On Many-to-One Mappings Over Finite Fields

Yanbin Zheng Yanjin Ding Meiying Zhang Pingzhi Yuan Qiang Wang[9pt] In Memory of Professor Dingyi Pei (1941–2023) Thanks: This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2024YFA1013000), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 12571103, 12461103), and NSERC of Canada (RGPIN-2023-04673). Thanks: Y. Zheng, Y. Ding and M. Zhang are with the School of Mathematical Sciences, Qufu Normal University, Qufu, China. Y. Zheng is also with the Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China (e-mail: zheng@qfnu.edu.cn). Y. Ding is also with the Hubei Key Laboratory of Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematics and Statistics, Hubei University, Wuhan, China. Thanks: P. Yuan is with the School of Mathematical Sciences, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (e-mail: yuanpz@scnu.edu.cn). Thanks: Q. Wang is with the School of Mathematics and Statistics, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada (e-mail: wang@math.carleton.ca). Thanks: This paper has been published in IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. Please refer to this paper as: Y. Zheng, Y. Ding, M. Zhang, P. Yuan, Q. Wang, On many-to-one mappings over finite fields, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol.˜72, no.˜5, pp.˜2734–2752, May, 2026.

Abstract

We introduce the definition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings between two finite sets, which unifies and generalizes the definitions of $2$ -to- $1$ and $n$ -to- $1$ mappings in recent literature. We also characterize these $m$ -to- $1$ mappings in terms of the generalized local criterion and thus provide three generic constructions of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings, which unify and generalize the previous known constructions. Using these constructions, the problem whether $x^{r}h(x^{s})$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on the multiplicative group $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ is converted into that whether an associated polynomial $x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on the order $\ell$ subgroup $U_{\ell}$ of $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , where $m_{2}=m/(r,s)$ and $\ell=(q-1)/s$ . Furthermore, the $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ property of $x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ on $U_{\ell}$ is studied in detail in four different cases. In addition, a recursive construction of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from $m$ -to- $1$ mappings is proposed.

Index Terms:

Permutations, Two-to-one mappings, Many-to-one mappings.

I Introduction

One-to-one mappings from a finite field $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ to itself (i.e., permutations of $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ ) have been extensively studied; see for example [23, 56, 57, 64] and the references therein. Two-to-one mappings over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ are closely connected to linear codes [12, 13] and cryptographic functions such as APN functions, planar functions, and bent functions [16, 31, 58, 40, 30, 10]. This motivates the further theoretical study of two-to-one mappings; see for example [43, 34, 29]. In order to unify and generalize previous results in the literature, this paper provides a systematic study of $m$ -to- $1$ (a generalization of two-to-one) mappings over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ including their characterization, properties, and construction methods.

I-A The progress of many-to-one mappings

Assume $A$ and $B$ are finite sets and $f$ is a mapping from $A$ to $B$ . For any $b\in B$ , let $\#f^{-1}(b)$ denote the number of preimages of $b$ under $f$ . The mapping $f$ is called $2$ -to- $1$ if $\#f^{-1}(b)\in\{0,2\}$ for each $b\in B$ , except for at most a single $b^{\prime}\in B$ such that $\#f^{-1}(b^{\prime})=1$ ; see the first column of Fig. 1.

$2$ -to- $1$ $n$ -to- $1$ in [19] $n$ -to- $1$ in [46] our $m$ -to- $1$

Fig. 1: Schematic diagrams of many-to-one mappings

(a)

2

-to-

1

in [43]

(b)

n

-to-

1

in [19, 51]

(d)

2

-to-

1

in [59]

(e)

n

-to-

1

in [46]

(f) Our 2

Fig. 2: Constructions of many-to-one mappings

The study of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings is partly motivated by the design of cryptographic functions, in particular APN and planar functions; see for example [16, 31, 58, 9, 30, 10]. In 2019, Mesnager and Qu [43] provided a systematic study of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings over finite fields and presented several constructions of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings by using an AGW-like criterion (see Fig. 2(a)), permutation polynomials, linear translators, and APN functions. They also reviewed several classical types of $2$ -to- $1$ polynomial mappings, including Dickson polynomials, Muller-Cohen-Matthews polynomials, among others. Moreover, all $2$ -to- $1$ polynomials of degree $\leq 4$ over any finite field were determined in [43]. In 2021, Li et al. [34] proved that there is no $2$ -to- $1$ polynomials of degree 5 over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ when $n>9$ , and found some classes of $2$ -to- $1$ trinomials and quadrinomials over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ . In the same year, Yuan et al. [59] presented another new AGW-like criterion (see Fig. 2(d)) for $2$ -to- $1$ mappings. Using this criterion, they obtained new constructions of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings and eight classes of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $(x^{2^{k}}+x+\delta)^{s}+cx$ over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ . In 2023, Mesnager et al. [44] proposed several classes of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $x^{r}+x^{s}+x^{t}+x^{3}+x^{2}+x$ , $\sum_{i=1}^{2}(x^{2^{k}}+x+\delta)^{s_{i}}+cx$ , or $h(x)\circ(x^{2^{e}}+x)$ over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ , where $(e,n)=1$ and $h$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on the image set of $x^{2^{e}}+x$ . Very recently, Kölsch and Kyureghyan [29] observed that on $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ the classification of $2$ -to- $1$ binomials is equivalent to the classification of o-monomials, which is a well-studied and elusive problem in finite geometry. They also provided some connections between $2$ -to- $1$ maps and hyperovals in non-Desarguesian planes. As applications, the $2$ -to- $1$ mappings over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ are used to construct cryptographic functions [43, 52, 63] and linear codes [33, 41, 42].

In 2021, the concept of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings was generalized to $n$ -to- $1$ mappings [19]. More specifically, when $\#A\equiv 0,1\pmod{n}$ , $f$ is called an $n$ -to- $1$ mapping if $\#f^{-1}(b)\in\{0,n\}$ for each $b\in B$ , except for at most a single $b^{\prime}\in B$ such that $\#f^{-1}(b^{\prime})=1$ ; see the second column of Fig. 1. Later, an extended definition of $n$ -to- $1$ mappings was introduced in [4] (on finite field $A$ ) and independently in [46] (on finite set $A$ ), which allows $\#A\bmod{n}\in\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\}$ . Specifically, $f$ is called an $n$ -to- $1$ mapping if $\#f^{-1}(b)\in\{0,n\}$ for each $b\in B$ , except for at most a single $b^{\prime}\in B$ such that $\#f^{-1}(b^{\prime})=r$ , where $r=\#A\bmod n$ ; see the third column of Fig. 1. In this case, $f$ maps the remaining $r$ elements in $A$ to the same image $b^{\prime}$ if $r\neq 0$ . Under this definition, a new method to obtain $n$ -to- $1$ mappings based on Galois groups of rational functions was proposed, and two explicit classes of $2$ -to- $1$ and $3$ -to- $1$ rational functions over finite fields were given in [4]. Very recently, the main result of [4] was refined and generalized in [15]. Under this definition, all $3$ -to- $1$ polynomials of degree $\leq 4$ over finite fields were determined in [46]. Moreover, an AGW-like criterion (see Fig. 2(e)) for characterizing $n$ -to- $1$ mappings was presented in [46], and this criterion was applied to polynomials of the forms $h(\psi(x))\phi(x)+g(\psi(x))$ , $L_{1}(x)+L_{2}(x)g(L_{3}(x))$ , $x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x^{q^{k}}-x+\delta)+cx$ over finite fields. Later, several classes of $n$ -to- $1$ trinomials of the form $x^{r}h(x^{q-1})$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ were given in [51]. Recently, a relationship between $3$ -to- $1$ mappings and APN functions was given in [28, 8]. In particular, Kölsch et al. [28] showed that APN functions on $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ with the minimal image size are very close to being $3$ -to- $1$ . Budaghyan et al. [8] provided a list of all known quadratic $3$ -to- $1$ APN functions on $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ for $n\leq 12$ up to EA-equivalence.

All the definitions of $n$ -to- $1$ mappings in [19, 4, 46] require that $\#f(R)=1$ , where $f(R)$ denotes the image of the set $R$ of the remaining $r$ elements in $A$ if $r\neq 0$ . In this paper, we will introduce a more general concept, $m$ -to- $1$ mappings, which allow that $\#f(R)\in\{1,2,\ldots,r\}$ ; see the last column of Fig. 1.

I-B The constructions of many-to-one mappings

In this subsection, we will focus on the constructions of many-to-one mappings, which was motivated by the following well known AGW criterion [1, 53] for $1$ -to- $1$ mappings.

AGW’s Criterion.

Let $A$ , $\bar{A}$ , $S$ , $\bar{S}$ be finite sets with $\#A=\#\bar{A}$ and $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , and let $f\colon A\rightarrow\bar{A}$ , $\bar{f}\colon S\rightarrow\bar{S}$ , $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ , and $\bar{\lambda}\colon\bar{A}\rightarrow\bar{S}$ be maps such that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ . If both $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are surjective, then $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $A$ to $\bar{A}$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $S$ to $\bar{S}$ and $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for each $s\in S$ .

The AGW criterion allows us to construct $1$ -to- $1$ maps on $A$ from $1$ -to- $1$ maps between two smaller sets $S$ and $\bar{S}$ , which can be illustrated by the following commutative diagram:

In recent years, the AGW criterion has been generalized to construct $2$ -to- $1$ and $n$ -to- $1$ mappings in [43, 19, 46, 59, 51]. All these constructions have the same assumption: $A$ , $\bar{A}$ , $S$ , and $\bar{S}$ are finite sets, and $f\colon A\rightarrow A$ (or $\bar{A}$ ), $\bar{f}\colon S\rightarrow\bar{S}$ , $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ , and $\bar{\lambda}\colon A~(\text{or}~\bar{A})\rightarrow\bar{S}$ are mappings such that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ . We now review these constructions.

•

Proposition 6 in [43] states that, if $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $S$ to $\bar{S}$ , $f|_{\lambda^{-1}(s)}$ is $2$ -to- $1$ for any $s\in S$ , and there is at most one $s\in S$ such that $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)$ is odd, then $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $A$ ; see Fig. 2(a).
•

Proposition 1 in [19] states that, if $\#A\equiv 0,1\pmod{n}$ , $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $S$ to $\bar{S}$ , $f|_{\lambda^{-1}(s)}$ is $n$ -to- $1$ for any $s\in S$ , and there is at most one $s\in S$ such that $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\equiv 1\pmod{n}$ , then $f$ is $n$ -to- $1$ on $A$ ; see Fig. 2(b).
•

Theorem 3.1 in [51] states that, if $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are surjective, $n\mid\#\lambda^{-1}(s)$ , and $f|_{\lambda^{-1}(s)}$ is $n$ -to- $1$ for any $s\in S$ , then $f$ is $n$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . However, there is a small error in their statement and a counter-example is the following: let $A=\mathbb{F}_{9}^{*}$ , $S=\bar{S}=\{\pm 1\}$ , $f=\bar{f}=x^{6}$ , and $\lambda=\bar{\lambda}=x^{4}$ . It is easy to very that $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=4$ and $f|_{\lambda^{-1}(s)}$ is $2$ -to- $1$ for any $s\in S$ . But $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $A$ and $\bar{f}$ is also $2$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . The reason why their statement fails is that the condition $n\mid\#\lambda^{-1}(s)$ is too weak. However, the result can be fixed by strengthening this condition to $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=n\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ ; see our Corollary 3.
•

Proposition 4.2 in [59] states that, if $f$ , $\bar{f}$ , $\lambda$ , $\bar{\lambda}$ are surjective, $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ to $\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ for any $s\in S$ , $\#S$ is even, and $\bar{f}$ is $2$ -to- $1$ from $S$ to $\bar{S}$ , then $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $A$ ; see Fig. 2(d). It should be noted that the above conditions imply that $\#A$ is even; see the proof of our Corollary 2.
•

Theorem 4.3 in [46] assumes that $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are surjective, $\#A\equiv\#S\pmod{n}$ , $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , and $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ to $\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ for any $s\in S$ . When $n\mid\#S$ , $f$ is $n$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $n$ -to- $1$ on $S$ ; see Fig. 2(e). When $n\nmid\#S$ , they did not give necessary and sufficient condition for $f$ to be $n$ -to- $1$ on $A$ .

I-C The contribution of the paper

The definition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings between two finite sets is introduced in Section II, which unifies and generalizes the definitions of $2$ -to- $1$ and $n$ -to- $1$ mappings in the literature. Section III presents a generalized local criterion, which describes a necessary and sufficient condition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on finite sets. Then three constructions of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings are proposed by employing the generalized local criterion. The first construction reduces the problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on a finite set $A$ to a relatively simpler problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on some subsets of $A$ . The second construction converts the problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ into another problem whether an associated mapping $\bar{f}$ is $m/m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on a finite set $S$ . These two constructions can be illustrated by Figs. 2(c) and 2(f) respectively, and they unify and generalize all the constructions of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings and $n$ -to- $1$ mappings in [43, 19, 46, 59, 51]. In the case that $(A,\ast)$ is a finite group, the third construction reduces the problem whether $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ to that whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ , where $u$ is a mapping from $A$ to $A$ such that $\bar{\lambda}(u(a))=c$ for any $a\in A$ and a fixed $c\in A$ .

In Section IV, applying the second construction, the problem whether $f(x)\coloneqq x^{r}h(x^{s})$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on the multiplicative group $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ is converted into another problem whether $g(x)\coloneqq x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on the multiplicative subgroup $U_{\ell}$ ; see Theorem 3 for details. In the following sections, the $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ property of $g$ on $U_{\ell}$ is explicitly discussed in four different cases: (1) $m=2,3$ or $\ell=2,3$ ; (2) $g$ behaves like a monomial on $U_{\ell}$ ; (3) $g$ behaves like a rational function on $U_{\ell}$ ; (4) we repeatedly use the second construction and convert the problem that $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ into that another associated mapping $\bar{g}$ is $m_{3}$ -to- $1$ on a finite set $\lambda(U_{\ell})$ . These results and the connections with earlier results in the literature are presented from Section V to Section VIII. Finally, we present two methods for constructing $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from permutations or $m$ -to- $1$ mappings. This provides a recursive construction of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings.

I-D Notation

The letter $\mathbb{Z}$ will denote the set of all integers, $\mathbb{N}$ the set of all positive integers, $\#S$ the cardinality of a finite set $S$ , and $\varnothing$ the empty set containing no elements. The greatest common divisor of two integers $a$ and $b$ is written as $(a,b)$ . Let $a\bmod m$ denote the smallest non-negative remainder obtained when $a$ is divided by $m$ . For a prime power $q$ , let $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ be the finite field with $q$ elements, $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}=\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus\{0\}$ , and $\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ the ring of polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Let $U_{\ell}$ denote the cyclic group of all $\ell$ -th roots of unity over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , i.e., $U_{\ell}=\{\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}:\alpha^{\ell}=1\}$ . The trace function from $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ is defined by $\mathrm{Tr}_{q^{n}/q}(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}x^{q^{i}}$ .

II The definition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings

Definition 1.

Let $A$ be a finite set and $m\in\mathbb{Z}$ with $1\leq m\leq\#A$ . Write $\#A=km+r$ , where $k$ , $r\in\mathbb{Z}$ with $0\leq r<m$ . Let $f$ be a mapping from $A$ to another finite set $B$ . Then $f$ is called $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if there are $k$ distinct elements in $B$ such that each element has exactly $m$ preimages in $A$ under $f$ . The remaining $r$ elements in $A$ are called the exceptional elements of $f$ on $A$ , and the set of these $r$ exceptional elements is called the exceptional set of $f$ on $A$ and denoted by $E_{f}(A)$ . In particular, $E_{f}(A)=\varnothing$ if and only if $r=0$ , i.e., $m\mid\#A$ .

In the case either $r=0$ or $r\neq 0$ and $\#f(E_{f}(A))=1$ , Definition 1 is the same as the definition of $2$ -to- $1$ or $n$ -to- $1$ mentioned in the previous section. In other cases, it is a generalization of the definitions in the literature. Throughout this paper, we use Definition 1 in all of our results. Moreover, it should be noted that $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $A$ means that $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $A$ to $f(A)$ , where $f(A)$ may not equal $A$ . If $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ , then any $b\in f(A)$ has at most $m$ preimages in $A$ under $f$ .

Definition 2.

A polynomial $f(x)\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ is called $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ if the associated mapping $f\colon c\mapsto f(c)$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ to itself is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ .

Example 1.

Let $f(x)=x^{3}+x$ . Then $f$ maps $0,1,2,3,4$ to $0,2,0,0,3$ in $\mathbb{F}_{5}$ , respectively. Thus, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{5}$ and the exceptional set $E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{5})=\{1,4\}$ .

Example 2.

The monomial $x^{n}$ with $n\in\mathbb{N}$ is $(n,q-1)$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ and $E_{x^{n}}(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*})=\varnothing$ .

This example can be generalized to the following form.

Example 3.

Let $f$ be an endomorphism of a finite group $G$ and $\ker(f)=\{x\in G:f(x)=e\}$ , where $e$ is the identity element in $G$ . It is easy to verify that $\{x\in G:f(x)=f(a)\}=a\ker(f)$ for any $a\in G$ . Hence, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $G$ and $E_{f}(G)=\varnothing$ , where $m=\#\ker(f)$ .

We next compute the number of all $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ .

Theorem 1.

Let $q=km+r$ , where $1\leq m\leq q$ and $0\leq r<m$ . Let $N_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ be the number of all $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ to itself. Then

N_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{q})=\frac{(q!)^{2}\,(q-k)^{r}}{k!\,r!\,(m!)^{k}(q-k)!}.

Proof.

