4$ or $9$ are more involved.  In particular, for $m=4$ we will need to impose the condition that $\sqrt{\Delta}$ is not in the cyclotomic extension of $k$ (this avoids the obstruction of \S\ref{SS:rationals} that always occurs for $k=\mathbb Q$).  In \S\ref{S:discriminants}, we again use the large sieve to bound the number of $(a,b)\in B_k(x)$ for which $\sqrt{\Delta_{a,b}}$ (and $\sqrt[3]{\Delta_{a,b}}$ if $\mu_3\subseteq k$) lie in the cyclotomic extension of $k$.

Our main theorems will then be deduced in \S\ref{S:proof}.

\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
Many thanks to Bjorn Poonen for his careful reading of this paper and helpful comments.   Thanks also to Aaron Greicius and Nathan Jones.

\subsection*{Notation and conventions}   \label{S:notation}
For each field $k$, let $\kbar$ be an algebraic closure of $k$ and let $G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k := \operatorname{Gal}(\kbar/k)$ be the absolute Galois group of $k$.  For each integer $n\geq 1$, let $\mu_n$ be the group of $n$-th roots of unity in $\kbar$.   Let $k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$ (resp.~$k^{\operatorname{ab}}$) be the cyclotomic (resp.~maximal abelian) extension of $k$ in $\kbar$.

For a number field $k$, denote its ring of integers by $\mathcal O_k$.  Let $\Sigma_k$ be the set of non-zero prime ideals of $\mathcal O_k$.  For each $\mathfrak p\in \Sigma_k$, we have a residue field $\mathbb F_\mathfrak p=\mathcal O_k/\mathfrak p$; let $N(\mathfrak p)$ be its cardinality.    Let $\Sigma_k(x)$  be the set of primes $\mathfrak p$ in $\Sigma_k$ with $N(\mathfrak p)\leq x$.  Let $\ord_\mathfrak p\colon k^\times \to \ZZ$ be the surjective discrete valuation corresponding to $\mathfrak p$.   Denote the absolute discriminant of $k$ by $d_k$.

Fix a group $G$.  Let $G'$ be the derived subgroup of $G$, i.e., the minimal normal subgroup of $G$ for which $G/G'$ is abelian.  Equivalently, $G'$ is the group generated by the set $\{xyx^{-1}y^{-1}:x,y\in G\}$.  The {abelianization} of $G$ is $G^{\operatorname{ab}}:=G/G'$.  Profinite groups will always be considered with their profinite topologies.

For $a,b$ in a field $k$, define $\Delta_{a,b}= -16(4a^3+27b^2)$.  If $\Delta_{a,b}\neq 0$, then let $E(a,b)$ be the elliptic curve over $k$ defined by the Weierstrass equation $Y^2=X^3+aX+b$.

Suppose that $f$ and $g$ are real valued functions of a real variable $x$.  By $f\ll g$ (or $g \gg f$), we mean that there are positive constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ such that for all $x\geq C_1$, $|f(x)| \leq C_2 |g(x)|$.  We use $O(f)$ to represent an unspecified function $g$ with $g \ll f$.   The dependencies of the implied constants will always be indicated by subscripts.  Also, all implicit constants occurring in this paper are effective.

Finally, the symbols $\ell$ and $p$ will always denote rational primes.

\section{Criterion for maximal Galois action} \label{S:criterion}

 \begin{prop} \label{P:Criterion}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over a number field $k$, and let $\Delta$ be the discriminant of a Weierstrass model of $E$ over $k$.
Suppose that the following conditions hold:
\begin{alphenum}
\item \label{I:a} $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ for every prime $\ell\geq 5$,
\item \label{I:b} $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$ and $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$,
\item \label{I:c} $\sqrt{\Delta} \not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$,
\item \label{I:d} $\mu_3 \not\subseteq k$ or $\sqrt[3]{\Delta}\not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$.
\end{alphenum}
Then $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=H_k$.
\end{prop}

\begin{remark}
\begin{romanenum}
\item
The image of $\Delta$ in $k^\times/(k^\times)^{12}$ depends only on the isomorphism class of $E/k$.  Thus for a positive integer $r$ dividing $12$, the $r$-th root of $\Delta$,  up to a factor in $\mu_r\cdot k^\times$, is independent of all choices.   In particular, conditions (\ref{I:c}) and (\ref{I:d}) are well-defined.
\item
The Kronecker-Weber theorem says that $\mathbb Q^{\operatorname{cyc}}=\mathbb Q^{\operatorname{ab}}$, so condition (\ref{I:c}) \emph{never} holds for $k=\mathbb Q$.
\end{romanenum}
\end{remark}

Since $\det\circ \rho_E \colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \widehat\ZZ^\times$ is the cyclotomic character of $k$, we find that $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k})=H_k$ if and only if $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\widehat\ZZ)$.  Applying Lemma~\ref{L:SL(Zhat) Goursat} to $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})$, we have $\rho_E(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k})=H_k$  if and only if $\rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$ holds whenever $m$ is $4$, $9$, or a prime $\geq 5$.  Proposition~\ref{P:Criterion} is then an immediate consequence of the following lemma.

\begin{lemma} \label{L:cyclotomic exceptional}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over a number field $k$ with discriminant $\Delta\in k^\times/(k^\times)^{12}$.
\begin{romanenum}
\item
Let $\ell\geq 5$ be a prime.  If $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$, then $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}) = \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$.
\item
If $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$ and $\sqrt{\Delta} \not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$, then $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$.
\item
If $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$ and $\sqrt[3]{\Delta} \not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$, then $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.
\item
If $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$ and $\mu_3 \not\subseteq k$, then $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.
\end{romanenum}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $m$ be a positive integer such that $\rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$.  Since $k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$ is an abelian extension of $k$, we have inclusions
\begin{equation} \label{E:cyclotomic inclusions}
\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)' \subseteq \rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k})' \subseteq \rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}) \subseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ).
\end{equation}
\noindent (i) Suppose that $m=\ell\geq 5$ is prime.   By Lemma~\ref{L:derived subgroup finite} we have $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)'=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$, so from (\ref{E:cyclotomic inclusions}) we deduce that $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}) = \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$.

\noindent (ii)  Our assumption $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$ implies that $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k(\mu_4)}) = \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$.  Thus to prove $\rho_{E,4}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}}) = \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)$, it suffices to show that $k(E[4])\cap k^{\operatorname{cyc}} = k(\mu_4)$.

In \cite{Lang-Trotter}*{Part III \S11}, it is shown that $\sqrt[4]{\Delta}$ is an element of $k(E[4])$.  Using $\sqrt{\Delta} \not\in k(\mu_4)$, one finds that $k(\mu_4, \sqrt[4]{\Delta})\subseteq k(E[4])$ is an abelian extension of $k(\mu_4)$ of degree $4$.  By Lemma~\ref{L:derived subgroup finite} the group $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/4\ZZ)^{\operatorname{ab}}$ is cyclic of order $4$, so $k(E[4]) \cap k(\mu_4)^{\operatorname{ab}} = k(\mu_4, \sqrt[4]{\Delta})$.  Therefore
\begin{equation} \label{E:4 cyclotomic}
k(E[4]) \cap k^{\operatorname{cyc}} = (k(E[4])\cap k(\mu_4)^{\operatorname{ab}}) \cap k^{\operatorname{cyc}} = k(\mu_4, \sqrt[4]{\Delta}) \cap k^{\operatorname{cyc}} = k(\mu_4),
\end{equation}
where the last equality uses $\sqrt{\Delta} \not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$.

\noindent (iii)  The assumption $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$ implies that $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k(\mu_9)})= \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.  By Lemma~\ref{L:derived subgroup finite}, the group $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)^{\operatorname{ab}}$ has order $3$.

Note that $\sqrt[3]{\Delta}$ is an element of $k(E[3])$ (see \cite{Adelmann}*{Proposition 5.4.3} for example).  Arguing as in part (ii), we find that $k(E[9]) \cap k(\mu_9)^{\operatorname{ab}} = k(\mu_9, \sqrt[3]{\Delta}).$   Since $\sqrt[3]{\Delta} \not\in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$, we deduce that $k(E[9]) \cap k^{\operatorname{cyc}}=k(\mu_9)$, and hence $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.

\noindent (iv) The assumptions imply that $\rho_{E,3}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)=\GL_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)$.  One readily checks that $\GL_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)'=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)$, and thus $\rho_{E,3}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)'=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)$.   Using (\ref{E:cyclotomic inclusions}), with $m=3$, gives $\rho_{E,3}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)$.

