A decomposition formula for the Bartholdi zeta function of a hypergraph covering

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.27134
• Title: A decomposition formula for the Bartholdi zeta function of a hypergraph covering
• Author: Kosei Watanabe (Nagoya University)
• Classification: math.CO (Combinatorics)
• Publication Date: October 31, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27134

Abstract

This paper generalizes the decomposition formula for the Bartholdi zeta function of graph coverings due to Mizuno and Sato to the case of hypergraph coverings. The decomposition formula demonstrates that the Bartholdi zeta function of a hypergraph covering can be factored as a product of Bartholdi L-functions of the base hypergraph, where these L-functions are associated with irreducible representations of the group.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem to be Addressed

This paper investigates the decomposition formula for the Bartholdi zeta function of hypergraph coverings. Specifically, given a base hypergraph H and its k-fold covering hypergraph H̄ (constructed via permutation voltage assignments), how can the Bartholdi zeta function of H̄ be expressed as a product of related zeta functions of H?

Significance of the Problem

1. Theoretical Value: Zeta functions are important invariants in graph and hypergraph theory, connecting combinatorial structures with algebra, number theory, and other fields
2. Unified Framework: Decomposition formulas provide a unified mathematical framework for understanding the relationship between covering structures and base structures
3. Computational Significance: Through decomposition formulas, the computation of zeta functions for complex covering hypergraphs can be transformed into multiple simpler computations on the base hypergraph

Limitations of Existing Methods

• Research on Ihara Zeta Functions: Decomposition formulas for Ihara zeta functions of graph and hypergraph coverings already exist (Stark-Terras, Mizuno-Sato, Li-Hou, Saito-Sato, etc.)
• Limitations on Bartholdi Zeta Functions:
  • Mizuno-Sato (2003) provided a decomposition formula for Bartholdi zeta functions of graph coverings
  • Saito-Sato (2013) studied hypergraph coverings using regular voltage assignments
  • Missing Link: The decomposition formula for Bartholdi zeta functions of hypergraph coverings using permutation voltage assignments has not been established

Research Motivation

Li and Hou (2018) have already provided a decomposition formula for Ihara zeta functions of hypergraph coverings using permutation voltage assignments. The natural question is whether this can be generalized to the more general Bartholdi zeta function. This paper fills this theoretical gap.

Core Contributions

1. Main Theorem (Theorem 1.2/4.21): Establishes the decomposition formula for Bartholdi zeta functions of hypergraph coverings: $\zeta(\bar{H}, u, t) = \prod_{i=1}^{s} \zeta(H, \rho_i, \phi, u, t)^{m_i}$ where $\rho_i$ are irreducible representations of the group Γ and $m_i$ are their multiplicities in the permutation representation
2. Technical Theorem (Theorem 4.1): Provides a determinant expression form of the decomposition formula, generalizing the result of Li-Hou
3. Hashimoto Expression (Proposition 4.10, 4.19): Establishes a Hashimoto-type determinant expression for Bartholdi L-functions
4. Complete Theoretical Framework: Provides a complete mathematical theory from hypergraph coverings to the decomposition of their zeta functions, including complete proofs of all necessary lemmas
5. Concrete Example (Example 4.22): Verifies the theoretical results through explicit computation

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Input:

• Connected finite hypergraph H (acyclic, each hypervertex belongs to at least two hyperedges)
• Permutation voltage assignment $\phi: E(R(B_H)) \to S_k$
• Group $\Gamma \subseteq S_k$ generated by $\phi$

Output:

• Decomposition expression for the Bartholdi zeta function of the k-fold covering hypergraph $\bar{H}$

Theoretical Architecture

1. Correspondence between Hypergraphs and Bipartite Graphs

For a hypergraph H, define the incidence bipartite graph $B_H$:

• Vertex set: $V(B_H) = V(H) \cup E(H)$
• Edge set: $E(B_H) = \{\{v,e\} \mid v \in e\}$

This correspondence allows the use of graph-theoretic tools to study hypergraphs.

2. Definition of Bartholdi Zeta Function

For a hypergraph H, its Bartholdi zeta function is defined as: $\zeta(H, u, t) = \prod_{[C]} (1 - u^{cbc(C)}t^{|C|})^{-1}$ where:

• $[C]$ ranges over all equivalence classes of prime cycles
• $cbc(C)$ is the cycle bump count of cycle C
• When $u=0$, it reduces to the Ihara zeta function

3. Permutation Voltage Assignment and Covering Construction

A permutation voltage assignment $\phi: E(R(B_H)) \to S_k$ satisfies $\phi(e^{-1}) = \phi(e)^{-1}$, and is used to construct the derived graph $B_H^\phi$, from which the covering hypergraph $\bar{H}$ is obtained.