For any $m$ -to- $1$ mapping $f$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ with $q=km+r$ , we get $\#E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q})=r$ and $\#f(\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}))=k$ . Then there are $\binom{q}{k}$ choices for $f(\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}))$ . For the first element in $f(\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}))$ , its preimage has $\binom{q}{m}$ choices. For the second element, its preimage has $\binom{q-m}{m}$ choices. Similar results hold until the last element has $\binom{m+r}{m}$ choices. Moreover, the image of each element in $E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ has $q-k$ choices. Hence,

	$\displaystyle N_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$	$\displaystyle=\binom{q}{k}\binom{q}{m}\binom{q-m}{m}\cdots\binom{m+r}{m}(q-k)^{r}$
		$\displaystyle=\binom{q}{k}\frac{q!\,(q-k)^{r}}{r!\,(m!)^{k}}.\qed$

III Generalized local criterion and three constructions for $m$ -to- $1$ mappings

Very recently, the local criterion for a mapping to be a permutation of $A$ was provided by Yuan [60], which is equivalent to the AGW criterion. We now present a generalization of it for a mapping to be $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ .

Lemma 1 (Generalized local criterion).

Let $A$ , $B$ , and $C$ be finite sets. Let $f\colon A\to B$ , $\psi\colon B\to C$ , and $\varphi\colon A\to C$ be mappings such that $\varphi=\psi\circ f$ , i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

For any $c\in\varphi(A)$ , let $\varphi^{-1}(c)=\{a\in A:\varphi(a)=c\}$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq\#A$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(c)$ for any $\#\varphi^{-1}(c)\geq m$ and

\sum_{\#\varphi^{-1}(c)\geq m}\#E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(c))+\sum_{\#\varphi^{-1}(c)<m}\#\varphi^{-1}(c)=\#A\bmod{m},

(1)

where $c$ runs through $\varphi(A)$ , $E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(c))$ is the exceptional set of $f$ being $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(c)$ .

Proof.

Assume that $\varphi(A)=\{c_{1},c_{2},\ldots,c_{n}\}$ . Then

A=\varphi^{-1}(c_{1})\uplus\varphi^{-1}(c_{2})\uplus\cdots\uplus\varphi^{-1}(c_{n}),

where $\uplus$ denotes the union of disjoint sets. Thus,

f(A)=f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{1}))\cup f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{2}))\cup\cdots\cup f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{n})).

By $\varphi=\psi\circ f$ , we have

\psi(f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})))=\varphi(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))=c_{i},

and hence

f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))\subseteq\psi^{-1}(c_{i}).

If $c_{i}\neq c_{j}$ , then $\psi^{-1}(c_{i})\cap\psi^{-1}(c_{j})=\varnothing$ , and thus

f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))\cap f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{j}))=\varnothing.

Therefore,

f(A)=f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{1}))\uplus f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{2}))\uplus\cdots\uplus f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{n})).

(2)

Let $\#A=km+r$ , where $0\leq r<m$ . ( $\Leftarrow$ ) Assume $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})$ for any $\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})\geq m$ and Eq. 1 holds. Then there are $(\#A-r)/m=k$ distinct elements in $f(A)$ such that each element has exactly $m$ preimages in $A$ under $f$ . Hence $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . ( $\Rightarrow$ ) Assume $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . Then there are at most $m$ preimages in $\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})$ for any element in $f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))$ and $\#E_{f}(A)=r<m$ , where $E_{f}(A)$ is the exceptional set of $f$ being $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . If $\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})\geq m$ , let $\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})=k_{i}m+r_{i}$ with $k_{i}\geq 1$ and $0\leq r_{i}<m$ , and let $k^{\prime}_{i}$ be the number of $b\in f(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))$ which has exactly $m$ preimages in $\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})$ . If $k^{\prime}_{i}<k_{i}$ , then

	$\displaystyle\#E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(c_{i}))$	$\displaystyle=\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})-k^{\prime}_{i}m$
		$\displaystyle=(k_{i}-k^{\prime}_{i})m+r_{i}\geq m,$

contrary to $\#E_{f}(A)<m$ . Thus $k^{\prime}_{i}=k_{i}$ , i.e., $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})$ if $\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})\geq m$ . If $\#\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})<m$ , then $\varphi^{-1}(c_{i})\subseteq E_{f}(A)$ by Eq. 2. Hence,

\Big(\underset{\#\varphi^{-1}(c)\geq m}{\uplus}E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(c))\Big)\uplus\Big(\underset{\#\varphi^{-1}(c)<m}{\uplus}\varphi^{-1}(c)\Big)=E_{f}(A)

(3)

and thus Eq. 1 holds. ∎

The generalized local criterion converts the problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ to another problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on some subsets $\varphi^{-1}(c)$ of $A$ . The identity Eq. 1 establishes a numerical relationship between the exceptional sets $E_{f}(A)$ and $E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(c))$ . In fact, this relationship can also be expressed as Eq. 3 when $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . We next use this criterion to deduce three constructions of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings.

III-A The first construction

Construction 1.

For any $s\in\lambda(A)$ , let $\lambda^{-1}(s)=\{a\in A:\lambda(a)=s\}$ . Suppose $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq\#A$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m$ and

\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m}\#E_{f}(\lambda^{-1}(s))+\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)<m}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m},

where $s$ runs through $\lambda(A)$ , $E_{f}(\lambda^{-1}(s))$ is the exceptional set of $f$ being $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ .

Proof.

Let $\varphi=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ , i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

Since $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , there is a unique $s\in\lambda(A)$ such that $\bar{f}(s)=\bar{s}$ for any $\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)=\bar{f}(\lambda(A))$ . Thus $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=\lambda^{-1}(s)$ . Then the result follows from Lemma 1. ∎

When $S=\bar{S}$ and $\bar{f}$ is the identity mapping, 1 is reduced to Lemma 1, and thus they are equivalent to each other. Moreover, 1 generalizes [43, Proposition 6] and [19, Proposition 1] which use the $n$ -to- $1$ definition, require that $\#A\equiv 0,1\pmod{n}$ and $\#S=\#\bar{S}$ , and only give the sufficient condition.

III-B The second construction

Construction 2.

Suppose $\lambda$ is surjective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ , and $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $s\in S$ and a fixed $m_{1}\in\mathbb{N}$ , where

	$\displaystyle\lambda^{-1}(s)$	$\displaystyle\coloneqq\{a\in A:\lambda(a)=s\},$
	$\displaystyle\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$	$\displaystyle\coloneqq\{b\in\bar{A}:\bar{\lambda}(b)=\bar{f}(s)\}.$

Then for $1\leq m\leq m_{1}\,\#S$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and

\sum_{s\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m},

(4)

where $E_{\bar{f}}(S)$ is the exceptional set of $\bar{f}$ being $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ .

Proof.

Since $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ is surjective, $A=\uplus_{s\in S}\lambda^{-1}(s)$ and

	$\displaystyle\#A$	$\displaystyle=\sum_{s\in S}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\sum_{s\in S}m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$
		$\displaystyle\geq\sum_{s\in S}m_{1}=m_{1}\#S.$

Thus, the definitions that $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ and $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ are meaningful when $1\leq m\leq m_{1}\,\#S$ . For any $s\in S$ , it follows from $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ that

(\bar{\lambda}\circ f)(\lambda^{-1}(s))=(\bar{f}\circ\lambda)(\lambda^{-1}(s))=\bar{f}(s),

and so $f(\lambda^{-1}(s))\subseteq\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ . Because

\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))

and $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ , we have

\#f(\lambda^{-1}(s))=\#\lambda^{-1}(s)/m_{1}=\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s)).

Therefore,

f(\lambda^{-1}(s))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))\quad\text{for each $s\in S$.}

(5)

Let $\varphi=\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ , i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

By Lemma 1, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ for any $\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})\geq m$ and

\sum_{\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})\geq m}\#E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s}))+\sum_{\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})<m}\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=\#A\bmod{m},

(6)

where $\bar{s}$ runs through $\varphi(A)$ . According to the proof of Lemma 1, if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ , then

\Big(\underset{\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})\geq m}{\uplus}E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s}))\Big)\uplus\Big(\underset{\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})<m}{\uplus}\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})\Big)=E_{f}(A).

(7)

For any $\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)$ , assume there are exactly $m_{\bar{s}}$ distinct elements $s_{1},s_{2},\ldots,s_{m_{\bar{s}}}\in S$ such that

\bar{f}(s_{1})=\bar{f}(s_{2})=\cdots=\bar{f}(s_{m_{\bar{s}}})=\bar{s},

(8)

i.e., the set of preimages of $\bar{s}$ under $\bar{f}$ is $\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})=\{s_{1},s_{2},\ldots,s_{m_{\bar{s}}}\}$ . Then by Eq. 5,

f(\lambda^{-1}(s_{i}))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s_{i}))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})

(9)

for any $1\leq i\leq m_{\bar{s}}$ . For any $s^{\prime}\in S\setminus\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ , we have $\bar{f}(s^{\prime})\neq\bar{f}(s_{1})$ and so

$\displaystyle\varnothing$	$\displaystyle=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s^{\prime}))\cap\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s_{1}))$	(10)
	$\displaystyle=f(\lambda^{-1}(s^{\prime}))\cap f(\lambda^{-1}(s_{1}))$
	$\displaystyle=f(\lambda^{-1}(s^{\prime}))\cap\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s}).$

It follows from $\varphi=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ and Eq. 8 that

\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=\lambda^{-1}(s_{1})\uplus\lambda^{-1}(s_{2})\uplus\cdots\uplus\lambda^{-1}(s_{m_{\bar{s}}}).

(11)

Then by Eq. 9,

f(\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s}))=f(\lambda^{-1}(s_{1}))\cup\cdots\cup f(\lambda^{-1}(s_{m_{\bar{s}}}))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s}).

Since $A=\uplus_{s\in S}\lambda^{-1}(s)$ , $S=\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})\cup(S\setminus\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s}))$ , and Eq. 10 holds, it follows that the preimage set of $\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ under $f$ is $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ . Because

\#\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})=m_{1}\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s_{i}))=m_{1}\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})

(12)

and $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ from $\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})$ to

f(\lambda^{-1}(s_{i}))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s_{i}))=\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})

for $1\leq i\leq m_{\bar{s}}$ , we get

		$\displaystyle\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=m_{1}m_{\bar{s}}\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})\text{~~and}$		(13)
		$\displaystyle\text{$f$ is $m_{1}m_{\bar{s}}$-to-$1$ from $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ onto $\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})$.}$		(13)

We first prove the sufficiency. Suppose that $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and Eq. 4 holds, where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ . Define

	$\displaystyle B_{1}$	$\displaystyle=\{\bar{f}(s):s\in S\setminus E_{\bar{f}}(S)\},$
	$\displaystyle B_{2}$	$\displaystyle=\{\bar{f}(s):s\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)\}.$

Then $\varphi(A)=B_{1}\uplus B_{2}$ . When $\bar{s}\in B_{1}$ , since $\bar{f}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , we have $\#\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})=m_{2}$ . By Eq. 13,

\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=m_{1}m_{2}\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})=m\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})\geq m

(14)

and $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ from $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ onto $\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ . Thus,

\sum_{\bar{s}\in B_{1}}\#E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s}))=0.

(15)

When $\bar{s}\in B_{2}$ , we get $E_{\bar{f}}(S)=\uplus_{\bar{s}\in B_{2}}\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ . Then by Eq. 11 and Eq. 4,

$\displaystyle\sum_{\bar{s}\in B_{2}}\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$	$\displaystyle=\sum_{\bar{s}\in B_{2}}\sum_{s_{i}\in\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})}\#\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})$	(16)
	$\displaystyle=\sum_{s_{i}\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})$
	$\displaystyle=\#A\bmod{m}<m.$

Equations Eq. 14, Eq. 15, and Eq. 16 imply Eq. 6. Then the sufficiency follows from Lemma 1.

We next prove the necessity. Assume $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . Let

	$\displaystyle C_{1}$	$\displaystyle=\{\bar{s}\in\varphi(A):\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})\geq m\},$
	$\displaystyle C_{2}$	$\displaystyle=\{\bar{s}\in\varphi(A):\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})<m\}.$

Then $\varphi(A)=C_{1}\uplus C_{2}$ and $S=\uplus_{\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)}\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ . For any $\bar{s}\in C_{1}$ , by Lemma 1 and Eq. 13, we obtain some equivalent statements: (a) $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ ; (b) $m=m_{1}m_{\bar{s}}$ ; (c) $m_{1}\mid m$ and $m_{\bar{s}}=m/m_{1}$ ; (d) $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ , and $E_{\bar{f}}(\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s}))=\varnothing$ . We also note that $\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=m\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ . Thus,

\underset{\bar{s}\in C_{1}}{\uplus}E_{f}(\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s}))=\varnothing.

(17)

Then Eq. 7 minus Eq. 17 gives

\underset{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}{\uplus}\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=E_{f}(A),

(18)

Substituting Eq. 13 into Eq. 18 yields

\sum_{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}m_{1}\#\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})=r,

where $r=\#A\bmod m<m$ . Hence,

\sum_{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}\#\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})\leq r/m_{1}<m/m_{1}.

Combining this inequality and (d) yields that $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $\uplus_{\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)}\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})=S$ , and

E_{\bar{f}}(S)=\uplus_{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s}).

Then by Eq. 18 and $\varphi=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ , we have

$\displaystyle E_{f}(A)$	$\displaystyle=\underset{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}{\uplus}\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$	(19)
	$\displaystyle=\underset{\bar{s}\in C_{2}}{\uplus}\underset{s_{i}\in\bar{f}^{-1}(\bar{s})}{\uplus}\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})$
	$\displaystyle=\underset{s_{i}\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}{\uplus}\lambda^{-1}(s_{i})$

and thus Eq. 4 holds. ∎

The identity Eq. 5 plays an important role in the above proof. Using this identity, the fact that $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ is divided into two parts: $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ and $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . When the first part holds, the problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ is converted into that whether $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . The identity Eq. 4 establishes a numerical relationship between the exceptional sets $E_{f}(A)$ and $E_{\bar{f}}(S)$ . Moreover, this relationship is strengthened to Eq. 19 when $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ .

The significance of 2 resides in the fact that it not only unifies and generalizes the constructions in [59, 46, 51] but also provides more new explicit constructions.

Applying 2 to $m_{1}=1$ or $m\mid m_{1}\,\#S$ yields the following results.

Corollary 1.

Let $A$ , $\bar{A}$ , $S$ , $\bar{S}$ be finite sets and $f\colon A\rightarrow\bar{A}$ , $\bar{f}\colon S\rightarrow\bar{S}$ , $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ , $\bar{\lambda}\colon\bar{A}\rightarrow\bar{S}$ be mappings such that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ . Suppose $\lambda$ is surjective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ , and $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $s\in S$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq\#S$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $S$ and

\sum_{s\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m}.

Corollary 1 is a generalization of [46, Theorem 4.3] which uses the $n$ -to- $1$ definition, requires $\#A\equiv\#S\pmod{n}$ , and does not give a necessary and sufficient condition in the case $n\nmid\#S$ .

Corollary 2.

With the notation and the hypotheses of 2, we assume $m\mid m_{1}\,\#S$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ .

Proof.

We need only show Eq. 4 holds when $m_{1}\mid m$ and $\bar{f}$ is $(m/m_{1})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . In this case, $(m/m_{1})\mid\#S$ and so $E_{\bar{f}}(S)=\varnothing$ , which is equivalent to $\sum_{s\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=0$ . Note that $A=\uplus_{\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)}\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})$ and $\#\varphi^{-1}(\bar{s})=m\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{s})$ for any $\bar{s}\in\varphi(A)$ by Eq. 14. Thus $m\mid\#A$ and so Eq. 4 holds. ∎

Corollary 2 generalizes [59, Proposition 4.2] where $m=2$ , $m_{1}=1$ , $\#S$ is even, and only the sufficient condition is given. Corollary 2 reduces to the following form when $m=m_{1}$ .

Corollary 3.

Let $A$ , $\bar{A}$ , $S$ , $\bar{S}$ be finite sets and $f\colon A\rightarrow\bar{A}$ , $\bar{f}\colon S\rightarrow\bar{S}$ , $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ , $\bar{\lambda}\colon\bar{A}\rightarrow\bar{S}$ be mappings such that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ . Suppose $\lambda$ is surjective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ , and $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $s\in S$ and a fixed $m_{1}\in\mathbb{N}$ . Then $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ .

1 reduces to the sufficiency part of Corollary 3 under the conditions that $\lambda$ is surjective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ , and $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $s\in S$ and a fixed $m\in\mathbb{N}$ . Moreover, Corollary 3 is a corrected version of [51, Theorem 3.1].

III-C The third construction

Construction 3.

Let $(G,\ast)$ be a finite group and $A$ , $S$ be subsets of $G$ . Let $f\colon A\rightarrow G$ , $\bar{f}\colon S\rightarrow G$ , $\lambda\colon A\rightarrow S$ , $\bar{\lambda}\colon G\rightarrow G$ be mappings such that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ , i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

Assume $\bar{\lambda}$ is an endomorphism of $G$ and $u$ is a mapping from $A$ to $G$ such that $\bar{\lambda}(u(a))=c$ for any $a\in A$ and a fixed $c\in G$ . Let $f\ast u$ be the mapping defined by $f(a)\ast u(a)$ for $a\in A$ . In particular, $(f\ast c)(a)=f(a)\ast c(a)=f(a)\ast c$ .

1.

Suppose $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ and $u=v\circ\lambda$ , where $v$ is a mapping from $S$ to $G$ . Then $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ , where $1\leq m\leq\#A$ .
2.

