Equality of orthogonal transvection group and elementary orthogonal transvection group

Abstract: H. Bass defined orthogonal transvection group of an orthogonal module and elementary orthogonal transvection group of an orthogonal module with a hyperbolic direct summand. We also have the notion of relative orthogonal transvection group and relative elementary orthogonal transvection group with respect to an ideal of the ring. According to the definition of Bass relative elementary orthogonal transvection group is a subgroup of relative orthogonal transvection group of an orthogonal module with hyperbolic direct summand. Here we show that these two groups are the same in the case when the orthogonal module splits locally.

\section{\large Introduction}

In Section 5 of \cite{SV} L.N. Vaserstein proved that first row of an elementary linear matrix of even size
(bigger than or equal to 4) is the same as the first row of a symplectic matrix of the same size w.r.t. an alternating
form. This result motivated us to prove that the orbit of a unimodular row of even size under the action of
elementary linear group is same as the orbit of a unimodular row of same size under the action of elementary
symplectic group (see Theorem 4.1, \cite{cr}); we also proved a relative (to an ideal of the ring) version of this result (see Theorem 5.5, \cite{cr}). Generalising this result in the setting of finitely generated projective modules
involving the transvection groups as defined by H. Bass,  we proved that
in the case of a symplectic module with a hyperbolic direct summand the orbits of any unimodular element from the
symplectic module, under the actions of elementary linear transvection group and the  elementary symplectic transvection group
coincide(see Theorem 6.1, \cite{cr2}).
While proving the above result on equality of orbits of unimodular
elements of symplectic modules, we observed that in the relative case to an ideal of the ring, the equality holds between the linear transvection
group and the elementary linear transvection group (see Proposition 4.10, \cite{cr2}).
We also noticed that in the
relative case to an ideal of the ring, the symplectic transvection group and the elementary symplectic transvection
group coincide (see Theorem 5.23, \cite{cr2}). In the absolute case
the  equalities for linear transvection group, symplectic
transvection group, and orthogonal transvection group  with the corresponding elementary transvection groups
were proved in \cite{bbr}. In view of the above results it  is  natural to ask whether the equality of orthogonal transvection group and elementary orthogonal
transvection group holds in the relative case to an ideal of the ring.
In this article we prove the equality of these two groups in the case when the orthogonal module splits locally.

\section{\large Preliminaries}

\medskip
In this article we will always assume that $R$ is a commutative ring with unit.
A row ${ v} = (v_{1}, \ldots, v_{n}) \in R^{n}$ is said to be {\it
  unimodular} if there are elements $w_{1}, \ldots, w_{n}$ in $R$ such
that $v_{1}w_{1} + \cdots + v_{n}w_{n} = 1$. Um$_{n}(R)$ will denote
the set of all unimodular rows ${ v} \in R^{n}$. Let $I$ be an ideal
in $R$. We denote by ${\rm Um}_n(R, I)$ the set of all unimodular rows
of length $n$ which are congruent to $e_1 = (1, 0, \ldots, 0)$ modulo
$I$. (If $I = R$, then ${\rm Um}_n(R, I)$ is ${\rm Um}_n(R)$).

\begin{de} {\rm Let $P$ be a finitely generated projective $R$-module.
An element $p \in P$ is said to be {\it unimodular} if there exists a
$R$-linear map $\phi: P \to R$ such that $\phi(p)=1$. The collection
of unimodular elements of $P$ is denoted by ${\rm Um}(P)$.

Let $P$ be of the form $R \oplus Q$ and have an element of the form
$(1,0)$ which correspond to the unimodular element. An element $(a,q)
\in P$ is said to be {\it relative unimodular} w.r.t. an ideal $I$ of
$R$ if $(a,q)$ is unimodular and $(a,q)$ is congruent to $(1,0)$
modulo $IP$.  The collection of all relative unimodular elements
w.r.t. an ideal $I$ is denoted by ${\rm Um}(P,IP)$.  }
\end{de}

Let us recall that if $M$ is a finitely presented $R$-module and $S$
is a multiplicative set of $R$, then $S^{-1} {\rm Hom}_R(M,R) \cong
{\rm Hom}_{R_S}(M_S, R_S)$ (Theorem 2.13", Chapter I, \cite{lam}).
Also recall that if $f=(f_1, \ldots,
f_n)\in R^n := M$, then $\Theta_M(f)=\{ \phi(f): \phi \in {\rm
  Hom}(M,R) \}= \sum_{i=1}^n Rf_i$. Therefore, if $P$ is a finitely
generated projective $R$-module of rank $n$, $\mathfrak{m}$ is a maximal ideal
of $R$ and $v\in {\rm Um}(P)$, then $v_\mathfrak{m} \in {\rm Um}_n(R_\mathfrak{m})$. Similarly if
$v \in {\rm Um}(P,IP)$ then $v_\mathfrak{m} \in {\rm Um}_n(R_\mathfrak{m}, I_\mathfrak{m})$.

\begin{de} {\bf Elementary Linear Group:}
{\rm Elementary linear group E$_{n}(R)$ denote the subgroup of SL$_{n}(R)$ consisting of all
{\it elementary} matrices, i.e. those matrices which are a finite
product of the {\it elementary generators} E$_{ij}(\lambda) = I_{n} +
e_{ij}(\lambda)$, $1 \leq i \neq j \leq n$, $\lambda \in R$, where
$e_{ij}(\lambda) \in$ M$_{n}(R)$ has an entry $\lambda$ in its $(i,
j)$-th position and zeros elsewhere.}
\end{de}

In the sequel, if $\alpha$ denotes an $m \times n$ matrix, then we let
$\alpha^t$ denote its {\it transpose} matrix. This is of course an
$n\times m$ matrix. However, we will mostly be working with square
matrices, or rows and columns.

\begin{de} {\bf The Relative Groups E$_n(I)$, E$_n(R,I)$:} {\rm Let $I$ be
  an ideal of $R$. The relative elementary linear group {\rm E}$_n(I)$ is the
  subgroup of {\rm E}$_n(R)$ generated as a group by the elements {\rm
    E}$_{ij}(x)$, $x \in I$, $1 \leq i \neq j \leq n$.

  The relative elementary linear group ${\rm E}_n(R, I)$ is the normal
  closure of {\rm E}$_n(I)$ in {\rm E}$_n(R)$.

$($Equivalently, ${\rm E}_n(R, I)$ is generated as a group by ${\rm
    E}_{ij}(a) {\rm E}_{ji}(x)$E$_{ij}(-a)$,\textnormal} \newcommand{\longrightarrow}{\longrightarrow{ with} $a \in R$, $x
  \in I$, $i \neq j$, provided $n \geq 3$ {\rm (see \cite{V3}, Lemma 8)}$)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm E$_n^1(R, I)$ is the subgroup of ${\rm E}_n(R)$ generated by the
  elements of the form $E_{1i}(a)$ and $E_{j1}(x)$, where $a \in R, x
  \in I$, and $2 \le i, j \le n$.  }
\end{de}

\begin{rmk} \label{unimodularOverLocalRing}
It is easy to check that if $v \in {\rm Um}_n(R,I)$, where $(R, \mathfrak{m})$ is a
local ring and $I$ be an ideal of $R$, then $v = e_1 \beta$, for some
$\beta \in {\rm E}_n(R,I)$.
\end{rmk}

\begin{de} {\bf Orthogonal Group:} {\rm The orthogonal group ${\rm O}_{2n}(R)$
with respect to the standard symmetric matrix $\widetilde {\psi}_n = \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}\sum}
  e_{2i-1,2i} + \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}\sum} e_{2i,2i-1}$ is the collection
$\{\alpha \in {\rm GL}_{2n}(R)\,\,|\,\, \alpha^t \widetilde{\psi}_n
  \alpha = \widetilde{\psi}_n \}$. For an ideal $I$ of $R$, ${\rm O}_{2n}(R, I)$
  represents the kernel of the natural map ${\rm O}_{2n}(R) \longrightarrow {\rm O}_{2n}(R/I)$.}
\end{de}

\textnormal} \newcommand{\longrightarrow}{\longrightarrow{Let $\sigma$ denote the permutation of the natural numbers $\{1, 2, \ldots, 2n \}$ given
  by $\sigma(2i)=2i-1$ and $\sigma(2i-1)=2i$}.

\begin{de} \label{2.4} {\bf Elementary Orthogonal Group:}
{\rm As in \S 2 of \cite{SK} we define for $z \in R$, $1\le i\ne j\le 2n$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
oe_{ij}(z) =  1_{2n} + z e_{ij} - z e_{\sigma (j) \sigma (i)} & {\rm if} ~ i\ne \sigma(j).
\end{eqnarray*}

It is easy to check that all these elements belong to O$_{2n}(R)$.
We call them {\it elementary orthogonal matrices} with respect to the standard
symmetric matrix $\widetilde{\psi}_n$ over $R$ and the
subgroup of {\rm O}$_{2n}(R)$ generated by them is called the
elementary orthogonal group {\rm EO}$_{2n}(R)$ with respect to the standard
symmetric matrix $\widetilde{\psi}_n$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de} {\bf The Relative Group EO$_{2n}(I)$, EO$_{2n}(R,I)$:}
{\rm Let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. The relative elementary group ${\rm EO}_{2n}(I)$
is the subgroup ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R)$ generated as a group by the elements
$oe_{i j}(x), x \in I$ and $1 \le i \ne j \le 2n$.