Core Technical Route

Step 1: Determinant Expression (Theorem 4.1)

Using the determinant expression from Theorem 2.19 and the adjacency matrix decomposition from Lemma 3.11: $A(B_{\bar{H}}) = \sum_{g \in \Gamma} (P(g) \otimes A(B_H)_g)$

We obtain: $\zeta(\bar{H}, u, t)^{-1} = \zeta(H, u, t)^{-m_1} (1-(1-u)^2t)^{(k-m_1)(m-n)} \prod_{i=2}^{s} M_i^{m_i}$

where $M_i$ is a determinant related to the representation $\rho_i$.

Step 2: Introduction of L-functions (Definition 4.2)

Define the Bartholdi L-function: $\zeta(H, \rho, \phi, u, t) = \prod_{[C]} \det(I_l - \rho(\phi(C))u^{cbc(C)}t^{|C|})^{-1}$

This is a generalization of the classical zeta function in the representation-theoretic framework.

Step 3: Hashimoto Expression (Proposition 4.10, 4.19)

The key technical breakthrough is establishing a determinant expression for the L-function. Define matrices:

• $B = (b_{\alpha\beta})$: $b_{\alpha\beta} = \rho(\phi(e_\alpha))$ when $t(e_\alpha) = o(e_\beta), e_\alpha \neq e_\beta^{-1}$
• $J = (j_{\alpha\beta})$: $j_{\alpha\beta} = \rho(\phi(e_\alpha))$ when $e_\alpha = e_\beta^{-1}$

We prove: $\zeta(B_H, \rho, \phi, u, t)^{-1} = \det(I - t(B + uJ))$

Step 4: Matrix Transformation Techniques

Introduce auxiliary matrices K and L, and use a series of lemmas (Lemma 4.11-4.15) to establish key identities:

• $K^tL = B + J$
• $^tLK = \sum_{g \in \Gamma} A(B_H)_g \otimes \rho(g)$
• $^tKK = D(B_H) \otimes I_l$ (when $\rho$ is a unitary representation)

Through the construction of matrices $X$ and $Y$ and the determinant equality: $\det(XY) = \det(YX)$

We transform $\det(I - t(B+uJ))$ into a form containing $\sum_{g \in \Gamma} \rho(g) \otimes A(B_H)_g$.

Step 5: Lyndon Word Technique (Lemma 4.8, Theorem 4.9)

Use Lyndon word theory to establish the correspondence between prime cycles and determinants of matrix products: $\prod_{p \in L} \det(I - M_p t^{|p|}) = \prod_{[C]} \det(I_l - \rho(\phi(C))u^{cbc(C)}t^{|C|})$

This serves as a bridge connecting combinatorial structures with algebraic expressions.

Technical Innovations

1. Critical Role of Unitary Representation Assumption: Requiring $\rho_i$ to be unitary when $m_i > 0$ is crucial in the proofs of Lemma 4.13 and 4.14, ensuring the specific forms of $^tKK$ and $K^tK$
2. Matrix Block Technique: Through carefully designed matrix blocking and properties of Kronecker products, high-dimensional problems are decomposed into manageable block structures
3. Application of Lyndon Words: First systematic application of Lyndon word theory in hypergraph zeta function theory, providing an elegant method for handling equivalence classes of prime cycles
4. Completely Self-Contained Proofs: The paper provides complete proofs of all lemmas, without relying on unproven results

Experimental Setup

Mathematical Verification Rather Than Numerical Experiments

This is a pure mathematics paper that does not involve traditional experiments, but rather verifies theoretical results through rigorous mathematical proofs.

Example Verification (Example 4.22)

Constructed Hypergraph:

• $V(H) = \{v_1, v_2, v_3\}$
• $E(H) = \{e_1, e_2, e_3\}$, where $e_1 = \{v_1,v_2\}$, $e_2 = \{v_2,v_3\}$, $e_3 = \{v_1,v_2,v_3\}$

Permutation Voltage Assignment:

• $\phi((v_1,e_1)) = \phi((v_1,e_3)) = (12) \in S_2$
• Other directed edges assigned the identity permutation

Covering Hypergraph:

• $\Gamma = S_2$, 2-fold covering
• $n = 12$ vertices, $m = 14$ edges

Verification Results:

• The group $S_2$ has two irreducible representations: the trivial representation $\rho_1$ and the sign representation $\rho_2$
• Multiplicities are both $m_1 = m_2 = 1$, degrees both $f_1 = f_2 = 1$
• Through explicit computation of adjacency and degree matrices, we verify: $\zeta(\bar{H}, u, t)^{-1} = \zeta(H, \rho_1, \phi, u, t)^{-1} \cdot \zeta(H, \rho_2, \phi, u, t)^{-1}$

The paper provides complete polynomial factorization forms, confirming the correctness of the decomposition formula.