Suppose $\lambda$ is surjective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))$ , and both $f$ and $f\ast u$ are $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $s\in S$ and a fixed $m_{1}\in\mathbb{N}$ . Then $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}\#S$ .

Proof.

Since $\bar{\lambda}$ is an endomorphism of $G$ , $\bar{\lambda}(u(a))=c$ , and $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=\bar{f}\circ\lambda$ , we have

\displaystyle\bar{\lambda}\circ(f\ast u)=(\bar{\lambda}\circ f)\ast(\bar{\lambda}\circ u)=(\bar{f}\circ\lambda)\ast c=(\bar{f}\ast c)\circ\lambda,

i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

We first prove Item 1. Clearly, $I\ast c$ permutes $G$ , where $I$ is the identity mapping on $G$ . Also note that $\bar{f}$ maps $S$ to $G$ and $\bar{f}\ast c=(I\ast c)\circ\bar{f}$ . Hence, $\bar{f}\ast c$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $S$ . By 1, $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m$ and

\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m}\#E_{f\ast u}(\lambda^{-1}(s))+\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)<m}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m}.

By 1, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ for any $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m$ and

\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)\geq m}\#E_{f}(\lambda^{-1}(s))+\sum_{\#\lambda^{-1}(s)<m}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m}.

For any $a\in\lambda^{-1}(s)$ , i.e., $\lambda(a)=s$ , we get $u(a)=v(\lambda(a))=v(s)$ and so

(f\ast u)(a)=f(a)\ast u(a)=f(a)\ast v(s).

(20)

Hence, $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ , and $E_{f\ast u}(\lambda^{-1}(s))=E_{f}(\lambda^{-1}(s))$ . Thus $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ .

We now prove Item 2. Since $\bar{\lambda}$ is an endomorphism of $G$ ,

\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s)\ast c)=\#\ker(\bar{\lambda})=\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s))

by Example 3, and so $\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{f}(s)\ast c)$ . Also note that $\lambda$ is surjective and $f\ast u$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ . Thus, by 2, $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}\ast c$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and

\sum_{s\in E_{\bar{f}\ast c}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m},

(21)

where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}\leq\#S$ . By 2 again, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $\bar{f}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and

\sum_{s\in E_{\bar{f}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(s)=\#A\bmod{m},

(22)

where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}\leq\#S$ . Note that $\bar{f}$ maps $S$ to $G$ , $I\ast c$ permutes $G$ , and $\bar{f}\ast c=(I\ast c)\circ\bar{f}$ . Hence, $\bar{f}\ast c$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ if and only if $\bar{f}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and $E_{\bar{f}\ast c}(S)=E_{\bar{f}}(S)$ , i.e., Eq. 21 is equivalent to Eq. 22. Thus, $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . ∎

This result reduces the problem whether $f\ast u$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ to that whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $A$ . Thus, it provides a method for constructing new $m$ -to- $1$ mapping $f\ast u$ from known $m$ -to- $1$ mapping $f$ under certain conditions.

Remark 1.

When $u=v\circ\lambda$ , Eq. 20 implies that $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ if and only if $f\ast u$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ . Thus Item 2 also holds without the restriction that $f\ast u$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(s)$ if $u=v\circ\lambda$ . However, Theorem 20 is in the case $u\neq v\circ\lambda$ of 3.

Remark 2.

When $(G,\ast)=(\mathbb{F}_{q},+)$ , $c=0$ and $m_{1}=m=1$ , Item 2 of 3 is reduced to [61, Theorem 3.2].

IV $m$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $x^{r}h(x^{s})$

In the rest of the paper, we consider only the $m$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $x^{r}h(x^{s})$ over finite fields. We first recall the well-known $1$ -to- $1$ property of such polynomials.

Theorem 2.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ for some $\ell,s\in\mathbb{N}$ and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ . Then $x^{r}h(x^{s})$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ if and only if $(r,s)=1$ and $x^{r}h(x)^{s}$ permutes $U_{\ell}$ .

This result appeared in different forms in many references such as [54, 50, 2, 55, 66]. Many classes of permutation polynomials are constructed via an application of this result.

For simplicity, we consider only the case that $x^{r}h(x^{s})$ has only the root $0$ in $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . The following $m$ -to- $1$ relationship between $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ and $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ is a consequence of Definition 1.

Lemma 2.

Assume $f\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has only the root $0$ in $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Then $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ if and only if $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . If $2\leq m\leq q$ , then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ if and only if $m\nmid q$ and $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ .

Proof.

The first part is obvious. Assume $2\leq m\leq q$ and $q=km+r$ , where $0\leq r\leq m-1$ . If $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , then $0\in E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q})$ and thus $r\geq 1$ . Hence, $m\nmid q$ and $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ with $E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*})=E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q})\setminus\{0\}$ . If $m\nmid q$ and $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , then $r\neq 0$ and so $\#E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*})=(q-1)\bmod{m}\leq m-2$ . Thus, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ with $E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q})=E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*})\cup\{0\}$ . ∎

It is easy to check whether $m$ divides $q$ . Hence, for the polynomial $f$ having only the root $0$ in $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , we only consider the problem when $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ in the sequel. In particular, we obtain the following main theorem for $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ .

Theorem 3.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $\ell,r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}\coloneqq\{\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}:\alpha^{\ell}=1\}$ . If $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ , then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ , and $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ .

Proof.

Evidently, $x^{s_{1}}\circ f=x^{rs_{1}}h(x^{s})^{s_{1}}=x^{r_{1}s}h(x^{s})^{s_{1}}=g\circ x^{s}$ . Since $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ is a cyclic group and $s\mid q-1$ , $x^{s}$ is $s$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ onto $U_{\ell}$ . Because $h$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ , $h(x^{s})\neq 0$ for any $x\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , and so $f(\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*})\subseteq\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Since $s_{1}\mid q-1$ , $x^{s_{1}}$ is $s_{1}$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ onto $U_{\ell m_{1}}$ . For any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ ,

g(\alpha)^{\ell m_{1}}=\alpha^{r_{1}\ell m_{1}}h(\alpha)^{s_{1}\ell m_{1}}=(\alpha^{\ell})^{r_{1}m_{1}}h(\alpha)^{\ell s}=1

and so $g(U_{\ell})\subseteq U_{\ell m_{1}}$ . Thus the following diagram is commutative:

Put $\lambda=x^{s}$ and $\bar{\lambda}=x^{s_{1}}$ . It follows from $s=m_{1}s_{1}$ that $\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=m_{1}\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(g(\alpha))$ for any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ . Write $\alpha=\xi^{is}$ for $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ , where $1\leq i\leq\ell$ and $\xi$ is a primitive element of $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Then $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=\xi^{i}\langle\xi^{\ell}\rangle$ , where $\langle\xi^{\ell}\rangle$ is a cyclic group of order $s$ . Thus $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ by $(r,s)=m_{1}$ . According to 2, for $1\leq m\leq m_{1}\#U_{\ell}$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ , and

\sum_{\alpha\in E_{g}(U_{\ell})}\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=\#\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}\bmod m.

(23)

Let $\ell=\ell_{2}m_{2}+t$ with $0\leq t<m_{2}$ . Then $\#E_{g}(U_{\ell})=t$ and

q-1=\ell s=\ell_{2}sm_{2}+st=\ell_{2}(s/m_{1})m+st.

Hence, the right-hand side of Eq. 23 is $st\bmod m$ . Since $\lambda$ is $s$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ onto $U_{\ell}$ , the left-hand side of Eq. 23 is $st$ . Now Eq. 23 becomes $st=st\bmod m$ , i.e., $st<m$ . ∎

From the above proof, we see that Theorem 3 is a special case of 2, and the explicit condition $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ is a simplified version of the restriction Eq. 23 about exceptional sets. Theorem 3 gives us a recipe to construct $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ from $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ mappings on its subgroup $U_{\ell}$ under suitable conditions.

Example 4.

Let $f(x)=x^{2}h(x^{4})$ and $g(x)=xh(x)^{2}$ , where $h(x)=x^{2}+x+3\in\mathbb{F}_{17}[x]$ . Then $U_{4}=\{\pm 1,\pm 4\}$ , $h$ has no roots in $U_{4}$ , $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{4}$ , and the exceptional set $E_{g}(U_{4})=\{-4\}$ . Thus $f$ is $6$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{17}^{*}$ . Moreover, it is easy to verify that $E_{f}(\mathbb{F}_{17}^{*})=\{\pm 3,\pm 5\}=\lambda^{-1}(E_{g}(U_{4}))$ , where $\lambda=x^{4}$ .

Remark 3.

In Theorem 3, when $m<s\leq\ell m_{1}$ , the condition that $h$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ is necessary for $f$ to be $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Indeed, if $h$ has a root in $U_{\ell}$ , then by the fact that $x^{s}$ is $s$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ onto $U_{\ell}$ , we have $\#f^{-1}(0)\geq s>m$ , which contradicts the definition of $m$ -to- $1$ .

When $m=1$ , Theorem 3 is reduced to Theorem 2. Moreover, applying Theorem 3 to $m_{1}=1$ or $m_{2}=1$ yields the following results.

Corollary 4.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $(r,s)=1$ , where $\ell,r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r}h(x)^{s}$ , where $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $g$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ and $s(\ell\bmod{m})<m$ , where $1\leq m\leq\ell$ .

Corollary 4 generalizes [46, Proposition 4.9] where $m\mid\ell$ .

Corollary 5.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $\ell,r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ .

When $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ , $\lambda(x)=x^{s}$ , and $\bar{\lambda}(x)=x^{s_{1}}$ , 1 reduces to the sufficiency part of Corollary 5, and thus 2 is more general than 1. For this reason, we will not consider 1 in the sequel.

Theorem 3 converts the problem whether $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ to the second problem whether $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ . In the following sections, we will study the second problem in depth for the special cases such as

1.

$m=2,3$ or $\ell=2,3$ ;
2.

$g$ behaves like a monomial on $U_{\ell}$ ;
3.

$g$ behaves like a rational function on $U_{\ell}$ ;
4.

the second problem is further reduced to another problem by using 2 again.

Similar results on the $1$ -to- $1$ mappings can be found in the survey paper [56] and references therein.

V Small $m$ or $\ell$

Applying Theorem 3 to $m=2$ , $3$ yields the next results.

Theorem 4.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $r\geq 1$ , $s\geq 2$ , and $\ell\geq 2$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$m_{1}=1$ , $\ell$ is even, and $g$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ ;
2.

$m_{1}=2$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ .

Proof.

By Theorem 3, $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid 2$ , $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<2$ , and $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ , where $m_{2}=2/m_{1}$ . If $m_{1}=1$ , then $m_{2}=2$ . Since $s\geq 2$ , $s(\ell\bmod{2})<2$ is equivalent to $2\mid\ell$ . If $m_{1}=2$ , then $m_{2}=1$ and $s(\ell\bmod{1})=0<2$ . ∎

Item 2 of Theorem 4 generalizes [43, Proposition 16] which only gives the sufficiency. We next give an example of Theorem 4.

Corollary 6.

Let $f(x)=x^{r}(x^{\frac{2q-2}{3}}+x^{\frac{q-1}{3}}+a)$ , where $r\geq 1$ , $q\geq 7$ , $3\mid q-1$ , and $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus\{1,-2\}$ . Then $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $(r,\frac{q-1}{3})=2$ , $r\equiv 2,4\pmod{6}$ , and $((a-1)^{5}(a+2))^{\frac{q-1}{6}}\notin\{\omega,\omega^{2}\}$ , where $\omega$ is a primitive third root of unity over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ .

Proof.

Clearly, $\ell=3$ and $U_{3}=\{1,\omega,\omega^{2}\}$ . Let $h(x)=x^{2}+x+a$ . Then $h(1)=a+2$ and $h(\omega)=h(\omega^{2})=a-1$ , and so $h$ has no roots in $U_{3}$ . By Theorem 4, $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $(r,\frac{q-1}{3})=2$ and $g(x)\coloneqq x^{\frac{r}{2}}h(x)^{\frac{q-1}{6}}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ , i.e., $g(1)$ , $g(\omega)$ , and $g(\omega^{2})$ are distinct. The latter is equivalent to $((a-1)^{5}(a+2))^{\frac{q-1}{6}}\notin\{\omega^{\frac{r}{2}},\omega^{r}\}$ and $\omega^{\frac{r}{2}}\neq 1$ . Then the result follows from $2\mid r$ and $\mathrm{ord}(\omega)=3$ . ∎

Theorem 5.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $r\geq 1$ , $s\geq 2$ , and $\ell\geq 3$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$m_{1}=1$ , $\ell\equiv 0\pmod{3}$ , and $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ ;
2.

$m_{1}=1$ , $\ell\equiv 1\pmod{3}$ , $s=2$ , and $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ ;
3.

$m_{1}=3$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ .

Proof.

By Theorem 3, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid 3$ , $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<3$ , and $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ , where $m_{2}=3/m_{1}$ . If $m_{1}=1$ , then $m_{2}=3$ . Since $s\geq 2$ , $s(\ell\bmod{3})<3$ is equivalent to $\ell\equiv 0\pmod{3}$ or $\ell\equiv 1\pmod{3}$ and $s=2$ . If $m_{1}=3$ , then $m_{2}=1$ and $s(\ell\bmod{1})=0<3$ . ∎

When $U_{\ell}$ has few elements, i.e., $\ell$ is small, it is easy to determine the $m$ -to- $1$ property of $g$ on $U_{\ell}$ . We demonstrate the cases $\ell=2$ , $3$ as an example.

Theorem 6.

Let $q$ be odd, $s=(q-1)/2$ , and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ with $h(1)h(-1)\neq 0$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq 2m_{1}$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$m=m_{1}$ and $g(1)\neq g(-1)$ ;
2.

$m=2m_{1}$ and $g(1)=g(-1)$ .

Applying Theorem 6 to $h(x)=x+a$ yields the next result.

Corollary 7.

Let $f(x)=x^{r}(x^{\frac{q-1}{2}}+a)$ , where $r\in\mathbb{N}$ , $q$ is odd, and $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus\{\pm 1\}$ . Then $f$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$(r,\frac{q-1}{2})=1$ and $(a^{2}-1)^{\frac{q-1}{2}}=(-1)^{r}$ ;
2.

$(r,\frac{q-1}{2})=2$ and $((a+1)/(a-1))^{\frac{q-1}{4}}\neq(-1)^{\frac{r}{2}}$ .

This result generalizes [46, Theorem 4.14] in which $q\equiv 3\pmod{4}$ and $(r,\frac{q-1}{2})=1$ .

Theorem 7.

Let $s=(q-1)/3$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $r$ , $s\in\mathbb{N}$ and $3\mid q-1$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{3}$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq 3m_{1}$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$m=m_{1}$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ ;
2.

$m=2m_{1}$ , $g$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ , and $s\mid r$ ;
3.

$m=3m_{1}$ and $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ .

Applying Theorem 7 to $h(x)=x-a$ yields the next result.

Corollary 8.

Let $f(x)=x^{r}(x^{\frac{q-1}{3}}-a)$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}(x-a)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r\in\mathbb{N}$ , $3\mid q-1$ , $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus U_{3}$ , $r_{1}=r/(r,\frac{q-1}{3})$ , and $s_{1}=(q-1)/(3r,q-1)$ . Then $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$(r,\frac{q-1}{3})=1$ and $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ ;
2.

$(r,\frac{q-1}{3})=3$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{3}$ .

Example 5.

Let $f(x)=x^{2}(x^{21}+\xi^{9})$ and $g(x)=x^{2}(x+\xi^{9})^{21}$ , where $\xi$ is a primitive element of $\mathbb{F}_{64}$ such that $\xi^{6}+\xi^{4}+\xi^{3}+\xi+1=0$ . Then $g(1)=g(\omega)=g(\omega^{2})=1$ , where $\omega=\xi^{21}$ . Hence $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{64}^{*}$ .

Similar results on the $1$ -to- $1$ mappings can be found in [45, 23, 56] and references therein.

VI Monomials

The difficulty in applying Theorem 3 is to verify that $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ . However, the task is easy when $g$ behaves like a monomial on $U_{\ell}$ . The results in this section are conjunctions of Theorem 3 and some results in [2, 66, 67].

Theorem 8.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ , $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , and $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , where $\ell,r,s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ be such that $h(\alpha)^{s_{1}}=\beta\alpha^{t}$ for any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ , a fixed $\beta\in U_{\ell}$ , and a fixed integer $t$ . Then $f(x)\coloneqq x^{r}h(x^{s})$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(r_{1}+t,\ell)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ .

Proof.

For any $x\in U_{\ell}$ , by $h(x)^{s_{1}}=\beta x^{t}$ , we get $x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}=\beta x^{r_{1}+t}$ , which is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ if and only if $(r_{1}+t,\ell)=m_{2}$ . The result follows now from Theorem 3. ∎

In Theorem 8, $g(x)\coloneqq x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ behaves like the monomial $\beta x^{r_{1}+t}$ on $U_{\ell}$ . The following results give choices for the parameters satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem 8.

Corollary 9.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $\ell$ , $r$ , $s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})^{\ell m_{1}}$ , where $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(r,\ell m_{1})=m$ , where $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ .

Proof.

For $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ , $h(\alpha)^{\ell m_{1}s_{1}}=h(\alpha)^{q-1}=1$ . Now the result is in the special case $\beta=1$ and $t=0$ of Theorem 8. ∎

VI-A $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$

Now we extend a class of permutations of $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ in [67, Theorem 5.1] to $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

Theorem 9.

Suppose $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ and $\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{q}=M(x)$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $\deg(M)\leq t\leq 2\deg(M)$ . Let

f(x)=x^{r}M(x^{q-1})^{km_{1}},

where $r$ , $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(r_{1}-kt,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ and $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Proof.