By Lemma~\ref{L:derived subgroup finite}, the group $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)^{\operatorname{ab}}$ has order $3$.  So from (\ref{E:cyclotomic inclusions}), with $m=9$, we find that $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})$ is either $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)'$ or $\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.  If $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)'$, then Lemma~\ref{L:derived subgroup finite} implies that $\rho_{E,3}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})\neq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/3\ZZ)$.  Therefore,  $\rho_{E,9}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_{k^{\operatorname{cyc}}})=\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/9\ZZ)$.
\end{proof}

We now state a criterion that applies to $k=\mathbb Q$.
\begin{lemma}[Jones]  \label{L:Serre curve criterion}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over $\mathbb Q$ which satisfies the following properties:
\begin{alphenum}
\item $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ for every prime $\ell\geq 5$,
\item $\rho_{E,72}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/72\ZZ)$.
\end{alphenum}
Then $E$ is a Serre curve.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each $m\geq 1$, we have $\rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)=\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$ if and only if $\rho_{E,m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_\mathbb Q)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$.
The lemma is now a special case of  \cite{Jones}*{Lemma~5}.
\end{proof}

\section{Elliptic curve over finite fields} \label{S:over finite fields}
Fix a positive integer $m$ and a prime $p\nmid m$.  Let $E$ be an elliptic curve over the field $\mathbb F_p$.  As before, one has a Galois representation $\rho_{E,m}\colon \operatorname{Gal}({\FFbar}_p/\mathbb F_p) \to \GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$, which arises from the Galois action on the $m$-torsion of $E$.

Let $\operatorname{Frob}_p\in \operatorname{Gal}(\FFbar_p/\mathbb F_p)$ be the $p$-th power Frobenius automorphism.  For a subset $C$ of $\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$ stable under conjugation, define the set
\[
\Omega_C(p) := \big\{(r,s) \in \mathbb F_p^2 : \Delta_{r,s} \neq 0, \, \rho_{E(r,s),m}(\operatorname{Frob}_p) \in C \big\}.
\]
The following theorem gives a good estimate on the cardinality of this set.

\begin{thm}[Jones] \label{T:Jones} Fix a positive integer $m$ and a conjugacy class $C$ of $\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$.  Let $d$ be the element of $(\ZZ/m\ZZ)^\times$ such that $\det(C)=\{d\}$.  Then for all primes $p$ with $p\equiv d \bmod{m}$,
\[
\frac{|\Omega_C(p)|}{p^2} = \frac{|C| }{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|}  + O\Bigg(\frac{m^5}{p^{1/2}}\Bigg).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Theorem~8 (and Theorem~7) of \cite{Jones}.  A key ingredient is a generalization of results of Hurwitz, see \cite{Jones-Trace}.
\end{proof}

\section{The large sieve}
Let $K$ be a number field, $\Lambda$ a free $\mathcal O_K$-module of rank $n$, and $\norm{\cdot}$ a norm on $\Lambda_\mathbb R = \mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \Lambda$.  Fix a subset $Y$ of $\Lambda$.   Let $x\geq1$ and $Q>0$ be real numbers.  For every prime ideal $\mathfrak p\in\Sigma_K$, let $\omega_\mathfrak p$ be a real number in the interval $[0,1)$.  Assume the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The set $Y$ is contained in a ball of radius $x$; i.e.,~there is an $a_0\in \Lambda_\mathbb R$ such that  $\norm{a-a_0}\leq x$ for all $a\in Y$.
\item  For every $\mathfrak p\in \Sigma_K(Q)$, the image $Y_\mathfrak p$ of $Y$ in $\Lambda/\mathfrak p\Lambda$ by reduction modulo $\mathfrak p$ satisfies
\[
|Y_\mathfrak p| \leq (1-\omega_\mathfrak p)|\Lambda/\mathfrak p\Lambda|.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\begin{thm}[Large sieve, \cite{SerreMordellWeil}*{\S12.1}] \label{T:large sieve}
With assumptions as above, we have
\[
|Y| \ll_{K,\Lambda, \norm{\cdot}} \frac{ x^{[K:\mathbb Q]n} + Q^{2n}}{L(Q)}
\]
where
\[
L(Q):=\sum_{ \substack{\aA\subseteq \mathcal O_K \text{squarefree} \\ N(\aA)\leq Q}} \prod_{\mathfrak p|\aA} \frac{\omega_\mathfrak p}{1-\omega_\mathfrak p}.
\]
\end{thm}

\begin{remark}
We will apply the large sieve with $\Lambda=\mathcal O_k^2$ and $\norm{\cdot}$ our fixed norm on $\mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \mathcal O_k^2$.  In \S\ref{S:exceptional primes} and \S\ref{S:discriminants}, we will take $K$ to be $k$ and $\mathbb Q$, respectively.
\end{remark}

\section{Most elliptic curves have large $\ell$-adic Galois images} \label{S:exceptional primes}
Throughout this section, fix a number field $k$.

\begin{definition}
For each positive integer $m$, define the set
\[
B_{k,m}(x):=\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x):  \rho_{E(a,b),m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \not\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ) \}.
\]
\end{definition}
The main goal of this section is to prove the following bound.
\begin{prop} \label{P:l-adic surjectivity}  There is an absolute constant $\beta\geq 1$ such that
\[
\frac{|B_{k,4}(x) \cup B_{k,9}(x) \cup \bigcup_{\ell \geq 5} B_{k,\ell}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \frac{(\log x)^{\beta}}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\]
\end{prop}

\begin{remark}
For an elliptic curve $E$ over $k$, we have Galois representations ${\rho}_{E,\ell^\infty} \colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \GL_2(\ZZ_\ell)$ coming from the action on the $\ell$-power torsion.
Proposition~\ref{P:l-adic surjectivity} (with Lemma~\ref{L:reduce to finite groups}) shows that for a ``random'' elliptic curve $E$ over $k$, we have ${\rho}_{E,\ell^\infty}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ_\ell)$ for all primes $\ell$.  Since $\det \circ {\rho}_{E,\ell^\infty} \colon G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k \to \ZZ_\ell^\times$ is the $\ell$-adic cyclotomic character of $k$, we find that ${\rho}_{E,\ell^\infty}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)$ is as ``large as possible'' for all $\ell$.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}
Our proof of Proposition~\ref{P:l-adic surjectivity} is clearly based on Duke's paper \cite{Duke}, which proves the $k=\mathbb Q$ case (with Jones \cite{Jones} handling $4$ and $9$).

Unlike Duke's result, the implicit constants in Proposition~\ref{P:l-adic surjectivity} are effective.    The source of non-effective constants in \cite{Duke} is the use of the Siegel-Walfisz theorem.  We avoid this by applying the pigeonhole principle in the proof of Lemma~\ref{L:exceptional prime bound 1} and then sieving only by conjugacy classes with a fixed determinant.
\end{remark}

\subsection{Sieving elliptic curves by Frobenius conjugacy classes}
For a positive integer $m$ and a conjugacy class $C$ of $\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$, define the set
\[
Y_C(x) := \{ (a,b) \in B_k(x):  \rho_{E(a,b),m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \cap C = \emptyset  \big\}.
\]
For $d\in(\ZZ/m\ZZ)^\times$, let $\Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)$ be the set of $\mathfrak p\in\Sigma_k(Q)$ with degree $1$ (i.e., $N(\mathfrak p)$ prime) and $N(\mathfrak p)\equiv d \bmod{m}$.

\begin{prop}  \label{P:nasty sieving}
Let $m$ be a positive integer and $C$ a conjugacy class of $\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$.  Let $d$ be the unique element of $(\ZZ/m\ZZ)^\times$ such that $\det(C)=\{d\}$, and assume that $d\in \chi_k(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \bmod{m} \subseteq (\ZZ/m\ZZ)^\times$.  Then
\[
\frac{ |Y_C(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \Bigg( \frac{|C|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|}  |\Sigma_{k}^1(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2};d,m)| + O_k(m^5 x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/4}) \Bigg)^{-1}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Lambda$ be the $\mathcal O_k$-module $\mathcal O_k^2$.  We have already chosen a norm $\norm{\cdot}$ on $\Lambda_\mathbb R:=\mathbb R \otimes_\ZZ \mathcal O_k^2$, and the set $B_k(x)\subseteq \Lambda_\mathbb R$ lies in a ball of radius $x$.  Let $Q:=x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}$.

For each $\mathfrak p\in\Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)$, define
\[
\Omega_\mathfrak p = \{ (r,s) \in \mathbb F_\mathfrak p^2 : \Delta_{r,s} \neq 0, \, \rho_{E(r,s),m}(\operatorname{Frob}_{N(\mathfrak p)})  \in C \}
\]
and $\omega_\mathfrak p = |\Omega_\mathfrak p|/N(\mathfrak p)^2$.  Let $Y_{\mathfrak p}$ be the image of $Y_C(x)$ in $\mathbb F_\mathfrak p^2$ via reduction modulo $\mathfrak p$.

