This paper investigates the structure of stable lattices in residually reducible Hida deformations and explores the variation of associated two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions, extending previous work and answering a question by Ochiai.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of stable $ ext{I}$-free lattices in Hida deformations and analyzes their impact on two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions, providing new insights into their variation.
Findings
01
Characterization of $ ext{I}$-free lattices in Hida deformations.
02
Analysis of the variation of two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions.
03
Answer to Ochiai's question on lattice classes in residually reducible cases.
Abstract
This paper is a continuation of the author's previous work, where we studied the variation of the number of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable lattices in p-adic families of residually reducible ordinary Galois representations. In this paper, we study the number of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable free lattices in a residually reducible Hida deformation and the variation of their related two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions. This result gives an answer of a question asked by Ochiai.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Advanced Algebra and Geometry · advanced mathematical theories
Full text
Stable I-free lattices and the two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions in residually reducible Hida deformation
Dong Yan
Abstract
This paper is a continuation of the author’s previous work, where we studied the number of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable lattices in p-adic families of residually reducible ordinary modular Galois representations. In this paper, we study the number of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable free lattices in a residually reducible Hida deformation and the variation of their related two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions. This result gives an answer of a question asked by Ochiai.
We fix an irregular pair (p,k) i.e. p is an irregular prime and p divides the numerator of the k-th Bernoulli number Bk. By an idea of Ribet [24], there is an eigen cusp form fk∈Sk(SL2(Z)) such that the residual representation of the Galois representation ρfk attached to fk is reducible. This Galois representation ρfk and its Hida deformation play an important role in the Iwasawa theory for ideal class groups which is studied by Ribet [24], Mazur-Wiles [14] and Wile [28].
The author would like to study the Iwasawa theory for the two-variable Hida deformation of fk which is a special case of the Iwasawa theory for Galois deformations which is proposed by Greenberg [8]. One of subtle points in the residually reducible case is that the Selmer group and its characteristic ideal may depend on the choice of GQ-stable lattice. We first prepare some notation on Hida deformation. We fix embeddings Q↪Qp and Q↪C, where Q and Qp are the algebraic closures of the rational number field Q and the p-adic number field Qp respectively. Let Γ′ be the p-Sylow subgroup of group of diamond operators for the tower of modular curves {Y1(pt)}t≥1 (see §3). For an integer r, we denote by μr the group of r-th roots of unity. Let ω:(Z/pZ)×→μp−1 be the Teichmüller character. In [10] and [27], Hida and Wiles proved that there exists an integrally closed local domain I which is finite flat over Λ:=Zp[[Γ′]] and an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F=n=1∑∞a(n,F)qn∈I[[q]] with character ωk−1 which can specialize to the p-stabilization of fk under an arithmetic specialization (see §3 below).
Let Hord:=Hord(1,Zp) be Hida’s ordinary Hecke algebra over Λ as in [9] and hord:=hord(1,Zp) the quotient of Hord corresponding to cusp forms. By [9, Theorem 3.1], Hord and hord are free Λ-modules of finite rank. The action of Hecke operators on the modular curve X1(pr) induces convariant and cotravariant actions on its p-adic étale cohomology groups. We concern the covariant action throughout the paper. Let M:=M(ωk−2,1) be the Eisenstein maximal ideal of Hord as in [21, §1.2, (1.2.9)]. For simplicity, we assume the following condition throughout this section.
(Λ)
The Λ-module hMord is of rank one over Λ.
Note that the condition (Λ) holds for all irregular pairs (p,k) with p<107 and k<8000 except for the pair (p,k)=(547,486) (cf. [13, Appendix II]). We also have that under the condition (Λ), the above I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F has Fourier coefficients in Λ i.e. I=Λ (cf. [11, §7.6]).
In [10, Theorem 2.1], Hida constructed a Galois representation VF attached to F (see Theorem 3.2 below). Let ρF be the action of GQ on VF. Recall that VF has a lattice T (see Definition 2.3 below) which is stable under the action of GQ (we call that T is a GQ-stable lattice of VF). The action of GQ on T induced by ρF is continuous with respect to the mI-adic topology on AutI(T) and unramified outside {p,∞}, where mI denotes the maximal ideal of I. Let us fix an integer i from now on to the end of this paper. Let Γ=Gal(Q∞/Q), where Q∞ is the cyclotomic Zp-extension of Q. Let R=I[[Γ]] and we introduce the R-module T(i):=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi on which GQ acts diagonally, where κ~ is the character κ~:GQ↠Γ↪Zp[[Γ]]×. Recall that Wiles [27, Theorem 2.2.2] proved that VF has a unique Dp-stable subspace F+VF of dimension one such that the action of Dp on VF/F+VF is unramified. This induce an I[Dp]-submodule F+T=T∩F+VF of T and a R[Dp]-submodule F+T(i)=F+T(i)⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi of T(i). For a R-module M, we denote by M∨=HomZp(M,Qp/Zp) the Pontrjagin dual of M. Let A=T(i)⊗RR∨ and we denote by F+A=F+T⊗RR∨ in A. Then we define the Selmer group SelA as Definition 3.5.
In [18, Proposition 4.9] and [19, Remark 1.7 3-(b)], Ochiai proved that (SelA)∨ is a finitely generated torsion R-module for any T. Then we denote by charR(SelA)∨ the characteristic ideal of (SelA)∨. Let Lpalg(T(i)) be a generator of (SelA)∨ which is well-defined up to multiplying by elements of R×. We call Lpalg(T(i))the algebraic p-adic L-function for T(i).
