On the Schwartz space $ \mathcal S(G(k)\backslash G(\mathbb A)) $
Goran Mui\'c, Sonja \v{Z}unar

TL;DR
This paper constructs and analyzes a Schwartz space for automorphic forms on reductive groups over number fields, extending classical spaces and exploring their distributional and representation-theoretic properties.
Contribution
It introduces an adelic Schwartz space for reductive groups over number fields and studies its distributional dual and automorphic representations, extending Casselman's classical framework.
Findings
Constructed the adelic Schwartz space for reductive groups.
Analyzed the space of tempered distributions and their automorphic applications.
Described irreducible admissible subrepresentations of the dual space.
Abstract
For a connected reductive group defined over a number field , we construct the Schwartz space . This space is an adelic version of Casselman's Schwartz space , where is a discrete subgroup of . We study the space of tempered distributions and investigate applications to automorphic forms on . In particular, we study the representation contragredient to the right regular representation of and describe the closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of assuming that is semisimple.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
On the Schwartz Space
Goran Muić and Sonja Žunar
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Bijenička 30, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Abstract.
For a connected reductive group defined over a number field , we construct the Schwartz space . This space is an adelic version of Casselman’s Schwartz space , where is a discrete subgroup of . We study the space of tempered distributions and investigate applications to automorphic forms on . In particular, we study the representation contragredient to the right regular representation of and describe the closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of assuming that is semisimple.
Key words and phrases:
Schwartz space, automorphic forms
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
11F70, 22E50
The authors acknowledge Croatian Science Foundation grant No. 3628.
1. Introduction
Let be the group of -rational points of a reductive group defined over , and let be a discrete subgroup of . In [5], Casselman introduced the Schwartz space and used it to study the cohomology of arithmetic subgroups. The right regular representation of on is a smooth Fréchet representation of moderate growth, and the contragredient representation on the strong dual has the following remarkable property: the Gårding subspace of is the space of functions in of uniformly moderate growth [5, Theorem 1.16]. Thus, the standardly defined -finite automorphic forms (see (3-4); cf. [4, §1]) are simply the -finite and -finite vectors in the Gårding subspace of . Here is a maximal compact subgroup of , and is the center of the universal enveloping algebra of the complexified Lie algebra of .
In this paper, we extend Casselman’s construction of the Schwartz space to the adelic setting. More precisely, let be a (Zariski) connected reductive group defined over a number field . Let (resp., ) be the set of archimedean (resp., non-trivial non-archimedean) places of . Let be the completion of at a place , and let (resp., ) denote the ring of adeles (resp., finite adeles) of . We embed the group diagonally into the groups , and . Here denotes the restricted product, over all , with respect to certain open compact subgroups of . For an open compact subgroup of and , let be the congruence subgroup of that, embedded diagonally into , equals . In Section 3, we construct a Fréchet space with the following properties:
- (1)
Every is -invariant on the right. 2. (2)
For every (finite) set such that , is isomorphic to the direct sum of Fréchet spaces
[TABLE]
via the map . 3. (3)
If , then is a closed subspace of .
The decomposition (2) is analogous to the well-known decomposition [4, §4.3(2)] of spaces of adelic automorphic forms, and it allows for a simple adelic reformulation of the above-mentioned Casselman’s results (see Lemma 3-15(1) and Corollary 3-18).
The property (3) enables us to define the Schwartz space as the strict inductive limit of Fréchet spaces . In other words, we put
[TABLE]
and equip with the finest locally convex topology with respect to which the inclusion maps are continuous. The space is not a Fréchet space; however, it is an LF-space, i.e., a strict inductive limit of an increasing sequence of Fréchet subspaces (see Definition A-4). In particular, is a complete locally convex (Hausdorff) topological vector space, and we have the following description of bounded sets in (see Definition A-5): a subset of is bounded in if and only if is a bounded subset of for some (Lemma 4-4(3)). This description clarifies the structure of the strong dual —the space of continuous linear functionals equipped with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded sets in . By analogy with Casselman’s terminology in [5], we call the space of tempered distributions on .
The space is our main object of interest. It can be identified with the projective limit of the spaces , as described in Lemma 4-8. The right regular representation of and its contragredient representation are continuous representations of and smooth representations of (Propositions 4-5 and 4-10).
In Section 5, we recall some classical results on the action of Hecke algebra on , where is a continuous representation of on a complete complex locally convex topological vector space . Using these results, we study the subspaces of -invariants in and , where is an open compact subgroup of (see Lemmas 5-5 and 5-8).
In Section 6, we use results of Sections 3 and 5 to prove that the Gårding subspace of coincides with the space of functions in of uniformly moderate growth (see (6-11) and (3-6)). This is the adelic version (Theorem 6-14(2)) of the above-mentioned Casselman’s result [5, Theorem 1.16]. Here the Gårding subspace of a continuous representation of on a complete complex locally convex topological vector space is defined by analogy with the classical definition (see (2-12)) of the Gårding subspace for representations of Lie groups: we put
[TABLE]
where the convolution algebra and its subalgebra act on in the following standard way:
[TABLE]
where is a Haar measure on . As in the classical situation, the Gårding subspace is dense in (see the discussion after (2-13)), and it is contained in the subspace of - and -smooth vectors in (Corollary 6-7(1)); in particular, is dense in .
In Section 7, we assume that is semisimple and, under this assumption, describe closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of : in Theorem 7-10 we prove that they are the closures in of irreducible (admissible) -submodules of . Here the notion of admissibility is defined classically (Definitions 7-2 and 7-4; cf. [8] and [4, §4]). In relation to this, we note that the closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of Casselman’s Schwartz space were studied in [22] and [23].
In Sections 8 and 9, we turn our attention to Poincaré series on . In Section 8, we construct an LF-space such that the linear operator ,
[TABLE]
is well-defined, continuous and surjective (Theorem 8-4). The proof of Theorem 8-4 is based on an analogous result [5, Proposition 1.11 and Theorem 2.2] for the operator , where and is an arithmetic subgroup.
In Section 9, we use results of previous sections to study the Poincaré series of functions . The main results of this section—Propositions 9-2 and 9-4—may be regarded as the adelic version of [22, Proposition 6.4]. Let us describe them in more detail.