Suppose that $(a,b)\in B_k(x)$ satisfies $(a,b) \bmod{\mathfrak p} \in \Omega_\mathfrak p$; then $E(a,b)$ has good reduction at $\mathfrak p$ and $\rho_{E(a,b),m}(\operatorname{Frob}_\mathfrak p) \subseteq C$.  So $\rho_{E(a,b),m}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \cap C \neq \emptyset$, and thus $(a,b) \notin Y_C(x)$.  This shows that
\begin{equation*}
Y_{\mathfrak p} \subseteq \mathbb F_\mathfrak p^2 - \Omega_\mathfrak p,
\end{equation*}
and hence $|Y_{\mathfrak p}| \leq (1-\omega_\mathfrak p)|\Lambda/\mathfrak p\Lambda|.$

For $\mathfrak p\notin\Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)$, define $\omega_\mathfrak p=0$.   By the large sieve (Theorem~\ref{T:large sieve}),
\begin{equation} \label{E: result of large sieve}
|Y_C(x)| \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \frac{x^{2[k:\mathbb Q]} }{L(Q)},
\end{equation}
where
\[
L(Q):=\sum_{\substack{\aA\subseteq \mathcal O_k \text{ squarefree} \\ N(\aA)\leq Q}} \prod_{\mathfrak p|\aA}  \frac{\omega_\mathfrak p}{1-\omega_\mathfrak p} \geq  \sum_{\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)} \omega_\mathfrak p.
\]
For $\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)$, Theorem~\ref{T:Jones} gives
\[
\omega_\mathfrak p = \frac{|C|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|} + O(m^5/N(\mathfrak p)^{1/2}).
\]
Therefore
\begin{align*}
L(Q) & \geq  \sum_{\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)} \bigg( \frac{|C|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|} + O(m^5/N(\mathfrak p)^{1/2}) \bigg)\\
&=\frac{|C|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|}  |\Sigma_{k}^1(Q;d,m)| + O_k(m^5 Q^{1/2}).
\end{align*}
The assumption $d\in \chi_k(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \bmod{m}$ is needed to guarantees that $L(Q) \gg_{k,m} 1$.  The proposition follows by combining our lower bound of $L(Q)$ and (\ref{E:box asymptotics}) with (\ref{E: result of large sieve}).
\end{proof}

\subsection{Galois image modulo an integer}
The following proposition shows that for a ``random'' elliptic curve $E$ over $k$, $\rho_{E,m}$ has large image.
\begin{prop} \label{P:exceptional prime bound m}
For a positive integer $m$,
\[
\frac{|B_{k,m}(x)|}{|B_{k}(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot},m} \frac{\log x}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $C_1,\dots,C_n$ be the conjugacy classes of $\GL_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)$ with determinant $1$.
By Lemma~\ref{L:SL condition for m}, we have
$B_{k,m}(x) \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n Y_{C_i}(x)$.  Proposition~\ref{P:nasty sieving} gives
\[
\frac{|B_{k,m}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \leq \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{|Y_{C_i}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|}  \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \sum_{i=1}^n \Big( \frac{|C_i|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/m\ZZ)|}  |\Sigma_{k}^1(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2};1,m)| + O_k(m^5 x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/4})\Big)^{-1}.
\]
Using $ |\Sigma_{k}^1(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2};1,m)|\gg_{k,m} x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}/\log x$, we deduce that
\[
\frac{|B_{k,m}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot},m} \sum_{i=1}^n  \big( x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}/\log x\big)^{-1} \ll_m \frac{\log x}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\subsection{Galois image modulo primes}
Let $h$ be the absolute logarithmic height on $\mathbb P^1(\Qbar)$.  For an elliptic curve $E$, let $j(E)$ be its $j$-invariant.  The following theorem bounds the number of $\ell$'s that we need to consider (in particular, it gives an effective version of a result of Serre \cite{Serre-Inv72}).
\begin{thm}[Masser-W\"ustholz  \cite{MasserWustholz}] \label{T:MasserWustholz}
Let $E$ be an elliptic curve defined over a number field $k$, and assume that $E$ does not have complex multiplication.  There are positive absolute constants $c$ and $\gamma$ such that if $\ell > c \big( \max\big\{[k:\mathbb Q], h(j(E))\big\} \big)^\gamma$,  then
$\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k)  \supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ).$
\end{thm}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:j bound}
If $(a,b) \in B_k(x)$, then $h(j(E(a,b)))\ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \log x$.  \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Sigma_k^\infty$ be the set of archimedean places of $k$.  For each $v\in \Sigma_k^\infty$, let $|\!\cdot\!|_v$ be an absolute value on the completion $k_v$ of $k$ at $v$.
On $\prod_{v\in\Sigma_k^\infty} k_v^2$, we have a norm
$\norm{ (a_v,b_v)_v }_1 = \sup_{v\in \Sigma_k^\infty} |a_v|_v + \sup_{v\in \Sigma_k^\infty} |b_v|_v.$
Using the natural isomorphism $\mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \mathcal O_k^2 \cong \prod_{v\in\Sigma_k^\infty} k_v^2$, we may view $\norm{\cdot}_1$ as a norm on $\mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \mathcal O_k^2$.
Recall that $j(E(a,b)) = - 1728(4a)^3/ \Delta_{a,b}$.  Since $a$ and $b$ are integral, we have
 \begin{align*}
 h(j(E(a,b))) & = h([- 1728(4a)^3 : \Delta_{a,b}] )  \ll_k {\sum}_{v\in \Sigma_k^\infty } \log( \max\{ 1728\cdot 4^3|a|^3_v, |\Delta_{a,b}|_v \} )
 \end{align*}
and thus $h(j(E(a,b)))  \ll_k \log \norm{(a,b)}_1$. The norms $\norm{\cdot}$ and $\norm{\cdot}_1$ are equivalent, so
\[
h(j(E(a,b))) \ll_k \log \norm{(a,b)}_1 \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \log \norm{(a,b)} \leq \log x.
\qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:MasserWustholz}
There is a constant $c_k>0$ (depending only on $k$) and an absolute constant $\gamma>0$ such that
\[
\big\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x):  \rho_{E(a,b),\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \not\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)  \text{ for some prime $\ell\geq 5$} \big\} =  \bigcup_{5\leq \ell \leq c_k (\log x)^\gamma} B_{k,\ell}(x).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For an elliptic curve $E/k$ with complex multiplication, we have $\rho_{E,\ell}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \not\supseteq \operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ for every prime $\ell\geq 5$.  The lemma follows by combining Theorem~\ref{T:MasserWustholz} and Lemma~\ref{L:j bound}.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:exceptional prime bound 1}
Assume that $5\leq \ell \leq c_k (\log x)^\gamma$, where $c_k$ and $\gamma$ are the constants from Lemma~\ref{L:MasserWustholz}.  Then
\[
\frac{|B_{k,\ell}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \frac{ (\log x)^{7\gamma+1} }{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We may assume that $\ell$ satisfies $k\cap\mathbb Q(\mu_\ell)=\mathbb Q$ (this excludes only a finite number of $\ell$, which can be handled with Proposition~\ref{P:exceptional prime bound m}).
Define the set $\Sigma^1_k(x) := \{ \mathfrak p \in \Sigma_k(x) : N(\mathfrak p) \text{ is prime}\}$.
By the pigeonhole principle, there is an element $d\in (\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)^\times = \chi_k(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \bmod{\ell}$ such that
\[
|\Sigma_{k}^1(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2};d,\ell)|  \geq \frac{1}{\ell-1}|\Sigma^1_k(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2})| +O_k(1) \gg_k \frac{1}{\ell-1} x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}/\log x.
\]
Let $C_1,\dots, C_n$ be the conjugacy classes of $\GL_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)$ with $\det(C_i)=d$.  Combining Lemma~\ref{L:SL condition for ell} and Proposition~\ref{P:nasty sieving}, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{|B_{k,\ell}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \leq  \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{|Y_{C_i}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|}
&\ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \sum_{i=1}^n \left(\frac{|C_i|}{|\operatorname{SL}_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)|} |\Sigma_{k}^1(x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2};d,\ell)| + O_k(\ell^5x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/4}) \right)^{-1} \\
&\ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \sum_{i=1}^n \left(\frac{|C_i|}{|\GL_2(\ZZ/\ell\ZZ)|} x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}/\log x + O_k(\ell^5x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/4})\right)^{-1}.
\end{align*}
The bounds $n\leq \ell^3$, $1\leq |C_i|$, and $\ell\leq c_k(\log x)^\gamma$ imply
\[
\frac{|B_{k,\ell}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|}  \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} n \ell^4 \frac{\log x}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}} \ll_k \frac{(\log x)^{7\gamma+1}}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{P:l-adic surjectivity}}
Using Lemmas~\ref{L:MasserWustholz} and \ref{L:exceptional prime bound 1}, we obtain the following bounds:
\[
\frac{|\bigcup_{\ell \geq 5} B_{k,\ell}(x) |}{|B_k(x)|}  \leq   \sum_{5\leq \ell \leq c_k (\log x)^\gamma} \frac{|B_{k,\ell}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|}
 \ll _{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \sum_{5\leq \ell \leq c_k (\log x)^\gamma} \frac{(\log x)^{7\gamma+1}}{ x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}
 \ll_k   \frac{(\log x)^{8\gamma + 1}}{ x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\]
By Proposition~\ref{P:exceptional prime bound m} (with $m=4$ and $9$), we have
\[
\frac{|B_{k,4}(x) \cup B_{k,9}(x)|}{|B_k(x)|}  \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} \frac{\log x}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}.
\]
The proposition follows immediately with $\beta=8\gamma+1$.