Experimental Results

Theoretical Result Verification

Completeness of Main Theorem Proofs:

• Proof of Theorem 4.1 (pages 7-8): Rigorous derivation of determinant expressions through matrix blocking and representation-theoretic decomposition from Lemma 3.6
• Proof of Proposition 4.19 (pages 18-19): Uses six lemmas (Lemma 4.11-4.16) and sophisticated matrix transformation techniques
• Proof of Theorem 4.21 (pages 19-20): Integrates previous results to obtain the final decomposition formula

Verification of Key Lemmas:

1. Lemma 3.11: Adjacency matrix decomposition formula, proved by element-wise matrix comparison
2. Lemma 4.7: Establishes correspondence between matrix product determinants and cycles
3. Lemma 4.13-4.15: Matrix identities under unitary representations, critically depending on $^t\rho(g)\rho(g) = I_l$

Example Computation Results

Concrete polynomials from Example 4.22:

• $\zeta(\bar{H}, u, t)^{-1}$ is a product of 8 factors
• $\zeta(H, \rho_1, \phi, u, t)^{-1}$ contains 6 factors
• $\zeta(H, \rho_2, \phi, u, t)^{-1}$ contains 2 factors
• Verification: the first equals the product of the latter two

Example of Specific Factors:

• $(ut - t - 1)$
• $(u^2t^2 - t^2 - t - 1)$
• $(u^6t^6 + u^5t^6 - 4u^4t^6 \pm \cdots - 1)$ (higher-order terms)

These factors reflect the topological properties of the hypergraph and covering structure.

Theoretical Findings

1. Necessity of Unitarity: Although Theorem 4.1 holds for general representations, the unitary representation assumption is necessary to obtain the product decomposition form of Theorem 4.21
2. Role of Multiplicities: The multiplicities $m_i$ of irreducible representations directly correspond to the exponents of L-functions in the decomposition
3. Specialness of Trivial Representation: $\rho_1 = I$ corresponds to the Bartholdi zeta function of the base hypergraph, with multiplicity $m_1 > 0$ (Remark 3.7)
4. Relationship with Ihara Zeta Function: When $u=0$, the Bartholdi zeta function reduces to the Ihara zeta function, and the results of this paper include Li-Hou's Theorem 1.1 as a special case

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Origins of Ihara Zeta Function:
   • Ihara (1966): Introduced p-adic Selberg zeta function analogue
   • Serre (1977): Pointed out its relationship with regular graphs
   • Bass (1992): Generalized to arbitrary graphs
2. Decomposition Formulas for Graph Coverings:
   • Stark-Terras (1996): First discussion of Ihara zeta function decomposition for unramified Galois coverings
   • Mizuno-Sato (2000): Extended to coverings with regular voltage assignments
3. Hypergraph Zeta Functions:
   • Storm (2006): Defined Ihara zeta function for hypergraphs
   • Sato (2007): Introduced Bartholdi zeta function for hypergraphs
   • Saito-Sato (2013): Decomposition formula for hypergraph coverings with regular voltage assignments
4. Permutation Voltage Assignments:
   • Li-Hou (2018): Direct predecessor work, established decomposition formula for Ihara zeta functions of hypergraph coverings with permutation voltage assignments (Theorem 1.1)

Positioning of This Work

Relationship with Li-Hou (2018):

• Adopts the same hypergraph covering construction framework
• Generalizes results from Ihara zeta function ($u=0$) to Bartholdi zeta function (general $u$)
• Technically more complex, requiring handling of the bump count term $u^{cbc(C)}$

Relationship with Mizuno-Sato (2003):

• The latter addresses Bartholdi zeta functions of graph coverings
• This paper generalizes to hypergraph cases
• Connection established through bipartite graph $B_H$

Relationship with Saito-Sato (2013):

• The latter uses regular voltage assignments
• This paper uses permutation voltage assignments, which are more general but technically different