Let ρF(mI) be the residual representation of ρF modulo mI. The existence and the uniqueness of such residual representation are proved by Mazur-Wiles [15, §9]. Note that ρF(mI) is isomorphic to the semi-simplification of the residual representation of fk. Since ρF(mI) is reducible, the GQ-stable lattice T is not unique up to homothety. Thus Lpalg(T(i)) may depend on T.
We call T a free lattice if T is a free I-module. In general, a GQ-stable lattice T is not necessarily free over I. However since I=Λ is a regular local ring, there exists a GQ-stable I-free lattice by taking the double linear dual T∗∗:=HomI(HomI(T,I),I) of a given GQ-stable lattice T. We have a formula on the change of the algebraic p-adic L-functions for different choice of lattices due to Ochiai.
Assume the condition (Λ). Let T and T′ be GQ-stable I-free lattices of ρF such that T′⊂T. Let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi and T′(i)=T′⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi. Then we have
[TABLE]
where P1(R) is the set of all height-one primes of R.
There is a “geometric lattice” TF of VF which is constructed as follows
[TABLE]
Let TF(i):=TF⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi. As a continuation of the work on Iwasawa theory for two-variable residually reducible Hida deformations, Ochiai proposed the following question:
Question 1.2** (Ochiai [19, Question 4.5 and §1]).**
(1)
How many GQ-stable lattices up to GQ-isomorphism exist for a given Hida deformation ([19, Question 4.5-(1)])?
2. (2)
Can we calculate the variation of Lpalg(T(i)) when T varies ([19, Question 4.5-(2)])?
3. (3)
Is Lpalg(TF(i)) minimal under divisibility among the set of Lpalg(T(i)) for all GQ-stable lattices of VF ([19, §1 the statement below Remark 1.7])?
Note that Question 1.2-(3) is motivated by Stevens [26] in which we find a conjectural answer on the choice of the minimal lattice of the p-adic representation attached to an elliptic curve over Q. It is conjectured by Greenberg that the μ-invariant of the algebraic and the analytic p-adic L-functions for the minimal lattice are both zero. Then under the conjecture of μ=0, the half of the main conjecture for residually reducible elliptic curves follows by Kato’s theorem.
In this paper, we give an answer of the above question. First we give some remarks on Question 1.2. In order to answer the question, first we must remark that we must make clear the question whether we consider only GQ-stable I-free lattices or we consider all GQ-stable lattices. Recall that under certain conditions, we proved the following result for non-free lattices.
Let (p,k) be an irregular pair. Assume the condition (Λ) and that the ideal generated by Kubota-Leopoldt p-adic L-function Lp(ωk−1;γ′)∈Λ (see §4.1 below) is a prime ideal of Λ. Suppose that Lp(ωk−1;γ′) has a zero in pZp, then there are infinitely many GQ-stable lattices of VF up to GQ-isomorphism.
However, by Lemma 4.2 we know that to answer Question 1.2-(2), it is enough to study the the variation of Lpalg(T(i)) when T varies in the set of GQ-stable I-free lattices. Our answers to the Question 1.2-(1) (only for free lattices), (2) and (3) is the following theorem.
Let Lfr(ρF) be the set of isomorphic classes of GQ stable I-free lattices of VF. We denote by Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(i)) the set of all (Lpalg(T(i))) when T varies in the set of all GQ-stable lattices of VF. Our main result is as follows:
Let (p,k) be an irregular pair. Assume the condition (Λ), then we have the following statements:
(1)
There are only finitely many GQ-stable I-free lattices of VF. Furthermore, we have
[TABLE]
2. (2)
Let D(Lp(ωk−1;γ′)) be the set of all ideals of I which divide (Lp(ωk−1;γ′)). Then there exists a set T of a system of representatives of Lfr(ρF) which contains TF such that we have the following bijection
[TABLE]
such that T/TF→∼I/a(1), where I/a(1) denotes the I-module I/a on which GQ acts trivially.
3. (3)
The algebraic p-adic L-function Lpalg(TF(i)) is the minimal one under divisibility among the set of Lpalg(T(i)) for all GQ-stable lattices of VF. Furthermore, we have the following equality:
[TABLE]
By Theorem A we have that to determine the set Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(i)), it is enough to calculate Lpalg(TF(i)). By combining Theorem A with a recent calculation of Bellaïche and Pollack [3] on the one-variable cyclotomic deformation case, we obtain a result of Lpalg(TF(0)) as follows.
Let (p,k) be an irregular pair. Assume (Λ) and the following condition
(pFour)
We have the equality (Lp(ωk−1;γ′))=(a(p,F)−1) in I.
Then Lpalg(TF(0)) is a unit of R and
[TABLE]
Outline of the paper**.**
In §2, we study some properties of G-stable lattices of the representation over a discrete valuation ring, which is used to prove Theorem A. In §3, we recall some known results on Hida deformation and Selmer group. In §4, we prove Theorem A and we give some examples of Lfr(ρF) and Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(i)) in §5. By our arguments in §4, we can define a graph structure on the set of the isomorphic classes of GQ-stable I-free lattices which we will study in the appendix.
Notation**.**
Let R be a commutative domain and K the field of fractions of R. For a finite dimensional K-vector space V and a linear representation of a group G:
[TABLE]
we denote by C(ρ) (resp. Cfr(ρ)) the set of homothetic classes of G-stable lattices (resp. G-stable R-free lattices) of ρ and by L(ρ) (resp. Lfr(ρ)) the set of isomorphic classes of G-stable lattices (resp. G-stable R-free lattices) of ρ.