\section{Discriminants} \label{S:discriminants}

\begin{prop} \label{P:Serre obstruction bound}
Fix a number field $k\neq \mathbb Q$, an integer $r\geq 2$, and assume that $k$ contains $\mu_r$.  Then
\[
\frac{|\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :  \sqrt[r]{\Delta_{a,b}} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}  \}|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot},r}  \frac{\log x}{\sqrt{x}}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}
From Proposition~\ref{P:Serre obstruction bound}, we find that conditions (\ref{I:c}) and (\ref{I:d}) of Proposition~\ref{P:Criterion} hold for ``most'' elliptic curves over a fixed number field $k\neq \mathbb Q$.
\end{remark}

For the rest of this section, we shall fix $k$ and $r$ as in Proposition~\ref{P:Serre obstruction bound}.  Let $d=[k:\mathbb Q]$.  Let $S$ be the finite set of rational primes which satisfies the following conditions with minimal value $\prod_{p\in S} p$;
\begin{itemize}
\item $S$ contains the primes dividing $6r$,
\item $S$ contains the primes that are ramified in $k$,
\item $\mathcal O_S$ is a principal ideal domain, where $\mathcal O_S$ is the ring of $S'$-integers of $k$ and $S'=\{\mathfrak p \in \Sigma_k : \mathfrak p | p,\, \text{ for some } p\in S\}$.
\end{itemize}
Note that the above choice of $S$ depends only on $k$ and $r$.

\begin{lemma}  \label{L:ramification cyclotomic}
Fix a prime $p \notin S$, an element $\Delta\in k^\times$, and let $\Pp_1\dots,\Pp_n$ be the prime ideals of $\mathcal O_{k(\sqrt[r]{\Delta})}$ lying over $p$.  If $\sqrt[r]{\Delta} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$, then
\[
e(\Pp_1/p) = \dots = e(\Pp_n/p),
\]
where $e(\Pp_i/p)$ is the ramification index of $\Pp_i$ over $p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\sqrt[r]{\Delta} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}= \mathbb Q^{\operatorname{cyc}}\cdot k$,  one can show that there is a field $L \subseteq \mathbb Q^{\operatorname{cyc}}$ such that $k(\sqrt[r]{\Delta}) = L \cdot k$.   Since $p$ is unramified in $k$, we find that $e(\Pp_i/p) = e(\Pp_i \cap \mathcal O_L/p)$.  The value $e(\Pp_i \cap \mathcal O_L/p)$ is independent of $i$, since $L$ is a Galois extension of $\mathbb Q$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:beta description}
Let $\mathcal B \subseteq \mathcal O_S^\times$ be a set of representatives for the cosets of $\mathcal O_S^\times/(\mathcal O_S^\times)^r$.  Then for any $\Delta \in \mathcal O_k$ with $\sqrt[r]{\Delta} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$, there are $m \in \ZZ$, $\alpha \in \mathcal O_S$, and $\beta \in \mathcal B$ such that $\Delta= m \alpha^r \beta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\Delta \in \mathcal O_k$ with $\sqrt[r]{\Delta} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}$.  We first show that $\Delta$ can be written in the form $m\alpha^r \beta$, for some $m\in \ZZ$, $\alpha \in \mathcal O_S$, and $\beta \in \mathcal O_S^\times$.  We may assume that $\Delta$ is non-zero.  Since $\mathcal O_S$ is a principal ideal domain, there is an element $\alpha\in \mathcal O_S$ such that $0\leq \ord_\mathfrak p(\Delta/\alpha^r) < r$ for all $\mathfrak p \not\in S'$.

Take any prime $p\notin S$ and let $\mathfrak p_1,\dots, \mathfrak p_g$ be the prime ideals of $\mathcal O_S$ lying over $p$.  Suppose that some $\mathfrak p_i$ divides $\Delta/\alpha^r$ in $\mathcal O_S$.  Since $0< \ord_\mathfrak p(\Delta/\alpha^r) < r$, we deduce that the extension $k(\sqrt[r]{\Delta})/k$ is ramified at $\mathfrak p_i$.  By Lemma~\ref{L:ramification cyclotomic}, we find that $k(\sqrt[r]{\Delta})/k$ is ramified at all the primes $\mathfrak p_1,\dots,\mathfrak p_g$, and hence $p\mathcal O_S = \mathfrak p_1\dots \mathfrak p_g$ divides $\Delta/\alpha^r$ in $\mathcal O_S$.    Dividing by $p$ and repeating the above process, we find that there is an integer $m\geq 1$ such that $\beta:=\Delta/(m\alpha^r)$ is an element of $\mathcal O_S^\times$.  We may assume that $\beta$ is in $\mathcal B$ after multiplying $\alpha$ by an appropriate element of $\mathcal O_S^\times$.
\end{proof}

For each $\beta\in \mathcal O_S^\times$, define the sets
\[
W_\beta := \{ (a,b) \in \mathcal O_k^2:  \Delta_{a,b} = m \alpha^r \beta, \text{ for some } m \in \ZZ,\, \alpha \in \mathcal O_S \}
\]
and $W_\beta(x) := W_\beta \cap B_k(x)$.  For a set $\mathcal B$ as in Lemma~\ref{L:beta description}, we have
\[
\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :  \sqrt[r]{\Delta_{a,b}} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}  \} \subseteq \bigcup_{\beta \in \mathcal B} W_\beta(x).
\]
The set $\mathcal B$ is finite (since the abelian group $\mathcal O_S^\times$ is finitely generated), so
\begin{equation} \label{E: W bound for discriminant}
|\{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :  \sqrt[r]{\Delta_{a,b}} \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}  \}| \ll_{k,r} \max_{\beta \in \mathcal O_S^\times} |W_\beta(x)|.
\end{equation}
Thus to prove Proposition~\ref{P:Serre obstruction bound}, it suffices to find bounds for the functions $|W_\beta(x)|$.

\begin{lemma} \label{L:Weil conjecture bound}
Let $p\nmid 6$ be a prime with $p\equiv 1 \bmod{r}$.  For any $\gamma\in \mathbb F_p^\times$,
\[
|\{(a,b) \in \mathbb F_p^2 :  \Delta_{a,b} = \gamma c^r, \, \text{for some $c\in\mathbb F_p$}\}| =  \frac{1}{r} p^2 + O_{r}(p^{3/2}).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\gamma\in \mathbb F_p^\times$.  The equation $\Delta_{a,b} = \gamma c^r$ defines a geometrically irreducible variety $X$ in $\AA^3_{\mathbb F_p}=\Spec(\mathbb F_p[a,b,c])$.  Using the Weil conjectures, we find that
\begin{equation} \label{E:Weil conjecture}
|X(\mathbb F_p)| = p^2 + O_r(p^{3/2})
\end{equation}
(that the implicit constant in (\ref{E:Weil conjecture}) depends only on $r$ can be deduced from \cite{Bombieri}).