It is well-known that for every , the series converges absolutely almost everywhere on and defines an element of (e.g., see [17, §4]). The functions , , may be regarded as elements of the strong dual in a standard way (see (9-3)), and in Proposition 9-4 we study the convergence of the series in .
Next, let be the right regular representation of on . In Proposition 9-2, we use to describe a construction of adelic automorphic forms using Poincaré series. More precisely, we prove that for every , the function coincides almost everywhere with an element of . This means that if is additionally a -finite and -finite vector in , then is a -finite automorphic form on . Let us mention that the question when the constructed function vanishes identically is non-trivial. It may be studied using the integral non-vanishing criterion [17, Theorem 4-1] for Poincaré series on unimodular locally compact Hausdorff groups. This criterion was strengthened in [20, Lemma 2-1] and [35, Theorem 1], and it found applications to various classes of cuspidal automorphic forms on (resp., on the metaplectic cover of ) in [18], [20] and [21] (resp., in [33], [34] and [35]).
We end the paper by an appendix in which we collect some well-known facts from functional analysis used in the paper.
In future work, we will study applications to compactly supported Poincaré series related to results of [16] and [19]. We expect our results to find various interesting applications, e.g. in cohomology theory, especially to the Eisenstein cohomology of adelic reductive groups (see [10], [11], [13], [15] and [28]).
We would like to thank H. Grobner for enlightening discussions on analytic theory of automorphic forms [12]. In particular, the second author would like to thank H. Grobner and the University of Vienna for their hospitality during her visit in May 2019.
2. Preliminaries
Let be a (Zariski) connected reductive group defined over a number field . Let (resp., ) be the set of archimedean (resp., non-trivial non-archimedean) places of . Let be the completion of at a place , and let be the ring of integers of .
The group is a reductive Lie group. Let be the Lie algebra of , let be the universal enveloping algebra of the complexification of , and let be the center of . We fix a maximal compact subgroup of .
By a norm (see [4, §1.2]) on we mean a function of the form
[TABLE]
where is a continuous representation of with finite kernel on a finite-dimensional complex Hilbert space such that \sigma\big{|}_{K_{\infty}} is unitary. Here ∗ denotes the adjoint on with respect to the Hilbert space structure on . The following properties of are obvious:
- (N1)
for all . 2. (N2)
for all . 3. (N3)
for all and .
Any two norms and on are equivalent in the sense that there exist such that for all . In the following, we fix a norm on .
By [5, Lemma 1.10], we have the following lemma.
Lemma 2-1**.**
Let be a discrete subgroup of . Then, there exist such that
[TABLE]
Next, following Casselman [5], for every discrete subgroup of we define the function ,
[TABLE]
We note two simple consequences of (N1) and (N2) in the following lemma.
Lemma 2-2**.**
Let be discrete subgroups of . Let be a complete set of left coset representatives for in , i.e., . Then, we have the following:
- (1)
* for all .* 2. (2)
* for all .*
Still following Casselman [5], we say that a smooth function is of uniformly moderate growth if there exists such that for every left-invariant differential operator there exists such that
[TABLE]
Similarly, we say that a continuous representation of on a locally convex topological vector space is of moderate growth if for every continuous seminorm on there exist and a continuous seminorm on such that
[TABLE]
Here and throughout the paper, all vector spaces are assumed to be complex. All locally convex topological vector spaces are assumed to be Hausdorff.
Next, let (resp., ) be the ring of adeles (resp., of finite adeles) of . We recall that there exists a finite set such that for all places , is defined over and is a hyperspecial maximal compact subgroup of [29, 3.9.1]. For , let . We have
[TABLE]
where is the restricted product over all with respect to the subgroups of , . We identify the group (resp., ) with its image under the canonical inclusion into
[TABLE]
The group embeds diagonally into as a discrete subgroup of finite covolume. It also embeds diagonally into and . Next, by intersecting the group (embedded diagonally into ) with an open compact subgroup of , we obtain a subgroup of which is called a congruence subgroup of . For simplicity, the images of under the diagonal embeddings , and will also be denoted by . Embedded into , is a discrete subgroup of . We write
[TABLE]
Throughout the paper we will use the following lemma.
Lemma 2-6**.**
Let and be open compact subgroups of , and let . Then, there exists such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since the subgroups and are mutually commensurable, so are and , hence the claim follows from Lemma 2-2(1). ∎
Throughout the paper we use the following notation. We write elements in the form , where and . Moreover, for and , we define the function ,
[TABLE]
Let us recall that a continuous function is said to be smooth if it has the following two properties:
- (1)
For every , is a smooth function . 2. (2)
For every , the function is locally constant.
We will denote the space of smooth functions by . For and , we define the function by
[TABLE]
Next, we define the following function spaces:
[TABLE]
If is one if these spaces and is an open compact subgroup of , we denote
[TABLE]
Analogously to the above definitions of function spaces on , we define the space as well as the spaces , , , , , and of functions , where is a discrete subgroup of . Finally, we define to be the subspace of locally constant functions in . We have
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of , and denotes the characteristic function of .
Let us fix Haar measures on and on . The measure on given by the formula
[TABLE]
is a Haar measure on .
For , the space is a complex associative algebra under the convolution
[TABLE]
where and . If is a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space , then is a left -module under the action
[TABLE]
(see [14, §2]), where the integral is to be interpreted as a Gelfand-Pettis integral, i.e., its value is determined by the condition
[TABLE]
for all continuous linear functionals (see Theorem A-1). In the case when , the Gårding subspace of is standardly defined by
[TABLE]
In the case when , we define the Gårding subspace of by analogy as follows:
[TABLE]
In both cases, the Gårding subspace is dense in : Let be an approximation of unity, i.e., such that , , , and is a neighborhood basis of in . Let be a decreasing sequence of open compact subgroups of that constitute a neighborhood basis of in . Then, (resp., ) for all .
Next, for functions and , we define the Poincaré series
[TABLE]
where is a discrete subgroup of . An invariant Radon measure on is defined by the condition
[TABLE]
and an invariant Radon measure on is defined analogously.
We end this section by proving a useful integration formula given in (2-17). Let us fix an open compact subgroup of . We recall the following well-known fact [3]: there exists a finite set such that
[TABLE]
Let us fix such a set .