The relative elementary group ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R, I)$ is the normal closure of
${\rm EO}_{2n}(I)$ in ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{lem} \label{equiv-defn}
${\rm EO}_{2n}(R, I)$ is  generated as a group by the elements of the form $g ~oe_{ij}(x) g^{-1}$, where
$g \in {\rm EO}_{2n}(R), x \in I$, and either $i=1$ or $j=1$.
\end{lem}

Proof: An element of the form $g ~oe_{ij}(x) g^{-1} \in {\rm EO}_{2n}(R, I)$, where
$g \in {\rm EO}_{2n}(R), x \in I$, and either $i=1$ or $j=1$. Consider an elementary generator
$oe_{kl}(a) oe_{ij}(x) oe_{kl}(-a)$ of
${\rm EO}_{2n}(R, I)$, where $a \in R, x \in I$, and $i, j \ne 1$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& oe_{kl}(a) oe_{ij}(x) oe_{kl}(-a)\\
&=& ^{oe_{kl}(a)} [oe_{i1}(x), oe_{1j}(1)] \\
&=& ^{oe_{kl}(a)} \{ oe_{i1}(x) ~  oe_{1j}(1) ~  oe_{i1}(-x) ~  oe_{1j}(-1) \} \\
&=& ^{oe_{kl}(a)} oe_{i1}(x)  ^{oe_{kl}(a)} \{ oe_{1j}(1) ~  oe_{i1}(-x) ~  oe_{1j}(-1) \}
\end{eqnarray*}
and hence the lemma follows.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{de}\label{defn-EO^1}
  {\rm The group ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R,I)$ is the subgroup of ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R)$
  generated by the elements of the form $oe_{1 i}(a)$ and $oe_{j
    1}(x)$, where $a \in R$, $x \in I$ and $3 \le i, j \le 2n$.}
\end{de}

In the following two lemmas we obtain some useful facts regarding elementary
orthogonal groups. An analogous result in the linear case was proved in
\cite{vdK1} and in the symplectic case was proved in the Appendix
of \cite{cr2}.

\begin{lem} \label{subset}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring and $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Then ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R, I)
\subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$, for $n \ge 3$.
\end{lem}

Proof: Let us define $S_{ij} = \{ oe_{ij}(a) oe_{ji}(x) oe_{ij}(-a) : a \in R, x \in I \}$. It suffices
to show that ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$ contains the set $S_{ij}$ for all $1 \le i \ne j \le 2n$.
Note that $S_{ij} = S_{\sigma(j) \sigma(i)}$ and
$S_{1j} \subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$, for $3 \le j \le 2n$. First we state the following
identities
\begin{align}\label{commprop}
[gh,k] &~ = ~ \big({}^g[h,k]\big)[g,k],\\
[g,hk] &~ = ~ [g,h]\big({}^h[g,k]\big),\\
{}^g[h,k] &~ = ~ [{}^gh,{}^gk],
\end{align}
where $^gh$ denotes $ghg^{-1}$ and $[g,h]=ghg^{-1}h^{-1}$. Using these
identities and the commutator law $[oe_{ik}(a), oe_{kj}(b)] = oe_{ij}(ab)$
we establish the inclusion.

Note that $oe_{1j}(x), oe_{i1}(x) \in {\rm EO}_{2n}^{1}(R,I)$, for $3 \le
i,j \le 2n$ and $x \in I$. For $3 \le i,j \le 2n$ and $x \in I$, we have $oe_{ij}(x) = [oe_{i1}(x),
  oe_{1j}(1)] \in {\rm EO}_{2n}^{1}(R,I)$. In
      the following computation we will express the generators of
      $S_{ij}$ in terms of $oe_{i1}(x)$ or $oe_{1j}(a)$, where $x \in
      I, a \in R $. Also, note that we will use $\circledast$ to represent
      elements of ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$.

\begin{eqnarray*}
^{oe_{ij}(a)} oe_{ij}(x) &=& ^{oe_{ij}(a)} [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2i}(x)] \\
&=& [oe_{i2}(a) oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2i}(x) oe_{2j}(ax)] \\
&=& ^{oe_{i2}(a)} [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2i}(x) oe_{2j}(ax)] [oe_{i2}(a), oe_{2i}(x) oe_{2j}(ax)] \\
&=& ^{oe_{i2}(a)} [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2i}(x)] ^{oe_{i2}(a) oe_{2i}(x)} [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2j}(ax)] \\
&&  [oe_{i2}(a), oe_{2i}(x)] oe_{2j}(a^2x^2) oe_{2i}(x) \\
&=& ^{oe_{i2}(a)} oe_{ji}(x) ^{oe_{i2}(a)}[oe_{j2}(1) oe_{ji}(-x), oe_{2j}(ax)]  ~ \circledast\\
&=& \circledast ~ [oe_{j2}(1) oe_{ji}(x) oe_{j2}(ax), oe_{ij}(a^2x) oe_{2j}(ax)] ~ \circledast\\
&=& \circledast  ~ ^{oe_{j2}(1)} [oe_{ji}(x) oe_{j2}(ax), oe_{ij}(a^2x) oe_{2j}(ax)] \\
&& [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{ij}(a^2x) oe_{2j}(ax)] ~ \circledast \\
&=& \circledast ~ [oe_{ij}(x) oe_{j2}(ax), oe_{ij}(a^2x) oe_{i2}(-a^2x) ^{oe_{j2}(1)} oe_{2j}(ax)] \\
&& oe_{i2}(-a^2x) ^{oe_{ij}(a^2 x^2)} [oe_{j2}(1), oe_{2j}(ax)] ~ \circledast
\end{eqnarray*}

Since $S_{i2}, S_{j2} \subseteq
{\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R,I)$, therefore $S_{ij} \subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$, for $3 \le i, j \le 2n$. Similarly $S_{ik},
S_{1k} \subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$ will imply that $S_{i1} \subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I)$, for $3 \le i \le 2n$.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{pr} \label{vanderk1}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring and let $I$ be an
ideal of $R$. Then for $n \ge 3$ the following sequence is exact

\[ 1 \longrightarrow {\rm EO}_{2n}(R,I) \longrightarrow {\rm EO}^1_{2n}(R,I) \longrightarrow {\rm EO}^1_{2n}(R/I,0) \longrightarrow 1. \]

Thus ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R,I)$ equals ${\rm EO}^1_{2n}(R,I) \cap {\rm O}_{2n}(R,I)$.
\end{pr}

Proof: Let $f : {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R, I) \longrightarrow {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R/I, 0)$. Note that
$\ker(f) = {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R,I) \cap {\rm O}_{2n}(R,I)$. We shall prove that $\ker(f) = {\rm EO}_{2n}(R,I)$.
Let $E = \prod_{k=1}^r
oe_{j_k 1}(x_k) oe_{1i_k}(a_k)$ be an element in the $\ker(f)$ and $E$ can be
written as $oe_{j_1 1}(x_1) \prod_{k=2}^r \gamma_k oe_{j_k 1}(x_k)
\gamma_k^{-1}$, where $\gamma_l$ is equal to
$\prod_{k=1}^{l-1}~oe_{1i_k}(a_k) \in {\rm EO}_{2n}(R)$, and hence $\ker(f)
\subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}(R,I)$.  The reverse inclusion follows from the fact
that ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R,I) \subseteq {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R,I)$ (see Lemma \ref{subset}).
\hfill{$\square$}

\section{{\large Local Global Principle for Relative Elementary Group}}

In this section we prove Lemma \ref{ness4-E1} and Lemma \ref{E1-dil-strong} which will be used in proving the main result in the final section.
In Lemma \ref{E1-dil-strong} we obtain the Local-Global Principle for an extended
ideal for slightly larger group EO$_{2n}^1(R,I)$ than the relative group EO$_{2n}(R, I)$. This group was introduced in the linear case
by W. van der Kallen in \cite{vdK1}.
The Local-Global Principle for an extended
ideal in the linear, orthogonal and symplectic groups was proved in \cite{acr}.

The line of arguments given in the proofs below closely follow that in the  Local-Global principle for an extended ideal in the symplectic case
in \cite{cr2}. However, as far as the the computational details are concerned, there are substantial deviations from \cite{cr2} in many steps.

\begin{lem} \label{ness4-E1} Let $R$ be a commutative ring and $I$ be an
ideal of $R$. Let $n \ge 3$. Let $\varepsilon =
  \varepsilon_1 \ldots \varepsilon_r$ be an element of ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R,I)$,
  where each $\varepsilon_k$ is an elementary generator.  If
  $oe_{ij}(Xf(X))$ is an elementary generator of ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R[X],I[X])$,
  then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varepsilon ~ oe_{ij}(Y^{4^r}Xf(Y^{4^r}X)) ~ \varepsilon^{-1}
&=& \prod_{t=1}^s oe_{i_t j_t}(Y h_t(X,Y)),
\end{eqnarray*}
where either $i_t=1$ or $j_t=1$ and $h_t(X,Y) \in R[X,Y]$, when
$i_t=1$; $h_t(X,Y) \in I[X,Y]$ when $j_t=1$.
\end{lem}

Proof: We prove the result using induction on $r$, where $\varepsilon$ is
product of $r$ many elementary generators. Let $r=1$ and $\varepsilon
= oe_{pq}(a)$. Note that $a \in R$ when $p=1$, and $a \in I$ when
$q=1$. Given that $oe_{ij}(Xf(X))$ is an elementary generator of
${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R[X],I[X])$. First we assume $i=1$, hence
$f(X) \in R[X]$.