For fixed $(a,b)\in \mathbb F_p^2$, if $ \Delta_{a,b} = \gamma c^r$ has a solution $c\in \mathbb F_p^\times$, then it has exactly $r$ such solutions (this uses the assumption $p\equiv 1\bmod{r}$).  Most solutions have $c\neq 0$, since $|\{(a,b)\in\mathbb F_p^2: \Delta_{a,b}=0\}| \ll p$.  The lemma is now immediate.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:W mod p bound}
Take any  $\beta \in \mathcal O_S^\times$.  Let $p \not\in S$ be a prime that splits completely in $k$, and let $W_{\beta,p}$ be the image of $W_\beta$ in $\mathcal O_k^2/p\mathcal O_k^2$.  Then
\[
|W_{\beta,p}| \leq \Big( \frac{1}{r^{d-1}} + O_{r,d}(p^{-1/2}) \Big) |\mathcal O_k^2/p\mathcal O_k^2|.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathfrak p_1,\dots, \mathfrak p_d \in \Sigma_k$ be the prime ideals lying over $p$.   By the Chinese remainder theorem, we have a natural identification $\mathcal O_k/p\mathcal O_k = \prod_{i=1}^d \mathbb F_{\mathfrak p_i}$.  Then
\[
W_{\beta,p} \subseteq \bigcup_{ m \in R } \prod_{i=1}^d \big\{(a,b) \in \mathbb F_{\mathfrak p_i}^2 : \Delta_{a,b}= m \alpha^r \cdot (\beta \bmod{\mathfrak p_i}),\, \text{for some } \alpha\in \mathbb F_{\mathfrak p_i}   \big\},
\]
where the union is over a set of coset representatives $R\subseteq \mathbb F_p^\times$ of $\mathbb F_p^\times/(\mathbb F_p^\times)^r$.   We have $p\equiv 1 \bmod{r}$, since $p$ splits completely in $k$ and by assumption $\mu_r\subseteq k$.  By Lemma~\ref{L:Weil conjecture bound},
\[
|W_{\beta,p}| \leq |R| \big(p^2/r + O_{r}(p^{3/2})\big)^d  = p^{2d}/{r^{d-1}} + O_{r,d}(p^{2d-1/2}).  \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{L:W bound}
For $\beta\in \mathcal O_S^\times$,
${|W_\beta(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot},r} {|B_k(x)|} (\log x)/{\sqrt{x}}.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $I$ be the set of primes $p\not\in S$ that split completely in $k$.  By Lemma~\ref{L:W mod p bound}, for each prime $p \in I$, we have $|W_\beta(x) \bmod{p\mathcal O_k^2}| \leq (1-\omega_p) |\mathcal O_k^2/p\mathcal O_k^2|$, where $\omega_p = 1-1/r^{d-1} + O_{r,d}(p^{-1/2})$.  For $p\notin I$, set $\omega_p=0$.

We may now apply the large sieve.  By Theorem~\ref{T:large sieve} (with $K=\mathbb Q$, $\Lambda=\mathcal O_k^2$, $Q=\sqrt{x}$, and our chosen norm $\norm{\cdot}$ on $\mathbb R\otimes_\ZZ \Lambda$), we have
$|W_\beta(x)| \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} { x^{2d}}/{L(\sqrt{x})},$
where
\[
L(\sqrt{x}) := \sum_{ \substack{J \subseteq I \text{ finite} \\  \prod_{p\in J} p \leq \sqrt{x}} } \prod_{p\in J} \frac{\omega_p}{1-\omega_p}.
\]
Using $r\geq 2$ and $d\geq 2$ (since $k\neq \mathbb Q$),  we have the bound
\[
L(\sqrt{x}) \geq \sum_{ \substack{J \subseteq I \text{ finite} \\  \prod_{p\in J} p \leq \sqrt{x} } } \prod_{p\in J} \Big( 1 + O_{r,d}(p^{-1/2}) \Big) \geq \sum_{ \substack{p\in I \\  p \leq \sqrt{x} } } \Big( 1 + O_{r,d}(p^{-1/2}) \Big).
\]
The set $I$ has positive density in the primes, so $L(\sqrt{x}) \gg_{r,k} \sqrt{x}/\log x$.  The lemma follows by using this bound for $L(\sqrt{x})$ and (\ref{E:box asymptotics}) with our upper bound for $|W_\beta(x)|$.
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{P:Serre obstruction bound}]
Apply Lemma~\ref{L:W bound} to the bound (\ref{E: W bound for discriminant}).
\end{proof}

\section{Elliptic curves with maximal Galois action} \label{S:proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:main theorem 2}}
Define the sets
\begin{align*}
Y_1(x ) &= B_{k,4}(x) \cup B_{k,9}(x) \cup {\bigcup}_{\ell\geq 5}B_{k,\ell}(x),\\
Y_2(x) &= \{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :    \sqrt{\Delta_{a,b}}  \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}} \}, \\
Y_3(x) &= \{ (a,b) \in B_k(x) :    \mu_3 \subseteq k \text{ and } \sqrt[3]{\Delta_{a,b}}  \in k^{\operatorname{cyc}}\}.
\end{align*}
By Proposition~\ref{P:Criterion}, we have
$\{(a,b) \in B_k(x): \rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \neq H_k \}
\subseteq Y_1(x) \cup Y_2(x)  \cup Y_3(x)$,
and thus
\[
|\{(a,b) \in B_k(x): \rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \neq H_k \}| \leq |Y_1(x)| + |Y_2(x)| + |Y_3(x)|.
\]
By Proposition \ref{P:l-adic surjectivity}, we have ${|Y_1(x)|}/{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}} {(\log x)^{\beta}}/{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}$, where $\beta\geq 1$ is an absolute constant.  By Proposition~\ref{P:Serre obstruction bound}, we have
\[
\frac{|Y_2(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \frac{\log x}{\sqrt{x}} \text{\quad  and \quad} \frac{|Y_3(x)|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \frac{\log x}{\sqrt{x}}.
\]
Combining everything together gives:
\[
\frac{|\{(a,b) \in B_k(x): \rho_{E(a,b)}(G}  %\newcommand{\calG}{\mathcal G_k) \neq H_k \}|}{|B_k(x)|} \ll_{k,\norm{\cdot}}  \max\Big\{ \frac{(\log x)^{\beta}}{x^{[k:\mathbb Q]/2}}, \frac{\log x}{\sqrt x} \Big\} \ll \frac{\log x}{\sqrt{x}},
\]
where the last bound uses $k\neq \mathbb Q$.

\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Jones-Serre curves}} \label{SS:Serre curves}
The theorem is easily deduced by combining the criterion of Lemma~\ref{L:Serre curve criterion} with Proposition~\ref{P:l-adic surjectivity} and Proposition~\ref{P:exceptional prime bound m} (with $m=72$).


Un-unzippable Convex Caps

Abstract: An unzipping of a polyhedron P is a cut-path through its vertices that unfolds P to a non-overlapping shape in the plane. It is an open problem to decide if every convex P has an unzipping. Here we show that there are nearly flat convex caps that have no unzipping. A convex cap is a "top" portion of a convex polyhedron; it has a boundary, i.e., it is not closed by a base.

\section{Introduction}
\seclab{Introduction}
We define an \emph{unzipping} of a polyhedron ${\mathcal P}$ in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$ to be a
non-overlapping, single-piece unfolding
of the surface to the plane that results from cutting a continuous path
${\gamma}$ through all the vertices of ${\mathcal P}$.
The cut-path ${\gamma}$ need not follow the edges of ${\mathcal P}$, nor even
be polygonal, but it must include
every vertex of ${\mathcal P}$, passing through $n-2$ vertices and beginning and
ending at the other two vertices, where $n$ is the total number of vertices.
If ${\gamma}$ does follow edges of ${\mathcal P}$, we call it an \emph{edge-unzipping}.

Edge-unzippings are special cases of edge-unfoldings, where the cuts follow
a tree of edges that span the $n$ vertices.
The interest in edge-unfoldings stems largely from what has
become known as D\"urer's problem~\cite{do-gfalop-07}~\cite{o-dp-13}:
Does every convex polyhedron have an edge-unfolding?
The emphasis here is on a non-overlapping result, what is often
called a \emph{net} for the polyhedron.
This question was first formally raised by Shephard in~\cite{s-cpcn-75}.
In that paper, he already investigated the special case where the
cut edges form a Hamiltonian path of the $1$-skeleton of ${\mathcal P}$:
Hamiltonian unfoldings. These are exactly what I'm calling edge-unzippings.
Shephard noted that the rhombic dodecahedron does
not have an edge-unzipping because its $1$-skeleton has no
Hamiltonian path.

The attractive ``zipping'' terminology stems from the paper~\cite{lddss-zupc-10},
which defined \emph{zipper unfoldings} to be what I'm shortening to unzippings.
They showed that all the Platonic and the Archimedean solids have
edge-unzippings.
And they posed a fascinating question:

\begin{center}
\fbox{\textbf{Open Problem}: Does every convex polyhedron have an unzipping?}
\end{center}

\subsection{Nonconvex Polyhedra}
\seclab{NonconvexPolyhedra}
First we note that not every nonconvex polyhedron has an unzipping.
This has been a ``folk theorem'' for years, but has apparently not been
explicitly stated in the literature.\footnote{
The closest is~\cite{bdekms-upcf-03}, which notes that
``the neighborhood of a negative-curvature vertex ... requires two or more
cuts to avoid self-overlap.''}
In any case, it is not difficult to see.