Since $0\neq\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{q}=M(x)$ for $x\in U_{q+1}$ , we get $M(x)^{q-1}=\varepsilon^{-1}x^{-t}$ , and so $M(x)^{k(q-1)}=\varepsilon^{-k}x^{-kt}$ . Then the result follows from Theorem 8. ∎

When $t=\deg(M)$ and $k=m_{1}=m=1$ , Theorem 9 is equivalent to [67, Theorem 5.1].

Remark 4.

The polynomial $M$ satisfying $\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{q}=M(x)$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ can be determined explicitly. Indeed, let $M(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{d}a_{i}x^{i}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ , where $d=\deg(M)$ . Then a direct computation gives that $\varepsilon x^{t}M^{q}=M$ if and only if

M(x)=\sum_{i=t-d}^{\lfloor t/2\rfloor}(a_{i}x^{i}+\varepsilon a_{i}^{q}x^{t-i}),

(24)

where $\lfloor t/2\rfloor$ denotes the largest integer $\leq t/2$ .

For simplicity, take $t=d$ , $a_{0}=-a\in U_{q+1}$ , $\varepsilon=-a$ , and other $a_{i}=0$ . Then $M(x)=x^{d}-a$ , and it has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $a\notin(U_{q+1})^{d}$ . Hence we obtain the following result.

Corollary 10.

Let $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfy $a^{q+1}=1$ and $a^{t}\neq 1$ , where $t=(q+1)/(d,q+1)$ with $d\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let

f(x)=x^{r}(x^{d(q-1)}-a)^{km_{1}},

where $r$ , $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(r_{1}-kd,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ and $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Example 6.

Let $q$ be odd such that $3\mid q+1$ and $8\nmid q+1$ . Then $x^{4q-3}+x$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

Example 7.

Let $q$ be odd and $3\mid q+1$ . Let $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfy $a^{q+1}=1$ and $a^{(q+1)/3}\neq 1$ . Then $x^{3q-2}-ax$ is $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

Example 8.

Let $q=2^{10k+5}$ with $k\geq 0$ . Let $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfy $a^{q+1}=1$ and $a^{(q+1)/11}\neq 1$ . Then $x^{22q-21}+a^{2}x$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

VI-B $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$

Next we extend two classes of permutations of $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ in [66] to $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ .

Theorem 10.

Let $q^{n}-1=\ell s$ , $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , and $\ell m_{1}\mid(q-1,n)$ , where $n$ , $\ell$ , $s$ , $r\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ , where $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ .

Proof.

Let $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ and $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ . By $q\equiv 1\pmod{\ell m_{1}}$ ,

\frac{q^{\ell m_{1}}-1}{q-1}=\sum^{\ell m_{1}-1}_{i=0}q^{i}\equiv 0\pmod{\ell m_{1}},

and so $q-1$ divides $(q^{\ell m_{1}}-1)/(\ell m_{1})$ , which divides

(q^{n}-1)/(\ell m_{1})=s/m_{1}=s_{1}.

Thus $q-1\mid s_{1}$ . For $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ , we have $\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ by $\ell\mid q-1$ , and so $h(\alpha)\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Then $h(\alpha)^{s_{1}}=1$ by $q-1\mid s_{1}$ . Since $\ell\mid q-1$ and $q-1\mid s_{1}$ , we get $\ell\mid s_{1}$ . Then $(r_{1},\ell)=1$ by $(r_{1},s_{1})=1$ . Now the result is in the special case $t=0$ and $m=m_{1}$ of Theorem 8. ∎

In the following results we use the notation

h_{d}(x)=x^{d-1}+x^{d-2}+\cdots+x+1.

(25)

Theorem 11.

Let $q^{n}-1=\ell s$ , $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , and $\ell m_{1}\mid q+1$ , where $n$ is even, $\ell,s,r\in\mathbb{N}$ . Assume

h(x)\coloneqq h_{d}(x^{e})^{t}H(h_{k}(x^{e})^{\ell_{0}})

has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ , where $H\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ , $d,e,t,k\in\mathbb{N}$ , and $\ell_{0}=\ell/(\ell,k-1)$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ , $f(x)\coloneqq x^{r}h(x^{s})$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and

\Big(\ell m_{1},r+\frac{(1-d)est}{q-1}\Big)=m.

(26)

Proof.

Since $n$ is even and $\ell m_{1}\mid q+1$ , we have the divisibility relations

q-1=\frac{q^{2}-1}{q+1}\mid\frac{q^{n}-1}{q+1}\mid\frac{q^{n}-1}{\ell m_{1}}=s_{1},

where $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ . For $\alpha\in U_{\ell}\setminus\{1\}$ , we get $\alpha^{q}=\alpha^{-1}$ by $\ell\mid q+1$ , and so

h_{k}(\alpha)^{q}=\Big(\frac{\alpha^{k}-1}{\alpha-1}\Big)^{q}=\frac{\alpha^{-k}-1}{\alpha^{-1}-1}=\frac{h_{k}(\alpha)}{\alpha^{k-1}}.

Then $h_{k}(\alpha)^{\ell_{0}q}=h_{k}(\alpha)^{\ell_{0}}$ , i.e., $h_{k}(\alpha)^{\ell_{0}}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Clearly, $h_{k}(1)=k\in\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Since $H\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ and $H(h_{k}(x^{e})^{\ell_{0}})$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ , we have $H(h_{k}(\alpha^{e})^{\ell_{0}})\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ for any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ . Thus $H(h_{k}(\alpha^{e})^{\ell_{0}})^{s_{1}}=1$ .

For $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ , if $\alpha^{e}\neq 1$ , then $\alpha^{q}=\alpha^{-1}$ by $\ell\mid q+1$ , and so

h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{q}=\Big(\frac{\alpha^{ed}-1}{\alpha^{e}-1}\Big)^{q}=\frac{\alpha^{-ed}-1}{\alpha^{-e}-1}=\frac{h_{d}(\alpha^{e})}{\alpha^{e(d-1)}}.

By hypothesis, $h_{d}(x^{e})$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ , and so $h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{q-1}=\alpha^{e(1-d)}$ . Thus,

h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{s_{1}}=h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{(q-1)s_{1}/(q-1)}=\alpha^{e(1-d)s_{1}/(q-1)}.

If $\alpha^{e}=1$ , then $h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{s_{1}}=h_{d}(1)^{s_{1}}=d^{s_{1}}=1$ by $d\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ and $q-1\mid s_{1}$ . Thus $h_{d}(\alpha^{e})^{s_{1}}=\alpha^{e(1-d)s_{1}/(q-1)}$ for any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ . Then the result follows from Theorem 8. ∎

The following lemma characterizes the condition that $h_{d}(x^{e})$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ .

Lemma 3.

Let $U_{\ell}$ be the cyclic group of all $\ell$ -th roots of unity over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}$ , where $\ell,n\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\ell\mid q^{n}-1$ . Then $h_{d}(x^{e})$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ if and only if $(d,q\ell/(e,\ell))=1$ , where $d,e\in\mathbb{N}$ .

Proof.

Evidently, $h_{d}(1)\neq 0$ if and only if $(d,q)=1$ . For $\alpha\in U_{\ell}\setminus\{1\}$ , $h_{d}(\alpha)=(\alpha^{d}-1)/(\alpha-1)$ . Then $h_{d}(\alpha)\neq 0$ if and only if $\alpha^{d}\neq 1$ , which is equivalent to $(d,\ell)=1$ . Hence, $h_{d}(x)$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ if and only if $(d,q\ell)=1$ . Note that $x^{e}$ is $(e,\ell)$ -to- $1$ from $U_{\ell}$ onto $U_{\ell/(e,\ell)}$ . Thus, $h_{d}(x^{e})$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ if and only if $h_{d}(x)$ has no roots in $U_{\ell/(e,\ell)}$ , which is equivalent to $(d,q\ell/(e,\ell))=1$ . ∎

Applying Theorem 10 to $h(x)=h_{d}(x^{e})^{t}$ and Theorem 11 to $H(x)=1$ yields the following results.

Corollary 11.

Let $q^{n}-1=\ell s$ , $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , and $\ell m_{1}\mid(q-1,n)$ , where $n,\ell,s,r\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h_{d}(x^{es})^{t}$ , where $d,e,t\in\mathbb{N}$ with $(d,q\ell/(e,\ell))=1$ . Then $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ .

Corollary 12.

Let $q^{n}-1=\ell s$ , $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , and $\ell m_{1}\mid q+1$ , where $n$ is even, $\ell,s,r\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h_{d}(x^{es})^{t}$ , where $d,e,t\in\mathbb{N}$ with $(d,q\ell/(e,\ell))=1$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and Eq. 26 holds, where $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ .

The results in this subsection extend Theorems 1.2 and 1.3, Corollaries 2.3 and 2.4 in [66] where $m_{1}=1$ and $(e,\ell)=1$ .

VII Rational functions

In this section, we demonstrate the case that $g$ behaves like a rational function on $U_{\ell}$ . Part 1 presents a class of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ by using a known $1$ -to- $1$ rational function. Parts 2 and 3 give two classes of rational functions that are $3$ -to- $1$ and $5$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ respectively, by employing the decompositions of related algebraic curves.

Applying Theorem 3 to $\ell=q+1$ and $s=q-1$ yields the next result.

Theorem 12.

Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{q-1})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $r\geq 1$ , $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=(q-1)/m_{1}$ , and $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , and $(q-1)(q+1\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ and $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ .

VII-A Known $1$ -to- $1$ rational functions

Lemma 4 ([21, Lemma 2.2]).

For $n\in\mathbb{N}$ , $x^{4}+x+1$ and $x^{4}+x^{3}+1$ have no roots in $U_{2^{n}+1}$ .

Lemma 5 ([62, Lemma 3.2]).

Let $q=2^{n}$ with $n\geq 1$ . Then

G(x)\coloneqq\frac{x^{5}+x^{2}+x}{x^{4}+x^{3}+1}

permutes $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $n$ is even.

Theorem 13.

Let $q=2^{n}$ with $n$ even. Then $x^{4q+1}+x^{3q+2}+x^{5}$ is $(5,q-1)$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

Proof.

Put $h(x)=x^{4}+x^{3}+1$ and $g(x)=x^{\frac{5}{m_{1}}}h(x)^{\frac{q-1}{m_{1}}}$ , where $m_{1}=(5,q-1)$ . Then

	$\displaystyle x^{m_{1}}\circ g(x)$	$\displaystyle=x^{5}h(x)^{q-1}$
		$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{5}(x^{4}+x^{3}+1)^{q}}{x^{4}+x^{3}+1}$
		$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{5}(x^{-4}+x^{-3}+1)}{x^{4}+x^{3}+1}$
		$\displaystyle=G(x)$

for $x\in U_{q+1}$ . By Lemma 5, $G$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , and so $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . Then the result follows form Lemmas 4 and 12. ∎

Theorem 13 extends [62, Theorems 3.1 and 3.2] where $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ .

VII-B New $3$ -to- $1$ rational function

We begin with a different proof of a result in [32, 11, 38, 27].

Lemma 6 ([32, 11, 38, 27]).

Let

T_{i}=\{c\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}^{*}\mid\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=i\}

with $i\in\{0,1\}$ . Then the mapping $a\mapsto a+a^{-1}$ is $2$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}\setminus\{0,1\}$ onto $T_{0}$ and it is also $2$ -to- $1$ from $U_{2^{n}+1}\setminus\{1\}$ onto $T_{1}$ , where $U_{2^{n}+1}=\{a\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{2n}}\mid a^{2^{n}+1}=1\}$ .

Proof.

For $a\in U_{2^{n}+1}\setminus\{1\}$ , we have $a+1/a\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}^{*}$ and

	$\displaystyle\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/(a+1/a))$	$\displaystyle=\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/(a+1)+1/(a^{2}+1))$
		$\displaystyle=1/(a+1)+1/(a^{2^{n}}+1)$
		$\displaystyle=1,$

i.e., $a+1/a\in T_{1}$ . For any $a$ , $a+b\in U_{2^{n}+1}\setminus\{1\}$ , if $a+1/a=(a+b)+1/(a+b)$ , then $b=0$ or $b=(a^{2}+1)/a\neq 0$ . Thus, $a\mapsto a+1/a$ is $2$ -to- $1$ from $U_{2^{n}+1}\setminus\{1\}$ onto $T_{1}$ with cardinality $2^{n-1}$ . Similarly, $a\mapsto a+1/a$ is $2$ -to- $1$ from $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}\setminus\{0,1\}$ onto $T_{0}$ with cardinality $2^{n-1}-1$ . ∎

Corollary 13.

For any $c\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}^{*}$ , $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=0$ if and only if $c=a+a^{-1}$ for some $a\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}\setminus\{0,1\}$ , and $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=1$ if and only if $c=a+a^{-1}$ for some $a\in U_{2^{n}+1}\setminus\{1\}$ .

We next give a new class of $3$ -to- $1$ rational functions on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ .

Theorem 14.

Let $c\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}^{*}$ with $n\geq 1$ and

g(x)=\frac{cx^{3}+x^{2}+1}{x^{3}+x+c}.

If $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1+c^{-1})=0$ , then $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ . If $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1+c^{-1})=1$ , then $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ .

Proof.

Put $q=2^{n}$ . Proposition 3.1 (i) in [6] implies that $x^{3}+x+c$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Then for any $x$ , $y\in U_{q+1}$ , $g(x)=g(y)$ is equivalent to

(cx^{3}+x^{2}+1)(y^{3}+y+c)=(cy^{3}+y^{2}+1)(x^{3}+x+c).

(27)

Proposition 3.2 (ii) in [6] states that Eq. 27 factors as

(x+y)H_{1}(x,y)H_{2}(x,y)=0,

(28)

where $H_{1}(x,y)=xy+\alpha x+\beta y+1$ , $H_{2}(x,y)=xy+\beta x+\alpha y+1$ , and $\alpha,\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ are the roots of $Q(x)\coloneqq x^{2}+cx+c^{2}+1$ . Thus $\alpha+\beta=c$ and $\alpha\beta=c^{2}+1$ .

(i) When $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1+c^{-1})=0$ , we get $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}((c^{2}+1)/c^{2})=0$ and thus $\alpha,\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . For any $x$ , $y\in U_{q+1}$ ,

	$\displaystyle xyH_{1}(x,y)^{q}$	$\displaystyle=xy(xy+\alpha x+\beta y+1)^{q}$
		$\displaystyle=xy(x^{-1}y^{-1}+\alpha x^{-1}+\beta y^{-1}+1)$
		$\displaystyle=xy+\beta x+\alpha y+1$
		$\displaystyle=H_{2}(x,y)$

and hence the roots of $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ are the same. For $x$ , $y\in U_{q+1}$ , if $H_{1}(x,y)\neq 0$ , then $H_{2}(x,y)\neq 0$ and thus $x=y$ by Eq. 28, which implies that $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ . Therefore, we need only show that if $H_{1}(x,y)=0$ , then $x=y$ .

If $\beta\in U_{q+1}$ , then $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\cap U_{q+1}=\{1\}$ , i.e., $\beta=1$ . Since $\alpha+\beta=c$ and $\alpha\beta=c^{2}+1$ , we get $\alpha=c+1=c^{2}+1$ . Hence $c=1$ and so $\alpha=0$ . Then $H_{1}(x,y)=xy+y+1$ . If $H_{1}(x,y)=0$ , then $x\neq 1$ and $y=(x+1)^{-1}$ . By $y^{q}=y^{-1}$ , we get $x^{2}+x=1$ and thus $y=(x+1)^{-1}=x$ .

If $\beta\notin U_{q+1}$ , then $x+\beta\neq 0$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . If $H_{1}(x,y)=0$ , then $y=(\alpha x+1)/(x+\beta)$ and so

y^{q}=\Big(\frac{\alpha x+1}{x+\beta}\Big)^{q}=\frac{\alpha x^{-1}+1}{x^{-1}+\beta}=\frac{\alpha+x}{1+\beta x}.

By $y\in U_{q+1}$ and $\alpha+\beta=c\neq 0$ , we get the following equivalent statements:

	$\displaystyle y^{q}=y^{-1}~\Longleftrightarrow$	$\displaystyle~~\frac{\alpha+x}{1+\beta x}=\frac{x+\beta}{\alpha x+1}$
	$\displaystyle\Longleftrightarrow$	$\displaystyle~~(\alpha+\beta)x^{2}+(\alpha+\beta)^{2}x+(\alpha+\beta)=0$
	$\displaystyle\Longleftrightarrow$	$\displaystyle~~x^{2}+(\alpha+\beta)x+1=0$
	$\displaystyle\Longleftrightarrow$	$\displaystyle~~x=(\alpha x+1)/(x+\beta)=y.$

(ii) When $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1+c^{-1})=1$ , we have

\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}((c^{2}+1)/c^{2})=1.

Thus $Q$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ and so $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}\setminus\mathbb{F}_{q}$ with $\beta=\alpha^{q}$ . Since $\alpha^{q+1}=c^{2}+1$ and $c\neq 0$ , we get $\alpha$ , $\alpha^{q}\notin U_{q+1}$ . Let

$\displaystyle y_{0}$	$\displaystyle=x,$	(29)
$\displaystyle y_{1}$	$\displaystyle=(\alpha x+1)/(x+\alpha^{q}),$
$\displaystyle y_{2}$	$\displaystyle=(\alpha^{q}x+1)/(x+\alpha).$

Then for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ ,

y_{1}^{q}=\Big(\frac{\alpha x+1}{x+\alpha^{q}}\Big)^{q}=\frac{x+\alpha^{q}}{\alpha x+1}=\frac{1}{y_{1}}

and $y_{2}^{q}=y_{2}^{-1}$ similarly. Thus $(x,y_{i})\in U_{q+1}\times U_{q+1}$ , $0\leq i\leq 2$ , are solutions of Eq. 28. Hence, $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , $y_{2}$ are distinct for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ except for $(q+1)\bmod{3}$ elements. By Eq. 29 and $\alpha+\alpha^{q}=c$ , it is easy to verify that $y_{i}=y_{j}$ for any $i\neq j\in\{0,1,2\}$ if and only if $x^{2}+cx+1=0$ .