Lemma 2-16**.**
Let be non-negative or such that . Then, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
By a standard argument, it suffices to prove (2-17) in the case when is a non-negative function in . In this case, by the classical theory for some non-negative function . In fact, we can assume that (by replacing by the function ). For such , we have
[TABLE]
where the fourth equality holds by the following elementary equivalence: for all and ,
[TABLE]
Now we have
[TABLE]
where the fifth equality holds by the invariance of the Haar measure on . This proves (2-17). ∎
3. Adelic reformulation of Casselman’s results
Let be a discrete subgroup of . Following Casselman [5], we define the Schwartz space to consist of the functions such that for all left-invariant differential operators and we have
[TABLE]
We equip with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms . By [5, Proposition 1.8], is a Fréchet space, and the right regular representation of on is a smooth representation of moderate growth (see (2-4)).
Let be the strong dual of . We recall that this means that is the space of continuous linear functionals equipped with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
where goes over all bounded sets in (see Definitions A-5 and A-8). By Lemma A-10, is a complete locally convex topological vector space.
To the best of our knowledge, the proof of the following lemma is missing from the literature, so we include a sketch of it here.
Lemma 3-1**.**
The contragredient representation ,
[TABLE]
is a smooth represetation of .
Proof.
By the discussion at the beginning of Section 11, the continuity of the representation is not an immediate consequence of the continuity of . On the bright side, to prove it, we only need to show that for every the map is continuous (at ) (see (11-1)). In other words, we need to prove that for every bounded set in and for every ,
[TABLE]
By the continuity of , there exist , and such that
[TABLE]
for all . The right-hand side tends to [math] when by a standard estimate that uses the definition of seminorms and the mean value theorem; we leave the details to the reader.
The smoothness of can now be proved as in the proof of Proposition 4-10(2) (see Section 11). ∎
Still following Casselman [5], as well as [4], [22] and [23], we define the space
[TABLE]
(see (2-3)), its subspace of -finite vectors (smooth automorphic forms for )
[TABLE]
and its subspace of -finite vectors ((-finite) automorphic forms for )
[TABLE]
The spaces and are -modules under the right translations, and is a -module. All these spaces embed canonically into by identifying with the linear functional ,
[TABLE]
Adelic analogues of the spaces (3-2)–(3-4) can be defined in the following standard way (cf. [4, §4]). For an open compact subgroup of , we define the space
[TABLE]
its subspace of -finite vectors
[TABLE]
and its subspace of -finite vectors
[TABLE]
Next, we define an adelic analogue of the space . Let be an open compact subgroup of . We define a vector space to consist of the functions such that
[TABLE]
for all , and , where the group is defined by (2-5). Equipped with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms , is, by a standard argument, a complete locally convex topological vector space. Moreover, we will show in Lemma 3-9 that its topology is generated by a countable family of seminorms, hence it is a Fréchet space. Thus, by Lemma A-10, its strong dual is a complete locally convex topological vector space.
As in Section 2, let be a finite subset of such that .
Lemma 3-9**.**
The topology of is generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let , and . It suffices to show that the seminorm is continuous with respect to the locally convex topology on generated by the seminorms (3-10). By definition of , there exist , and such that . The claim now follows from the inequality
[TABLE]
To clarify the relation between the real and the adelic situation, we note that for as above, the direct sum of Fréchet spaces is itself a Fréchet space. Its topology is generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
The representation
[TABLE]
is a smooth representation of of moderate growth, being a direct sum of such representations.
Lemma 3-11**.**
- (1)
The representation of defined by
[TABLE]
is a smooth Fréchet representation of moderate growth. 2. (2)
The rule defines an equivalence
[TABLE]
of representations and .
Proof.
One checks easily that is a linear isomorphism . Its inverse maps to the function defined by
[TABLE]
That these linear isomorphisms by restriction become isomorphisms of Fréchet spaces and , follows from Lemma 3-9 and the fact that
[TABLE]
for all , , and . Finally, one checks easily that by pulling back the representation to via the isomorphism , one obtains the representation . The lemma follows. ∎
Lemma 3-13**.**
- (1)
The contragredient representation is a smooth representation of . 2. (2)
The linear operator , , where
[TABLE]
is an equivalence of representations and .
Proof.
For every , let be the canonical inclusion . Using Lemma A-11(2), one sees easily that the rule defines an equivalence of representations
[TABLE]
In turn, by Lemma 3-11(2) the linear operator ,
[TABLE]
is an equivalence of representations and . Since , the claim (2) follows. The claim (1) now follows from (2) and Lemma 3-1. ∎
Lemma 3-15**.**
- (1)
We have the following embedding of -modules: , , where
[TABLE]
for all and . 2. (2)
The inverse of restricts to the following isomorphisms given by the rule :
- (i)
an isomorphism of -modules 2. (ii)
an isomorphism of -modules 3. (iii)
an isomorphism of -modules .
Proof.
The equality in (3-16) follows from (2-17). The rest of the lemma follows easily from (3-5) and the definitions of and of the function spaces (3-2)–(3-4) and (3-6)–(3-8). ∎
As a corollary of the above results and Casselman’s [5, Theorem 1.16], in Corollary 3-18 we determine the Gårding subspace of . The following proposition is a special case of [5, Theorem 1.16].
Proposition 3-17**.**
For every , we have
[TABLE]
Corollary 3-18**.**
We have
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 3-17,
[TABLE]
The claim follows from this by applying the equivalence and using Lemma 3-13(2)(2)(i). ∎
4. The space
In this section we define the space . First, we make the following observation.
Lemma 4-1**.**
Let be open compact subgroups of . Then, is a closed subspace of .
Proof.