Consider the polyhedron illustrated in Fig.~\figref{heartsfan}.
The central vertex $v$ has more than $4 \pi$ incident surface angle.
In fact, it has well more than $8 \pi$ incident angle, but we only need $> 4 \pi$.
An unzipping cut-path ${\gamma}$ cannot terminate at $v$, because the neighbhood
of $v$ in the unfolding has more than $2\pi$ incident angle, and so would
overlap in the planar development.
Nor can ${\gamma}$ pass through $v$, because partitioning the $> 4 \pi$ angle would
leave more than $2\pi$ to one side or the other, again forcing overlap
in the neighborhood of at least one of the two planar images of $v$.
Therefore, no polyhedron with a vertex with more than $> 4 \pi$ incident angle
has an unzipping.
Indeed, as Stefan Langerman observed,\footnote{
Personal communication, Aug. 2017}
similar reasoning shows that for
any degree ${\delta}$ there is a polyhedron that cannot be unfolded without overlap
by a cut tree of maximum degree ${\delta}$.
The polyhedron in Fig.~\figref{heartsfan} requires degree $> 4$ at $v$
to partition the more than $8 \pi$ angle into $< 2\pi$ pieces.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{Figures/heartsfan}
\caption{A polyhedron that cannot be unzipped.
Based on Fig.~24.14, p.370 in~\protect\cite{do-gfalop-07}.}
\figlab{heartsfan}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Open Problem: Conjecture}
This negative result for nonconvex polyhedra increases the interest in the open problem for convex polyhedra.
In~\cite{o2015spiral} I conjectured the answer is {\sc no}, but it seems
far from clear how to settle the problem.
For that reason, here we turn to a very special case.

\subsection{Convex Caps}
\seclab{ConvexCaps}
The special case is unzipping ``convex caps.''
I quote the definition from~\cite{o-eunfcc-17}:
\begin{quotation}
\noindent
``Let ${\mathcal P}$ be a convex polyhedron, and let $\phi(f)$  be
the angle the normal to face $f$ makes with the $z$-axis.
Let $H$ be a halfspace whose bounding plane is orthogonal to the $z$-axis, and includes points
vertically above that plane.
Define a \emph{convex cap} ${\mathcal C}$ of angle ${\Phi}$ to be $C={\mathcal P} \cap H$
for some ${\mathcal P}$ and $H$, such that ${\phi}(f) \le {\Phi}$ for all $f$ in ${\mathcal C}$. [...]
Note that ${\mathcal C}$ is not a closed polyhedron; it has no ``bottom,''
but rather a boundary ${\partial \mathcal C}$.''
\end{quotation}

\noindent
The result of this note is:
\begin{theorem}
For any ${\Phi} > 0$, there is a convex cap ${\mathcal C}$ that has no unzipping.
\thmlab{ZipCex}
\end{theorem}
\noindent
Because this holds for any ${\Phi} > 0$,
there are arbitrarily flat convex caps that cannot be unzipped.
(${\Phi}$ will not otherwise play a role in the proof.)

\section{Proof of Theorem~1}
\seclab{proof}
The convex caps used to prove the theorem are all variations on the cap
shown in Fig.~\figref{ZipCex3D}.
The base ${\partial \mathcal C} = (b_1,b_2,b_3)$ forms a unit side-length equilateral triangle in the $xy$-plane.
The three vertices $a_1,a_2,a_3$ are also the corners of an equilateral triangle,
lifted a small amount $z_a$ above the base.
In projection to the the $xy$-plane, the ``apron'' of quadrilaterals between
$\triangle b_1 b_2 b_3$ and $\triangle a_1 a_2 a_3$ has width ${\varepsilon} > 0$.
The vertex $c$, at height $z_c > z_a$, sits over the centroids of the equilateral triangles.
The shape of the cap is controlled by three parameters: ${\varepsilon}, z_a, z_b$.
Keeping ${\varepsilon}$ fixed and varying $z_a$ and $z_c$ permits controlling the
curvatures ${\omega}_a$ at $a_i$ and ${\omega}_c$ at $c$.
In Fig.~\figref{ZipCex3D}, ${\varepsilon}=0.1$
and $z_a,z_c = 0.02, 0.1$
leads to ${\omega}_a=1.9^\circ$ and ${\omega}_c=5.6^\circ$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/ZipCex3D}
\caption{A convex cap ${\mathcal C}$ that has no unzipping.}
\figlab{ZipCex3D}
\end{figure}

A typical attempt at an unzipping (of a variant of
Fig.~\figref{ZipCex3D}) is shown in Fig.~\figref{Layout_caaa}.
In general we will only display what are labeled $L$ and $R$ in this figure, rather
than the full unfolding.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{Figures/Layout_caaa}
\caption{An overlapping unfolding of a convex cap
(a variant of Fig.~\protect\figref{ZipCex3D})
from cut-path
${\gamma} =(c, a_2, a_3, a_1, b_1)$.
Compare Fig.~\protect\figref{Devel_caaa_linear_5_10} ahead.}
\figlab{Layout_caaa}
\end{figure}
From now on we will illustrate cut-paths and unzippings in the plane, starting
from Fig.~\figref{EqTris} (and not always repeating all the labels).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figures/EqTris}
\caption{Projection of Fig.~\protect\figref{ZipCex3D} to $xy$-plane.}
\figlab{EqTris}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Constraints on the cut-path}
\seclab{Constraints}
Any point $p$ in the relative interior of ${\gamma}$ (i.e., not an endpoint)
develops in the plane to two points $p'$ and $p''$,
with right and left incident surface angles ${\rho}={\rho}(p)$ and ${\lambda}={\lambda}(p)$.
If $p$ is not at a vertex of ${\mathcal C}$, then ${\lambda}+{\rho}=2\pi$.
If $p$ is at a vertex of curvature ${\omega}={\omega}(p)$, then ${\lambda}+{\rho}+{\omega}=2\pi$.
We will show the development ${\mathcal C}$ as cut by ${\gamma}$ by drawing two directed paths
$R$ and $L$, each determined by the ${\rho}$ and ${\lambda}$ angles,
which deviate by ${\omega}(v)$ at each vertex $v \in {\gamma}$.
The surface of ${\mathcal C}$ is right of $R$ and left of $L$
(see Fig.~\figref{Layout_caaa}), but not explicitly
depicted in subsequent figures.

The constraints on ${\gamma}$ to be an unzipping are:
\begin{enumerate}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\item ${\gamma}$ must be a path, by definition of unzipping.
\item ${\gamma}$ must start at one of the vertices $\{c,a_1,a_2,a_3\}$
and terminate on ${\partial \mathcal C}$.
\item ${\gamma}$ does not have to include any of the vertices $\{b_1,b_2,b_3\}$,
it just needs to exit ${\mathcal C}$ at some point of ${\partial \mathcal C}$.
\item ${\gamma}$ can only touch ${\partial \mathcal C}$ at one point, for if it touches at two
or more points, the unfolding would be disconnected into more than one piece.
\item Between vertices, ${\gamma}$ can follow any path on ${\mathcal C}$, as long as ${\gamma}$
does not self-cross, which would again result in more than one piece.
\item And of course, the developments of $R$ and $L$ must not cross in the plane,
for $R / L$ crossings imply overlap.\footnote{
The reverse is not always true: It could be that $R$ and $L$ do not cross, but
other portions of the surface away from the cut ${\gamma}$ are forced to overlap
by, for example, large curvature openings.}
\end{enumerate}

We think of ${\gamma}$ as directed from its root start vertex
to ${\partial \mathcal C}$; the path opens from the root to its boundary exit.
The main constraint we exploit is item~4: ${\gamma}$ can only touch ${\partial \mathcal C}$ at one point.
We will see that only by leaving ${\mathcal C}$ and returning could the unzipping avoid overlap.

Due to the symmetry of ${\mathcal C}$---in particular, the equivalence of $\{a_1,a_2,a_3\}$---there are only four combinatorially distinct possible cut-paths ${\gamma}$,
where we use $b$ to represent any point on ${\partial \mathcal C}$:
\begin{enumerate}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\item ${\gamma} = (c, a_1, a_2, a_3, b) = caaab$.
\item ${\gamma} = (a_1, c, a_2, a_3, b) = acaab$.
\item ${\gamma} = (a_1, a_2, c, a_3, b) = aacab$.
\item ${\gamma} = (a_1, a_2, a_3, c, b) = aaacb$.
\end{enumerate}
We abbreviate the path structure with strings $acaab$ and so on, with the obvious meaning.
It turns out that the location of $b$, the point at which ${\gamma}$ exits ${\mathcal C}$, plays
little role in the proof.