If $n$ is odd, then $3\mid q+1$ and $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1)=1$ . Since $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1+c^{-1})=1$ , we get $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ . By Corollary 13, $x^{2}+cx+1$ has two distinct roots $x_{0}$ , $x_{0}^{-1}$ in $\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus\{0,1\}$ . Hence for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $x^{2}+cx+1\neq 0$ , and thus $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , $y_{2}$ are distinct. Therefore, $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ .

If $n$ is even, then $q+1\equiv 2\pmod{3}$ and $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1)=0$ . Since $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1+c^{-1})=1$ , we get $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=1$ . By Corollary 13, $x^{2}+cx+1$ has two distinct roots $x_{0}$ , $x_{0}^{-1}$ in $U_{q+1}\setminus\{1\}$ . Hence for any $x\in U_{q+1}\setminus\{x_{0},x_{0}^{-1}\}$ , $x^{2}+cx+1\neq 0$ , and thus $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , $y_{2}$ are distinct. Therefore, $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . ∎

Theorem 14 can also be obtained from the perspective of composition of rational functions; see Remark 9. Moreover, this result generalizes [62, Lemma 4.1] where $c=1$ and [6, Proposition 3.2 (ii)] where $n$ is even and $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=0$ . It also implies the following result.

Theorem 15.

Let $g_{1}(x)=x(x^{3}+x+c)^{\frac{2^{n}-1}{3}}$ , where $c\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}^{*}$ and $n$ is even. If $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=0$ , then $g_{1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ . If $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=1$ , then $g_{1}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{2^{n}+1}$ .

Proof.

Let $q=2^{n}$ . For any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $x^{q}=x^{-1}$ and thus

$\displaystyle x^{3}\circ g_{1}$	$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{3}(x^{3}+x+c)^{q}}{x^{3}+x+c}$	(30)
	$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{3}(x^{-3}+x^{-1}+c)}{x^{3}+x+c}$
	$\displaystyle=\frac{cx^{3}+x^{2}+1}{x^{3}+x+c}.$

If $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ , then $x^{3}\circ g_{1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ by Theorem 14, and thus $g_{1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ .

If $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=1$ , then $x^{2}+cx+c^{2}+1$ has two roots $\alpha$ , $\alpha^{q}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}\setminus\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , where $\alpha+\alpha^{q}=c$ and $\alpha^{q+1}=c^{2}+1$ . Thus, $\alpha$ , $\alpha^{q}\notin U_{q+1}$ , $\alpha^{q}=\alpha+c$ , $\alpha^{2}=c\alpha+c^{2}+1$ , and $\alpha^{3}=\alpha\alpha^{2}=\alpha+c^{3}+c$ . Let

	$\displaystyle y_{0}$	$\displaystyle=x,$
	$\displaystyle y_{1}$	$\displaystyle=(\alpha x+1)/(x+\alpha^{q}),$
	$\displaystyle y_{2}$	$\displaystyle=(\alpha^{q}x+1)/(x+\alpha).$

In the proof of Theorem 14, we have already shown that $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , $y_{2}\in U_{q+1}$ and they are distinct for any $x\in U_{q+1}\setminus\{x_{0},x_{0}^{-1}\}$ , where $x_{0}$ , $x_{0}^{-1}\in U_{q+1}$ are the roots of $x^{2}+cx+1$ . To prove that $g_{1}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , we need only show

g_{1}(y_{0})=g_{1}(y_{1})=g_{1}(y_{2})

for any $x\in U_{q+1}\setminus\{x_{0},x_{0}^{-1}\}$ . Indeed, for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ ,

\displaystyle\frac{\alpha x+1}{(x+\alpha^{q})^{q}}=\frac{\alpha x+1}{x^{q}+(\alpha+c)^{q}}=\frac{\alpha x+1}{x^{-1}+\alpha}=x\quad\text{and}

		$\displaystyle\phantom{{}={}}(\alpha x+1)^{3}+(\alpha x+1)(x+\alpha^{q})^{2}+c(x+\alpha^{q})^{3}$
		$\displaystyle=(\alpha x+1)^{3}+(\alpha x+1)(x+\alpha+c)^{2}+c(x+\alpha+c)^{3}$
		$\displaystyle=(\alpha^{3}+\alpha+c)x^{3}+(\alpha^{3}+c\alpha^{2}+(c^{2}+1)\alpha+c^{3})x$
		$\displaystyle\phantom{{}={}}+c(\alpha+c)^{3}+(\alpha+c)^{2}+1$
		$\displaystyle=c^{3}x^{3}+c^{3}x+c^{4}.$

Therefore,

	$\displaystyle g_{1}(y_{1})$	$\displaystyle=\frac{\alpha x+1}{x+\alpha^{q}}\Big(\Big(\frac{\alpha x+1}{x+\alpha^{q}}\Big)^{3}+\frac{\alpha x+1}{x+\alpha^{q}}+c\Big)^{\frac{q-1}{3}}$
		$\displaystyle=x(c^{3}x^{3}+c^{3}x+c^{4})^{\frac{q-1}{3}}$
		$\displaystyle=x(x^{3}+x+c)^{\frac{q-1}{3}}$
		$\displaystyle=g_{1}(y_{0})$

and $g_{1}(y_{2})=g_{1}(y_{0})$ by a similar argument. ∎

Corollary 14.

Let $f(x)=x^{3q}+x^{q+2}+cx^{3}$ , where $q=2^{n}$ with $n\geq 2$ and $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Then $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $n$ is odd and $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=1$ , and $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ .

Proof.

Fix $h(x)=x^{3}+x+c$ . Then $f(x)=x^{3}h(x^{q-1})$ . Let $m_{1}=(3,q-1)$ and $g(x)=x^{3/m_{1}}h(x)^{(q-1)/m_{1}}$ . By Theorem 12, $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}=1$ and $x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , i.e., $n$ is odd and $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=1$ by Eq. 30 and Theorem 14.

By Theorem 5, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if (1) $m_{1}=1$ , $3\mid q+1$ , and $x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , or (2) $m_{1}=3$ and $xh(x)^{(q-1)/3}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . If $n$ is odd, then $m_{1}=1$ and $3\mid q+1$ . By Theorem 14, $x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ . Thus, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ . If $n$ is even, then $m_{1}=3$ . By Theorem 15, $xh(x)^{(q-1)/3}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ . Thus, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ . ∎

The $1$ -to- $1$ part of Corollary 14 is known; see for example [36, 47, 48]. The sufficiency of the $3$ -to- $1$ part can also be verified from the perspective of composition of functions. Indeed, if $\mathrm{Tr}_{2^{n}/2}(1/c)=0$ , then $c=a+a^{-1}$ for some $a\in\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}\setminus\{0,1\}$ by Corollary 13. A direct computation yields that $a\sigma\circ f\circ\sigma=(a+1)^{6}x^{3}$ , where $\sigma(x)=x^{q}+ax$ . Since $\sigma$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ and $x^{3}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , it follows that $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

A mapping $f$ from $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ to itself is called differentially $d$ -uniform (abbreviated $d$ -uniform) if

d=\max_{a,b\in\mathbb{F}_{q},a\neq 0}\#\{x\in\mathbb{F}_{q}:f(x+a)-f(x)=b\}.

In particular, $f$ is called almost perfect nonlinear (APN) if it is $2$ -uniform. Recently, Kölsch et al. [28] established the following equivalence relation between $d$ -uniform mappings and $(d+1)$ -to- $1$ mappings.

Lemma 7 ([28, Corollary 7]).

Let $q=2^{n}$ with $n$ even and

f(x)=\sum\limits_{0\leq i<j\leq n-1}a_{ij}x^{2^{i}+2^{j}}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x].

Assume that $f(x)=g(x^{3})$ for some $g\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ . Then $f$ is APN on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ if and only if $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ .

Combining Corollaries 14 and 7 yields the next result.

Corollary 15.

Let $f(x)=x^{3q}+x^{q+2}+cx^{3}$ , where $q=2^{n}$ with $n$ even and $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Then $f$ is APN on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ .

This result gives an infinite class of APN trinomials, but it is linear equivalent to the well known Gold function $x^{3}$ by the remark after Corollary 14.

Kölsch et al. [28] also showed that all APN functions on $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ with the minimal image size are very close to being $3$ -to- $1$ . Budaghyan et al. [8] provided a list of all known quadratic $3$ -to- $1$ APN functions on $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ for $n\leq 12$ up to EA-equivalence. Beierle et al. [7] computationally constructed 3,775,599 CCZ-inequivalent quadratic APN functions over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{8}}$ and estimated the total number to be about 6 million. Among them, many APN functions meet the condition of Lemma 7, and thus they are $3$ -to- $1$ . Therefore, it would be interesting to explore the method of constructing $m$ -to- $1$ mappings presented in this paper for finding new classes of quadratic APN functions of the form $g(x^{3})$ .

VII-C New $5$ -to- $1$ rational function

Theorem 16.

Let $q=2^{n}$ with $n\geq 1$ and

g(x)=\frac{x^{4}+x+1}{x^{5}+x^{4}+x}.

If $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $g$ is $5$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . If $n\not\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ .

Proof.

By Lemma 4, $x(x^{4}+x^{3}+1)$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Hence for any $x$ , $y\in U_{q+1}$ , $g(x)=g(y)$ is equivalent to

(x^{4}+x+1)(y^{5}+y^{4}+y)=(x^{5}+x^{4}+x)(y^{4}+y+1).

(31)

[3, Page 8] states that Eq. 31 factors as

(x+y)\prod_{i=1}^{4}(xy+\omega^{2^{i-1}}x+\omega^{2^{i+1}}y+1)=0,

(32)

where $\omega$ is a primitive element of $\mathbb{F}_{16}$ such that $\omega^{4}+\omega+1=0$ . This factorization can be verified manually or by a computer program. Since $\mathrm{ord}(\omega^{2^{i+1}})=15$ and $q+1\not\equiv 0\pmod{15}$ , we get $\omega^{2^{i+1}}\notin U_{q+1}$ , and so $x+\omega^{2^{i+1}}\neq 0$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , where $1\leq i\leq 4$ . Let

y_{0}=x\quad\text{and}\quad y_{i}=(\omega^{2^{i-1}}x+1)/(x+\omega^{2^{i+1}}),

(33)

where $1\leq i\leq 4$ . Then $(x,y_{i})\in U_{q+1}\times K$ , $0\leq i\leq 4$ , are solutions of Eq. 32, where $K$ is an extension field of $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ . Thus, $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if and only if Eq. 32 has no roots $(x,y)\in U_{q+1}^{2}$ with $x\neq y$ . When $5\mid q+1$ , $g$ is $5$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , …, $y_{4}$ in $U_{q+1}$ and they are distinct for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ .

For $1\leq i\leq 4$ , a direct computation yields that $y_{i}^{q}=1/y_{i}$ if and only if $\alpha x^{2}+\beta x+\gamma=0$ , where

	$\displaystyle\alpha$	$\displaystyle=\omega^{2^{i-1}}+\omega^{2^{i+1}q},$
	$\displaystyle\beta$	$\displaystyle=\omega^{2^{i-1}}\omega^{2^{i-1}q}+\omega^{2^{i+1}}\omega^{2^{i+1}q},$
	$\displaystyle\gamma$	$\displaystyle=\omega^{2^{i-1}q}+\omega^{2^{i+1}}.$

Because

\omega^{2^{i-1}}+\omega^{2^{i+1}}=(\omega+\omega^{4})^{2^{i-1}}=1,

(34)

we have

	$\displaystyle\beta$	$\displaystyle=\omega^{2^{i-1}}(\omega^{2^{i+1}}+1)^{q}+(\omega^{2^{i-1}}+1)\omega^{2^{i+1}q}=\alpha,$
	$\displaystyle\gamma$	$\displaystyle=(\omega^{2^{i+1}}+1)^{q}+(\omega^{2^{i-1}}+1)=\alpha.$

Thus $y_{i}\in U_{q+1}$ if and only if $\alpha(x^{2}+x+1)=0$ . Since $\omega^{16}=\omega$ , $\alpha=0$ if and only if $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ .

If $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $\alpha=0$ and so $y_{i}\in U_{q+1}$ for $1\leq i\leq 4$ . Hence Eq. 32 has five solutions $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , …, $y_{4}$ in $U_{q+1}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . (i) Assume $y_{i}=y_{0}$ for some $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ . By Eqs. 33 and 34, $y_{i}=y_{0}$ is equivalent to $x^{2}+x+1=0$ . Thus $x^{3}=1$ and $x\neq 1$ , a contradiction to that $U_{q+1}$ has no elements of order $3$ by $(3,q+1)=1$ . (ii) Assume $y_{i}=y_{j}$ for some $i\neq j\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ . By Eq. 33, $y_{i}=y_{j}$ is equivalent to

(\omega^{2^{i-1}}+\omega^{2^{j-1}})x^{2}+(\omega^{2^{i-1}}\omega^{2^{j+1}}+\omega^{2^{i+1}}\omega^{2^{j-1}})x\\ +\omega^{2^{i+1}}+\omega^{2^{j+1}}=0,

(35)

Since $\mathrm{ord}(\omega)=15$ , $\omega^{2^{i-1}}\neq\omega^{2^{j-1}}$ for $i\neq j\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ . By Eq. 34, $\omega^{2^{i+1}}=\omega^{2^{i-1}}+1$ . Hence, Eq. 35 is equivalent to $x^{2}+x+1=0$ , a contradiction to that $U_{q+1}$ has no elements of order $3$ . Combining (i) and (ii), we see that $y_{0}$ , $y_{1}$ , …, $y_{4}$ are distinct. Note that $5\mid q+1$ . Therefore, $g$ is $5$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ .

If $n\not\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $\alpha\neq 0$ . Hence $y_{i}\in U_{q+1}$ for $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ if and only if $x^{2}+x+1=0$ . When $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ , we have $(3,q+1)=1$ , and so $U_{q+1}$ has no elements of order $3$ . Thus, $y_{i}\notin U_{q+1}$ for any $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ , i.e., Eq. 32 has no roots $(x,y)\in U_{q+1}^{2}$ with $x\neq y$ . When $n\equiv 1,3\pmod{4}$ , we get $3\mid q+1$ , and so $U_{q+1}$ has two elements of order $3$ . Then $y_{i}\in U_{q+1}$ , i.e., $x^{2}+x+1=0$ , implies that

\omega^{2^{i-1}}x+1=\omega^{2^{i-1}}x+x+x^{2}=x(\omega^{2^{i+1}}+x),

i.e., $y_{i}=x$ for any $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$ by Eq. 33. Hence, Eq. 32 also has no roots $(x,y)\in U_{q+1}^{2}$ with $x\neq y$ . Therefore, $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ if $n\not\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ . ∎

Theorem 16 extends some results in [21, 39, 37] which only consider the $1$ -to- $1$ property of $g$ by using different methods. Moreover, Theorem 16 can also be obtained from the perspective of composition of rational functions; see Remark 9.

Corollary 16.

Let $f(x)=x^{4q-1}+x^{3q}+x^{3}$ , where $q=2^{n}$ with $n\geq 2$ . Then $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $n$ is odd, and $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ .

Proof.

Fix $h(x)=x^{4}+x^{3}+1$ . Then $h$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ by Lemma 4 and $f(x)=x^{3}h(x^{q-1})$ . For any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $x^{q}=x^{-1}$ and so

	$\displaystyle x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$	$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{3}(x^{4}+x^{3}+1)^{q}}{x^{4}+x^{3}+1}$
		$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{3}(x^{-4}+x^{-3}+1)}{x^{4}+x^{3}+1}$
		$\displaystyle=\frac{x^{4}+x+1}{x^{5}+x^{4}+x}.$

Let $m_{1}=(3,q-1)$ and $g(x)=x^{3/m_{1}}h(x)^{(q-1)/m_{1}}$ . By Theorem 12, $f$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}=1$ and $x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , i.e., $n$ is odd by Theorem 16.

Theorem 16 implies $x^{3}h(x)^{q-1}$ is not $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . Thus, by Theorem 5, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}=3$ and $g_{1}(x)\coloneqq xh(x)^{(q-1)/3}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . The condition $m_{1}=3$ is equivalent to $n$ is even. If $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ , then $x^{3}\circ g_{1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ by Theorem 16, and so $g_{1}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . If $n\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $x^{3}\circ g_{1}$ is $5$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ by Theorem 16. Since $g_{1}$ induces a map from $U_{q+1}$ to $U_{3(q+1)}$ and $x^{3}$ is a $3$ -to- $1$ map from $U_{3(q+1)}$ to $U_{q+1}$ , we have $g_{1}$ is not $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . Hence, $f$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $n\equiv 0\pmod{4}$ . ∎

The $1$ -to- $1$ part of Corollary 16 is the same as [21, Theorem 3.5]. We remark that the polynomial $f$ in Corollary 16 can be written as $f(x)=x^{4q-1}+\mathrm{Tr}_{q^{2}/q}(x^{3})$ , and permutation polynomials of more general form $x^{s}+\gamma\mathrm{Tr}_{q^{n}/q}(x^{t})$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}$ are intensively studied; see for example [31, 9, 30, 10, 20, 35, 26, 25].

VIII Further reduction

By using 2 repeatedly, the following result converts the second problem whether $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ to the third problem whether $\bar{g}$ is $m_{2}/m_{3}$ -to- $1$ on another set $S$ .