For a prime l, we denote by Il the inertia subgroup of the decomposition group Dl at l. For a Dirichlet character θ modulo M, by abuse of notation, we sometimes denote by θ the character of GQ composed with GQ↠Gal(Q(μM)/Q)→∼(Z/MZ)×. We denote by κcyc (resp. κ′) the isomorphism Γ→∼1+pZp (resp. Γ′→∼1+pZp). For later convenience, we choose γ (resp. γ′) a topological generator of Γ (resp. Γ′) such that κcyc(γ)=κ′(γ′)=:u. For an element a∈Zp×, write a=ω(a)⟨a⟩ under Zp×→∼μp−1×(1+pZp) and we denote by sa the element of Zp such that ⟨a⟩=usa.
For a Dirichlet character θ, write Λθ=Zp[θ][[Γ′]]. For a fixed Noetherian integrally closed domain R, we denote by P1(R) the set of all height-one prime ideals of R. For a finitely generated R-module M, we denote by M∗ the R-linear dual of M and by M∗∗ the double R-linear dual of M.
Acknowledgements**.**
The author expresses his sincere gratitude to Professor Tadashi Ochiai for spending a lot of time to read the manuscript carefully, giving the author useful comments and pointing out mistakes. He also thanks to Kenji Sakugawa for reading the manuscript, stimulating discussion and correcting several mistakes.
2 Stable lattices in the two-dimensional representation over a discrete valuation ring
In this section, we study some properties of G-stable lattices of a representation over the field of fractions of a discrete valuation ring. The tool of counting the number of the isomorphic classes of stable lattices is the ideal of reducibility which is defined by Bellaïche-Chenevier [1] for the residually reducible case. Although it might be known for the experts that the ideal of reducibility coincide with the whole ring if the residual representation is irreducible, we obtain the following proposition without the assumption on the residually reducibility. This will be used in §4 to verify whether the isomophic classes of GQ-stable Ip-lattice in a Hida deformation for a height-one prime ideal p is unique or not.
Propostion 2.1**.**
Let R be a local domain with maximal ideal m and K the field of fractions of R. We assume that the characteristic of the residue field R/m is not two. Let V be a vector space of dimension two over K and
[TABLE]
a linear representation of a group G such that trρ(G)⊂R. Assume that there exists an element g0∈G such that the characteristic polynomial of ρ(g0) has roots in R which are distinct modulo m. Then there exists a unique ideal I(ρ) of R such that for any ideal J, I(ρ)⊂J if and only if there exist characters ϑ1,ϑ2:G→(R/J)× such that trρmodJ=ϑ1+ϑ2. Furthermore, if J⊂m, the set of such characters {ϑ1,ϑ2} is unique.
Proposition 2.1 is proved in the same way as [1, Lemme 1]. However, we add the proof for later reference.
Proof.
The uniqueness of I(ρ) follows by its property. We prove the existence. Let λ1 and λ2 be the roots of the characteristic polynomial of ρ(g0). Let us choose a K-basis {e1,e2} of V such that ρ(g0)=(λ100λ2). For any g∈G, write ρ(g)=(a(g)c(g)b(g)d(g)) with respect to the basis {e1,e2}. Then we have the following equalities:
[TABLE]
Since R is a local domain and λ1≡λ2(modm), λ1−λ2 is a unit of R. Thus a(g),d(g)∈R by the equalities (2). Since b(g)c(g′)=a(gg′)−a(g)a(g′), we have b(g)c(g′)∈R for any g,g′∈G.
Let I(ρ) be the R-submodule of K which is generated by b(g)c(g′) for all g,g′∈G. Then I(ρ) is an ideal of R. Let us take an ideal J of R. The case when J=R is obvious. Hence it is sufficient to consider the case when J⊂m. Assume I(ρ)⊂J. By the definition of I(ρ), we have that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
are characters. We denote by ϑ1 (resp. ϑ2) : G→(R/J)× the composition of amodI(ρ) (resp. dmodI(ρ)) with the surjection R/I(ρ)↠R/J. Then we have trρmodJ=ϑ1+ϑ2.
For the converse, we denote by ψi:G→(R/m)×(i=1,2) the composition of ϑi with the surjection R/J↠R/m. Then we have trρmodm=ψ1+ψ2. Since for any g∈G,
[TABLE]
and char(R/m)=2, we have detρmodm=ψ1ψ2. Thus the mod m characteristic polynomial of ρ(g0) is
[TABLE]
where λi=λimodm(i=1,2). Then we have {ψ1(g0),ψ2(g0)}={λ1,λ2}. Since λ1≡λ2(modm), we have ψ1=ψ2. Then by [1, Lemme 1], we have {ϑ1,ϑ2}={amodJ,dmodJ} and b(g)c(g′)∈J for any g,g′∈G. This implies I(ρ)⊂J.
Now we prove the uniqueness of the set of characters {ϑ1,ϑ2}. First we prove the uniqueness of {ψ1,ψ2} by contradiction. Assume we have another set of characters {ψ1′,ψ2′}={ψ1,ψ2} such that trρmodm=ψ1′+ψ2′. By considering the modm characteristic polynomial of ρ(g), we have
[TABLE]
for any g∈G. We may assume ψ1′(g0)=ψ1(g0) without loss of generality. Assume there exists an element h∈G such that ψ1′(h)=ψ2(h)=ψ1(h). Then we have
[TABLE]
By (3), the equality (4) contradicts to ψ1(g0)=ψ2(g0) or ψ1(h)=ψ2(h). Thus, under the assumption ψ1′(g0)=ψ1(g0), we must have ψ1′=ψ1 and ψ2′=ψ2.