We will display the structure of ${\gamma}$ and the developments of $R$ and $L$
as in
Fig.~\figref{Path_acaa_linear}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Path_acaa_linear}
\caption{%
Left: path ${\gamma} = (a_1, c, a_2, a_3, b_3) = acaab$.
Right: $R$ and $L$ developed.
$\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}=\{5^\circ,10^\circ\}$.}
\figlab{Path_acaa_linear}
\end{figure}
Here ${\gamma}$ is shown following straight segments between vertices, and
the developments overlap substantially.
But as per item~5 above, ${\gamma}$ can follow potentially any
(non-self-intersecting) curve between vertices.
However, the developed images of the vertices are independent of the
shape of the path
between vertices, a condition we exploit in the proof.
So once the combinatorial structure of the cut ${\gamma}$ is fixed, the developed
locations of the vertex images are determined.
We will continue to use $\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}=\{5^\circ,10^\circ\}$ for illustration,
although any smaller curvatures also work in the proofs.

\subsection{Radial Monotonicity: Intuition}
\seclab{RM}
Before beginning the proof details, we provide the intuition behind it.
That intuition depends on the notion of a ``radially monotone'' curve,
a concept used in~\cite{o-ucprm-16} and~\cite{o-eunfcc-17}.
A directed polygonal chain $P$ in the plane with vertices $u_1, u_2, \ldots, u_k$ is
\emph{radially monotone with respect to $u_1$} if the distance from $u_1$ to
every point $p \in P$ increases monotonically as $p$ moves out along the chain.
$P$ is \emph{radially monotone} if it is radially monotone with respect to each
vertex $u_i$: concentric circles centered on each $u_i$ are crossed just
once by the chain beyond $u_i$.

If both the $R$ and $L$ developments are radially monotone, then $L$ and $R$
do not intersect except at their common ``root'' vertex, a fact proved in the
cited papers.\footnote{
There are some curvature bound assumptions to this claim that are not relevant here.}
This suggests that ${\gamma}$ should be chosen so that $R$ and $L$ are radially monotone.
However, if $R$ or $L$ or both are not radially monotone, they do not necessarily
overlap: radial monotonicity is sufficient for non-overlap but not necessary.
Nevertheless, striving for radial monotonicity makes sense.
The sharp turns necessary to span the vertices of ${\mathcal C}$
(visible in Fig.~\figref{Path_acaa_linear}) should be avoided,
for they violate radial monotonicity.
(Any angle $\angle u_{i-1}, u_i, u_{i+1}$ smaller than $90^\circ$ implies
non-monotonicity at $u_i$ with respect to $u_{i-1}$.)
Avoiding these sharp turns forces ${\gamma}$ to exit ${\mathcal C}$ before spanning the vertices.
Although radial monotonicity is not used in the proofs to follow,
it is the intuition behind the proofs.

\subsection{Lemmas~1,2,3,4}
\seclab{Lemmas}
Of the four possible types of ${\gamma}$, $acaab$ is the ``closest'' to being
unzippable, so we start with this type.

\begin{lemma}
For sufficiently small ${\omega}_a$, ${\omega}_c$, and ${\varepsilon}$,
any cut-path ${\gamma}$ of type $acaab$ must leave and reenter ${\mathcal C}$
to avoid overlap. Therefore, ${\mathcal C}$ cannot be unzipped with
this type of cut-path.
\lemlab{acaab}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have already seen in Fig.~\figref{Path_acaa_linear} that straight
connections between the vertices leads to overlap.
Fig.~\figref{RMlogic4frames}(a) repeats the set-up of that figure, with
added notation. Let $R_1,R_2,R_3$ be the portions of the
right development $R$ between vertices, and similarly for $L_i$.
We now imagine that $R_i$ and $L_i$ are arbitrary cuts between their vertex
endpoints. We concentrate on $R_3$ and $L_3$.

From the fact that the images of the vertices, and in particular, $a_2$,
are in their correct developed planar locations, we can derive
constraints on the shape of the $R_3$ and $L_3$ paths.
The shape of $R_i$ determines $L_i$ and vice versa, because for all
non-vertex points of ${\gamma}$, ${\rho}+{\lambda} = 2\pi$.
Thus $R_i$ and $L_i$ are congruent as curves, but rigidly rotated differently
by the curvatures along ${\gamma}$.

There are only two topological possibilities for $R_3$ and $L_3$
to avoid
crossing earlier portions of $R$ and $L$,
illustrated in Fig.~\figref{RMlogicTopology}.
In~(a) of the figure, $R_3$ passes right of $a''_2$ on its way
counterclockwise to $a'_3$, and
in~(b), $L_3$ passes right of $a'_2$ on its way
clockwise to $a''_3$.
The situations are analogous in the neighborhood of $a_2$,
and we concentrate only on the former more direct route.

Knowing that $R_3$ passes to the right of $a''_2$ determines the vector
displacement of the tightest possible prefix $(a'_2,a''_2)$ of $R_3$, but not the shape of that
prefix. This vector displacement forms an effective angle
$\angle c',a'_2,a''_2$ of much larger than the near-$30^\circ$ necessary
to stay on the narrow ${\varepsilon}$-apron.
Fig.~\figref{RMlogic4frames}(a) and~(b) show that this angle is
nearly $70^\circ$, well beyond $30^\circ$.
(And the angle is larger if $R_3$ passes further to the right of $a''_2$.)
This $70^\circ$ turn implies an effective surface angle ${\rho} = 290^\circ$ to the right of ${\gamma}$
on ${\mathcal C}$ at $a_2$, ``effective'' because the exact shape of ${\gamma}$ is unknown.
The exact angle and length of vector displacement depend on $\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}$,
but for any given curvatures, we can choose an ${\varepsilon}$ small enough so
that the prefix steps ${\gamma}$ exterior to ${\mathcal C}$.
Thus ${\gamma}$ must leave ${\mathcal C}$ to
avoid overlap before it completes its tour of the vertices.
Although this proves the lemma, we continue the analysis
below to reveal a deeper structure.
\end{proof}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/RMlogic4frames}
\caption{Analysis of ${\gamma}$ of type  $acaab$.
(a)~Opening at $a_1$ and $c$ causes $R_3 / L_3$ overlap.
(b)~$R_3$ bends around $a''_2$.
(c)~$L_3$ complements $R_3$, which again intersects $L_3$.
(d)~$L_3$ complements $R_3$. $R_3$ is following the arc centered on $x$.}
\figlab{RMlogic4frames}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{Figures/RMlogicTopology}
\caption{Possible paths from $a_2$ to $a_3$.
(a)~$R_3$ skirts $a''_2$.
(b)~$L_3$ skirts $a'_2$.}
\figlab{RMlogicTopology}
\end{figure}

Knowing this constraint just derived on the prefix of $R_3$, we
know $L_3$ must complement $R_3$ on that prefix,
which leads to Fig.~\figref{RMlogic4frames}(c).
Again there is an overlap intersection further along $R_3$. Altering $R_3$ to again bend around $L_3$
leads to Fig.~\figref{RMlogic4frames}(d).
Continuing this process of incrementally determining constraints on $R_3$ that
are mirrored in $L_3$,
leads to the conclusion that $R_3$ must follow (or be outside of) the arc of a circle
centered at $x$, where $x$ is the combined center of rotation of
the rotations at $a_1$ and at $c$.
This is why we can be sure the angle at $a_2$ is well beyond $30^\circ$
independent of $\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}$:
it is determined by (an approximation to) the tangent to this circle.
Finally, $R_3$ and $L_3$ are opened further by the curvature ${\omega}_a$ at $a_2$, which does
not alter the previous analysis.

Here we pause to discuss the ``combined center of rotation'' just used.
Any pair of rotations about two distinct points is equivalent to a single rotation
about a combined center. In our situation, the two rotations are
${\omega}_a$ about $a_1$ and ${\omega}_c$ about $c$.
For small rotations, they are equivalent to a rotation by ${\omega}_a+{\omega}_c$
about the weighted center
$$
x= \frac{ {\omega}_a a_1 + {\omega}_c c }{ {\omega}_a+{\omega}_c} \;.
$$
This point is indicated in Figs.~\figref{RMlogic4frames}(a) and~(d).
This result on combining rotations is proved in both~\cite{o2017addendum} and~\cite{barvinok2017pseudo}
(and likely elsewhere).

