Michael Tepper
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Michael Tepper has a total of 3 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Lucien Szpiro
Ph.D. Program in Mathematics, CUNY Graduate Center, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10016-4309, USA
3 shared publications - Phillip Williams
Department of Mathematics The King’s College 56 Broadway New York, NY 10004, U.S.A.
2 shared publications Phillip Williams
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- 1 October 2013
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Algebra
- Vol. 397, 489-498
Semi-stable reduction implies minimality of the resultant
- 1 October 2013
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Algebra
- Vol. 397, 489-498
Semi-stable reduction implies minimality of the resultant
- Open Access
Semi-stable Reduction Implies Minimality of the Resultant
For a dynamical system on n-dimensional projective space over a number field or a function field, we show that semi-stable reduction implies the minimality of the resultant. We use this to show that every such dynamical system over a number field admits a globally minimal presentation.
Open AccessSemi-stable Reduction Implies Minimality of the Resultant
For a dynamical system on n-dimensional projective space over a number field or a function field, we show that semi-stable reduction implies the minimality of the resultant. We use this to show that every such dynamical system over a number field admits a globally minimal presentation.
- Open Access
Resultant and conductor of geometrically semi-stable self maps of the projective line over a number field or function field
We study the minimal resultant divisor of self-maps of the projective line over a number field or a function field and its relation to the conductor. The guiding focus is the exploration of a dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1, which bounds the degree of the minimal discriminant of an elliptic surface in terms of the conductor. We study minimality and semi-stability, considering what conditions imply minimality (Theorem 4.4) and whether semi-stable models and presentations are minimal, proving results in the degree two case (Theorems 4.6, 4.7). We prove the singular reduction of a semi-stable presentation coincides with the bad reduction (Theorem 3.1). Given an elliptic curve over a function field with semi-stable bad reduction, we show the associated Lattes map has unstable bad reduction (Theorem 3.6). Degree 2 maps in normal form with semi-stable bad reduction are used to construct a counterexample (Theorem 2.1) to a natural dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1. Finally, we consider the notion of "critical bad reduction," and show that a dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1 may still be possible using the locus of critical bad reduction to define the conductor (Theorem 4.10, Theorem 4.13).
Open AccessResultant and conductor of geometrically semi-stable self maps of the projective line over a number field or function field
We study the minimal resultant divisor of self-maps of the projective line over a number field or a function field and its relation to the conductor. The guiding focus is the exploration of a dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1, which bounds the degree of the minimal discriminant of an elliptic surface in terms of the conductor. We study minimality and semi-stability, considering what conditions imply minimality (Theorem 4.4) and whether semi-stable models and presentations are minimal, proving results in the degree two case (Theorems 4.6, 4.7). We prove the singular reduction of a semi-stable presentation coincides with the bad reduction (Theorem 3.1). Given an elliptic curve over a function field with semi-stable bad reduction, we show the associated Lattes map has unstable bad reduction (Theorem 3.6). Degree 2 maps in normal form with semi-stable bad reduction are used to construct a counterexample (Theorem 2.1) to a natural dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1. Finally, we consider the notion of "critical bad reduction," and show that a dynamical analog to Theorem 1.1 may still be possible using the locus of critical bad reduction to define the conductor (Theorem 4.10, Theorem 4.13).