Now we complete the proof of Proposition 2.5. Suppose that we have another set of characters {ϑ1′,ϑ2′} of G with values in (R/J)× such that trρmodJ=ϑ1′+ϑ2′. Then we have {ϑ1′modm,ϑ2′modm}={ψ1,ψ2} by the uniqueness of the set {ψ1,ψ2}, where ϑi′modm:G→(R/m)×(i=1,2) is the composition of ϑi′ with the surjection R/J↠R/m. Then {ϑ1′,ϑ2′}={amodJ,dmodJ} holds by [1, Lemme 1]. Thus the uniqueness of {ϑ1,ϑ2} follows. This completes the proof of Proposition 2.1.
∎
Definition 2.2**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Proposition 2.1. We call I(ρ) the ideal of reducibility of R corresponding to ρ (cf. [1, §2.3]).
We recall the definition of lattice and stable lattice as follows:
Definition 2.3**.**
Let R be a commutative Noetherian integrally closed domain with field of fractions K. Let V be a finite dimensional K-vector space. We say that a R-submodule T of V is a lattice of V if and only if T is finitely generated and T⊗RK=V. Let
[TABLE]
be a linear representation of a group G, we say that T is a G-stable lattice of V if T is a lattice and ρ(G)T=T.
For the remainder of this section, let R be a discrete valuation ring. We study the number of isomorphic classes of G-stable lattices by means of the ideal of reducibility. Firstly we recall the following proposition.
Propostion 2.4** ([4, Chap. 7, §4.1, Corollary to Proposition 4]).**
Let A be a discrete valuation ring with ϖ a fixed uniformizer and K the field of fractions of A. Let V be a finite dimensional K-vector space. We denote by A^=jlimA/ϖjA the ϖ-adic completion of A and by K^ the field of fractions of A^. Let CA (resp. CA^) be the category of A-lattices of V (resp. the category of A^-lattices of V⊗KK^) and F1,F2 the following functors:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then we have F2∘F1=idCA and F1∘F2=idCA^ i.e. the category CA and CA^ are equivalent.
Propostion 2.5**.**
Let A be a discrete valuation ring with ϖ a fixed uniformizer and K the filed of fractions of A. We assume the characteristic of the residue field A/(ϖ) is not two. Let V be a two-dimensional K-vector space and
[TABLE]
a linear representation of a group G such that ρ has a G-stable lattice T. Assume that there exists an element g0∈G such that the characteristic polynomial of ρ(g0) has roots in A which are distinct modulo (ϖ). We denote by I(ρ) the ideal of reducibility of A. Then we have the following statements:
(1)
We have I(ρ)⊂(ϖ) if and only if the semi-simplification (T/ϖT)ss is decomposed into two characters i.e. (T/ϖT)ss≅A/(ϖ)(ψ1)⊕A/(ϖ)(ψ2), where ψi:G→(A/(ϖ))× (i=1,2) is a character. Furthermore, we have ψ1=ψ2 in this case.
2. (2)
We have ♯C(ρ)=♯L(ρ)=ordϖI(ρ)+1.
3. (3)
More precisely, let ordϖI(ρ)=n>0. Then there exists a chain of G-stable lattices Tn⊋⋯⊋T0 which is a system of representatives of both C(ρ) and L(ρ) such that for any 1≤j≤n, Tj/T0 is isomorphic to A/(ϖ)j as an A-module and Tn/T0 is isomorphic to A/(ϖ)n(ϑ1(n)) as an A[G]-module, where {ϑ1(n),ϑ2(n)} is the set of characters with values in (A/(ϖ)n)× such that trρmod(ϖ)n=ϑ1(n)+ϑ2(n).
Proof.
We prove the first assertion. By Proposition 2.1, the condition I(ρ)⊂(ϖ) is equivalent to that there exist characters ψ1 and ψ2 of G with values in (A/(ϖ))× such that trρmod(ϖ)=ψ1+ψ2. Hence it is equivalent to (T/ϖT)ss≅A/(ϖ)(ψ1)⊕A/(ϖ)(ψ2) by Brauer-Nesbitt theorem. We have ψ1(g0)=ψ2(g0) under the assumption. This completes the proof of the first assertion.
We prove the second assertion. First we assume that (T/ϖT)ss is irreducible. Then every G-stable lattice is homothetic with T by Nakayama’s lemma. Thus ♯L(ρ)≤♯C(ρ)=1, and hence ♯L(ρ)=1. On the other hand the assumption that (T/ϖT)ss is irreducible is equivalent to I(ρ)=A by (1). Thus the second assertion follows when (T/ϖT)ss is irreducible. Next we assume that (T/ϖT)ss is reducible. Then trρmod(ϖ) is the sum of two distinct characters by (1). We may assume that A is complete by Proposition 2.4. Then ordϖI(ρ)+1=♯L(ρ)=♯C(ρ) follows by the same proof [29, Proposition 3.4], where the same statement is proved for the ring of integers of a finite extension of Qp. This completes the proof of the second assertion.