Theorem 17.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and $m_{1}=(r,s)$ , where $\ell$ , $r$ , $s\in\mathbb{N}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ , $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ , and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Let $S$ , $\bar{S}$ be finite sets and $\lambda\colon U_{\ell}\rightarrow S$ , $\bar{\lambda}\colon U_{\ell m_{1}}\rightarrow\bar{S}$ , $\bar{g}\colon S\rightarrow\bar{S}$ be mappings such that $\lambda$ is surjective and $\bar{\lambda}\circ g=\bar{g}\circ\lambda$ . That is, the following diagrams are commutative:

Suppose $\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=m_{3}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{g}(\alpha))$ and $g$ is $m_{3}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ for any $\alpha\in S$ and a fixed $m_{3}\in\mathbb{N}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}m_{3}\mid m$ , $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , $\bar{g}$ is $m/(m_{1}m_{3})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and

\sum_{\alpha\in E_{\bar{g}}(S)}\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=\ell\bmod{m_{2}},

(36)

where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}m_{3}\,\#S$ , $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ , and $E_{\bar{g}}(S)$ is the exceptional set of $\bar{g}$ being $m/(m_{1}m_{3})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ .

Proof.

By Theorem 3, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ , and $s(\ell\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , where $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ . Thus, $f$ is not $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if $1\leq m<m_{1}$ , i.e., the result holds when $1\leq m<m_{1}$ . Applying 2 to the lower commutative diagram yields that $g$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ if and only if $m_{3}\mid m_{2}$ , $\bar{g}$ is $(m_{2}/m_{3})$ -to- $1$ on $S$ , and Eq. 36 holds, where $1\leq m_{2}\leq m_{3}\,\#S$ . Note that $m_{1}m_{3}\mid m$ is equivalent to $m_{1}\mid m$ and $m_{3}\mid m_{2}$ . Since $\lambda$ is surjective,

	$\displaystyle\ell$	$\displaystyle=\#U_{\ell}=\sum_{\alpha\in S}\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$
		$\displaystyle=\sum_{\alpha\in S}m_{3}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\bar{g}(\alpha))$
		$\displaystyle\geq m_{3}\,\#S.$

The conditions $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ and $1\leq m_{2}\leq m_{3}\,\#S$ imply that $m_{1}\leq m\leq m_{1}m_{3}\,\#S$ . Thus the result holds when $m_{1}\leq m\leq m_{1}m_{3}\,\#S$ . This completes the proof. ∎

To simplify the construction of commutative diagrams, assume $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ , where $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ . Then $g(x)=x^{r/m_{1}}H(x)^{q-1}$ and it maps $U_{q+1}$ to $U_{q+1}$ . To further reduce the problem, we mainly consider two cases:

1.

$\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to $U_{q+1}$ and $\bar{g}=x^{n}$ ;
2.

$\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ and $\bar{g}=x^{n}$ .

VIII-A $\lambda$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to itself

Theorem 18.

Let $L_{1},L_{2},M_{1},M_{2}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $M_{i}$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $L_{i}=\varepsilon_{i}x^{t_{i}}M_{i}^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , and $L_{i}/M_{i}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ , where $\varepsilon_{i}\in U_{q+1}$ and $t_{i}\geq\deg(M_{i})$ . Let $H=M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\big(M_{2}\circ x^{n}\circ L_{1}/M_{1}\big)$ and

f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}},

where $n$ , $r\in\mathbb{N}$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , $r/m_{1}\equiv nt_{1}t_{2}\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Proof.

Since $M_{1}$ and $M_{2}$ have no roots in $U_{q+1}$ and $L_{1}/M_{1}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ , it follows that $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Let $M_{2}=\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}x^{j}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ . Then

	$\displaystyle H$	$\displaystyle=M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\big(\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}x^{j}\circ x^{n}\circ L_{1}/M_{1}\big)$
		$\displaystyle=M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}(L_{1}/M_{1})^{nj}$
		$\displaystyle=\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}L_{1}^{nj}M_{1}^{n(t_{2}-j)}.$

For $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $L_{i}=\varepsilon_{i}x^{t_{i}}M_{i}^{q}$ implies that $L_{1}^{q}=\varepsilon_{1}^{-1}x^{-t_{1}}M_{1}$ and $\varepsilon_{2}^{-1}L_{2}=x^{t_{2}}M_{2}^{q}=\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}x^{t_{2}-j}$ . Thus,

	$\displaystyle H^{q}$	$\displaystyle=\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}(L_{1}^{q})^{nj}(M_{1}^{q})^{n(t_{2}-j)}$
		$\displaystyle=\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}(\varepsilon_{1}^{-1}x^{-t_{1}}M_{1})^{nj}(\varepsilon_{1}^{-1}x^{-t_{1}}L_{1})^{n(t_{2}-j)}$
		$\displaystyle=(\varepsilon_{1}^{-1}x^{-t_{1}})^{nt_{2}}\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}M_{1}^{nj}L_{1}^{n(t_{2}-j)}$
		$\displaystyle=(\varepsilon_{1}^{-1}x^{-t_{1}})^{nt_{2}}M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}(L_{1}/M_{1})^{n(t_{2}-j)}$
		$\displaystyle=\varepsilon_{1}^{-nt_{2}}x^{-nt_{1}t_{2}}M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\big(\textstyle{\sum}\,a_{j}^{q}x^{t_{2}-j}\circ(L_{1}/M_{1})^{n}\big)$
		$\displaystyle=\varepsilon_{1}^{-nt_{2}}x^{-nt_{1}t_{2}}M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\big(\varepsilon_{2}^{-1}L_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n}\big)$
		$\displaystyle=x^{-nt_{1}t_{2}}M_{1}^{nt_{2}}\big(\beta L_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n}\big),$

where $\beta=\varepsilon_{1}^{-nt_{2}}\varepsilon_{2}^{-1}$ . For $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $x^{r/m_{1}}=x^{nt_{1}t_{2}}$ by $r/m_{1}\equiv nt_{1}t_{2}\pmod{q+1}$ , and so

	$\displaystyle g(x)$	$\displaystyle\coloneqq x^{r/m_{1}}H^{q}/H=\frac{\beta L_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n}}{M_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n}}$
		$\displaystyle=\beta L_{2}/M_{2}\circ x^{n}\circ L_{1}/M_{1}.$

Since $\beta L_{2}/M_{2}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ , we get

(\beta L_{2}/M_{2})^{-1}\circ g=x^{n}\circ L_{1}/M_{1}.

Note that $f(x)\in U_{\frac{q^{2}-1}{m_{1}}}$ for any $x\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ and $g(x)\in U_{q+1}$ for $x\in U_{q+1}$ . Thus the following diagrams are commutative:

Let $\lambda=L_{1}/M_{1}$ and $\bar{\lambda}=(\beta L_{2}/M_{2})^{-1}$ . Since both $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ permute $U_{q+1}$ , $\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\alpha^{n})$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ for any $\alpha\in U_{q+1}$ . By Theorem 17, $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $(q-1)((q+1)\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , and $x^{n}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ , or equivalently $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m_{2}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ and $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ . ∎

The conditions in Theorem 18 can be satisfied. Indeed, all the desired polynomials $L_{i}$ and $M_{i}$ are completely determined in [67, Lemma 2.1] and [5, Proposition 3.5] when $\deg(L_{i})=\deg(M_{i})=t_{i}\in\{1,2\}$ . The next result is a reformulation of [67, Lemma 2.1].

Lemma 8.

Let $\ell(x)\in\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}(x)$ be a degree-one rational function, where $\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}$ is the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Then $\ell(x)$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ if and only if $\ell(x)=(\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q})/(\alpha x+\beta)$ , where $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ and $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ .

Theorem 18 reduces to the following form when $L_{2}=\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q}$ and $M_{2}=\alpha x+\beta$ .

Corollary 17.

Let $L$ , $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $M$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $L=\varepsilon x^{t}M^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , and $L/M$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $t\geq\deg(M)$ . Let

H=\alpha L^{n}+\beta M^{n}\quad\text{and}\quad f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}},

where $n\geq 1$ , $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ with $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv nt\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Proof.

Take $M_{2}=\alpha x+\beta$ , $\varepsilon_{2}=t_{2}=1$ , and $L_{2}=\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q}$ . Then $M_{2}$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ by $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ , $L_{2}/M_{2}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ by Lemma 8, and $H=M_{1}^{n}(M_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n})=\alpha L_{1}^{n}+\beta M_{1}^{n}$ . Then the result follows from Theorem 18. ∎

Remark 5.

In the case $\deg(L)=\deg(M)=t$ and $m_{1}=m=1$ , Corollary 17 is equivalent to [5, Theorem 3.3]. In other cases, it generalizes [5, Theorem 3.3]. Moreover, the proof of [5, Theorem 3.3] mainly takes advantage of some properties of “ $\beta$ -associated polynomials”, while Corollary 17 is based on the commutative diagrams in the proof of Theorem 18.

In Corollary 17, take $M=\gamma x+\delta$ , $\varepsilon=t=1$ , and $L=\delta^{q}x+\gamma^{q}$ , where $\gamma^{q+1}\neq\delta^{q+1}$ . Then $L/M$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ by Lemma 8, and so we obtain the next result.

Example 9.

Let $\alpha$ , $\beta$ , $\gamma$ , $\delta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfy $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ and $\gamma^{q+1}\neq\delta^{q+1}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H(x)=\alpha(\delta^{q}x+\gamma^{q})^{n}+\beta(\gamma x+\delta)^{n},

$n,r\geq 1$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv n\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Remark 6.

In the special case $\alpha\beta\gamma\delta\neq 0$ and $m_{1}=m=1$ , Example 9 is equivalent to [14, Theorem 1.2]. See related results in [18, 49] and their generalization [17].

In Corollary 17, take $M=x^{4}+x+1$ , $\varepsilon=1$ , $t=5$ , and $L=x^{5}+x^{4}+x$ . If $q=2^{s}$ with $s\not\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ , then $L/M$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ by Theorem 16, and so we have the following result.

Example 10.

Let $q=2^{s}$ with $s\not\equiv 2\pmod{4}$ and $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ with $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H(x)=\alpha(x^{5}+x^{4}+x)^{n}+\beta(x^{4}+x+1)^{n},

$n\geq 1$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv 5n\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Theorem 18 reduces to the next result when $L_{2}=cx^{3}+x^{2}+1$ and $M_{2}=x^{3}+x+c$ .

Corollary 18.

Let $q$ be even and $L$ , $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $M$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $L=\varepsilon x^{t}M^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , and $L/M$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $t\geq\deg(M)$ . Let

H=L^{3n}+L^{n}M^{2n}+cM^{3n}~\text{and}~f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}},

where $n\geq 1$ , $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ with $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1+c^{-1})=0$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv 3nt\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

Proof.

Take $M_{2}=x^{3}+x+c$ , $\varepsilon_{2}=1$ , $t_{2}=3$ , and $L_{2}=cx^{3}+x^{2}+1$ . Then $L_{2}/M_{2}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ by Theorem 14 and $H=M_{1}^{3n}(M_{2}\circ L_{1}^{n}/M_{1}^{n})=L_{1}^{3n}+L_{1}^{n}M_{1}^{2n}+cM_{1}^{3n}$ . Now the result follows from Theorem 18. ∎

In Corollary 18, taking $L=\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q}$ and $M=\alpha x+\beta$ yields the next result.

Example 11.

Let $q$ be even and $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ with $\alpha^{q+1}\neq\beta^{q+1}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H(x)=(\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q})^{3n}+(\beta^{q}x+\alpha^{q})^{n}(\alpha x+\beta)^{2n}+c(\alpha x+\beta)^{3n},

$n\geq 1$ , $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ with $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1+c^{-1})=0$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv 3n\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ and $(n,q+1)=m/m_{1}$ , where $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ .

VIII-B $\lambda$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$

In order to create a well-defined setting, we stipulate that $c/0=\infty$ for any $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ . For any nonconstant $f=L/M$ , where $L$ , $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]\setminus\{0\}$ , define

f(\infty)=\begin{cases}\infty&\text{if $\deg(L)>\deg(M)$,}\\ a/b&\text{if $\deg(L)=\deg(M)$,}\\ 0&\text{if $\deg(L)<\deg(M)$,}\end{cases}

where $a$ and $b$ are the leading coefficients of $L$ and $M$ , respectively. In particular, $\infty^{n}=\infty$ for any $n\in\mathbb{N}$ . For arbitrary $N(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{u}a_{i}x^{i}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ , define $N^{(q)}(x)=\sum_{i=0}^{u}a_{i}^{q}x^{i}$ .

Theorem 19.

Let $L$ , $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $L=\varepsilon x^{t}L^{q}$ and $M=\varepsilon x^{t}M^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ and that $L/M$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $t\geq\max\{\deg(L),\deg(M)\}$ . Let $N\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $N^{(q)}/N$ induces a bijection from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ . Let

H=M^{nu}\big(N\circ x^{n}\circ L/M\big)\quad\text{and}\quad f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}},

where $n,r\in\mathbb{N}$ , $u=\deg(N)$ , $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv ntu\pmod{q+1}$ . Then for $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if one of the following holds:

1.

$m=m_{1}$ and $(n,q-1)=1$ ;
2.

$m_{1}\mid m$ , $(n,q-1)=m/m_{1}\geq 3$ , and $2(q-1)<m$ .

Proof.

Put $N=\sum_{i=0}^{u}a_{i}x^{i}\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ . Then

H=M^{nu}(\sum a_{i}x^{i}\circ x^{n}\circ L/M)=\sum a_{i}L^{ni}M^{n(u-i)}

and for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ ,

	$\displaystyle H^{q}$	$\displaystyle=\sum a_{i}^{q}L^{qni}M^{qn(u-i)}$
		$\displaystyle=\sum a_{i}^{q}(\varepsilon^{-1}x^{-t}L)^{ni}(\varepsilon^{-1}x^{-t}M)^{n(u-i)}$
		$\displaystyle=(\varepsilon^{-1}x^{-t})^{nu}\sum a_{i}^{q}L^{ni}M^{n(u-i)}.$

Define $g(x)=x^{r/m_{1}}H^{q-1}$ . The condition $r/m_{1}\equiv ntu\pmod{q+1}$ implies $x^{r/m_{1}}=x^{ntu}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . Recall that $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Thus, for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ ,

g(x)=x^{r/m_{1}}H^{q}/H=\frac{\beta\sum_{i=0}^{u}a_{i}^{q}L^{ni}M^{n(u-i)}}{~\sum_{i=0}^{u}a_{i}L^{ni}M^{n(u-i)}},

(37)

where $\beta=\varepsilon^{-nu}$ . If $M(x)\neq 0$ for some $x\in U_{q+1}$ , then

	$\displaystyle g(x)$	$\displaystyle=\frac{\beta\sum a_{i}^{q}(L/M)^{ni}}{~\sum a_{i}(L/M)^{ni}}=\frac{\beta N^{(q)}\circ(L/M)^{n}}{N\circ(L/M)^{n}}$		(38)
		$\displaystyle=\frac{\beta N^{(q)}}{N}\circ x^{n}\circ\frac{L}{M}.$		(38)

If $M(x_{0})=0$ for some $x_{0}\in U_{q+1}$ , then $x_{0}$ is unique and $L(x_{0})\neq 0$ , since $L/M$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . Hence by Eq. 37,

g(x_{0})=\beta a_{u}^{q}L(x_{0})^{nu}/a_{u}L(x_{0})^{nu}=\beta a_{u}^{q}/a_{u}.

Because $L(x_{0})\neq 0$ and $M(x_{0})=0$ , we get $L(x_{0})/M(x_{0})=\infty$ and $\infty^{n}=\infty$ . Thus,

\frac{\beta N^{(q)}}{N}\circ x^{n}\circ\frac{L(x_{0})}{M(x_{0})}=\frac{\beta N^{(q)}(\infty)}{N(\infty)}=\frac{\beta a_{u}^{q}}{a_{u}}.

In summary, Eq. 38 holds for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . Since $\beta N^{(q)}/N$ induces a bijection from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ ,

(\beta N^{(q)}/N)^{-1}\circ g=x^{n}\circ L/M.

Note that $f(x)\in U_{\frac{q^{2}-1}{m_{1}}}$ for $x\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ and $g(x)\in U_{q+1}$ for $x\in U_{q+1}$ . Thus the following diagrams are commutative:

Let $\lambda=L/M$ and $\bar{\lambda}=(\beta N^{(q)}/N)^{-1}$ . Since both $\lambda$ and $\bar{\lambda}$ are bijective, $\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(\alpha^{n})=1$ and $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ for any $\alpha\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . By Theorem 17, for $1\leq m\leq m_{1}(q+1)$ , $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m_{1}\mid m$ , $(q-1)((q+1)\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ , $x^{n}$ is $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ , and $\#E_{x^{n}}(\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\})=(q+1)\bmod{m_{2}}$ , where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ .

Under the condition $m_{1}\mid m$ , if $m_{2}=1$ , then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $(n,q-1)=1$ . If $m_{2}=2$ , then $x^{n}$ only maps 0 to 0 and $\infty$ to $\infty$ . Hence $x^{n}$ is not $2$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ , and so $f$ is not $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ . If $m_{2}\geq 3$ , then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $(q-1)((q+1)\bmod{m_{2}})<m$ and $(n,q-1)=m_{2}$ , i.e., $(n,q-1)=m_{2}$ and $2(q-1)<m$ . ∎

Remark 7.

The idea of Theorem 19 comes from [5]. In the case $t=\deg(L)=\deg(M)$ and $m_{1}=m=1$ , Theorem 19 is similar to [5, Theorem 5.1]. In other cases, Theorem 19 generalizes [5, Theorem 5.1].