{\it Case $($1$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(1,j)$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
oe_{1j}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1j}(-a) &=& oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)).
\end{eqnarray*}

{\it Case $($2$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(1, \sigma(j))$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
oe_{1 \sigma(j)}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1 \sigma(j)}(-a) &=& oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)).
\end{eqnarray*}

{\it Case $($3$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(1, k), k \ne j , \sigma(j)$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
oe_{1 k}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1 k}(-a) &=& oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)).
\end{eqnarray*}

{\it Case $($4$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(j, 1))$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& oe_{j 1}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{j 1}(-a) \\
&=&  ^{oe_{j1}(a)}  [oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)), oe_{kj}(Y^2)] \\
&=& [oe_{jk}(aY^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)), oe_{k1}(a Y^2) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2)] \\
&=& oe_{jk}(a Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{k1}(a Y^2) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2) \\
&& oe_{1k}(-Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{jk}(- aY^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{kj}(-Y^2) ~ oe_{k1}(-a Y^2) \\
&=& oe_{jk}(aY^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{k1}(a Y^2) ~ oe_{1k}(-Y^2X f(Y^4X)) \\
&& oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2) ~ oe_{1k}(-Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{kj}(-Y^2) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2) \\
&& [oe_{j1}(-aY), oe_{1k}(Y X f(Y^4X))] ~ oe_{kj}(-Y^2) ~ oe_{k1}(-a Y^2) \\
&=& [oe_{j1}(aY), oe_{1k}(YX f(Y^4X))] ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{k1}(aY^2) \\
&& oe_{1k}(Y^2X f(Y^4X))  oe_{1j}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) [oe_{k1}(-aY^4) oe_{j1}(-aY), \\
&& oe_{1k}(Y X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^3 X f(Y^4X))]  oe_{k1}(-a Y^2)
\end{eqnarray*}

{\it Case $($5$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(\sigma(j), 1))$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(-a) \\
&=& ^{oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(a)} [oe_{1k}(Y^2), oe_{kj}(Y^2X f(Y^4X))] \\
&=& [oe_{\sigma(j) k} (aY^2) ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2), oe_{kj}(Y^2X f(Y^4X))] \\
&=& oe_{\sigma(j) k} (aY^2) ~ oe_{1k}(Y^2) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{1k}(-Y^2) ~ oe_{\sigma(j) k} (-aY^2) \\
&& oe_{kj}(-Y^2X f(Y^4X)) \\
&=& oe_{\sigma(j) k} (aY^2) ~ oe_{1j} (Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{kj}(Y^2X f(Y^4X)) \\
&& [oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(-aY), oe_{1k}(Y)] ~ oe_{kj}(-Y^2X f(Y^4X)) \\
&=& [oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(aY), oe_{1k}(Y)] ~ oe_{1j}  (Y^4X f(Y^4X))\\
&& [oe_{\sigma(j) 1}(-aY), oe_{1k}(Y) oe_{1j}(Y^3X f(Y^4X))]
\end{eqnarray*}

{\it Case $($6$)$:} Let $(p,q)=(k, 1), k \ne j , \sigma(j)$. In this case
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& oe_{k 1}(a) ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) ~ oe_{k 1}(-a) \\
&=& oe_{kj} (aY^4X f(Y^4X)) ~  oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X)) \\
&=& [oe_{k1}(aY^2), oe_{1j}(Y^2X f(Y^4X))] ~ oe_{1j}(Y^4X f(Y^4X))
\end{eqnarray*}

Hence the result is true when $i=1$ and $\varepsilon$ is an elementary
generator. Carrying out similar calculation one can show the result is
true when $j=1$ and $\varepsilon$ is an elementary generator. Let us
assume that the result is true when $\varepsilon$ is product of $r-1$
many elementary generators, i.e, $\varepsilon_2 \ldots \varepsilon_r ~
oe_{ij}(Y^{4^{r-1}}X f(Y^{4^{r-1}}(X)) ~ \varepsilon_r^{-1} \ldots
\varepsilon_2^{-1} = \prod_{t=1}^k oe_{p_t q_t}(Y g_t(X,Y))$, where
either $p_t=1$ or $q_t=1$. Note that $g_t(X,Y) \in R[X,Y]$ when
$p_t=1$ and $g_t(X,Y) \in I[X,Y]$ when $q_t=1$.

We now establish the result when $\varepsilon$ is product of $r$ many
elementary generators. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \varepsilon ~ oe_{ij}(Y^{4^r}X f(Y^{4^r}X)) ~ \varepsilon^{-1}  \\
& = & \varepsilon_1 \varepsilon_2 \ldots \varepsilon_r ~ oe_{ij}(Y^{4^r}X f(Y^{4^r}X))
~ \varepsilon_r^{-1} \ldots \varepsilon_2^{-1} \varepsilon_1^{-1} \\
& = & \varepsilon_1 ~ \big( \prod_{t=1}^k oe_{p_t q_t}(Y^4 g'_t(X,Y)) \big) ~ \varepsilon_1^{-1}  \\
& = & \prod_{t=1}^k \varepsilon_1 ~ oe_{p_t q_t}(Y^4 g'_t(X,Y)) ~ \varepsilon_1^{-1} \\
& = & \prod_{t=1}^s oe_{i_t j_t}(Y h_t(X,Y)).
\end{eqnarray*}

To get the last equality one needs to repeat the calculation which was
done for a single elementary generator. Note that at the last line
either $i_t=1$ or $j_t=1$. Also, note that $h_t(X,Y) \in R[X,Y]$, when
$i_t=1$ and $h_t(X,Y) \in I[X,Y]$, when $j_t=1$
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{nt}
{\rm Let $M$ be a finitely presented $R$-module and $a$ be a
  non-nilpotent element of $R$. Let $R_a$ denote the ring $R$
  localised at the multiplicative set $\{a^i : i \ge 0 \}$ and $M_a$
  denote the $R_a$-module $M$ localised at $\{a^i : i \ge 0 \}$. Let
  $\alpha(X)$ be an element of ${\rm End}(M[X])$. The localization map $i:
  M \to M_a$ induces a map $i^*: {\rm End}(M[X]) \to {\rm End}(M[X]_a)
  = {\rm End}(M_a[X])$. We shall denote $i^*(\alpha(X))$ by $\alpha(X)_a$
  in the sequel.}
\end{nt}

We need the following two lemmas.

\begin{lem} \label{equal-auto}
  Let $M$ be a finitely presented $R$-module and $I$ be an ideal of
  $R$. Let $\alpha(X), \beta(X) \in
  {{\rm End}}(M[X],IM[X])=ker({{\rm End}}(M[X]) \longrightarrow {{\rm End}}(M[X]/IM[X]))$, with
  $\alpha(0)=\beta(0).$ Let $a$ be a non-nilpotent element in
  $R$ such that $\alpha(X)_a = \beta(X)_a$ in
  ${{\rm End}}(M_a[X],IM_a[X])$. Then $\alpha(a^N X)=\beta(a^N X)$ in
  ${{\rm End}}(M[X],IM[X])$, for $N \gg 0$.
\end{lem}

\begin{lem} \label{E1-dil-strong} Let $R$ be a commutative ring and
$I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $n \ge 3$. Let $a$ be a
  non-nilpotent element in $R$ and $\alpha(X)$ be in
  ${\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R_a[X],I_a[X])$, with $\alpha(0)=Id$. Then there exists
  $\alpha^*(X) \in {\rm EO}_{2n}^1(R[X],I[X])$, with $\alpha^*(0) = Id.$, such
  that $\alpha^*(X)$ localises to $\alpha(bX)$, for $b \in (a^d)$, $d
  \gg 0$.
\end{lem}

The proofs as in Lemma 3.3 in \cite{cr2} and in Lemma 3.4 in \cite{cr2} work verbatim for Lemma \ref{equal-auto} and Lemma \ref{E1-dil-strong} as above, respectively, and hence the proofs are omitted.

The following result was proved in \cite{acr}. We next apply Lemma \ref{E1-dil-strong} to record a different proof.

\begin{thm} \label{rel-dil-strong} Let $R$ be a commutative ring and
$I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $n \ge 3$. Let $a$ be a
  non-nilpotent element in $R$ and $\alpha(X)$ be in
  ${\rm EO}_{2n}(R_a[X],I_a[X])$, with $\alpha(0)=Id$. Then there exists
  $\alpha^*(X) \in {\rm EO}_{2n}(R[X],I[X])$, with $\alpha^*(0) = Id.$, such that
  $\alpha^*(X)$ localises to $\alpha(bX)$, for $b \in (a^d)$, $d \gg
  0$.
\end{thm}

Proof: Follows from Lemma \ref{vanderk1} and Lemma \ref{E1-dil-strong}.
\hfill{$\square$}

\section{\large{Orthogonal Modules and Orthogonal Transvections}}

In this section we prove Theorem \ref{eql-rel} which is the main result of this paper. We begin with a sequence of definitions.

\begin{de}
{\rm
Let $M$ be an $R$-module. A {\it bilinear form} on $M$ is a function
$\beta: M \times M \longrightarrow R$ such that $\beta(x, y)$ is $R$-linear as a function
of $x$ for fixed $y$, and $R$-linear as a function of $y$ for fixed $x$. The pair
$(M, \beta)$ is called bilinear form module over $R$. $\beta$ is called an {\it inner product}
if it satisfies non-degeneracy condition, i.e, the natural map induced by $\beta$
 from $P \longrightarrow P^*$ is an isomorphism. In this case
the pair $(M, \beta)$ is called inner product module over $R$. A bilinear form
or inner product $\beta$ is called {\it symmetric} if $\beta(x, y) = \beta(y, x)$, for all $x, y \in M$. An inner
product module $(M, \beta)$ will be called {\it inner product space} if $M$ is finitely
generated and projective over $R$.
}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm
An {\it orthogonal $R$-module} is a pair $(P,\langle , \rangle)$,
where $P$ is a finitely generated projective $R$-module of even rank
and $\langle , \rangle: P \times P \longrightarrow R$ is a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form.
This is also known as {\it symmetric inner product space}.}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm
Let $(P_1,\langle , \rangle_1)$ and $(P_2,\langle , \rangle_2)$ be
two  orthogonal $R$-modules. Their {\it orthogonal sum} is the pair
$(P,\langle , \rangle)$, where $P=P_1 \oplus P_2$ and the inner product
is defined by $\langle (p_1,p_2),(q_1,q_2)\rangle = \langle
p_1,q_1\rangle_1 + \langle p_2,q_2\rangle_2$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm There is a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form $\langle , \rangle$ on the
$R$-module $R \oplus R^*$, namely $\langle (a_1,f_1),
(a_2,f_2) \rangle = f_2(a_1) + f_1(a_2)$. The orthogonal module $R \oplus R^*$ with this
symmetric bilinear form is denoted by $\mathbb{H}(R)$ and called {\it hyperbolic plane}.
Note that $\mathbb{H}^n(R)$ is the orthogonal sum of $n$-copies of $\mathbb{H}(R)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm An {\it isometry} of an orthogonal module $(P,\langle , \rangle)$ is
  an automorphism of $P$ which fixes the bilinear form. The group of
  isometries of $(P, \langle , \rangle)$ is denoted by
  ${\rm O}(P)$.  }
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm
Let $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ be an orthogonal module. H. Bass defined
{\it orthogonal transvection}
of an orthogonal module $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ is an automorphism of the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tau(p) &=& p - \langle u , p \rangle v + \langle v , p \rangle u,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $u,v \in P$ are isotropic, i.e, $\langle u, u \rangle = \langle v, v \rangle = 0$
with $\langle
u,v \rangle=0$, and either $u$ or $v$ is unimodular. It is easy to
check that $\langle \tau(p), \tau(q) \rangle = \langle p, q
\rangle$, i.e, $\tau \in {\rm O}(P)$ and $\tau$ has an inverse $\sigma(p) = p + \langle u, p
\rangle v - \langle v, p \rangle u$.