Let , and . We have
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
This shows that is a topological subspace of , and it is closed in since it is complete. ∎
Let us define a vector space
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of . We equip with the inductive limit topology determined by the inclusion maps , i.e., with the finest locally convex topology on with respect to which the maps are continuous [24, Definition 12.2.1]. Using Lemma 4-1, one sees easily that it suffices to require that the maps , , be continuous for some decreasing sequence such that is a neighborhood basis of in . In other words, is an LF-space with a defining sequence (see Definition A-4). In particular, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 4-4**.**
- (1)
The space is a complete locally convex topological vector space. 2. (2)
For every open compact subgroup of , is a closed subspace of . 3. (3)
A subset of is bounded if and only if there exists an open compact subgroup of such that and is bounded in . 4. (4)
Let be a locally convex topological vector space. A linear operator is continuous if and only if for every open compact subgroup of , the restriction A\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}:{\mathcal{S}}^{L}\to V is continuous. 5. (5)
Let be a linear operator such that for every open compact subgroup of , there exists an open compact subgroup of such that . Then, is continuous if and only if the restrictions A\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}:{\mathcal{S}}^{L}\to{\mathcal{S}}^{L^{\prime}} are continuous.
Proof.
The claims (1), (2), (3) and (4) follow from Lemma A-7(1), Lemma A-7(3), Lemma A-7(4) and Lemma A-7(6), respectively. The claim (5) follows from (2) and (4). ∎
The following proposition provides a foundation for doing harmonic analysis on . The proof of its first part is quite tedious, so we postpone it until Section 10.
Proposition 4-5**.**
- (1)
The right regular representation of is well-defined and continuous, in the sense that the map , , is continuous. 2. (2)
The representation \left(r\big{|}_{G_{\infty}},{\mathcal{S}}\right) is a smooth representation of .
Proof of Proposition 4-5(2).
The claim follows from the fact that the representation \left(r\big{|}_{G_{\infty}},{\mathcal{S}}\right) is the union of its smooth subrepresentations (see Lemma 3-11(1) and Lemma 4-4(2)). ∎
Next, let be the strong dual of . We recall that this means that is the space of continuous linear functionals , and it is equipped with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms ,
[TABLE]
where goes over bounded sets in (see Definitions A-5 and A-8). By Lemma A-10, is a complete locally convex topological vector space. By analogy with Casselman’s terminology in [5], we call the space of tempered distributions on .
Remark 4-7*.*
- (1)
By Lemma 4-4(4), a linear functional is continuous if and only if for every open compact subgroup of , the restriction T\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}:{\mathcal{S}}^{L}\to{\mathbb{C}} is continuous. 2. (2)
By Lemma 4-4(3), the topology on is simply the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of subspaces .
In the following lemma we describe as the projective limit of the spaces . This is a special case of the well-known result [7, Theorem 1.3.5] exhibiting a canonical isomorphism, in the category of locally convex topological vector spaces, from the strong dual of a regular inductive limit to the projective limit of strong duals. In our situation a short proof is easily attainable, and we present it for the reader’s convenience.
Let denote the projective limit of spaces , taken over the directed set of open compact subgroups of ordered by reverse inclusion, with restriction maps as transition morphisms. Let us equip with the coarsest (locally convex) topology with respect to which the canonical projections onto the spaces are continuous.
Lemma 4-8**.**
The map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism of topological vector spaces.
Proof.
By Remark 4-7(1), the map (4-9) is a well-defined linear isomorphism. To prove that it is a homeomorphism, we recall that the topology of is generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
where goes over all bounded sets in . On the other hand, by [24, Example 5.11.6] the topology of is generated by the seminorms of the form , where is an open compact subgroup of and is a continuous seminorm on . Thus, the topology of is generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of and goes over all bounded subsets of . For all such and we have
[TABLE]
which proves the claim by Lemma 4-4(3). ∎
Next, recall that by Proposition 4-5(1) the right regular representation of on is continuous. Its contragredient representation is defined by the formula
[TABLE]
In Section 11 we prove the following proposition.
Proposition 4-10**.**
- (1)
The contragredient representation is a continuous representation of . 2. (2)
The representation \left(r^{\prime}\big{|}_{G_{\infty}},{\mathcal{S}}^{\prime}\right) is a smooth representation of .
5. Action of Hecke algebra
Let us fix an open compact subgroup of . For example, could be of the form
[TABLE]
where is a finite subset of such that , and is an open compact subgroup of for every . Here is defined as in Section 2; in particular, for every , is a hyperspecial maximal compact subgroup of .
The subalgebra
[TABLE]
of the convolution algebra (see (2-10)) has a unit element . The algebra
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of , is called the Hecke algebra of . The algebra is a special case of the classically defined Hecke algebra of a locally compact totally disconnected group (e.g., see [8]). In the following, we recall some classical results on the action of in representations of ; these results will provide useful information (Lemmas 5-5 and 5-8) on representations and .
Let be a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . For , the continuous representation \pi\big{|}_{\mathcal{G}} of on induces a representation of the convolution algebra on by continuous linear operators ,
[TABLE]
(see [14, §2]). In particular, the algebra acts on by continuous linear operators ,
[TABLE]
Let be an open compact subgroup of . We define the subspace of -invariants in by
[TABLE]
The space is obviously a closed -invariant subspace of .
Lemma 5-2**.**
- (1)
We have
[TABLE] 2. (2)
The space is an -invariant subspace of , and we have
[TABLE] 3. (3)
The map ,
[TABLE]
is a continuous -equivariant projection operator onto .
Proof.
(1) We have
[TABLE]
where the third equality holds since is -invariant on the left. This proves (5-3).
(2) The space is an -invariant subspace of by (1). To prove (5-4), note that for all and ,
[TABLE]
(3) We have that by (1), and one checks easily that for all and, using (A-3), that the (continuous) operator is -equivariant. ∎
As our notation suggests, the subspace of -invariants in coincides with the space defined in Section 3. This follows easily from the definitions and (4-2). In particular, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 5-5**.**
- (1)
The space is an -module under the action defined by
[TABLE] 2. (2)
The linear operator defined by the formula
[TABLE]
or equivalently by the formula
[TABLE]
is a continuous -equivariant projection operator onto .
Proof.
(1) This follows from Lemma 5-2(2).
(2) The equality (5-7) follows from (5-6) by applying the evaluation map , , and using (A-2). To justify this last step, note that is a continuous linear functional on by Remark 4-7(1) and the following estimate: for every open compact subgroup of ,
[TABLE]
All the other claims in (2) follow from Lemma 5-2(3). ∎
By applying Lemma 5-2(3) to the representation , we obtain the following lemma.
Lemma 5-8**.**
The linear operator defined by the formula
[TABLE]
or equivalently by the formula
[TABLE]
is a continuous -equivariant projection operator onto .