We prove the third assertion. By the same proof of [29, Proposition 3.4], we have that Tj/T0 is isomorphic to A/(ϖ)j as an A-module for any 1≤j≤n. Under the assumption trρmod(ϖ)n=ϑ1(n)+ϑ2(n), we have that Tn/T0 is isomorphic to either A/(ϖ)n(ϑ1(n)) or A/(ϖ)n(ϑ2(n)) by Proposition 2.1. If Tn/T0→∼A/(ϖ)n(ϑ2(n)), one may change the chain Tn⊋⋯⊋T0 to
Note that for all representation we consider in this paper, we always have ♯C(ρ)=♯L(ρ). However, they are different in general. For example, for the semi-simple representation 1⊕χcyc:GQ→AutZp(Zp⊕2), the tree C(ρ) is a full-line (cf. [13, §17, Proposition 2]) and ♯C(ρ)=∞. However let T and T′ be the representatives of the points x and x′ in C(ρ) respectively. Since the representation is semi-simple, T is isomorphic to T′ as A[G]-modules. Hence ♯L(ρ)=1. Since we consider the variation of the algebraic p-adic L-function when a stable lattice varies, we must minimize the possibility of the change of Selmer group. Thus we consider the isomorphic classes of stable lattices instead of homothetic classes.
3 Hida deformation and Selmer group
3.1 Hida deformation
We recall some known results on Galois representations attached to normalized I-adic eigen cusp forms in this section. For more details, the reader can refer to [11, Chapter 7].
We denote by Γt′ the p-Sylow subgroup of the group of diamond operators on the modular curve Y1(pt+1). Γt′ is canonically isomorphic to the multiplicative group 1+pZ/1+pt+1Z. We define Γ′:=tlimΓt′. Recall that κ′ denotes the canonical isomorphism κ′:Γ′→∼1+pZp.
A character ν of Γ′ is called an arithmetic character of weight kν∈Z≥2 if there exists an open subgroup U of Γ′ such that ν∣U=κ′kν−2. Let I be an integrally closed local domain which is finite flat over Λ. We denote by Xarith(I) the set of arithmetic specializations which is the set of continuous homomorphisms defined as follows:
[TABLE]
For an arithmetic specialization ϕ, we denote by prϕ the order of the character ϕ∣Γ′⋅κ′2−kϕ and by ψϕ the following Dirichlet character
[TABLE]
Definition 3.1**.**
Let χ be a Dirichlet character modulo Np with (N,p)=1 and I an integrally closed local domain which is finite flat over Λχ. We call F=n=1∑∞a(n,F)qn∈I[[q]] an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form with character χ if
[TABLE]
is a p-ordinary normalized eigen cusp form for all ϕ∈Xarith(I).
In [10, Theorem 2.1], Hida constructed a continuous Galois representation ρF attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F as follows:
Let F be an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form with character χ. Then there exist a K-vector space VF of dimension two and a Galois representation
[TABLE]
such that
(1)
There exists a GQ-stable lattice T of VF such the representation GQ→AutI(T) induced by ρF is continuous with respect to the mI-adic topology on AutI(T).
2. (2)
The representation ρF is irreducible and unramified outside Np∞.
3. (3)
For the geometric Frobenius element Frobl at l∤Np, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Although ρF may not have a GQ-stable I-free lattice, we have the following proposition for the existence of the residual representation at a prime ideal of I (see [15, §9] for example).
Propostion 3.3** (Hida, Mazur-Wiles).**
Let VF be the Galois representation attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F. Then for a prime ideal p of I, there exists a residual representation
[TABLE]
of ρF at p such that ρF(p) is semi-simple, continuous under the mI-adic topology of GL2(Frac(I/p)) and satisfies the following properties:
(1)
The representation ρF(p) is unramified outside Np∞.
2. (2)
For the arithmetic Frobenius element Frobl at l∤Np, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Furthermore, the residual representation ρF(p) is unique up to isomorphism over an algebraic closure of Frac(I/p).
As an representation of the decomposition subgroup Dp, we have the following property of ρF due to Mazur and Wiles:
Let VF be the Galois representation attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F. Then VF has a unique Dp-stable subspace F+VF of dimension 1 such that the action of Dp on VF/F+VF is unramified.
3.2 Selmer groups for Galois deformations
In this section, we recall the comparison formula of Selmer groups for two-variable Hida deformation which is proved by Ochiai [19]. First we recall the definition of Selmer group for a general Galois deformation. Let R be an integrally closed local domain which is finite flat over Zp[[X1,⋯,Xn]] with M the maximal ideal of R and K the field of fractions. Let V be a finite-dimensional K-vector space and
[TABLE]
a linear representation such that
(i)
The representation ρ has a GQ-stable lattice T.
2. (ii)
The action of GQ on T is continuous with respect to the M-adic topology on AutR(T).
3. (iii)
The the action of GQ on T is unramified outside a finite set of primes Σ⊃{p,∞}.
Let A=T⊗RR∨
. Suppose that we have a Dp-stable subspace F+V of V. Let F+T=F+V∩T and let F+A=F+T⊗RR∨ in A. We define the Selmer group SelA as follows:
[TABLE]
The first well-known example for the above ρ is the cyclotomic deformation of an ordinary p-adic representation. For simplicity, we only state the case of ordinary p-adic representation Vf coming from a p-ordinary eigen cusp form f. Let T be a GQ-stable O-lattice of Vf, where O is the ring of integers of the field Qp({a(n,f)}n≥1). Let T(i):=T⊗ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωj where GQ acts on diagonally. Let ΛOcyc=O[[Γ]] and A=T(i)⊗ΛOcycΛOcyc∨. Since f is p-ordinary, we have the Dp-stable subspace F+Vf⊂Vf of dimension one such that the action of Dp on Vf/F+Vf is unramified by Theorem 3.4. Let F+T=T∩F+Vf. We have Dp-stable submodules F+T(i):=F+T⊗ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi and F+A:=F+T(i)⊗ΛOcycΛOcyc∨ of T(i) and A respectively. Then one can define SelA as Definition 3.5.