The subgroup of ${\rm O}(P)$ generated by the orthogonal
transvections is called orthogonal transvection group and denoted by ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P, \langle , \rangle)$ (see
\cite{bass2} or \cite{HO}).  }
\end{de}

{\bf Now onwards $Q$ will denote $(R^2 \oplus P)$ with induced form
  on $(\mathbb{H}(R)~\oplus~P)$, and $Q[X]$ will denote $(R[X]^2 \oplus
  P[X])$ with induced form on $(\mathbb{H}(R[X])~\oplus~P[X])$.}

\begin{de} {\rm The orthogonal transvections of $Q=(R^2 \oplus P)$ of
the form
    \begin{eqnarray*}
      (a, b, p) & \mapsto & (a, b + \langle p, q \rangle, p-aq),
     \end{eqnarray*}
or of the form
    \begin{eqnarray*}
      (a, b, p) & \mapsto & (a + \langle p, q \rangle, b,  p-bq),
    \end{eqnarray*}
where $a, b \in R$ and $p, q \in P$,
are called {\it elementary orthogonal transvections}. Let us denote the first
isometry by $\rho(q)$ and the second one by $\mu(q)$. It can
be verified that the elementary orthogonal transvections are orthogonal
transvections on $Q$. Indeed, consider $(u, v) =((0,1,0),(0,0,q))$  to get
$\rho(q)$ and consider $(u, v)= ((1,0,0),(0,0,q))$ to get $\mu(q, \beta)$.

The subgroup of ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q, \langle , \rangle)$ generated by
elementary orthogonal transvections is denoted by ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,
\langle , \rangle)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de}
{\rm Let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. The group of {\it relative orthogonal
    transvections} to an ideal  $I$ is generated by the orthogonal
  transvections of the form $\sigma(p) = p - \langle u, p \rangle v +
  \langle v, p \rangle u$, where either $u \in IP$ or $v \in IP$. The group
  generated by relative orthogonal
  transvections is denoted by ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P,IP, \langle , \rangle)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{de} {\rm Let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. The elementary orthogonal
transvections of $Q$ of the form $\rho(q), \mu(q)$, where
$q \in IP$ are called {\it relative elementary
orthogonal transvections} to an ideal $I$.

The subgroup of ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q, \langle , \rangle)$ generated by
relative elementary orthogonal transvections is denoted by
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(IQ,\langle , \rangle )$. The normal closure of
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(IQ,\langle , \rangle )$ in
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q, \langle , \rangle)$ is denoted by
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle , \rangle)$.}
\end{de}

\begin{rmk} \label{free}
Let $P=\oplus_{i=1}^{2n} Re_i$ be a free $R$-module with $R=2R$.
The non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form $\langle,\rangle$ on $P$
corresponds to a symmetric matrix $\varphi$ with
respect to the basis $\{e_1, e_2, \ldots, e_{2n} \}$ of $P$ and we write
$\langle p, q \rangle = p^t \varphi q$.

  In this case the orthogonal transvection $\tau(p) = p - \langle u,
  p \rangle v + \langle v, p \rangle u$ corresponds to the matrix
  $(I_{2n} - v u^t \varphi  + u v^t \varphi)$ and the group generated by them
  is denoted by ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P, \langle , \rangle_{\varphi})$.

Also in this case ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q, \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi})$ will
be generated by the matrices of the form $\rho_{\varphi}(q) =
\Big( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & q^t \varphi \\ -q &
  0 & I_{2n} \end{smallmatrix} \Big)$, and $\mu_{\varphi}(q) =
\Big( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 0 & q^t \varphi \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 &
-q & I_{2n} \end{smallmatrix} \Big)$.

Note that for standard symmetric matrix $\widetilde{\psi}_n$ and for $q=(q_1, \ldots, q_{2n}) \in
R^{2n}$ with $q^t \widetilde{\psi}_n q = 0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{relatn5}
\rho_{\widetilde{\psi}_n}(q) &=& \prod_{i=3}^{2n+2} oe_{i1}(-q_{i-2}), \\
\label{relatn6}
\mu_{\widetilde{\psi}_n}(q) &=& \prod_{i=3}^{2n+2} oe_{1i}(-q_{\sigma(i-2)}).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{rmk}

In the following four lemmas we shall use the assumptions and notations in the
  statement of Remark \ref{free}.

\begin{lem} \label{kopeiko}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring with $R=2R$, and $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P, \langle, \rangle)$
be an orthogonal $R$-module with $P$ free $R$-module of rank $2n$, $n \ge 2$ and $Q= R^2
\oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$. If the symmetric bilinear form $\langle, \rangle$ correspond
(w.r.t. some basis) to  $\widetilde{\psi}_n$, the standard symmetric matrix, then ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,
\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}}) = {\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$.
\end{lem}

Proof: For proof see \S 2 of \cite{SK}.

\begin{lem} \label{free,psi} Let $R$ be a commutative ring with
  $R=2R$, and let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P, \langle, \rangle)$
be an orthogonal $R$-module with $P$ free $R$-module of rank $2n$, $n \ge 2$ and $Q= R^2
\oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$. If the symmetric bilinear form $\langle, \rangle$ correspond
(w.r.t. some basis) to  $\widetilde{\psi}_n$, the standard
  symmetric matrix, then ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,
  \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}}) = {\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$.
\end{lem}

Proof: We first show ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle ,
\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}})$ is a subset of ${\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$. An element of ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle ,
\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}})$ is of the form $T_1(q) T_2(s) T_1(q)^{-1}$, where $q \in R^{2n}$, $s \in I^{2n} (\subseteq R^{2n})$. Here $T_1$ and $T_2$ can be either of $\rho_{\widetilde{\psi}_n}$ or $\mu_{\widetilde{\psi}_n}$.
Using equations (\ref{relatn5}) and (\ref{relatn6}) we
show that either of the above elements belong to ${\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$,
 and hence ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}}) \subseteq
{\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$.

To show the other inclusion we recall that ${\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)$ is generated
by the elements $g ~ oe_{ij}(x) g^{-1}$, where $g \in {\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R), x \in I$, and
either $i=1$ or $j=1$ (see Lemma \ref{equiv-defn}). Using commutator
relation $[oe_{ik}(a), oe_{kj}(b)] = oe_{ij}(ab)$ and the
equations (\ref{relatn5}), (\ref{relatn6}) we can show that ${\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R,I)
\subseteq {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}})$, and hence
the equality is established.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{lem} \label{phi=phi*,ab}
Let $P$ be a free $R$-module of rank $2n$. Let $(P,\langle ,
\rangle_{\varphi})$ and $(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi^*})$ be two
orthogonal $R$-modules with $\varphi= \varepsilon^t
\varphi^*  \varepsilon$, for some $\varepsilon \in
{\rm GL}_{2n}(R)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi}) &=& \varepsilon^{-1} ~
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi^*}) ~ \varepsilon,\\
{\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q, \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) &=& (I_2 \perp
\varepsilon)^{-1}~ {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi^*}) ~ (I_2
\perp \varepsilon).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lem}

Proof: In the free case for orthogonal transvections we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
(I_{2n} - v u^t \varphi + u v^t \varphi) & = & \varepsilon^{-1} ~ (I_{2n} - \tilde{v} \tilde{u}^t \varphi^*
 - \tilde{u} \tilde{v}^t \varphi^*) ~ \varepsilon,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\tilde{u}=\varepsilon u$ and $\tilde{v} =
\varepsilon v$. Hence the first equality follows.

For elementary orthogonal transvections we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
(I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1} \rho_{\varphi^*}(q) (I_2 \perp \varepsilon) &=& \rho_{\varphi} (\varepsilon^{-1} q),\\
(I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1} \mu_{\varphi^*}(q) (I_2 \perp \varepsilon) &=& \mu_{\varphi} (\varepsilon^{-1} q),
\end{eqnarray*}
hence the second equality follows.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{lem} \label{phi=phi*,rel} Let $I$ be an ideal of $R$ and $P$ be
  a free $R$-module of rank $2n$. Let $(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi})$
  and $(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi^*})$ be two orthogonal $R$-modules
  with $\varphi= \varepsilon^t  \varphi^* \varepsilon$, for some $\varepsilon \in {\rm GL}_{2n}(R)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P,IP,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi}) &=&
\varepsilon^{-1} ~ {\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P,IP,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi^*}) ~ \varepsilon,\\
{\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) &=& (I_2 \perp
\varepsilon)^{-1} ~ {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi^*}) ~ (I_2
\perp \varepsilon).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lem}

Proof: Using the three equations appearing in the proof of Lemma
\ref{phi=phi*,ab}, we get these equalities.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{pr} \label{local-case,rel} Let $R$ be a commutative ring with
  $R=2R$, and let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P,\langle ,
  \rangle_{\varphi})$ be an orthogonal $R$-module with $P$ free of rank
  $2n$, $n \ge 2$ and $Q = R^2 \oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$. If $\varphi=\varepsilon^t  \widetilde{\psi}_n  \varepsilon$,
  for some $\varepsilon \in {\rm GL}_{2n}(R)$, then
  ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) =
  {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi})$.
\end{pr}

Proof: Using Lemma \ref{kopeiko}, Lemma \ref{free,psi}, and Lemma
\ref{phi=phi*,rel} we get,

\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) &=& (I_2
\perp \varepsilon)^{-1}~ {\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}})
  ~ (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)\\
  &=& (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1}~
  {\rm EO}_{2+2n}(R,I) ~ (I_2 \perp \varepsilon),
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) &=& (I_2 \perp
\varepsilon)^{-1} ~ {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}}) ~ (I_2
\perp \varepsilon)\\
&=& (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1} ~ {\rm EO}_{2+2n}(R,I)
~ (I_2 \perp \varepsilon),
\end{eqnarray*}
and hence the equality is established.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{de}
\rm{
An orthogonal module $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ over the ring $R$ is called {\it split} if there
exists a submodule $N \subseteq P$ such that $N$ is a direct summand of $P$
and such that $N$ is precisely equal to its orthogonal complement $N^{\perp} = \{ p \in P :
\langle p, n \rangle = 0 ~{\rm for~ all}~ n \in N \}$.