Proof.
To derive (5-10) from (5-9), we note that for every , the evaluation map , , is a continuous linear functional on ; namely,
[TABLE]
Thus, by applying to (5-9), we obtain
[TABLE]
The rest of the lemma follows from Lemma 5-2(3). ∎
6. Gårding subspace of
The goal of this section is to determine the Gårding subspace of (see (2-13)). We start by studying in more detail the Gårding subspace of a general continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . Let such be fixed, and let us define the following -invariant subspaces of :
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of , and
[TABLE]
Remark 6-1*.*
Since \left(r^{\prime}\big{|}_{G_{\infty}},{\mathcal{S}}^{\prime}\right) is a smooth representation of (Proposition 4-10(2)), we have
[TABLE]
By the discussion after (2-13), the Gårding subspace
[TABLE]
is dense in . On the other hand, for every open compact subgroup of ,
[TABLE]
is a dense subspace of . A simple relation between the spaces (6-3) and (6-4) is given in the following lemma.
Lemma 6-5**.**
We have
[TABLE]
Proof.
It suffices to prove the following equality for every open compact subgroup of :
[TABLE]
: For , and , we have
[TABLE]
: For and , we have
[TABLE]
which implies the claim. ∎
Corollary 6-7**.**
- (1)
. 2. (2)
The subspace is dense in .
Proof.
The claim (1) follows from (6-6), using that by [14, Lemma 2], and (2) follows from (1) since is dense in . ∎
The key to determining the Gårding subspace is the -equivalence of the following proposition.
Proposition 6-8**.**
Let be an open compact subgroup of . Then, we have the following commutative diagram of continuous -equivariant linear operators:
[TABLE]
The bottom map is an equivalence of representations of .
Proof.
The diagram (6-9) commutes, i.e., we have
[TABLE]
since
[TABLE]
The left-hand side operator in the diagram is continuous, -equivariant and surjective by Lemma 5-8. The operator on the top is obviously -equivariant; it is continuous since
[TABLE]
for every bounded set in ; it is surjective since by a corollary [24, Corollary 7.3.3] of the Hahn-Banach theorem every extends to an element of .
Since the operator on the bottom of the diagram is a restriction of the one on the top, it is continuous and -equivariant; it is also surjective by the commutativity of the diagram; it is injective, i.e., its kernel is trivial, since for every such that T\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}=0, we have
[TABLE]
hence . Finally, the inverse of the bottom map is continuous since for every bounded set in and all , we have
[TABLE]
where is the image of the bounded set in under the continuous linear operator , hence a bounded set in . ∎
Let us define the spaces (see (3-6)–(3-8))
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of .
Lemma 6-12**.**
- (1)
The space is a left -module under the right translations, and the rule , where
[TABLE]
defines an embedding of -modules . 2. (2)
Let be an open compact subgroup of . If , then . 3. (3)
The space is a -submodule of . 4. (4)
The space is a -module.
Proof.
(1) & (2) The only non-obvious part of (1) is that for every , is a well-defined element of . Let be an open compact subgroup of such that . By Remark 4-7(1) and Lemma 4-1, to prove that , it suffices to prove that T_{\varphi}\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L_{0}}}\in\left({\mathcal{S}}^{L_{0}}\right)^{\prime} for every open compact subgroup of , and this holds by Lemma 3-15(1) since for such we have that . Now it is straightforward to prove that is -invariant, hence
[TABLE]
(3) & (4) By Lemma 3-15(2)(2)(ii)–(2)(iii), is a -module, and is a -module. Both spaces are obviously invariant under the right translations by elements of . The claims follow. ∎
The following theorem is the main result of this section and an adelic analogue of [5, Theorem 1.16].
Theorem 6-14**.**
- (1)
For every open compact subgroup of , we have
[TABLE] 2. (2)
We have
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1) The image of the space under the -equivalence of Proposition 6-8 is clearly the space , which equals by Corollary 3-18. The claim follows.
(2) This follows from (1) by (6-6). ∎
7. Closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of
In this section, let be a (Zariski) connected semisimple group defined over . Under this assumption, in Theorem 7-10 we prove that the closed irreducible admissible subrepresentations of are the closures in of irreducible (admissible) -submodules of . We start with a few definitions and basic observations.
For a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space , let us denote by the -module of -smooth, -finite vectors in . We recall that if is admissible, then all -finite vectors in are -smooth.
Lemma 7-1**.**
Let be a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . Then, the -module
[TABLE]
is dense in .
Proof.
For every open compact subgroup of , is dense in by [14, Lemma 4]. It follows that the space is dense in . In turn, the space is dense in by Corollary 6-7(2). The claim follows. ∎
Definition 7-2**.**
We say that a -module is admissible if it has the following two properties:
- (1)
is a smooth -module, i.e.,
[TABLE]
where goes over all open compact subgroups of and
[TABLE] 2. (2)
For every open compact subgroup of , is an admissible -module, i.e.,
[TABLE]
Here is the set of equivalence classes of irreducible continuous representations of , and is the -isotypic component of .
Remark 7-3*.*
In [8, §3], admissible -modules are called admissible -modules.
Definition 7-4**.**
Let be a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . We say that is admissible if it satisfies one of the following equivalent conditions:
- (1)
The -module is admissible. 2. (2)
For every open compact subgroup of , is an admissible representation of . 3. (3)
For every open compact subgroup of ,
[TABLE]
where is the -isotypic component of .
Let be a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . Let be an open compact subgroup of . By Lemma 5-2(3), the linear operator ,
[TABLE]
is a continuous projection onto . Next, by the classical theory (e.g., see [14, §2]), for every the operator E_{\delta}:=\pi\big{|}_{K_{\infty}}\left(d(\delta)\overline{\xi}_{\delta}\right):V\to V,
[TABLE]
is a continuous projection onto and restricts to a continuous projection of onto . Here and are the degree and character of , respectively, and is the normalized Haar measure on . Thus, the operator ,
[TABLE]
is a continuous projection onto . Moreover, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 7-6**.**
For every -submodule of , restricts to a projection of onto .
Proof.