All degree-one rational functions over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ that are bijections from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ are completely determined in [67, Lemma 3.1], which can be reformulated as follows.

Lemma 9.

Let $\ell(x)\in\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}(x)$ be a degree-one rational function, where $\overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}$ is the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ . Then $\ell(x)$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ if and only if

\ell(x)=(\beta x+\beta^{q})/(\alpha x+\alpha^{q}),

where $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ and $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ .

Theorem 19 reduces to the following form if $N=\alpha x+\beta$ .

Corollary 19.

H=\alpha L^{n}+\beta M^{n}\quad\text{and}\quad f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}},

where $n\geq 1$ , $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ with $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ , $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv nt\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m=m_{1}$ and $(n,q-1)=1$ , where $1\leq m\leq\min\{2(q-1),m_{1}(q+1)\}$ .

Proof.

Let $\ell(x)=(\beta x+\beta^{q})/(-\alpha x-\alpha^{q})$ . Then it induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ by Lemma 9, and its compositional inverse is $\ell^{-1}(x)=-(\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q})/(\alpha x+\beta)$ , which induces a bijection from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ . In Theorem 19, take $N=\alpha x+\beta$ . Then $N^{(q)}=\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q}$ and $H=M^{n}(N\circ L^{n}/M^{n})=\alpha L^{n}+\beta M^{n}$ . Now the result follows from Theorem 19. ∎

Substituting the rational function in Lemma 9 to Corollary 19 yields the next result.

Example 12.

Let $\alpha$ , $\beta$ , $\gamma$ , $\delta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ satisfy $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ and $\gamma^{q-1}\neq\delta^{q-1}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H(x)=\alpha(\gamma x+\gamma^{q})^{n}+\beta(\delta x+\delta^{q})^{n},

$n$ , $r\geq 1$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv n\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m=m_{1}$ and $(n,q-1)=1$ , where $1\leq m\leq\min\{2(q-1),m_{1}(q+1)\}$ .

Proof.

Take $L=\gamma x+\gamma^{q}$ and $M=\delta x+\delta^{q}$ . Then $L/M$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ by Lemma 9, and $\alpha L(x)^{n}+\beta M(x)^{n}$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Indeed, if $\alpha L(x_{0})^{n}=-\beta M(x_{0})^{n}$ for some $x_{0}\in U_{q+1}$ , then $L(x_{0})\neq 0$ and $M(x_{0})\neq 0$ by $\alpha\beta\neq 0$ and $\gamma^{q-1}\neq\delta^{q-1}$ . Thus, $-\beta/\alpha=(L(x_{0})/M(x_{0}))^{n}\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , contrary to $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ . Then the result follows from Corollary 19. ∎

Remark 8.

In the case $m_{1}=m=1$ , Example 12 is equivalent to [14, Theorem 1.1]. In other cases, Example 12 is an extension of some results in [14, 18, 49].

Remark 9.

We now give different proofs of Theorems 14 and 16 by using the composition of rational functions. Let $q=2^{n}$ and let $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ be a solution of $x^{2}+cx+1=0$ and $\lambda(x)=(x+a)/(ax+1)$ . Then the compositional inverse of $\lambda$ is itself. By $a^{2}=ac+1$ and $a^{3}=a^{2}c+a$ , it is easy to verify that $\lambda\circ g=x^{3}\circ\lambda$ , i.e., $g=\lambda\circ x^{3}\circ\lambda$ , where $g$ is as in Theorem 14. For any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $g(x)^{q}=g(x)^{-1}$ and so $g$ maps $U_{q+1}$ to itself. Hence, the following diagram is commutative:

If $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ , then $a\in\mathbb{F}_{q}\setminus\{0,1\}$ by Corollary 13, and so $a^{q+1}=a^{2}\neq 1$ . By Lemma 8, $\lambda$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ and so $\lambda(U_{q+1})=U_{q+1}$ . When $n$ is odd, $(3,q+1)=3$ and so $x^{3}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . Thus, $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . When $n$ is even, $(3,q+1)=1$ and so $x^{3}$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . Thus, $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . If $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=1$ , then $a\in U_{q+1}\setminus\{1\}$ by Corollary 13, and so $a=e^{q-1}$ for some $e\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ . Then

\lambda(x)=\frac{ex+ea}{eax+e}=\frac{ex+e^{q}}{e^{q}x+e}

and $e^{q(q-1)}\neq e^{q-1}$ . Then by Lemma 9, $\lambda$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ onto $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ , and so $\lambda(U_{q+1})=\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . When $n$ is odd, $(3,q-1)=1$ and so $x^{3}$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . Thus, $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . When $n$ is even, $(3,q-1)=3$ and so $x^{3}$ is $3$ -to- $1$ form $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ from to itself. Thus, $g$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $U_{q+1}$ . This completes the proof of Theorem 14. In the above analysis, taking $c=1$ and replacing $3$ by $5$ yield another proof of Theorem 16.

We next construct a class of rational functions from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ by the composition of monomials and degree-one rational functions. Take $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ with $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ and

\ell_{2}(x)=-x\circ\frac{\beta x+\beta^{q}}{\alpha x+\alpha^{q}}\circ-x=\frac{\beta x-\beta^{q}}{-\alpha x+\alpha^{q}}.

By Lemma 9, $\ell_{2}$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . Then its compositional inverse is

\ell_{2}^{-1}(x)=(\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q})/(\alpha x+\beta),

which induces a bijection from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ . Let $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and $(k,q+1)=1$ . Then $x^{k}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ . Pick

\ell_{1}(x)=(\gamma^{q}x+\delta^{q})/(\delta x+\gamma),

where $\gamma,\delta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ with $\gamma^{q+1}\neq\delta^{q+1}$ . Then $\ell_{1}$ permutes $U_{q+1}$ by Lemma 8. Let

\displaystyle\lambda_{k}(x)

\displaystyle=\ell_{1}\circ x^{k}\circ\ell_{2}^{-1}=\frac{\gamma^{q}(\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q})^{k}+\delta^{q}(\alpha x+\beta)^{k}}{\gamma(\alpha x+\beta)^{k}+\delta(\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q})^{k}},

i.e., the following diagram is commutative:

Then $\lambda_{k}$ induces a bijection from $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ to $U_{q+1}$ . Applying Theorem 19 to $N=\gamma(\alpha x+\beta)^{k}+\delta(\alpha^{q}x+\beta^{q})^{k}$ yields the following result.

Corollary 20.

Let $L$ , $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ satisfy that $L=\varepsilon x^{t}L^{q}$ and $M=\varepsilon x^{t}M^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , $L/M$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $t\geq\max\{\deg(L),\deg(M)\}$ . Assume $\alpha$ , $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , $\gamma$ , $\delta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ , $\alpha^{q-1}\neq\beta^{q-1}$ , and $\gamma^{q+1}\neq\delta^{q+1}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H=\gamma(\alpha L^{n}+\beta M^{n})^{k}+\delta(\alpha^{q}L^{n}+\beta^{q}M^{n})^{k},

$n$ , $k$ , $r\geq 1$ , $(k,q+1)=1$ , $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv ntk\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m=m_{1}$ and $(n,q-1)=1$ , where $1\leq m\leq\min\{2(q-1),m_{1}(q+1)\}$ .

Substituting the rational function in Lemma 9 to Corollary 20 yields the next result.

Example 13.

Let $\beta$ , $\theta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ and $\delta\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfy $\beta^{q-1}\neq 1$ , $\theta^{q-1}\neq 1$ , and $\delta^{q+1}\neq 1$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}H(x^{q-1})^{m_{1}}$ , where

H(x)=((x+1)^{n}+\beta(\theta x+\theta^{q})^{n})^{k}+\delta((x+1)^{n}+\beta^{q}(\theta x+\theta^{q})^{n})^{k},

$n$ , $k$ , $r\geq 1$ , $(k,q+1)=1$ , $m_{1}=(r,q-1)$ , and $r/m_{1}\equiv kn\pmod{q+1}$ . Then $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $m=m_{1}$ and $(n,q-1)=1$ , where $1\leq m\leq\min\{2(q-1),m_{1}(q+1)\}$ .

Proof.

Let $L(x)=x+1$ and $M(x)=\theta x+\theta^{q}$ . By Lemma 9, $L/M$ induces a bijection from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ . By the proof of Example 12, $L^{n}+\beta^{q}M^{n}$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . If $H(\bar{x})=0$ for some $\bar{x}\in U_{q+1}$ , then

	$\displaystyle-\delta$	$\displaystyle=(L(\bar{x})^{n}+\beta M(\bar{x})^{n})^{k}/(L(\bar{x})^{n}+\beta^{q}M(\bar{x})^{n})^{k}$
		$\displaystyle=x^{k}\circ(x+\beta)/(x+\beta^{q})\circ x^{n}\circ L/M\circ\bar{x}\in U_{q+1},$

contrary to $\delta^{q+1}\neq 1$ . Thus $H$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Then the result follows from Corollary 20. ∎

There are many functions that permute $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$ ; see for example [23, 56, 17, 24, 65] and the references therein. By substituting these functions for $x^{n}$ in Theorem 19, one can obtain more classes of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ .

IX Recursive construction of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings

We first use 3 to give a method for constructing $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from other $m$ -to- $1$ mappings.

Theorem 20.

Let $k$ , $\ell$ , $r$ , $s$ , $t\in\mathbb{N}$ satisfy $q-1=\ell s$ , $(r,s)\mid t$ , and $(r,s)=(r+kt,s)$ . Suppose $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ satisfies $\varepsilon x^{t/m_{1}}M(x)^{s/m_{1}}=1$ for any $x\in U_{\ell}$ , where $m_{1}=(r,s)$ and $\varepsilon\in U_{\ell m_{1}}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and

F(x)=x^{kt}M(x^{s})^{k}f(x),

where $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . Then $F$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , where $1\leq m\leq\ell m_{1}$ .

Proof.

Put $\lambda=x^{s}$ , $\bar{\lambda}=x^{s_{1}}$ , and $g(x)=x^{r_{1}}h(x)^{s_{1}}$ , where $r_{1}=r/m_{1}$ and $s_{1}=s/m_{1}$ . In the proof of Theorem 3, we have shown that $\bar{\lambda}\circ f=g\circ\lambda$ , $\lambda$ is surjective from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ to $U_{\ell}$ , $\#\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)=m_{1}\,\#\bar{\lambda}^{-1}(g(\alpha))$ , and $f$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ for any $\alpha\in U_{\ell}$ . For $x\in\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ , i.e., $\lambda(x)=\alpha$ , we obtain $F(x)=x^{r+kt}M(\alpha)^{k}h(\alpha)$ , and thus $F$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\lambda^{-1}(\alpha)$ since $(r+kt,s)=m_{1}$ . Clearly, $\bar{\lambda}$ is a homomorphism from $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ onto $U_{\ell m_{1}}$ and

\displaystyle(x^{kt}M_{1}^{k})^{s_{1}}=(x^{s_{1}t}M_{1}^{s_{1}})^{k}=(x^{st_{1}}M_{1}^{s_{1}})^{k}=\varepsilon^{-k}\in U_{\ell m_{1}}

for any $x\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , where $M_{1}=M(x^{s})$ and $t_{1}=t/m_{1}$ . Then the result follows from 3. ∎

This result implies that if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ , then it can be used to construct a new $m$ -to- $1$ mapping $F$ . In particular, applying Theorem 20 to $\ell=q+1$ and $s=q-1$ yields the next result.

Theorem 21.

Suppose $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ and $\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{q}=M(x)$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ , where $\varepsilon\in U_{q+1}$ and $\deg(M)\leq t\leq 2\deg(M)$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{q-1})$ and

F(x)=x^{kt}M(x^{q-1})^{k}f(x),

where $r$ , $k\in\mathbb{N}$ satisfy $(r,q-1)=(r+kt,q-1)=1$ and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Then $F$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $f$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , where $1\leq m\leq q+1$ .

We next use Theorems 21 and 14 to construct new $3$ -to- $1$ mappings.

Corollary 21.

Let $f(x)=x^{3q}+x^{q+2}+cx^{3}$ , where $q=2^{n}$ with odd $n\geq 3$ and $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Let

F(x)=x^{kt}(x^{t(q-1)}+a)^{k}f(x),

where $k$ , $t\in\mathbb{N}$ and $a\in U_{q+1}\setminus(U_{q+1})^{t}$ . Assume $(t,q+1)\geq 2$ and $(3+kt,q-1)=1$ . Then $F$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ .

Proof.

The condition $(t,q+1)\geq 2$ implies that $(U_{q+1})^{t}\neq U_{q+1}$ . Put $M(x)=x^{t}-a$ . Since $a\in U_{q+1}$ , we have $-ax^{t}M(x)^{q}=M(x)$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . It follows from $a\notin(U_{q+1})^{t}$ that $M$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Clearly $f(x)=x^{3}h(x^{q-1})$ , where $h(x)=x^{3}+x+c$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . Odd $n$ implies that $(3,q-1)=1$ . Then the result follows from Theorems 21 and 14. ∎

The condition of $t$ and $k$ in Corollary 21 can be met easily; for example, $n=5$ , $t=3$ and $1\leq k\leq 10$ .

Corollary 22.

Let $f(x)=x^{3q}+x^{q+2}+cx^{3}$ , where $q=2^{n}$ with odd $n\geq 3$ and $c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . Assume

F(x)=x^{k(d-1)}h_{d}(x^{q-1})^{k}f(x),

where $k\in\mathbb{N}$ , $d$ is odd and $h_{d}$ is as in Eq. 25. Let $(d,q+1)=1$ and $(3+k(d-1),q-1)=1$ . Then $F$ is $3$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ if and only if $\mathrm{Tr}_{q/2}(1/c)=0$ .

Proof.

Since $(d,q+1)=1$ and $d$ is odd, we get $(d,q(q+1))=1$ and so $h_{d}$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ by Lemma 3. Let $t=d-1$ . Then $h_{d}(x)=x^{t}h_{d}(x)^{q}$ for any $x\in U_{q+1}$ . Because $n$ is odd, we have $(3,q-1)=1$ . Then the result follows from Theorems 21 and 14. ∎

The condition of $d$ and $k$ in Corollary 22 can be met easily; for example, $n=3$ , $d=5$ and $2\leq k\leq 7$ .

We remark that Theorems 20 and 21 can be used to construct new $m$ -to- $1$ mappings recursively. Taking Theorem 21 as an example, let us start with any $m$ -to- $1$ mapping on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , say $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{q-1})$ with $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ . For any fixed $t$ and $M(x)$ satisfying the assumptions in Theorem 21, there are many $k$ ’s such that $(r+kt,q-1)=1$ . Pick any such $k$ and we obtain an $m$ -to- $1$ mapping on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , i.e., $F(x)=x^{kt}M(x^{q-1})^{k}f(x)$ . In fact,

F(x)=x^{r+kt}M(x^{q-1})^{k}h(x^{q-1}).

Because $(r+kt,q-1)=1$ and $M^{k}h$ has no roots in $U_{q+1}$ , we can apply Theorem 21 again to pick $t^{\prime}$ , $M^{\prime}$ , and $k^{\prime}$ such that $(r+kt+k^{\prime}t^{\prime},q-1)=1$ and then obtain another $m$ -to- $1$ mapping on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , $F^{\prime}(x)=x^{k^{\prime}t^{\prime}}M^{\prime}(x^{q-1})^{k^{\prime}}F(x)$ .

We next give a method for constructing $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from $1$ -to- $1$ mappings.

Theorem 22.

Let $q-1=\ell s$ and let $M\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ satisfy $\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{s}=1$ for any $x\in U_{\ell}$ , where $\ell$ , $s$ , $t\in\mathbb{N}$ and $\varepsilon\in U_{\ell}$ . Let $f(x)=x^{r}h(x^{s})$ and $F(x)=x^{kt}M(x^{s})^{k}f(x)$ , where $r$ , $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and $h\in\mathbb{F}_{q}[x]$ . If $f$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , then $F$ is $(r+kt,s)$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ .

Proof.

Clearly, $F(x)=x^{r+kt}M(x^{s})^{k}h(x^{s})$ . Put $m_{1}=(r+kt,s)$ and $g(x)=x^{(r+kt)/m_{1}}(M(x)^{k}h(x))^{s/m_{1}}$ . Since $f$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ and $\varepsilon x^{t}M(x)^{s}=1$ for any $x\in U_{\ell}$ , it follows that $h$ and $M$ have no roots in $U_{\ell}$ . By Corollary 5, $F$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ if and only if $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ . For any $x\in U_{\ell}$ ,

	$\displaystyle x^{m_{1}}\circ g(x)$	$\displaystyle=x^{r+kt}M(x)^{ks}h(x)^{s}$
		$\displaystyle=(x^{t}M(x)^{s})^{k}x^{r}h(x)^{s}$
		$\displaystyle=\varepsilon^{-k}x^{r}h(x)^{s}.$

Since $f$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ , we get $x^{r}h(x)^{s}$ permutes $U_{\ell}$ by Theorem 2. Hence $\varepsilon^{-k}x^{r}h(x)^{s}$ (i.e., $x^{m_{1}}\circ g(x)$ ) permutes $U_{\ell}$ , and thus $g$ is $1$ -to- $1$ on $U_{\ell}$ . Therefore, $F$ is $m_{1}$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . ∎

This result establishes an important and interesting link between permutations and $m$ -to- $1$ mappings. In other words, we can use known permutations of $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ to construct $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ . We now give an example to illustrate this result by employing a class of permutation binomials given by Hou [22].

Corollary 23.