Moreover, an orthogonal module $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ over the ring $R$ is called {\it locally split} if
$(P_\mathfrak{m}, \langle, \rangle)$
is a split orthogonal $R_\mathfrak{m}$-module for every maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ of $R$.
}
\end{de}

\begin{lem} \label{split&free} (See Lemma 6.3, Chapter I in \cite{MH})
Let $R$ be a ring such that  every finitely generated projective module over $R$ is free. Then
an inner product space over $R$ is split if and only if it possesses a basis so that the associated
inner product matrix has the form $\big( \begin{smallmatrix} 0 & I \\ I & A \end{smallmatrix} \big)$.
If we also assume that $2$ is a unit in the ring, then every split inner product space has matrix
$\big( \begin{smallmatrix} 0 & I \\ I & 0 \end{smallmatrix} \big)$ with respect to a suitable basis.
\end{lem}

\begin{rmk} \label{localcase} In view of Proposition \ref{local-case,rel}
and above lemma, for any
    split orthogonal module $(P,\langle , \rangle_{\varphi})$ over a local
    ring $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ with $R=2R$, we have ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle,\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1
      \perp \varphi} ) = {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ, \langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1
      \perp \varphi} )$. Here $I$ is an ideal of the ring $R$.
\end{rmk}

Next we establish dilation principle for relative elementary orthogonal
transvection group.

\begin{lem} \label{rel-dilatn-ETrans_O} Let $R$ be a commutative ring
  with $R=2R$, and let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P,\langle ,
  \rangle)$ be an orthogonal $R$-module with rank of $P$ is
   $2n$, $n \ge 2$, and $Q=R^2 \oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$. Suppose that $a$ is a
  non-nilpotent element of $R$ such that $P_a$ is a free $R_a$ module,
  $(P_a, \langle, \rangle)$ is split orthogonal $R_a$-module,
  and the bilinear form $\langle, \rangle$ corresponds to the
  symmetric matrix $\varphi$ (w.r.t. some basis). Let
  $\alpha(X) \in {\rm Aut}(Q[X])$, with $\alpha(0) = Id$, and $\alpha(X)_a
  \in {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_a[X],IQ_a[X],\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp
    \varphi})$. Then, there exists $\alpha^*(X) \in
    {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X],IQ[X],\langle , \rangle)$, with $\alpha^*(0) =
  Id.$, such that $\alpha^*(X)$ localises to $\alpha(bX)$, for $b \in
  (a^d)$, $d \gg 0$.
\end{lem}

Proof: We have $P_a \cong R_a^{2n}$. Let $e_1, \ldots, e_{2n+2}$ be the standard basis of $Q_a$ with respect to which the bilinear form on $Q_a$ will correspond to $\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi$. Since $(P_a, \langle, \rangle)$ is a split orthogonal $R$-module with $R_a = 2R_a$, we have $\varphi = \varepsilon^t \widetilde{\psi}_n \varepsilon$, for some $\varepsilon \in {\rm GL}_{2n}(R_a)$ by Lemma \ref{split&free}. Therefore,
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_a[X], IQ_a[X], \langle, \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi}) = (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1} {\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R_a[X], I_a[X]) (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)$ by Lemma \ref{free,psi}, and Lemma
\ref{phi=phi*,rel}. Hence, $\alpha(X)_a = (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)^{-1} ~\beta(X)~ (I_2 \perp \varepsilon)$, for some $\beta(X) \in {\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R_a[X], I_a[X])$, with $\beta(0)=Id.$ By Lemma \ref{vanderk1} we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\rm EO}_{2n+2}(R_a[X], I_a[X]) &=& {\rm EO}_{2n+2}^1(R_a[X], I_a[X]) ~\cap  {\rm O}_{2n+2}(R_a[X], I_a[X]).
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence we can write $\beta(X) = \prod_t \gamma_t ~ oe_{i_t j_t}(X f_t(X)) ~ \gamma_t^{-1}$, where either $i_t =1$, or $j_t=1$, and $\gamma_t \in {\rm EO}_{2n+2}^1(R_a, I_a)$. Note that $f_t(X) \in R_a[X]$, when $i_t=1$ and $f_t(X) \in I_a[X]$, when $j_t=1$. Using Lemma \ref{ness4-E1} we get $\beta(Y^{4^r}X) = \prod_k oe_{i_k j_k}(Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m)$, with either $i_k =1$ or $j_k=1$. Note that $h_k(X,Y) \in R[X,Y]$, when $i_k=1$ and $h_k(X,Y) \in I[X,Y]$, when $j_k=1$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
oe_{1 j_k}(Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) &=& I_{2n+2} - (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) ~ e_1 ~ e_{\sigma(j_k)}^t  ~ \widetilde{\psi}_{n+1} \\
&& + (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) ~ e_{\sigma(j_k)} ~ e_1^t ~ \widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}, ~ {\rm for} ~ j_k \ge 3, \\
oe_{i_k 1}(Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) &=& I_{2n+2} - (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) ~ e_{i_k} ~ e_2^t ~ \widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}\\
&& + (- Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) ~ e_2 ~ e_ {i_k}^t ~ \widetilde{\psi}_{n+1}, ~ {\rm for} ~ i_k \ge 3. \\
\end{eqnarray*}

Let $\varepsilon_1, \ldots, \varepsilon_{2n}$ be the columns of the matrix $\varepsilon \in {\rm GL}_{2n}(R_a)$. Let $\widetilde{e_i}^t$ denote the column vector $(I_2 \perp \varepsilon) e_i$ of length $2n+2$. Note that $\widetilde{e_1}=e_1, \widetilde{e_2}=e_2$, and $\widetilde{e_i}^t = (0, 0, \varepsilon_{i-2}^t)$, for $i \ge 3$. Using Lemma \ref{phi=phi*,ab}  we can write $\alpha(Y^{4^r}X)_a$ as product of elements of the form
\begin{eqnarray*}
& I_{2n+2} - (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) \widetilde{e_1} \widetilde{e}_{\sigma(j_k)}^t  \left( \begin{smallmatrix} \widetilde{\psi}_1 & 0 \\ 0 & \varphi \end{smallmatrix} \right ) + (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m)  \widetilde{e}_{\sigma(j_k)} \widetilde{e_1}^t  \left ( \begin{smallmatrix} \widetilde{\psi}_1 & 0 \\ 0 & \varphi \end{smallmatrix} \right )& \\
&= \mu_{\varphi}((Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) \varepsilon_{\sigma(j_k) -2}), & \\
& I_{2n+2} - (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) \widetilde{e}_{i_k} \widetilde{e_2}^t  \left ( \begin{smallmatrix} \widetilde{\psi}_1 & 0 \\ 0 & \varphi \end{smallmatrix} \right ) + (-Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) \widetilde{e_2} \widetilde{e}_{i_k}^t  \left ( \begin{smallmatrix} \widetilde{\psi}_1 & 0 \\ 0 & \varphi \end{smallmatrix} \right ) & \\
&= \rho_{\varphi}(-(Y h_k(X,Y)/ a^m) \varepsilon_{i_k -2}), &
\end{eqnarray*}
 for $i_k, j_k \ge 3$. Note that $\alpha(Y^{4^r}X)_a \in {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_a[X, Y],IQ_a[X, Y],\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp
    \varphi})$, hence $\alpha(Y^{4^r}X)_a = id ~{\rm mod}~ (IQ_a[X, Y])$. Since $\rho_{\varphi}$ and $\mu_{\varphi}$ satisfy the splitting property $\rho_{\varphi}(q_1 + q_2) = \rho_{\varphi}(q_1) \rho_{\varphi}(q_2)$ and $\mu_{\varphi}(q_1 + q_2) = \mu_{\varphi}(q_1) \mu_{\varphi}(q_2)$, we get $\alpha(Y^{4^r}X)_a$ is product of elements of the form $T_1((Y f_k(X, Y)/a^m) \varepsilon_{p_k})  T_2((Y g_k(X, Y)/a^m) \varepsilon_{q_k}) \\T_1(-(Y f_k(X, Y)/a^m) \varepsilon_{p_k}) $, where $T_1, T_2$ are either $\rho_{\varphi}$ or $\mu_{\varphi}$, $f_k(X, Y) \in R[X, Y]$, $g_k(X, Y) \in I[X, Y]$, and $p_k , q_k \ge 3$.