We have that SelA is isomorphic to SelA(Q∞), where A=T⊗Zp⊗Qp/Zp⊗ωi and SelA(Q∞)⊂H1(QΣ/Q∞,A) is the cyclotomic Selmer group defined in [7].
By combining Proposition 3.6 with Kato’s theorem, we have that the Pontryagin dual SelA∨ is a finitely generated torsion ΛOcyc-module and
[TABLE]
Now let us consider the case where ρ comes form a Hida deformation. Let us keep the notation of Hida deformation in the previous section. Recall that VF is the Galois representation attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F and T a GQ-stable lattice of VF. Let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi. Let F+T=T∩F+VF and
F+T(i)=F+T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi. Let A=T(i)⊗II∨ (resp. A=T(i)⊗I[[Γ]]I[[Γ]]∨). Then one can define the Selmer group SelA (resp. SelA) for one-variable (resp. two-variable) Hida deformation as Definition 3.5. We have the following “torsionness” property for SelA and SelA:
Assume that the ring I is Gorenstein, then (SelA)∨ and (SelA)∨ are finitely generated torsion modules over I and I[[Γ]] respectively.
Since we are interested in the residually reducible case, it is important to calculate the difference of Selmer groups for different choice of GQ-stable lattice. In [19], by generalizing the method of Perrin-Riou [23], Ochiai gived a formula on calculation of the difference of Selmer groups for Galois deformation. Although Ochiai’s theorem could apply to plenty Galois deformations, we only state the case of the two-variable Hida deformation which will be used in the remainder of this paper.
Theorem 3.8** (Ochiai [19, Theorem 1.6 and Corollary 4.4]).**
Let VF be the Galois representation attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F. Suppose that I is isomorphic to O[[X]], where O is the ring of integers of a finite extension of Qp. Let T and T′ be GQ-stable I-free lattices of ρF. Let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi (resp. T′(i)=T′⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗Zpωi) and A=T(i)⊗I[[Γ]]I[[Γ]]∨ (resp. A′=T′(i)⊗I[[Γ]]I[[Γ]]∨). Then we have the following equality:
[TABLE]
4 Proof of the main theorem
4.1 Statement of the main result
Let us keep the notation of the previous section. In this subsection, we state Theorem A in more general settings. We fix a pair (N,χ) where N is a positive integer with (N,p)=1 and χ a Dirichlet character modulo Np form now on to the end of this paper. Recall that Iwasawa [12] showed that there exists a unique power series Lp(χ;γ′)∈Λχ such that
[TABLE]
for any arithmetic specialization ϕ∈Xarith(Λθ). Note that we modify Lp(χ;γ′) slightly different from Iwasawa’s original paper [12] for the compatibility of the arithmetic specialization.
Let VF be the Galois representation attached to an I-adic normalized eigen cusp form F with character χ which is fixed in the rest of the paper. We always assume the following condition:
(Dp-dist)
The residual representation ρF(mI) is Dp-distinguished i.e. ρF(mI)∣Dp is decomposed into two distinct characters of Dp with values in (I/mI)×.
Since we are interested in the case when ρF(mI) is reducible, we assume the following condition from now on to the end of this paper
(Red)
The residual representation ρF(mI) is isomorphic to 1⊕χ, where χ is the character
χ:GQ→χI×↠(I/mI)×.
Let ε1(resp.ε2):Dp→I× be the character such that Dp acts on F+VF (resp. VF/F+VF) via ε1 (resp. ε2). Since ε2 is unramified, under the conditions (Dp-dist) and (Red) we have ε1=χ∣Dp and ε2=1. Let φ the Euler totient function. Write R=I[[Γ]] from now on to the end of this paper. Recall that Lfr(ρF) is the set of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable I-free lattices of VF. Recall that i is a fixed integer throughout the paper. For a GQ-stable lattice T of VF, let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi and A=T(i)⊗RR∨. Let Lpalg(T(i)) be a generator of charR(SelA)∨, then Lpalg(T(i)) is well-defined up to multiplications by elements of R×. Let Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(i)) be the set of all (Lpalg(T(i))) when T varies. Our main result in this paper is the following theorem:
Theorem 4.1**.**
Suppose I is isomorphic to O[[X]]. Assume p∤φ(N) and the conditions (Red), (Dp-dist). Let J (resp. J) be the ideal of I (resp. R) which is generated by a(l,F)−1−χ(l)⟨l⟩κ′−1(⟨l⟩) for all primes l∤Np and a(p,F)−1. Then we have the following statements:
(1)
The set Lfr(ρF) is finite and we have
[TABLE]
2. (2)
There exist a set T of a system of representatives of Cfr(ρF) and a lattice Tmin∈T such that we have the following bijection
[TABLE]
such that T/Tmin→∼I/a(1).
3. (3)
Let Tmin be the GQ-stable I-free lattice in the second assertion. We have the following equalities:
Before we prove Theorem 4.1, we obtain some results on Hida deformation as preparation. By the following lemma, we know that it is enough to study the variation of Lpalg(T(i)) when T varies in the set of I-free lattices.
Let T be a GQ-stable lattice of VF. Let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi and T∗∗(i)=T∗∗⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi. Assume that I is a regular local ring. Then we have the following equality
[TABLE]
and T∗∗(i) is free over R.