Let $f(x)=x^{2q-1}+cx\in\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}[x]$ with $q$ odd and $c^{(q+1)/2}=-1$ or $3$ . Let $F(x)=x^{kt}(x^{t(q-1)}-a)^{k}f(x)$ , where $k$ , $t\in\mathbb{N}$ , $(t,q+1)\geq 2$ and $a\in U_{q+1}\setminus(U_{q+1})^{t}$ . Then $F$ is $m$ -to- $1$ on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$ , where $m=(1+kt,q-1)$ .

Proof.

The fact that $f$ permutes $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ is a part of [22, Theorem A]. The remainder of the argument is similar to that in Corollary 21 and thus is omitted. ∎

Conclusions

In this paper, we introduced the definition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings. We presented a generalized local criterion for a mapping to be $m$ -to- $1$ and proposed three constructions of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings, which unify and generalize all recent constructions in [43, 19, 46, 59, 51]. In particular, we characterized $m$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $x^{r}h(x^{(q-1)/\ell})$ and established interesting links between $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ and $m_{2}$ -to- $1$ mappings on $U_{\ell}$ , where $m_{2}=m/m_{1}$ and $m_{1}=(r,(q-1)/\ell)$ . We also systematically studied many explicit classes of these $m$ -to- $1$ mappings for small $m$ ’s, or small index $\ell$ , or special underlying mappings $g(x)=x^{r/m_{1}}h(x)^{(q-1)/\ell m_{1}}$ over $U_{\ell}$ such as monomials, rational functions, and those that can be further reduced through commutative diagrams. Finally, we provided two methods for constructing new $m$ -to- $1$ mappings from known permutations or $m$ -to- $1$ mappings.

Acknowledgment

We deeply thank the anonymous reviewers and the Associate Editor Prof. Gohar M. Kyureghyan for their valuable comments and suggestions which have greatly improved the manuscript. We also thank Yang Zhang for his contribution to Theorems 14, 15 and 16.

References

[1] A. Akbary, D. Ghioca, and Q. Wang, “On constructing permutations of finite fields,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 17, pp. 51–67, 2011.
[2] A. Akbary and Q. Wang, “On polynomials of the form $x^{r}f(x^{(q-1)/l})$ ,” Int. J. Math. Math. Sci., vol. 2007, 2007, Art. no. 23408.
[3] D. Bartoli and M. Giulietti, “Permutation polynomials, fractional polynomials, and algebraic curves,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 51, pp. 1–16, 2018.
[4] D. Bartoli, M. Giulietti, and M. Timpanella, “Two-to-one functions from Galois extensions,” Discrete Appl. Math., vol. 309, pp. 194–201, 2022.
[5] D. Bartoli, A. M. Masuda, and L. Quoos, “Permutation polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ from rational functions,” arXiv 1802.05260, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.05260v1
[6] D. Bartoli and L. Quoos, “Permutation polynomials of the type $x^{r}g(x)^{s}$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2n}}$ ,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 86, pp. 1589–1599, 2018.
[7] C. Beierle, P. Langevin, G. Leander, A. Polujan, and S. Rasoolzadeh, “Millions of inequivalent quadratic APN functions in eight variables,” arXiv 2508.04644, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.04644
[8] L. Budaghyan, I. Ivkovic, and N. S. Kaleyski, “Triplicate functions,” Cryptogr. Commun., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 35–83, 2023.
[9] P. Charpin and G. Kyureghyan, “When does ${G}(x)+\gamma\mathrm{Tr}({H}(x))$ permute $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ ?” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 15, pp. 615–632, 2009.
[10] P. Charpin, G. M. Kyureghyan, and V. Suder, “Sparse permutations with low differential uniformity,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 28, pp. 214–243, 2014.
[11] J. F. Dillon and H. Dobbertin, “New cyclic difference sets with Singer parameters,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 342–389, 2004.
[12] C. Ding, “Linear codes from some 2-designs,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 3265–3275, Jun. 2015.
[13] C. Ding, “A construction of binary linear codes from Boolean functions,” Discrete Math., vol. 339, no. 9, pp. 2288–2303, 2016.
[14] Z. Ding and M. E. Zieve, “Constructing permutation polynomials using generalized Rédei functions,” arXiv 2305.06322, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.06322
[15] Z. Ding and M. E. Zieve, “On a class of $m$ -to- $1$ functions,” Discrete Appl. Math., vol. 353, pp. 208–210, 2024.
[16] H. Dobbertin, “Almost perfect nonlinear power functions on GF( $2^{n}$ ): the Welch case,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 1271–1275, May 1999.
[17] X. Feng and Q. Wang, “Permutation polynomials of index $q+1$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ ,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 112, 2026, Art. no. 102796.
[18] S. Fu, X. Feng, D. Lin, and Q. Wang, “A recursive construction of permutation polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ with odd characteristic related to Rédei functions,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 87, pp. 1481–1498, 2019.
[19] Y. Gao, Y.-F. Yao, and L.-Z. Shen, “ $m$ -to- $1$ mappings over finite fields $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ ,” IEICE Trans. Fundamentals, vol. E104.A, no. 11, pp. 1612–1618, 2021.
[20] D. Gerike and G. M. Kyureghyan, “Results on permutation polynomials of shape $x^{t}+\gamma\mathrm{Tr}_{q^{n}/q}(x^{d})$ ,” in Combinatorics and Finite Fields: Difference Sets, Polynomials, Pseudorandomness and Applications, K.-U. Schmidt and A. Winterhof, Eds., 2019, pp. 67–78.
[21] R. Gupta and R. K. Sharma, “Some new classes of permutation trinomials over finite fields with even characteristic,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 41, pp. 89–96, 2016.
[22] X.-D. Hou, “Determination of a type of permutation trinomials over finite fields, II,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 35, pp. 16–35, 2015.
[23] X.-D. Hou, “Permutation polynomials over finite fields—A survey of recent advances,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 32, pp. 82–119, 2015.
[24] X.-D. Hou, “Rational functions of degree four that permute the projective line over a finite field,” Commun. Algebra, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 3798–3809, 2021.
[25] S. Jiang, K. Li, and L. Qu, “New constructions of permutation polynomials of the form $x+\gamma\mathrm{Tr}^{q^{3}}_{q}(h(x))$ over finite fields with even characteristic,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 109, 2026, Art. no. 102694.
[26] S. Jiang, M. Yuan, K. Li, and L. Qu, “New constructions of permutation polynomials of the form $x+\gamma\mathrm{Tr}^{q^{2}}_{q}(h(x))$ over finite fields with even characteristic,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 101, 2025, Art. no. 102522.
[27] K. H. Kim and S. Mesnager, “Solving $x^{2^{k}+1}+x+a=0$ in $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ with $\gcd(n,k)=1$ ,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 63, 2020, Art. no. 101630.
[28] L. Kölsch, B. Kriepke, and G. M. Kyureghyan, “Image sets of perfectly nonlinear maps,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 1–27, 2023.
[29] L. Kölsch and G. Kyureghyan, “The classifications of o-monomials and of 2-to-1 binomials are equivalent,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 93, pp. 961–970, 2025.
[30] G. M. Kyureghyan, “Constructing permutations of finite fields via linear translators,” J. Combin. Theory Ser. A, vol. 118, pp. 1052–1061, 2011.
[31] G. M. Kyureghyan and A. Pott, “Some theorems on planar mappings,” in Arithmetic of Finite Fields, J. von zur Gathen, J. L. Imaña, and Ç. K. Koç, Eds. Springer, Berlin, 2008, pp. 117–122.
[32] G. Lachaud and J. Wolfmann, “The weights of the orthogonals of the extended quadratic binary Goppa codes,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 686–692, 1990.
[33] K. Li, C. Li, T. Helleseth, and L. Qu, “Binary linear codes with few weights from two-to-one functions,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 67, no. 7, pp. 4263–4275, Jul. 2021.
[34] K. Li, S. Mesnager, and L. Qu, “Further study of $2$ -to- $1$ mappings over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ ,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 3486–3496, Jun. 2021.
[35] K. Li, L. Qu, X. Chen, and C. Li, “Permutation polynomial of the form $cx+\mathrm{Tr}_{q^{\ell}/q}(x^{a})$ and permutation trinomials over finite fields with even characteristic,” Cryptogr. Commun., vol. 10, pp. 531–554, 2018.
[36] K. Li, L. Qu, C. Li, and H. Chen, “On a conjecture about a class of permutation quadrinomials,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 66, 2020, Art. no. 101690.
[37] K. Li, L. Qu, C. Li, and S. Fu, “New permutation trinomials constructed from fractional polynomials,” Acta Arith., vol. 183, no. 2, pp. 101–116, 2018.
[38] K. Li, L. Qu, and Q. Wang, “New constructions of permutation polynomials of the form $x^{r}h(x^{q-1})$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ ,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 86, pp. 2379–2405, 2018.
[39] N. Li and T. Helleseth, “Several classes of permutation trinomials from Niho exponents,” Cryptogr. Commun., vol. 9, pp. 693–705, 2017.
[40] S. Mesnager, Bent Functions: Fundamentals and Results. Switzerland: Springer, 2016.
[41] S. Mesnager, L. Qian, and X. Cao, “Further projective binary linear codes derived from two-to-one functions and their duals,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 91, pp. 719–746, 2023.
[42] S. Mesnager, L. Qian, X. Cao, and M. Yuan, “Several families of binary minimal linear codes from two-to-one functions,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 3285–3301, 2023.
[43] S. Mesnager and L. Qu, “On two-to-one mappings over finite fields,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 7884–7895, Dec. 2019.
[44] S. Mesnager, M. Yuan, and D. Zheng, “More about the corpus of involutions from two-to-one mappings and related cryptographic S-boxes,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 1315–1327, 2023.
[45] G. L. Mullen and D. Panario, Handbook of Finite Fields. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2013.
[46] T. Niu, K. Li, L. Qu, and C. Li, “Characterizations and constructions of $n$ -to- $1$ mappings over finite fields,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 85, 2023, Art. no. 102126.
[47] F. Özbudak and B. G. Temür, “Classification of permutation polynomials of the form $x^{3}g(x^{q-1})$ of $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ where $g(x)=x^{3}+bx+c$ and $b,c\in\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ ,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 90, pp. 1537–1556, 2022.
[48] F. Özbudak and B. G. Temür, “Complete characterization of some permutation polynomials of the form $x^{r}(1+ax^{s_{1}(q-1)}+bx^{s_{2}(q-1)})$ over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ ,” Cryptogr. Commun., vol. 15, pp. 775–793, 2023.
[49] D. Panario, N. Uyar, and Q. Wang, “A construction of permutation polynomials using Rédei function in even characteristic,” arXiv 2305.03521, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.03521
[50] Y. H. Park and J. B. Lee, “Permutation polynomials and group permutation polynomials,” Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., vol. 63, pp. 67–74, 2001.
[51] X. Qin and L. Yan, “New results on $n$ -to- $1$ mappings over finite fields,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 98, 2024, Art. no. 102469.
[52] L. Qu, Q. Zhang, and K. Li, “Parametric construction approach of balanced Boolean functions from two-to-one mappings,” J. Cryptol., vol. 38, 2025, Art. no. 24.
[53] A. Tuxanidy and Q. Wang, “On the inverses of some classes of permutations of finite fields,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 28, pp. 244–281, 2014.
[54] D. Wan and R. Lidl, “Permutation polynomials of the form $x^{r}f(x^{(q-1)/d})$ and their group structure,” Monatsh. Math., vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 149–163, 1991.
[55] Q. Wang, “Cyclotomic mapping permutation polynomials over finite fields,” in Sequences, Subsequences, and Consequences, S. W. Golomb, G. Gong, T. Helleseth, and H.-Y. Song, Eds., 2007, pp. 119–128.
[56] Q. Wang, “Polynomials over finite fields: an index approach,” in Combinatorics and Finite Fields: Difference Sets, Polynomials, Pseudorandomness and Applications, K.-U. Schmidt and A. Winterhof, Eds., 2019, pp. 319–346.
[57] Q. Wang, “A survey of compositional inverses of permutation polynomials over finite fields,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 93, pp. 831–870, 2025.
[58] G. Weng and X. Zeng, “Further results on planar DO functions and commutative semifields,” Des. Codes Cryptogr., vol. 63, pp. 413–423, 2012.
[59] M. Yuan, D. Zheng, and Y. Wang, “Two-to-one mappings and involutions without fixed points over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ ,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 76, 2021, Art. no. 101913.
[60] P. Yuan, “Local method for compositional inverses of permutation polynomials,” Commun. Algebra, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 3070–3080, 2024.
[61] P. Yuan and C. Ding, “Further results on permutation polynomials over finite fields,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 27, pp. 88–103, 2014.
[62] Z. Zha, L. Hu, and S. Fan, “Further results on permutation trinomials over finite fields with even characteristic,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 45, pp. 43–52, 2017.
[63] Q. Zhang, K. Li, and L. Qu, “Balanced Boolean functions with few-valued Walsh spectra parameterized by ${P}(x^{2}+x)$ ,” Adv. Math. Commun., vol. 21, pp. 150–174, 2026.
[64] Y. Zheng, Q. Wang, and W. Wei, “On inverses of permutation polynomials of small degree over finite fields,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 914–922, Feb. 2020.
[65] Y. Zheng, X.-Y. Wang, S. Yang, and Q. Wang, “Rational functions of degree two or three that are many-to-one on the projective line,” Finite Fields Appl., vol. 118, 2027, Art. no. 102901.
[66] M. E. Zieve, “On some permutation polynomials over $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ of the form $x^{r}h(x^{(q-1)/d})$ ,” Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 137, no. 7, pp. 2209–2216, 2009.
[67] M. E. Zieve, “Permutation polynomials on $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ induced from Rédei function bijections on subgroups of $\mathbb{F}_{q}^{*}$ ,” arXiv 1310.0776v2, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.0776v2

Yanbin Zheng received the Ph.D. degree in Mathematics from Guangzhou University, Guangzhou, China, in 2015. He is currently an Associate Professor with the School of Mathematical Sciences, Qufu Normal University, Qufu, China. His research interests include finite fields and cryptography.

Yanjin Ding received the B.S. degree in mathematics from Jining University, Qufu, China, in 2020, and the M.S. degree in mathematics from Qufu Normal University, Qufu, China, in 2024. She is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in mathematics with Hubei University, Wuhan, China. Her research interests include finite fields and cryptography.

Meiying Zhang received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in mathematics from Qufu Normal University, Qufu, China, in 2020 and 2024, respectively. She is currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in mathematics at Qufu Normal University. Her research interests include finite fields and coding theory.

Pingzhi Yuan received the Ph.D. degree in mathematics from Sichuan University, Chengdu, China, in 1997. He is currently a Professor with the School of Mathematical Sciences, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China. His research interests include finite fields and zero-sum theory.

Qiang Wang received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in mathematics from Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an, China, in 1993 and 1996 respectively, the M.S. degree in information and system science from Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, in 2002, and the Ph.D. degree in mathematics from the Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada, in 2000. He is currently a Professor at Carleton University. His main research interests are finite fields and applications in coding theory, combinatorics, and cryptography. He serves as an Associate Editor for journals including Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computing (Springer), Finite Fields and Their Applications (Elsevier), and Canadian Journal of Mathematics, Canadian Mathematical Bulletin, Canadian Mathematical Communications (Cambridge University Press).

On Many-to-One Mappings Over Finite Fields

Abstract

Index Terms:

I Introduction

I-A The progress of many-to-one mappings

I-B The constructions of many-to-one mappings

AGW’s Criterion.

I-C The contribution of the paper

I-D Notation

II The definition of mm-to-11 mappings

Definition 1.

Definition 2.

Example 1.

Example 2.

Example 3.

Theorem 1.

Proof.

III Generalized local criterion and three constructions for mm-to-11 mappings

Lemma 1 (Generalized local criterion).

Proof.

III-A The first construction

Construction 1.

Proof.

III-B The second construction

Construction 2.

Proof.

Corollary 1.

Corollary 2.

Proof.

Corollary 3.

III-C The third construction

Construction 3.

Proof.

Remark 1.

Remark 2.

IV mm-to-11 mappings of the form xr​h​(xs)x^{r}h(x^{s})

Theorem 2.

Lemma 2.

Proof.

Theorem 3.

Proof.

Example 4.

Remark 3.

Corollary 4.

Corollary 5.

V Small mm or ℓ\ell

Theorem 4.

Proof.

Corollary 6.

Proof.

Theorem 5.

Proof.

Theorem 6.

Corollary 7.

Theorem 7.

Corollary 8.

Example 5.

VI Monomials

Theorem 8.

Proof.

Corollary 9.

Proof.

VI-A mm-to-11 mappings on 𝔽q2∗\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}

Theorem 9.

Proof.

Remark 4.

Corollary 10.

Example 6.

Example 7.

Example 8.

VI-B mm-to-11 mappings on 𝔽qn∗\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}

Theorem 10.

Proof.

Theorem 11.

Proof.

Lemma 3.

Proof.

Corollary 11.

Corollary 12.

VII Rational functions

II The definition of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings

III Generalized local criterion and three constructions for $m$ -to- $1$ mappings

IV $m$ -to- $1$ mappings of the form $x^{r}h(x^{s})$

V Small $m$ or $\ell$

VI-A $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}^{*}$

VI-B $m$ -to- $1$ mappings on $\mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}^{*}$

VII-A Known $1$ -to- $1$ rational functions

Lemma 4 ([21, Lemma 2.2]).

Lemma 5 ([62, Lemma 3.2]).

VII-B New $3$ -to- $1$ rational function

Lemma 7 ([28, Corollary 7]).

VII-C New $5$ -to- $1$ rational function

VIII-A $\lambda$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to itself

VIII-B $\lambda$ is $1$ -to- $1$ from $U_{q+1}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{q}\cup\{\infty\}$

IX Recursive construction of $m$ -to- $1$ mappings