Advantages of This Work

1. More General Framework: Permutation voltage assignments are more flexible than regular voltage assignments
2. Unified Theory: Incorporates graphs and hypergraphs, Ihara and Bartholdi zeta functions into a unified framework
3. Complete Proofs: All results have detailed proofs; the paper is self-contained
4. Concrete Example: Example 4.22 provides concrete demonstration of theoretical application

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Core Theorem: Successfully establishes the decomposition formula for Bartholdi zeta functions of hypergraph coverings with permutation voltage assignments (Theorem 4.21)
2. Theoretical Completeness:
   • Provides a complete theoretical chain from hypergraphs to bipartite graphs, from covering construction to zeta function decomposition
   • All intermediate results (lemmas and propositions) have rigorous proofs
3. Technical Contributions:
   • Develops Hashimoto expression techniques for handling hypergraph Bartholdi L-functions
   • Innovatively applies Lyndon word theory to handle prime cycles
   • Establishes sophisticated matrix transformation methods

Limitations

1. Unitary Representation Assumption: Theorem 4.21 requires that irreducible representations with nonzero multiplicity be unitary, excluding certain cases. While all irreducible representations of symmetric groups $S_k$ are unitary (under appropriate inner products), this may limit applicability to more general groups.
2. Hypergraph Restrictions:
   • Requires hypergraphs to be acyclic
   • Each hypervertex must belong to at least two hyperedges
   • These conditions are already required in Theorem 2.19 but limit universal applicability
3. Computational Complexity:
   • Although the decomposition formula is theoretically elegant, computing L-functions still requires handling all prime cycles
   • For large-scale hypergraphs, computational complexity may be high
4. Simplicity of Example: Example 4.22 only involves the $S_2$ group and small-scale hypergraphs; computational verification for more complex cases is lacking

Future Directions

The paper does not explicitly propose future research directions, but possible extensions include:

1. Relaxing Unitarity Assumption: Investigate whether similar results hold for non-unitary representations
2. More General Hypergraph Classes:
   • Allow the existence of cycles
   • Handle cases where hypervertices may belong to only one hyperedge
3. Algorithms and Computation:
   • Develop efficient algorithms for computing L-functions
   • Study numerical stability of decomposition formulas
4. Application Exploration:
   • Seek applications in network science, topological data analysis, and other fields
   • Study distribution of zeta function zeros and their relationship with hypergraph properties
5. Generalization to Directed Hypergraphs: Extend theory to directed hypergraph coverings

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor

• All theorems and lemmas have complete, rigorous proofs
• Logical chain is clear, progressing layer by layer from basic definitions to main results
• Strong self-contained nature facilitates reader understanding and verification

2. Technical Innovation

• Sophisticated Application of Matrix Techniques: In the proof of Proposition 4.19, matrices $X$ and $Y$ are constructed to cleverly connect different determinant expressions using $\det(XY) = \det(YX)$
• Innovative Use of Lyndon Words: First systematic application of Lyndon word theory to hypergraph zeta function research, providing new perspective for handling equivalence classes of prime cycles
• Deep Integration of Representation Theory and Combinatorics: Organically fuses group representation theory tools with hypergraph combinatorial structures

3. Importance of Theoretical Contribution

• Fills research gap: Completes the missing link of decomposition formula for Bartholdi zeta functions of hypergraph coverings with permutation voltage assignments
• Unified framework: Incorporates multiple existing results (Ihara zeta functions, graph coverings, hypergraph coverings) into unified theoretical framework
• Generalizability: Results include Li-Hou (2018)'s Theorem 1.1 as special case (when $u=0$)

4. Writing Quality

• Clear structure: Section 2 for preparation, Section 3 for covering construction, Section 4 for main theorems
• Systematic notation: Clear definitions, consistent notation usage
• Readability: Detailed remarks help understand key concepts

5. Example Verification

• Example 4.22 provides concrete computation, enhancing theoretical credibility
• Demonstrates practical application of decomposition formula

Weaknesses

1. Technical Limitations

• Strength of Unitary Representation Assumption: Theorem 4.21 requires $\rho_i$ to be unitary when $m_i > 0$, which is crucial in Lemma 4.13-4.15. While valid for $S_k$, it limits theoretical generality
• Restrictions on Hypergraph Conditions: The assumptions of acyclicity and each hypervertex belonging to at least two hyperedges exclude some natural hypergraph classes

2. Examples and Applications

• Single Example: Only provides one simple example with $S_2$ group
• Lack of Complex Cases: No computation shown for larger or more complex groups (such as $S_3, S_4$)
• Missing Application Scenarios: Does not discuss applications to practical problems