Suppose that VF has a GQ-stable I-free lattice T. Let F−T=T/F+T. Note that F+T and F−T may not be free of rank one over I. However, we have the following lemma which is proved by Fouquet and Ochiai [5]:
Suppose that VF has a GQ-stable I-free lattice T. Assume the condition (Dp-dist), then F+T and F−T are free I-modules of rank one.
Recall that γ (resp. γ′) is a topological generator of Γ (resp. Γ′) and u is a topological generator of 1+pZp such that
[TABLE]
We denote by κcycuniv the following character of GQ:
[TABLE]
Let I(ρF) be the ideal of reducibility of I (cf. Definition 2.2). We have the following lemma:
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1. Then under the assumption p∤φ(N), we have
[TABLE]
and I(ρF)=J.
Proof.
Under the assumption (Dp-dist), one could choose an element g0∈Dp such that ε1(g0)=ε2(g0). Let {e1,e2} be a basis of VF such that
[TABLE]
For any g∈GQ, write ρF(g)=(a(g)c(g)b(g)d(g)). We have that trρFmodJ is the sum of two characters by Chebotarev density theorem. Hence I(ρF)⊂J by Proposition 2.1. Recall that under the assumptions (Red) and (Dp-dist), we have ε2=1. Then under the assumption p∤φ(N), we have d(g)≡1(g)(modI(ρF)) for all g∈GQ by class field theory (cf. [29, Lemma 3.7]). Hence a(g)≡χκcycκcycuniv(g)(modI(ρF)) since the determinant detρF=χκcycκcycuniv. Thus
[TABLE]
is an element of I(ρF) for all primes l∤Np. Since ε2(Frobp)=a(p,F) by [27, Theorem 2.2.2], we also have a(p,F)−1∈I(ρF). This completes the proof.
Under the above preparation, we return to the proof of Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.10. First we obtain the following lemma on the relation between the ideal of reducibility and its localization.
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1. For any p∈P1(I), we denote by I(ρF,p) the ideal of reducibility of Ip corresponding to the representation
[TABLE]
Then we have I(ρF,p)=I(ρF)Ip.
Proof.
The proof is by definition. Clearly we have trρF⊂I⊂Ip. By the proof of Lemma 4.4, there exist a K-basis {e1,e2} of VF and an element g0∈Dp such that
[TABLE]
with respect to the basis {e1,e2}. This implies ε1(g0)≡ε2(g0)(modp). Thus, we complete the proof by constructions of I(ρF,p) and I(ρF) which are done in the proof of Proposition 2.1.
∎
The assumption that I is a regular local ring enables us to take a GQ-stable I-free lattice T. We fix such T to the end of the proof of Lemma 4.6. For any p∈P1(I), we denote by L(ρF,p) the set of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable Ip-lattices of VF. Since Ip is a discrete valuation ring, we have
[TABLE]
by Proposition 2.5. Then by combining Lemma 4.4 and Lemma 4.5, the equality (8) becomes to
[TABLE]
We define N the subset of P1(I) as follows:
[TABLE]
Since I is a unique factorization domain, every height one prime ideal of I is principal. Then N is finite. First we assume that N is non-empty. Let N={p1,⋯,pr} and let us take an element pi∈N. Write ordpiJpi=ni. We have
[TABLE]
by Lemma 4.4. Then by Proposition 2.5-(3), there exists a chain of GQ-stable Ipi-lattices
[TABLE]
of VF such that Ti(ni)⊋⋯⊋Ti(0) is a system of representatives of C(ρF,pi) and L(ρF,pi) which satisfies the following condition:
(Type 1)
The Ipi-module Ti(ji)/Ti(0) is isomorphic to Ipi/piji for every 1≤ji≤ni and GQ acts on Ti(ni)/Ti(0) trivially.
This implies that the Ipi[GQ]-module Ti(ji)/Ti(0) is isomorphic to Ipi/piji(1) for every ji=1,⋯,ni.
For each pi∈N and 0≤ji≤ni, we define the module T(j1,⋯,jr) as follows:
[TABLE]
Then T(j1,⋯,jr) is a reflexive lattice and we have
[TABLE]
by [4, Chap. VII. §4.3, Theorem 3-(ii)]. Since every Tp and Ti(ji) are stable under the action of GQ, T(j1,⋯,jr) is a GQ-stable lattice. Furthermore, under the assumption that I is a regular local ring, T(j1,⋯,jr) is free over I. Thus T(j1,⋯,jr) is a GQ-stable I-free lattice of VF.
Lemma 4.6**.**
When N is non-empty, {T(j1,⋯,jr)}i=1,⋯,r,ji=0,⋯,ni is a set of representatives of Lfr(ρF) and Cfr(ρF). When N is empty, Lfr(ρF) (resp. Cfr(ρF)) consist only of the isomorphic class (resp. homothetic class) of T.
Proof.
First we assume that N is non-empty. Let us take a GQ-stable I-free lattice T′. By multiplying an element of I if necessary, we may assume T′⊂T(n1,⋯,nr). Let us take an element p∈P1(I) and let us consider the following cases:
(a)
When p∈N, L(ρF,p) (resp. C(ρF,p)) consists only of the isomorphic (resp. homothetic) class of Tp by (9). Since T(n1,⋯,nr)p=Tp by (11), under the assumption T′⊂T(n1,⋯,nr), there exists an integer ep∈Z≥0 such that Tp′=pepTp.
2. (b)
When p=pi∈N, Ti(ni)⊋⋯⊋Ti(0) is a system of representatives of L(ρF,pi) and C(ρF,pi). Then under the assumption T′⊂T(n1,⋯,nr), there exist an integer epi∈Z≥0 and an integer 0≤ji≤ni such that Tpi=piepiTi(ji).