By the above discussion, we only need to prove that is invariant under the operator . If , then for some , and we have
[TABLE]
which implies that since is -invariant. Thus, , hence , where the last equality holds by the classical theory of -modules. The claim follows. ∎
Next, we recall two classical lemmas to be used in the proof of Theorem 7-10.
Lemma 7-7**.**
Let be the identity component of . Let be a continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . If is -smooth, -finite and -finite, then is -invariant.
Proof.
This is proved by the argument from the first paragraph of the proof of [14, Theorem 1]. ∎
Lemma 7-8**.**
Let
[TABLE]
Let be an admissible continuous representation of on a complete locally convex topological vector space . Then, for every there exists such that
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
Proof.
This is proved by the argument from the last paragraph of the proof of [14, Theorem 1]. ∎
Theorem 7-10**.**
Let be a (Zariski) connected semisimple group defined over . Then, the closed irreducible admissible -invariant subspaces of stand in one-one correspondence with the irreducible (admissible) -submodules of , the correspondence being
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us prove that for every irreducible admissible -submodule of , is an irreducible admissible representation of , and . We will do this in three steps, by proving the following claims:
- (1)
is -invariant. 2. (2)
. 3. (3)
is an irreducible representation of .
(1) The space is clearly -invariant and -invariant, hence it suffices to prove that it is -invariant, where is the identity component of . Since every is a -smooth, -finite and -finite vector in (see Proposition 4-10(2) and the definition of ), by Lemma 7-7 is -invariant. Thus, the space
[TABLE]
is -invariant. Since , we have that , hence is also -invariant.
(2) For every and every open compact subgroup of , we have
[TABLE]
where the set inclusion is valid by the continuity of , and the last equality holds because is finite-dimensional. It follows that , and the reverse inclusion is obvious.
(3) Let be a closed -invariant subspace of . Then, is a -submodule of , hence by the irreducibility of . Thus,
[TABLE]
This proves the claim.
Conversely, let be a closed irreducible admissible -invariant subspace of . The -module is admissible by Definition 7-4(1) and dense in by Lemma 7-1. To finish the proof of the theorem, we need to prove the following two claims:
- (4)
. 2. (5)
is an irreducible -module.
(4) Let be an open compact subgroup of . By Definition 7-4(2), is a closed admissible -invariant subspace of , hence
[TABLE]
Since all vectors in are -finite by definition and -finite by [31, Theorem 3.4.1], it follows that . Thus, .
(5) Let be a non-zero -submodule of . Then, one sees as in the proof of (1) that is -invariant, hence by the irreducibility of . Thus, for every open compact subgroup of and every , we have
[TABLE]
where the last equality holds because is finite-dimensional. It follows that , hence . This proves (5). ∎
Remark 7-11*.*
It is well-known that every closed irreducible -invariant subspace of (under the right regular representation) is of the form
[TABLE]
for some irreducible (admissible) -submodule of
[TABLE]
[4, §4.6]. The representations and are related as follows. One sees easily that maps into via the continuous, -equivariant, injective linear operator
[TABLE]
where is defined by (6-13). By restriction, the rule (7-12) defines a continuous, -equivariant, injective linear operator
[TABLE]
whose image is dense in .
8. The space
Let us define a vector space
[TABLE]
where . We will equip with a locally convex topology with respect to which the linear operator ,
[TABLE]
is well-defined, continuous and surjective.
For every open compact subgroup of and every compact subset of such that , let us define the following linear subspace of :
[TABLE]
Writing in the form for some finite subset of , we have
[TABLE]
Let us equip the space with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms
[TABLE]
where and . This turns into a Fréchet space that is isomorphic to the direct sum via the isomorphism suggested by (8-2).
Let us equip the space with the finest locally convex topology with respect to which the inclusion maps are continuous. One sees easily that it suffices to require that the inclusion maps , , be continuous for some sequence such that , , and is a neighborhood basis of in . In other words, is an LF-space with a defining sequence (see Definition A-4). In particular, by Lemma A-7(1) is a complete locally convex topological vector space.
The main result of this section is Theorem 8-4, in which we prove that the linear operator is well-defined, continuous and surjective. The proof relies on the analogous result [5, Proposition 1.11 and Theorem 2.2] for the operators , and uses the following lemma.
Lemma 8-3**.**
Let be a linear operator such that for every open compact subgroup of and every compact subset of such that , there exists an open compact subgroup of such that . Then, is continuous if and only if the restrictions A\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}(G({\mathbb{A}}))^{L}_{\Omega}}:{\mathcal{S}}(G({\mathbb{A}}))^{L}_{\Omega}\to{\mathcal{S}}^{L^{\prime}} are continuous.
Proof.
Completely analogous to the proof of Lemma 4-4(5). ∎
Theorem 8-4**.**
Let be an open compact subgroup of , and let be a compact subset of such that . Then, we have the following:
- (1)
For every , the series defined by (8-1) converges absolutely and uniformly on compact subsets of , and . 2. (2)
If (e.g., if , where is as in (2-15)), then the linear operator
[TABLE]
is continuous and surjective. 3. (3)
The linear operator
[TABLE]
is continuous and surjective.
Proof.
(1) Let and . Let be such that . We have
[TABLE]
Since if , the set on the right-hand side of this equality can be replaced by the set
[TABLE]
Note that is finite since is a union of finitely many left -cosets, and the cosets , , are mutually disjoint. Moreover, for every we have that , hence the series P_{\Gamma_{c,L}}\big{(}f(\delta_{\infty}{\,\cdot\,},\delta_{f}c)\big{)} converges absolutely on to an element of by [5, Proposition 1.11]; the convergence is uniform on compact subsets of by estimates similar to the ones in the proofs of [5, Lemma 1.10 and Proposition 1.11]. Combined with the right -invariance of , this implies that the series converges absolutely and uniformly on compact subsets of ; moreover, and
[TABLE]
for every . By (3-12), it follows that .
(2) To prove that the linear operator (8-5) is continuous, let , and . By the continuity of left translations and of the operators [5, Proposition 1.11], there exist , and such that
[TABLE]
for all and . Thus, we have
[TABLE]
This estimate proves that the linear operator (8-5) is continuous.