The above analysis suggests that ${\mathcal C}$ can be unzipped if the apron were large enough
to include the circle arc that ${\gamma}$ must follow from $a_2$ to $a_3$. And indeed
Fig.~\figref{Devel_acaa_arc_5_10} shows that this is true.
An interesting consequence of this unzipping is that,
even with a small apron, if we close the convex cap ${\mathcal C}$
by adding an equilateral triangle base to form a closed convex polyhedron ${\mathcal P}$,
then ${\mathcal P}$ does have an unzipping. Follow the path shown
in Fig.~\figref{Devel_acaa_arc_5_10}, and complete it by
extending ${\gamma}$ to cut $(b_3, b_1, b_2)$, leaving $b_2 b_3$ uncut. Then the
arc illustrated would lie on the unfolding of the base $\triangle b_1 b_2 b_3$.

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_acaa_arc_5_10}
\caption{An $acaab$ unzipping of ${\mathcal C}$ extending outside ${\partial \mathcal C}$.
Right: The $R$ and $L$ developments do not cross.}
\figlab{Devel_acaa_arc_5_10}
\end{figure}

We now turn to the other three types of cut-paths ${\gamma}$.
The proof for type $caaab$ is similar to Lemma~\lemref{acaab},
and so will only be sketched.

\begin{lemma}
For sufficiently small ${\omega}_a$, ${\omega}_c$, and ${\varepsilon}$,
any cut-path ${\gamma}$ of type $caaab$ must leave and reenter ${\mathcal C}$
to avoid overlap. Therefore, ${\mathcal C}$ cannot be unzipped with
this type of cut-path.
\lemlab{caaab}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The cut-path with straight segments overlaps at two spots in development,
as shown in Fig.~\figref{Devel_caaa_linear_5_10}
(cf.~Fig.~\figref{Layout_caaa}).
Using the same reasoning as in Lemma~\lemref{acaab},
except that the rotations are centered on $c$ (rather than on both $a_1$
and $c$), leads to the conclusion that $R_2$ and $R_3$ must both
deviate from the $30^\circ$ turn at $a_2$ and the $60^\circ$ turn at $a_3$
needed to stay on an arbitrarily thin apron. In fact, $R_2$ and $R_3$
must follow circle arcs centered on $c$.
Doing so would in fact allow ${\mathcal C}$ to be unzipped if apron were large enough, as shown
in Fig.~\figref{Devel_caaa_arcs_5_10}.
But for an arbitrarily thin ${\varepsilon}$-apron, ${\gamma}$ must exit ${\mathcal C}$ before visiting
all vertices, and so cannot be unzipped with this type of cut-path.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_caaa_linear_5_10}
\caption{The cut-path type $caaab$ leads to overlap with straight segments.}
\figlab{Devel_caaa_linear_5_10}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_caaa_arcs_5_10}
\caption{An $caaab$ unzipping of ${\mathcal C}$ extending outside ${\partial \mathcal C}$.
Right: The $R$ and $L$ developments do not cross.}
\figlab{Devel_caaa_arcs_5_10}
\end{figure}

The third type of cut-path, $aacab$ (Fig.~\figref{Devel_aaca_linear_5_10}),
is different in that not
even following arcs outside of ${\mathcal C}$ would suffice to unzip it without overlap.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_aaca_linear_5_10}
\caption{The cut-path type $aacab$ leads to $L / R$ overlap.}
\figlab{Devel_aaca_linear_5_10}
\end{figure}

\begin{lemma}
For sufficiently small ${\omega}_a$, ${\omega}_c$, and ${\varepsilon}$,
any cut-path ${\gamma}$ of type $aacab$ cannot visit all vertices
without overlap in the development.
Therefore, ${\mathcal C}$ cannot be unzipped with
this type of cut-path.
\lemlab{aacab}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We analyze the constraints on $R_2$ in
Fig.~\figref{RMlogic_aaca}.
The rotation at $a_1$ determines the prefix of $R_2$ following the same
reasoning as in Lemma~\lemref{acaab},
and again already in Fig.~\figref{RMlogic_aaca}(b) we have an angle
at $a_2$ much larger than the $30^\circ$ turn required to reach $c$.
This already establishes the cut-path cannot be an unzipping.
But in fact, it is clear that $R_2$ must follow the circle arc shown in
Fig.~\figref{RMlogic_aaca}(d), centered on $a_1$. Following this arc
makes it impossible for $R_2$ to reach $c$:
the path is forced toward $a_3$ instead.
\end{proof}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/RMlogic_aaca}
\caption{Analysis of ${\gamma}$ of type  $aacab$.
(a)~Opening at $a_1$  causes $R_2 / L_2$ overlap.
(b)~$R_2$ bends around $a''_2$.
(c)~$L_2$ complements $R_2$, which again intersects $L_2$.
(d)~$L_2$ complements $R_2$. $R_2$ is following the arc centered on $a_1$.}
\figlab{RMlogic_aaca}
\end{figure}

\noindent
The last combinatorial cut-path type, $aaacb$, mixes themes in the
others: first, ${\gamma}$ must go outside ${\mathcal C}$, which already establishes there
is no unzipping, and second, even if the apron were large enough, ${\gamma}$ cannot
reach $c$. We rely just on the first impediment.

\begin{lemma}
For sufficiently small ${\omega}_a$, ${\omega}_c$, and ${\varepsilon}$,
any cut-path ${\gamma}$ of type $aaacb$ cannot visit all vertices
without leaving and re-entering ${\mathcal C}$.
Therefore, ${\mathcal C}$ cannot be unzipped with
this type of cut-path.
\lemlab{aaacb}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fig.~\figref{Devel_aaac_linear_5_10} shows there is overlap when ${\gamma}$ is composed of straight segments.
By now familiar reasoning, the portion of ${\gamma}$ from $a_2$ to $a_3$ must follow a
circular arc centered on $a_1$. This is illustrated in
Fig.~\figref{Devel_aaac_arc_5_10}, and already steps outside
and ${\varepsilon}$-thin apron in the neighborhood of $a_2$, where it
makes an angle of approximately $90^\circ$ rather than the necessary $60^\circ$.
This establishes the claim of the lemma.
\end{proof}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_aaac_linear_5_10}
\caption{The cut-path type $aaacb$ leads to $L / R$ overlap with straight segments.}
\figlab{Devel_aaac_linear_5_10}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figures/Devel_aaac_arc_5_10}
\caption{The cut-path type $aaacb$ extends outside ${\mathcal C}$ on the $(a_2,a_3)$ arc
(and still $R$ crosses $L$ near $a_3)$.}
\figlab{Devel_aaac_arc_5_10}
\end{figure}

\medskip
\noindent
We restate Theorem~1 in more detail:

\setcounter{theorem}{0}
\begin{theorem}
Convex caps ${\mathcal C}$ with sufficiently small
$\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c, {\varepsilon}\}$, as depicted in Fig.~\figref{ZipCex3D},
have no unzipping: they are un-unzippable.
Thus there are arbitrarily flat convex caps that cannot be unzipped.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We argued that only four combinatorial types of cut-paths ${\gamma}$
are possible on ${\mathcal C}$.
Lemmas~\lemref{acaab}, \lemref{caaab}, \lemref{aacab}, \lemref{aaacb}
established that for sufficiently small
curvatures $\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}$ and a sufficiently thin ${\varepsilon}$-apron,
each of these cut-path types fails to unzip ${\mathcal C}$.
Because the arguments are independent of the exact values of
$\{{\omega}_a,{\omega}_c\}$, only requiring a sufficiently small ${\varepsilon}$ to match,
the claim holds for arbitrarily flat convex caps.
\end{proof}

\section{Discussion}
\seclab{Discussion}
It is tempting to hope that the negative result of Theorem~\thmref{ZipCex}
can somehow be used to address the open problem for convex polyhedra.
However, as mentioned earlier (Sec.~\secref{Lemmas}), closing the convex cap in Fig.~\figref{ZipCex3D}
by adding a base creates a polyhedron that can in fact be unzipped.
Perhaps this is not surprising, as the proofs rely crucially
on the fact that ${\mathcal C}$ has a boundary ${\partial \mathcal C}$.
I have also explored using several un-unzippable convex caps to tile
a closed convex polyhedron, but so far to no avail.
The open problem from~\cite{lddss-zupc-10}
quoted in Sec.~\secref{Introduction} remains open.

\newpage
\bibliographystyle{alpha}

Computational Geometry (cs.CG); Discrete Mathematics (cs.DM)

Un-unzippable Convex Caps