 Let $s \ge 0$ be an integer such that $\widetilde{\varepsilon_i} = a^s \varepsilon_i \in P$ for all $i = 1, \ldots, 2n$. Let $d = s+m$. Therefore $\alpha((a^{d}Y)^{4^r} X)_a$ is product of elements of the form $T_1((a^d Y f_k(X, a^dY)/a^m) \varepsilon_{p_k})  \\T_2((a^d Y g_k(X, a^d Y)/a^m) \varepsilon_{q_k}) T_1(-(a^d Y f_k(X, a^d Y)/a^m) \varepsilon_{p_k}) $
  Substituting $Y=1$ we get $\alpha(a^dX)_a$ is product of elements of the forms
\begin{eqnarray*}
T_1(a^s f'_k(X) \varepsilon_{p_k})  T_2(a^s  g'_k(X) \varepsilon_{q_k}) T_1(-(a^m f'_k(X) \varepsilon_{p_k}).
\end{eqnarray*}

Let us set $\alpha^*(X)$ to be the product of elements of the forms
\begin{eqnarray*}
T_1(f'_k(X) \widetilde{\varepsilon}_{p_k})  T_2(g'_k(X) \widetilde{\varepsilon}_{q_k}) T_1(- f'_k(X) \widetilde{\varepsilon}_{p_k}).
\end{eqnarray*}
From the construction it is clear that $\alpha^*(X)$ belongs to ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X], IQ[X], \langle, \rangle)$, $\alpha^*(0)=Id.$, and  $\alpha^*(X)$ localises to $\alpha(bX)$, for some $b \in (a^d), d \gg 0$.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{lem} \label{LG-ETrans-rel} Let $R$ be a commutative ring with
  $R=2R$, and let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P,\langle , \rangle)$
  be a locally split orthogonal $R$-module with $P$ is of rank $2n$, $n \ge 2$,
  and $Q = R^2 \oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$.
  Let $\alpha(X) \in {{\rm O}}(Q[X])$, with $\alpha(0) = Id$.  If $\alpha(X)_\mathfrak{m} \in
  {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_\mathfrak{m}[X],IQ_\mathfrak{m}[X],\langle , \rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp
    \varphi_\mathfrak{m}})$, for each maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ of $R$, then
    $\alpha(X) \in {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X],IQ[X],\langle , \rangle)$.
\end{lem}

Proof: One can suitably choose an element $a_\mathfrak{m}$ from $R \setminus
\mathfrak{m}$ such that $\alpha(X)_{a_\mathfrak{m}}$ belongs to
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_{a_\mathfrak{m}}[X],IQ_{a_\mathfrak{m}}[X])$. Let us set $\gamma(X,Y) =
\alpha(X+Y) \alpha(Y)^{-1}$. Note that $\gamma(X,Y)_{a_\mathfrak{m}}$ belongs
to ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_{a_\mathfrak{m}}[X,Y],IQ_{a_\mathfrak{m}}[X,Y])$, and $\gamma(0,Y) =
Id$. From Lemma \ref{rel-dilatn-ETrans_O} it follows that $\gamma(b_\mathfrak{m}
X,Y) \in {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X,Y],IQ[X,Y])$, for $b_\mathfrak{m} \in (a_\mathfrak{m}^d)$, where $d
\gg 0$. Note that the ideal generated by $a_\mathfrak{m}^d$'s is the whole ring
$R$. Therefore, $c_1 a_{\mathfrak{m}_1}^d+ \ldots + c_k a_{\mathfrak{m}_k}^d = 1 $, for
some $c_i \in R$. Let $b_{m_i}= c_i a_{m_i}^d \in (a_{m_i}^d)$. It is
easy to see that $\alpha(X)=\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}\gamma(b_{m_i}X,T_i)
\gamma(b_{m_k}X,0)$, where $T_i = b_{m_{i+1}}X+ \cdots +
b_{m_k}X$. Each term in the right hand side of this expression belongs
to ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X], IQ[X])$ and hence $\alpha(X) \in {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X],
IQ[X])$.
\hfill{$\square$}

\medskip
We now establish equality of the orthogonal transvection group and the
elementary orthogonal transvection group (in the relative case to an
ideal) of a locally split orthogonal $R$-module
with $R=2R$. An absolute version of this result (i.e, when $I=R$)
was proved in \cite{bbr} (see Theorem 3.10). Before proving the main
result we establish a lemma
to show that orthogonal transvections are homotopic to identity.

\begin{lem} \label{ortho-trans-hom-to-identity}
Let $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ be an orthogonal $R$-module and $\alpha \in
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P, \langle, \rangle)$. Then there exists $\beta(X) \in
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P[X], \langle, \rangle)$ such that $\beta(1)=\alpha$ and
$\beta(0)=Id.$
\end{lem}

Proof: As $\alpha \in {\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(P, \langle, \rangle)$, it is
product of orthogonal transvections of the form $\tau$, where
$\tau$ takes $p \in P$ to $p - \langle u, p \rangle v + \langle v, p
\rangle u$, where $u, v \in P$
are isotropic with $\langle u, v \rangle = 0$, and either $u$ or
$v$ is unimodular. Define $\tau X$ as the map which takes $p \in P$
to either $p - \langle u, p \rangle vX + \langle vX, p \rangle u$ or
$p - \langle uX, p \rangle v + \langle v, p \rangle uX$. This choice depends on
whether $u$ is unimodular or $v$ is unimodular. Note that $uX$
represents $u$ {\it times} $X$ and $vX$ represents $v$ {\it times} $X$.
 Also, note that $uX, vX \in P[X]$. We set $\beta(X)$ to be the product of
elements of the form $\tau X$, whenever $\tau$ appears in the
expression of $\alpha$. Then $\beta(1)=\alpha$ and $\beta(0)=Id$.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{thm} \label{eql-rel} Let $R$ be a commutative ring with $R=2R$,
  and let $I$ be an ideal of $R$. Let $(P, \langle , \rangle)$ be a
 locally split orthogonal $R$-module with $P$ is of rank $2n$, $n \ge 2$,
 and $Q = R^2 \oplus P$ with the induced form on $\mathbb{H}(R) \oplus P$.
 Then ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle) = {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle , \rangle)$.
\end{thm}

Proof: We have ${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle,\rangle) \subseteq
{\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle,\rangle)$. We need to show other inclusion.
Let us choose $\alpha$ from ${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q,IQ,\langle,\rangle)$.  By
Lemma \ref{ortho-trans-hom-to-identity} there exists $\alpha(X)$ in
${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X],IQ[X],\langle,\rangle)$ such that $\alpha(1) =
\alpha$ and $\alpha(0) = Id$. Note that
${\rm Trans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],IQ_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],\langle,\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp
  \varphi_{\mathfrak{m}}}) = {\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],IQ_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],\langle,
\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp \varphi_{\mathfrak{m}}})$, for each maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$
of $R$ (follows from Remark \ref{localcase}). Hence $\alpha(X)_\mathfrak{m}$
belongs to
${\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],IQ_{\mathfrak{m}}[X],\langle,\rangle_{\widetilde{\psi}_1 \perp
  \varphi \otimes R_{\mathfrak{m}}[X]})$, for each maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ of
$R$. Therefore, $\alpha(X) \in
{\rm ETrans}_{{\rm O}}(Q[X],IQ[X],\langle,\rangle)$ (see Lemma
\ref{LG-ETrans-rel}). Substituting $X=1$ we get the result.
\hfill{$\square$}

\medskip
In closing we make Remark \ref{final-rmk} below
for which  we need the following elementary observation.

\begin{lem}  \label{local-split}
Let $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ be a split orthogonal $R$-module. Then $(P_\mathfrak{m}, \langle, \rangle)$
is a split orthogonal $R_\mathfrak{m}$-module for every maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$ of $R$.
\end{lem}

Proof: Let us consider an equivalent form of the definition of split orthogonal $R$-modules
as it is stated in \S 6, Chapter I, \cite{MH}. The orthogonal module $(P, \langle, \rangle)$ is
split if it is direct sum of two submodules $M$ and $N$ which are dually paired to $R$ by the
inner product,
\begin{eqnarray*}
M \stackrel{\cong}{\longrightarrow} {\rm Hom}_R(N,R), ~{\rm and}~ N \stackrel{\cong}{\longrightarrow} {\rm Hom}_R(M,R)
\end{eqnarray*}
and such that $N$ is self orthogonal, i.e, $\langle N, N \rangle= 0$. Tensoring with $R_\mathfrak{m}$ we get
$P_\mathfrak{m} = M_\mathfrak{m} \oplus N_\mathfrak{m}$.  Moreover, $P$ projective will imply both $M$ and $N$ are
projective and hence finitely presented ($M$ finitely presented means there exists an exact
sequence $R^k \longrightarrow R^l \longrightarrow M$, for suitable natural numbers $k,l$). Therefore, by
Proposition 2.13" in Chapter I, \cite{lam} we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
M_\mathfrak{m} \stackrel{\cong}{\longrightarrow} {\rm Hom}_{R_\mathfrak{m}}(N_\mathfrak{m}, R_\mathfrak{m}), ~{\rm and}~ N_\mathfrak{m}
\stackrel{\cong}{\longrightarrow} {\rm Hom}_{R_\mathfrak{m}}(M_\mathfrak{m},R_\mathfrak{m})
\end{eqnarray*}
Also, $N$ is self orthogonal will imply $N_\mathfrak{m}$ is self-orthogonal and hence
$(P_\mathfrak{m}, \langle, \rangle)$ is a split orthogonal $R_\mathfrak{m}$-module for every maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$
of $R$.
\hfill{$\square$}

\begin{rmk}\label{final-rmk} In view of the above lemma the result as in Theorem \ref{eql-rel} holds when
$(P, \langle , \rangle)$ is assumed to  be a split orthogonal $R$-module.
\end{rmk}

\medskip

\noindent {Acknowledgement:} The author thanks Department of
Science and Technology, Govt. of India for INSPIRE Faculty Award
[IFA-13 MA-24] that supported this work.


Enumerating Labeled Graphs that Realize a Fixed Degree Sequence

Abstract: A finite non-increasing sequence of positive integers $d = (d_1\geq \cdots\geq d_n)$ is called a degree sequence if there is a graph $G = (V,E)$ with $V = \{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ and $deg(v_i)=d_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$. In that case we say that the graph $G$ realizes the degree sequence $d$. We show that the exact number of labeled graphs that realize a fixed degree sequence satisfies a simple recurrence relation. Using this relation, we then obtain a recursive algorithm for the exact count. We also show that in the case of regular graphs the complexity of our algorithm is better than the complexity of the same enumeration that uses generating functions.

\section*{Introduction}

A finite non-increasing sequence of positive integers
$d_1\geq \cdots\geq d_n$ is called a \emph{degree sequence} if there
is a graph $(V,E)$ with $V = \{v_1,\ldots,v_n\}$ and $\deg(v_i)=d_i$
for $i=1,\ldots,n$. In that case, we say that the graph $G$
\emph{realizes the degree sequence} $d$.  In this article, in
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} we give a remarkably simple recurrence relation
for the exact number of labeled graphs that realize a fixed degree
sequence $(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$.  We also give an algorithm and a concrete
implementation to explicitly count three classes of labeled graphs for
a moderate number of vertices.