Let us prove that the operator (8-5) is surjective. Since , there exists a (finite) set such that . Let . By Lemma 3-11(2), for all . Thus, by [5, Theorem 2.2] for every there exists a function such that . We define
[TABLE]
We will prove that . Since both sides of this equality are -invariant on the left and -invariant on the right, it suffices to show that for all . We have
[TABLE]
where the third equality holds because for and the following elementary equivalence holds:
[TABLE]
(3) The claim follows from (2) by Lemma 8-3. ∎
9. Poincaré series on
In this section, we apply our results to the Poincaré series of functions . The main results of this section—Propositions 9-2 and 9-4—may be regarded as the adelic version of [22, Proposition 6.4].
It is well-known (e.g., see [17, §4]) that for every the Poincaré series
[TABLE]
converges absolutely almost everywhere on and that
[TABLE]
Thus, is a continuous linear operator , and it is -equivariant with respect to the right regular representations on and . Next, one checks easily that the rule , where is defined by (6-13), is a continuous, -equivariant, injective linear operator . Thus, the composition
[TABLE]
is a continuous -equivariant linear operator . This enables us to prove the following proposition.
Proposition 9-2**.**
Let . Then, we have the following:
- (1)
The function coincides almost everywhere with an element of . 2. (2)
If is -finite, then the function coincides almost everywhere with an element of . 3. (3)
If is -finite and -finite on the right, then the function coincides almost everywhere with an element of .
Proof.
The image of under the continuous -equivariant linear operator (9-1) belongs to . By Theorem 6-14(2), this means that . This implies (1), and the other two claims follow analogously. ∎
Next, we turn our attention to the strong dual , which is a complete locally convex topological vector space by Lemma A-10. One sees easily that the space maps into via the continuous injective linear operator , where
[TABLE]
The following proposition describes the (absolute) convergence in of the Poincaré series , i.e., of the series
[TABLE]
where .
Proposition 9-4**.**
Let . Then, the series converges absolutely in , and we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be a bounded set in . To prove the first claim, we need to prove that
[TABLE]
By Lemma A-7(4), there exist an open compact subgroup of and a compact subset of such that is a bounded subset of . We note that for all and , the following equivalence holds:
[TABLE]
Next, applying Lemma 2-1, let us fix such that
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
To prove (9-5), let . The linear functional , , is continuous since
[TABLE]
Thus, we have
[TABLE]
where the third equality holds by the dominated convergence theorem (its use is justified by the above estimate of the right-hand side of (9-8) in the case when ). ∎
10. Proof of Proposition 4-5(1)
This section is devoted to proving Proposition 4-5(1). The proof is technical and can be skipped on first reading without loss of continuity.
Lemma 10-1**.**
Let be an open compact subgroup of . Let , and . Then:
- (1)
. 2. (2)
For all , and ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Obviously . Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
where in the second equality we applied the identity
[TABLE]
where is the right translation . ∎
Proof of Proposition 4-5(1).
By Lemma 10-1(1) the group acts on by right translations. We need to prove that this action is continuous, i.e, that for every ,
[TABLE]
Writing the function under the limit sign in the form
[TABLE]
we see that it suffices to prove the following three claims:
- (1)
The linear operator is continuous for every . 2. (2)
The function , , is continuous at . 3. (3)
The function is continuous at for every .
(1) By Lemma 10-1 the restrictions r(x)\big{|}_{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}:{{\mathcal{S}}^{L}}\to{{\mathcal{S}}^{x_{f}Lx_{f}^{-1}}} are continuous, hence is continuous by Lemma 4-4(5).
(2) Let us fix a decreasing sequence of open compact subgroups of such that is a neighborhood basis of in and that
[TABLE]
We also fix a compact neighborhood of in .
Our first goal is to construct a neighborhood basis of [math] in . First, we need some notation. Let denote the absolutely convex hull of a set (see Definition A-6). Moreover, for every , let be the family of open balls
[TABLE]
where is a continuous seminorm and . The family is a neighborhood basis of [math] in . Thus, applying Lemma A-7(2), we can define a neighborhood basis of [math] in to consist of the sets
[TABLE]
where is a sequence of continuous seminorms , and . A smaller neighborhood basis of [math] in can be obtained by requiring that the seminorms be finite sums of seminorms
[TABLE]
Let be fixed. To prove (2), it suffices to find a set such that for all , the following implication holds:
[TABLE]
i.e.,
[TABLE]
We will prove that for a suitable choice of and , the following stronger claim holds: for all and ,
[TABLE]
Our transition to (10-3) is motivated by the following fact: For every choice of and , the operators , , restrict to operators . Namely, for all ,
[TABLE]
Let us fix . To finish the proof, we need to find a continuous seminorm and a real number such that for all and , the following implication holds:
[TABLE]
Let us suppose without loss of generality that
[TABLE]
for some , and .
Before proceeding, we recall the standard filtration
[TABLE]
of by finite-dimensional -invariant subspaces. Let such that , and let be a basis of . Then,
[TABLE]
for some functions .
For all and , we have
[TABLE]
The seminorm defined in this way and clearly satisfy (10-4). This finishes the proof of (2).
(3) Fix , and let be an open compact subgroup of such that . For every , by Lemma 10-1, and for all , and we have
[TABLE]
by the continuity of the representation . This proves (3). ∎
11. Proof of Proposition 4-10
Proposition 4-10(1) states that is a continuous represenation of . We note that this is not immediately obvious: in general, if is a continuous representation of a locally compact Hausdorff group on an LF-space , its contragredient representation on the strong dual need not be continuous (simple counterexamples are regular representations of on , where is a Lie group of positive dimension [32, §4.1.2, p. 224]). However, the closed subrepresentation
[TABLE]
of is continuous [32, 4.1.2, pp. 223-224].
Proof of Proposition 4-10.
(1) We will prove that or equivalently that the function is continuous for every . Clearly, it suffices to prove that each of these functions is continuous at .
Let . We need to prove that for every bounded set in ,
[TABLE]
By Lemma 4-4(3) there exists an open compact subgroup of such that is a bounded subset of . Note that for and , hence we have, for all ,
[TABLE]
and the right-hand side tends to [math] as by the continuity of the representation (Lemma 3-13(1)). This proves the claim.
(2) Let denote the space of -smooth vectors in , i.e., the space of all such that the map , , is smooth. We need to show that .
Let be the unique -linear anti-automorphism of the algebra such that for all . One sees easily that
[TABLE]
for all , and .