3. Computational Complexity Analysis

• Does not discuss algorithmic complexity of computing L-functions
• Does not analyze computational advantages of decomposition formula over direct computation
• Lacks numerical stability analysis

4. Comparison with Existing Work

• Does not provide detailed comparison with Saito-Sato (2013) (regular voltage assignments) methodology
• Does not discuss respective advantages and applicable scenarios of the two voltage assignment methods

5. Theoretical Depth

• Does not explore properties of zeta function zeros
• Does not study topological or geometric meaning of decomposition formula
• Lacks combinatorial interpretation of multiplicities $m_i$

Impact Assessment

Contribution to the Field

• Theoretical Completeness: Completes an important piece of the puzzle in hypergraph covering zeta function theory
• Methodological Contribution: Provided matrix techniques and Lyndon word applications may inspire subsequent research
• Citation Potential: As natural generalization of Li-Hou (2018), expected to be cited in follow-up research

Practical Value

• Theoretical Tool: Provides powerful algebraic tools for studying hypergraph coverings
• Computational Method: Decomposition formula can in principle simplify zeta function computation for large-scale covering hypergraphs
• Limitation: Pure mathematical theory with potentially limited direct practical applications

Reproducibility

• Excellent Reproducibility:
  • All proofs are complete and detailed
  • Example 4.22 provides verifiable concrete computation
  • Paper is self-contained, allowing readers to independently verify all results
• Recommendation: Providing computational code (e.g., Mathematica or SageMath) would further enhance reproducibility

Applicable Scenarios

Direct Applications:

1. Hypergraph Theory Research: Study algebraic invariants and topological properties of hypergraphs
2. Covering Theory: Analyze structural properties of hypergraph coverings
3. Group Action Research: Study actions of symmetric groups on hypergraphs

Potential Applications:

1. Network Science:
   • Multi-body interaction networks (hyperedges represent joint actions of multiple nodes)
   • Group structure analysis in social networks
2. Topological Data Analysis:
   • Zeta functions of simplicial complexes
   • Algebraic invariants of persistent homology
3. Coding Theory:
   • Graph representations of LDPC codes
   • Hypergraph structures of quantum error-correcting codes
4. Chemistry and Materials Science:
   • Topological indices of molecular hypergraphs
   • Covering analysis of crystal structures

Inapplicable Scenarios:

• Large-scale problems requiring numerical computational efficiency (theoretical formula computational complexity may be high)
• Hypergraphs not satisfying acyclicity or connectivity assumptions
• Special cases requiring non-unitary representations

Overall Evaluation

This is a high-quality pure mathematics paper making substantive contributions to hypergraph zeta function theory. The paper's main strengths are:

1. Solves a natural and important theoretical problem
2. Technically rigorous and innovative
3. Clear writing with strong self-contained nature

Main limitations are:

1. Restrictions on theoretical assumptions (particularly unitarity)
2. Insufficient discussion of application examples and practical applications
3. Lack of computational complexity analysis

Recommendation Index: ★★★★☆ (4/5)

• For hypergraph theory and algebraic combinatorics researchers: ★★★★★
• For applied mathematics researchers: ★★★☆☆
• For practitioners needing practical computational tools: ★★★☆☆

References

The paper cites 15 key references, mainly including:

Foundational Works:

• 4 Y. Ihara (1966): Origins of Ihara zeta function
• 3 H. Bass (1992): Generalization to arbitrary graphs
• 2 L. Bartholdi (1999): Introduction of Bartholdi zeta function

Graph Covering Theory:

• 14 H.M. Stark, A.A. Terras (1996): Zeta function decomposition for graph coverings
• 7 H. Mizuno, I. Sato (2000): Graph coverings with regular voltage assignments
• 8 H. Mizuno, I. Sato (2003): Bartholdi zeta function decomposition for graph coverings

Hypergraph Theory:

• 15 C.K. Storm (2006): Ihara zeta function for hypergraphs
• 10 I. Sato (2007): Bartholdi zeta function for hypergraphs
• 5 D. Li, Y. Hou (2018): Ihara zeta function for hypergraph coverings with permutation voltage assignments (direct object of generalization in this paper)

Technical Tools:

• 12 J.-P. Serre (1977): Group representation theory
• 6 M. Lothaire (1983): Lyndon word theory
• 1 S.A. Amitsur (1979/80): Characteristic polynomials of matrix sums

These references constitute the theoretical foundation and technical toolbox for this research.