There is an extensive volume of research on the asymptotics of the
number of graphs that realize a fixed degree sequence. We refer the
reader to Wormald's excellent ICM lecture~\cite{Wormald18} for an
comprehensive survey, and references therein.  As for the exact number
of graphs that realize a fixed degree sequence, Read obtains
enumeration formulas in~\cite{Read59} and \cite{Read60} as
applications of Polya's
\emph{Hauptsatz}~\cite{Polya39,PolyaRead87}. However, Read himself
admits
\begin{quote}
  ``It may readily be seen that to evaluate the above expressions in
  particular cases may involve an inordinate amount of
  computation.''~\cite[Sect.7]{Read60}
\end{quote}
But we encountered no explicit complexity analysis of Read's formulas
in our search in the literature.  On the other hand, in~\cite{McKay83}
McKay writes explicit generating polynomials whose complexities can
readily be calculated, and in which coefficients of certain monomials
yield the exact number of different classes of labeled graphs. In
particular, he writes a generating polynomial (see
Equation~\eqref{eq:McKay}), whose computation complexity is
$\C{O}(2^{n^2/2})$, in which the coefficient of the monomial
$x_1^m\cdots x_n^m$ gives the exact count of labeled $m$-regular
graphs on $n$-vertices.

Our recurrence relation works for all degree sequences, but for those
degree sequences where there is a uniform upper limit $m$ for the
degrees, our algorithm has the worst-case complexity of
$\C{O}(n^{mn})$.  This means, in the specific case of $m$-regular
graphs we achieve a better complexity than generating polynomials.

While factorial-like worst-case complexity of the
enumeration~\eqref{eq:enumeration} may render practical calculations
difficult, the fact that it is recursive allows us to employ
computational tactics such as \emph{dynamic
  programming}~\cite{Bellman57,LewMauch07} or
\emph{memoization}~\cite{Michie68} to achieve better average
complexity.  We explore this avenue in our implementation given in the
Appendix.  To demonstrate of the versatility of our recurrence
relation and the resulting implementation, we tabulate the number of
$m$-regular labeled graphs, the number of labeled graphs that realize
the same degree sequence with binary trees, and the number of labeled
graphs that realize the same degree sequence with complete bipartite
graphs.

One can also read a given degree sequence $(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ as a
partition of $N = \sum_i d_i$.  The Erdős-Gallai
Theorem~\cite{ErdosGallai, Chodum:ErdosGallai} tells us when such a
partition is realizable as a degree sequence, or one can also use
Havel-Hakimi algorithm to decide whether the given partition is
realizable~\cite{Havel55,Hakimi62}.  Now, one can also use our
enumeration to decide whether given a degree sequence is realizable,
but admittedly, the Havel-Hakimi algorithm has a much better
complexity.

\subsection*{Plan of the article} We prove our recurrence relation,
analyze its complexity and compare it with generating functions for
regular graphs in Section~\ref{Sect:Enumeration}.  We present explicit
calculations we made in Section~\ref{Sect:Calculations}, and the code
we used performing the calculations in the Appendix.

\subsection*{Notations and conventions}

We assume all graphs are simple, labeled, and undirected throughout
the article.

\subsection*{Acknowledgments}

This article was written while the author was on academic leave at
Queen’s University in Canada from Istanbul Technical University. The
author would like to thank both universities for their support.

\section{Enumerating Graphs That Realize a Fixed Degree Sequence}
\label{Sect:Enumeration}

\subsection{The recurrence relation}

Assume $d=(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ is a non-increasing sequence of strictly
positive integers $d_i>0$.  Let us consider the trivial cases first:
It is clear that there is a single graph on the empty sequence
$\epsilon$: the empty graph.  Also, in case $n=1$, the only case for
which the sequence $(d_1)$ is realized by a graph is when $d_1=0$
which is excluded by our assumption. So, the count is 0 for all
$(d_1)$ for $d_1>0$.  We also exclude the case where the sum
$\sum_i d_i$ is odd since such sequences cannot be realized as degree
sequences because of the Hand-Shake Lemma.

We assume $n>1$ and the sum $\sum_i d_i$ is even.  If we consider the
vertex $x_n$ we see that it needs to be connected to exactly $d_n$
vertices in the set $\{x_1,\ldots,x_{n-1}\}$.  We need to consider the
set of all subsets of $\{x_1,\ldots,x_{n-1}\}$ of size $d_n$ to
enumerate all possibilities.  So, let $S$ be an arbitrary subset of
$\{1,\ldots,n-1\}$ of size $d_n$, and let $\chi_S$ be the
characteristic function of the set $S$.  Every graph in which $x_n$ is
connected to each vertex in $\{x_i\mid i\in S\}$ realizes the same
degree sequence
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:1}
  (d_1 - \chi_S(1),\ldots, d_{n-1} - \chi_S(n-1))
\end{equation}
if we remove $x_n$ and all the edges connected to $x_n$.  Let us write
$(d_1,\ldots,d_{n-1})\slash S$ for the sequence~\eqref{eq:1} after we
reorder the sequence in descending order and remove all 0's.  Let
$C((d_1,\ldots,d_n))$ be the number of graphs that realize the same
degree sequence $(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$.  Thus we obtain:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
  The total number of labeled graphs that realize the degree sequence
  $(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ satisfies the recurrence relation
  \begin{equation}
    \label{eq:enumeration}
    C((d_1,\ldots,d_n)) = \sum_{S\in\binom{\{1,\ldots,n-1\}}{d_n}} C((d_1,\ldots,d_{n-1})\slash S)
  \end{equation}
  where we write $\binom{X}{k}$ for the set of all subsets of size $k$
  of a set $X$.
\end{theorem}

\subsection{The complexity analysis}

In~\cite{McKay83} McKay writes a generating polynomial
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:McKay}
  f(x) = \prod_{1\leq i<j\leq n} (1 + x_i x_j).
\end{equation}
in which the coefficient of the monomial $x_1^{m}\cdots x_n^{m}$
yields the number of $m$-regular graphs on $n$-vertices.  If we assume
the complexity of the calculation is given by the number of
multiplications in the product, then the computational complexity of
the generating polynomial is $\C{O}(2^{n^2/2})$.

Let $d=(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ be a degree sequence, and let us use
$\# C(d)$ for the total number of summands (which is the number of
leaves in the recursion tree) in $C(d)$ in
Equation~\eqref{eq:enumeration} which will be the complexity measure
for our enumeration.

\begin{proposition}\label{prop:complexity}
  Assume there is a fixed upper bound $m$ for the degrees in $d$.
  Then the complexity of the enumeration given in~\eqref{thm:main} is
  $\C{O}(n^{mn})$.  In particular, the enumeration complexity for
  $m$-regular graphs is also $\C{O}(n^{mn})$.
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
  As long as $2m\leq n$, the function $\binom{n}{m}$ is increasing in
  $m$.  Then
  \begin{align}
    \label{eq:10}
    \# C((d_1,\ldots,d_n))
    = & \sum_{S\in\binom{\{1,\ldots,n-1\}}{d_n}}\# C((d_1,\ldots,d_{n-1})\slash S)\\
    \leq & \binom{n}{m} \max_{S\in 2^{\{1,\ldots,n-1\}}}\# C((d_1,\ldots,d_{n-1})\slash S)\\
    \leq & \cdots \leq \binom{n}{m}\cdots \binom{2m}{m} \max_{S\in 2^{\{1,\ldots,2m-1\}}} \# C((d_1,\dots,d_{2m-1})\slash S) \\
    \leq & \binom{n}{m}^{n-2m} C_m
  \end{align}
  for some constant $C_m$.  Since $m$ is fixed and $\binom{n}{m}$ is
  of order $n^m$ we get that the number of summands in
  $C((d_1,\ldots,d_n))$ is $\C{O}(n^{m(n-2m)}) = \C{O}(n^{mn})$.
\end{proof}

One can easily see that the enumeration complexity
of~\eqref{eq:enumeration} we obtained in
Proposition~\ref{prop:complexity} is better that the complexity of
generating polynomial for regular graphs.  However, we still have to
work around the fact that the worst-case complexity is factorial-like
with a constant exponent.  Fortunately, one can employ powerful
computational tactics such as dynamic programming or memoization to
improve average complexity of the enumeration since it is
recursive. See the Appendix for how we used memoization to improve
average complexity of our calculations.

\section{Explicit Calculations}
\label{Sect:Calculations}

Let us start with calculating an explicit example by hand. The degree
sequence of the complete graph $K_n$ on $n$-vertices is the constant
sequence $n-1$ of length $n$.  Since one has only one subset of
$\{1,\ldots,n-1\}$ of size $n-1$ we get that
\begin{align}\label{eq:13}
  C((\underbrace{n-1,\ldots,n-1}_\text{$n$-times}))
  = C((\underbrace{n-2,\ldots,n-2}_\text{$n-1$-times}))
  = \cdots = C((1,1)) = C(\epsilon) = 1.
\end{align}
In other words, the labeled complete graph $K_n$ is the only graph
with that specific degree sequence.

\subsection{Enumerating regular graphs}

An $m$-regular graph on $n$-vertices is similar to $K_{m+1}$ in that
it is a graph on $n$-vertices where every vertex has the same constant
degree $m$
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:3}
   (\underbrace{m,\ldots,m}_{\text{$n$-times}}).
\end{equation}
Now, let us write
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:4}
  R(n,m) = C((\underbrace{m,\ldots,m}_{\text{$m$-times}})).
\end{equation}
We need to note that $R(n,m)=0$ when $m\geq n$, or when both $n$ and
$m$ are odd since in these cases there are no graphs that can realize
the sequences given in~\eqref{eq:3}.