By the argument from the proof of [31, Lemma 1.6.4(1)] (of course, one needs to work with nets instead of sequences), the space is a complete topological vector space when equipped with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms ,
[TABLE]
where goes over bounded subsets of and goes over . But coincides with the relative topology on inherited from ; namely, by (11-2) we have that
[TABLE]
for all and . We note that the set on the right-hand side is bounded in , or equivalently in for such that (see Lemma 4-4(3)), since
[TABLE]
for all , , and .
Thus, is a complete, hence closed, subspace of . Since by [14, Corollary 1 of Lemma 3] it is also dense in , it follows that . ∎
Appendix
Here we collect a few facts from functional analysis used in the paper. All vector spaces are assumed to be complex. All locally convex topological vector spaces are assumed to be Hausdorff.
We start by recalling the definition and basic properties of the Gelfand-Pettis integral (e.g., see [9, §14]).
Theorem A-1**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space with a Radon measure , and let and be quasi-complete (e.g., complete) locally convex topological vector spaces. Then, for every continuous function there exists a unique (the Gelfand-Pettis integral of ) such that for every continuous linear functional , we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, the following holds:
- (1)
For every continuous linear operator ,
[TABLE] 2. (2)
For every continuous seminorm ,
[TABLE]
Next, we recall the definition and basic properties of LF-spaces—strict inductive limits of increasing sequences of Fréchet spaces (see e.g. [30, §13], [27, §II.6.3] or [24, §12.1]).
Definition A-4**.**
Let be a sequence of Fréchet spaces such that is a closed subspace of for every . The vector space equipped with the finest locally convex topology with respect to which the inclusion maps are continuous is called the LF-space with a defining sequence .
The next lemma uses the notion of bounded sets in a locally convex topological vector space. We recall their definition [24, Definition 6.1.1 and Theorem 6.1.5].
Definition A-5**.**
Let be a locally convex topological vector space, and let be a family of continuous seminorms generating its topology. A subset is bounded in if the following equivalent conditions hold:
- (1)
For every neighborhood of [math] in , there exists a such that for all such that . 2. (2)
for all .
We also need the following definition.
Definition A-6**.**
Let be a vector space. The absolutely convex hull of a subset is the set
[TABLE]
Lemma A-7**.**
Let be an LF-space with a defining sequence . Then, we have the following:
- (1)
*The space is a complete locally convex topological vector space. * 2. (2)
For every , let be a neighborhood basis of [math] in . Let be the family of subsets of the form
[TABLE]
*where . Then, is a neighborhood basis of [math] in . * 3. (3)
For every , is a closed subspace of . 4. (4)
A subset of is bounded in if and only if there exists such that and is bounded in . 5. (5)
Let and . Then, in if and only if there exists such that , , and in . 6. (6)
Let be a locally convex topological vector space. Then, a linear operator is continuous if and only if the restrictions A\big{|}_{E_{m}}:E_{m}\to F, , are continuous. 7. (7)
A seminorm is continuous if and only if the restrictions p\big{|}_{E_{m}}:E_{m}\to{\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}, , are continuous.
Proof.
The claim (1) holds because is locally convex by definition (it is Hausdorff by [24, Theorem 12.1.3(b)]) and complete by [24, Theorem 12.1.10]; (2) follows from [24, Theorems 12.1.1 and 4.2.11]; (3) holds by [24, Theorem 12.1.3(a)], (4) by [24, Theorem 12.1.7(a)]; (5) by [24, Theorem 12.1.7(b)], (6) by [24, Theorem 12.2.2], and (7) follows easily from the definition of topology on . ∎
Next, we recall the notion of the strong dual of a locally convex topological vector space [27, §IV.5] (see also [26, Theorem 3.18]).
Definition A-8**.**
Let be a locally convex topological vector space. The strong dual of is the space of continuous linear functionals equipped with the locally convex topology generated by the seminorms ,
[TABLE]
where goes over all bounded sets in .
Lemma A-10** ([30, Corollary 2 of Theorem 32.2]).**
Let be a metrizable locally convex topological vector space (e.g., a Fréchet space) or an LF-space. Then, the strong dual is complete.
Lemma A-11**.**
Let be locally convex topological vector spaces and for each , let be the canonical inclusion . Let us equip the direct sums and with product topologies. Then, we have the following:
- (1)
A subset of is bounded if and only if for some bounded subsets of . 2. (2)
The linear operator
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism of topological vector spaces.
Proof.
(1) This is a special case of [27, I.5.5].
(2) It is elementary and well-known that is a linear isomorphism. It follows easily from (1) that it is also a homeomorphism. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Advances in the Theory of Automorphic Forms and Their L-functions (eds. Jiang, D., Shahidi, F., Soudry, D.). Proceedings of the workshop in honor of James Cogdell’s 60th birthday, Vienna, 2013. Contemp. Math. 664, AMS, Providence, RI (2016)
- 2[2] Automorphic forms, representations, and L-functions (eds. Borel, A., Casselman, W.). Proc. Symp. Pure Math. 33 (Corvallis 1977), AMS, Providence, RI (1979)
- 3[3] Borel, A.: Some finiteness properties of adele groups over number fields. Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS, Vol. 16, pp. 5-30 (1963)
- 4[4] Borel, A., Jacquet, H.: Automorphic forms and automorphic representations. In [ 2 ] , Part 1, pp. 189-202.
- 5[5] Casselman, W.: Introduction to the Schwartz space of Γ \ G \ Γ 𝐺 \Gamma\backslash G . Canad. J. Math. 41, No. 2, pp. 285-320 (1989)
- 6[6] Cohomology of Arithmetic Groups (eds. Cogdell, J., Harder, G., Kudla, S., Shahidi, F.). On the Occasion of Joachim Schwermer’s 66th Birthday, Bonn, Germany, June 2016. Springer Proc. Math. Stat. 245, Springer, Cham (2018)
- 7[7] De Grande-De Kimpe, N., Kakol, J., Perez-Garcia, C., Schikhof, W. H.: p-adic locally convex inductive limits. In [ 25 ] , pp. 159-222.
- 8[8] Flath, D.: Decomposition of representations into tensor products. In [ 2 ] , Part 1, pp. 179-183.