We calculated $R(n,m)$ for $1\leq n\leq 30$ and $2\leq m\leq 8$.  The
results for $1\leq m\leq 5$ took about 2 minutes while the cases for
$6\leq m\leq 8$ took about 10 minutes on a moderate
computer\footnote{On an Intel i5-8250U CPU working at 1.60GHz with 8Gb
  of RAM on a Linux operating system.}.  These calculations strongly
indicate the average complexity of the enumeration algorithm with
memoization is much better than the worst-case complexity.

We tabulated the results for $2\leq n\leq 15$ in Table~\ref{table:1}.
A smaller version of the tables can be found
at~\cite[pg. 279]{Comtet:AdvancedCombinatorics}, and as the sequence
A295193 at OEIS~\cite{OEIS}.  The individual sequences for
$m=1,\ldots,6$ in Table~\ref{table:1} are respectively the sequences
A001147, A001205, A002829, A005815, A338978 and A339847 at OEIS.

\begin{table}[t]
  \footnotesize
  \begin{tabular}{|r|l|l|l|l|l|}\hline
    $n$ & $m=1$ & $m=2$ & $m=3$ & $m=4$ & $m=5$\\\hline\hline
      2 & 1       &0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
      3 & 0       &1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
      4 & 3       &3 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
      5 & 0       &12 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\ \hline
      6 & 15      &70 & 70 & 15 & 1 \\ \hline
      7 & 0       &465 & 0 & 465 & 0 \\ \hline
      8 & 105     &3507 & 19355 & 19355 & 3507 \\ \hline
      9 & 0       &30016 & 0 & 1024380 & 0 \\ \hline
     10 & 945     &286884 & 11180820 & 66462606 & 66462606 \\ \hline
     11 & 0       &3026655 & 0 & 5188453830 & 0 \\ \hline
     12 & 10395   &34944085 & 11555272575 & 480413921130 & 2977635137862 \\ \hline
     13 & 0       &438263364 & 0 & 52113376310985 & 0 \\ \hline
     14 & 135135  &5933502822 & 19506631814670 & 6551246596501035 & 283097260184159421 \\ \hline
     15 & 0       &86248951243 & 0 & 945313907253606891 & 0 \\ \hline

  \end{tabular}

  \begin{tabular}{|r|l|l|l|l|}\hline
    $n$ & $m=6$ & $m=7$ & $m=8$ \\\hline\hline
    2 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    3 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    4 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    5 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    6 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    7 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
    8 & 105 & 1 & 0 \\ \hline
    9 & 30016 & 0 & 1 \\ \hline
    10 & 11180820 & 286884 & 945 \\ \hline
    11 & 5188453830 & 0 & 3026655 \\ \hline
    12 & 2977635137862 & 480413921130 & 11555272575 \\ \hline
    13 & 2099132870973600 & 0 & 52113376310985 \\ \hline
    14 & 1803595358964773088 & 1803595358964773088 & 283097260184159421 \\ \hline
    15 & 1872726690127181663775 & 0 & 1872726690127181663775 \\ \hline

  \end{tabular}
  \normalsize
  \vspace{2mm}
  \caption{The number of labeled $m$-regular graphs on $n$-vertices
    for $m=1,\ldots,8$.}\label{table:1}
\end{table}

\subsection{Enumerating graphs that realize the same degree sequences as
  binary trees}

Any binary tree with $k+1$-leaves will have $k-1$ internal vertices of
degree 3.  Thus any such tree has the degree sequence
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:5}
  (\underbrace{3,\ldots,3}_{\text{$k-1$-times}},\underbrace{1,\ldots,1}_{\text{$k+1$-times}}).
\end{equation}
Now, let
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:6}
  T(k) = \binom{2k}{k-1} C((\underbrace{3,\ldots,3}_{\text{$k-1$-times}},\underbrace{1,\ldots,1}_{\text{$k+1$-times}})).
\end{equation}
be the number of labeled graphs that has the same degree sequence
given in~\eqref{eq:5}.  Notice that we put a correction factor
$\binom{2k}{k-1}$ since in the original enumeration $C(d)$ vertices
are not allowed to change degree.  In the case of regular graphs, one
does not need a correction factor since every vertex has the same
degree.

Using our implementation of the enumeration algorithm we calculated
these numbers on the same setup we described above.  The results are
calculated almost immediately and they are given in
Table~\ref{table:3}.

\begin{table}[h]
  \footnotesize
  \begin{tabular}{{|r|l|}}\hline
    $k$ & $R(k)$ \\\hline\hline
1 & 1 \\\hline
2 & 4 \\\hline
3 & 90 \\\hline
4 & 8400 \\\hline
5 & 1426950 \\\hline
6 & 366153480 \\\hline
7 & 134292027870 \\\hline
8 & 67095690261600 \\\hline
9 & 43893900947947050 \\\hline
10 & 36441011093916429000 \\\hline
11 & 37446160423265535041100 \\\hline
12 & 46669357647008722700474400 \\\hline
13 & 69367722399061403579194432500 \\\hline
14 & 121238024532751529573125745790000 \\\hline
15 & 246171692450596203263023527657431250 \\\hline
  \end{tabular}
  \normalsize
  \vspace{2mm}
  \caption{The number of labeled graphs that realize the same degree
    sequence as any binary tree on $2k$ vertices.}\label{table:3}
\end{table}

In~\cite[pg.6]{Moon70} the number of labeled trees on $n$ vertices
that realize a fixed degree sequence $(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ is calculated
as
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:11}
  \binom{n-2}{d_1-1,\ldots,d_n-1}
\end{equation}
which is different than our calculations for the case
$(d_1,\ldots,d_n)$ given as~\eqref{eq:5}.  But note that Moon's
formula enumerates only trees that realize a particular degree
sequence while we count all graphs.

\subsection{Enumerating graphs that realize the same degree sequences as
  complete bipartite graphs}

We fix two positive integers $n\leq m$.  A complete bipartite graph
$K_{n,m}$ contains $n+m$ vertices which is split into two disjoint
sets, say black and white.  Black vertices are connected to every
white vertex and vice versa, but vertices of the same color are not
connected.  Any such graph would have the degree sequence
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:7}
  (\underbrace{m,\ldots,m}_{\text{$n$-times}},\underbrace{n,\ldots,n}_{\text{$m$-times}})
\end{equation}
Let us write
\begin{equation}
  \label{eq:8}
  K(n,m) =
  \begin{cases}
    \binom{n+m}{n} C((\underbrace{m,\ldots,m}_{\text{$n$-times}},\underbrace{n,\ldots,n}_{\text{$m$-times}})) & \text{ if } n\neq m\\
    C((\underbrace{n,\ldots,n}_{\text{$2n$-times}})) & \text{ if } n=m
  \end{cases}
\end{equation}
for the number of labeled graphs that realize the degree sequence
given in~\eqref{eq:7} for every $m\geq 2$ and $1\leq n\leq m$.  We
tabulated the results for $2\leq m\leq 10$ and $2\leq n\leq 6$ in
Table~\ref{table:4}.  The first column of Table~\ref{table:4} is
A002061 at OEIS.

\begin{table}
  \centering
  \footnotesize
  \begin{tabular}{{|r|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}}\hline
    $m$ & $n=2$ & $n=3$ & $n=4$ & $n=5$ & $n=6$ \\\hline
    2 & 3 & & & & \\ \hline
    3 & 7 & 70 & & & \\ \hline
    4 & 13 & 553 & 19355 & & \\ \hline
    5 & 21 & 3211 & 527481 & 66462606 & \\ \hline
    6 & 31 & 13621 & 10649191 & 6445097701 & 2977635137862 \\ \hline
    7 & 43 & 44962 & 153984573 & 466128461506 & 1051046246482968 \\ \hline
    8 & 57 & 123145 & 1601363093 & 24363074013321 & 277358348828368109 \\ \hline
    9 & 73 & 293293 & 12389057785 & 905113150135831 & 53355534127828683775 \\ \hline
    10 & 91 & 627571 & 74598011761 & 23985623638038361 & 7334781492338569314961 \\ \hline
  \end{tabular}
  \normalsize
  \vspace{2mm}
  \caption{The number of labeled graphs that realize the same degree
    sequence as the complete bipartite graph
    $K_{n,m}$.}\label{table:4}
\end{table}

\section*{Appendix: The Code}

Since or implementation is simple and short, we opted to list the code
we used to make our calculations here in an Appendix in
Figure~\ref{fig:1}.  This way, our results can be reproduced and
verified.

We implemented our enumeration using Common Lisp~\cite{Steel:CLTL} and
a suitable memoization to control the depth of the recursive
calls. However, due to efficiency issues of the data structures we
use, our degree sequences are non-decreasing instead of being
non-increasing.  We used SBCL version 2.0.11 to run the lisp
code~\cite{SBCL}.

Our enumeration calculation requires us to calculate a finite number
of shorter degree sequences in each call. When we employ memoization,
we use a global table of already calculated results. If an enumeration
on a shorter degree sequence is needed, and if the result is already
calculated for another branch of the recursive call we recall the
result instead of calculating it from scratch.

\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{lstlisting}
(defun subsets (k xs)
   (cond ((null xs) 'nil)
         ((= 1 k) (loop for x in xs collect (list x)))
         (t (union (subsets k (cdr xs))
                   (mapcar (lambda (x) (cons (car xs) x))
                           (subsets (1- k) (cdr xs)))))))
\end{lstlisting}
\begin{lstlisting}
(defun new-degree-sequence (ds is)
  (let ((ys (copy-list (cdr ds))))
    (dolist (i is) (decf (nth i ys)))
    (delete 0 (sort ys #'<))))
\end{lstlisting}
\begin{lstlisting}
(let ((table (make-hash-table :test #'equal)))
  (defun graph-count (ds)
    (cond
       ((null ds) 1)
       ((oddp (reduce #'+ ds)) 0)
       (t (or (gethash ds table)
              (setf (gethash ds table)
                    (let* ((index-set (loop for i from 0 below (1- (length ds))
                                           collect i))
                           (all-subsets (subsets (car ds) index-set)))
                       (loop for xs in all-subsets sum
                            (graph-count (new-degree-sequence ds xs))))))))))
\end{lstlisting}
  \caption{Common Lisp implementation of the enumeration algorithm
    given in Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.}\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}