We have Tp′=Tp for all but finitely many p∈P1(I) by [4, Chap. VII. §4.3, Theorem 3-(i)]. Thus the integers ep in cases (a) and (b) are [math] for all but finitely many p∈P1(I). Furthermore, since I is a UFD, every height-one prime ideal is principal. Then p∈P1(I)∏pep is generated by an element x∈I. Let T′′=xT(j1,⋯,jr). We have Tp′=Tp′′ for any p∈P1(I). Since T′ and T′′ are reflexive lattices, we have
[TABLE]
This implies that {T(j1,⋯,jr)}i=1,⋯,r,ji=0,⋯,ni is a system of representatives of Cfr(ρF).
By our construction, there exists a prime ideal p∈P1(I) such that T(j1,⋯,jr)p and T(j1′,⋯,jr′)p are non-isomorphic as Ip[GQ]-modules for (j1,⋯,jr)=(j1′,⋯,jr′). Thus lattices T(j1,⋯,jr) and T(j1′,⋯,jr′) are not isomorphic as I[GQ]-modules. This implies that {T(j1,⋯,jr)}i=1,⋯,r,ji=0,⋯,ni is also a system of representatives of Lfr(ρF).
Now we assume that N is empty. Let us take a GQ-stable I-free lattice T′. By multiplying an element of I if necessary, we may assume T′⊂T. Under the assumption that N is empty, any prime ideal p∈P1(I) belongs to case (a) above. Then by the same argument, we have that there exists an element x′∈I such that T′=x′T. This completes the proof of Lemma 4.6.
∎
When J∗∗=I, Lfr(ρF) consists of a unique element by Lemma 4.6, hence all statements in Theorem 4.1 follows. Thus it is sufficient to consider the case when J∗∗⊊mI in the rest of the proof. This enables us to take an element (j1,⋯,jr)=(0,⋯,0) which we fixed in the rest of the proof.
Definition 4.7**.**
Let A be a Noetherian local domain and M a finitely generated A-module. Let δ:G→A× be a character of a group G. We call that M is an A[G]-module of type δ if M is a cyclic A-module and G acts on M via δ.
Lemma 4.8**.**
We have the equality F+T(j1,⋯,jr)=F+T(0,⋯,0).
Proof.
Write T0=T(0,⋯,0) and Tj=T(j1,⋯,jr) for short. We have T0⊂Tj by our construction, hence F+T0⊂F+Tj. We prove this Lemma by contradiction. Assume F+T0⊊F+Tj. Let us consider the following commutative diagram of I[Dp]-modules:
[TABLE]
We have the following exact sequence by the snake lemma:
[TABLE]
Since F+T0⊊F+Tj are free I-modules of rank one by Lemma 4.3, we have F+T0⊂mIF+Tj. Then by the condition (Dp-dist), we must have
Recall that F+Tj (resp. F−Tj) is an I[Dp]-module of type ε1 (resp. ε2). Let us take an element pi∈N such that (Tj/T0)pi≅Tj,pi/T0,pi≅Ipi/piji with ji=0. By localizing the exact sequence (14) at pi, we have that (F+Tj/F+T0)pi is a type ε1Ipi[Dp]-submodule of (Tj/T0)pi. However by the condition (Type 1), Tj,pi/T0,pi is an Ipi[GQ]-module of type 1. This contradicts to the condition (Dp-dist).
∎
Lemma 4.9**.**
We have the following isomorphism of I[GQ]-modules:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us keep the notation which is used in the proof of Lemma 4.8. The commutative diagram (12) induces the following isomorphism of I[Dp]-modules
[TABLE]
by Lemma 4.8 and its proof. Since the I-modules F−T0 and F−Tj are free of rank one by Lemma 4.3, under our assumption (j1,⋯,jr)=(0,⋯,0), there exists an element ξ∈mI such that Tj/T0→∼I/(ξ) as I-modules. By our construction, we have T0,p=Tj,p for any p∈N and Tj,pi/T0,pi≅Ipi/piji for any pi∈N. Thus we have
[TABLE]
By the following isomorphism of I-modules
[TABLE]
we have ξF−Tj=F−T0 and ξTj⊂T0. Thus by the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
we have that T0/ξTj is isomorphic to F+T0/ξF+Tj. Thus T0/ξTj is isomorphic to I/(ξ) as an I-module by Lemma 4.8. Then the following exact sequence
[TABLE]
implies that trFmod(ξ) is the sum of two characters with values in (I/(ξ))×. Then we have that Tj/T0 is an I[GQ]-module of either type χκcycκcycuniv or type 1 by combining Proposition 2.1 with Lemma 4.4. Since Tj/T0 is a type ε2I[Dp]-module by (15), we must have
[TABLE]
under (Dp-dist). Thus, we complete the proof by combining (17) with (16).
∎
When J∗∗=I, Lfr(ρF) consists of a unique element by Lemma 4.6, hence all statements in Theorem 4.1 follows. Thus we may assume J∗∗⊊I. Let
[TABLE]
where T(j1,⋯,jr) is defined as (10). Then by Lemma 4.6, we have the following equality
[TABLE]
We have (Lp(χ;γ′))⊂J by [29, Proposition 3.8], thus the first assertion of Theorem 4.1 follows. Let
[TABLE]
Then the second assertion of Theorem 4.1 follows by Lemma 4.9.
Now we prove the third assertion. Let T be a GQ-stable lattice of VF and T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi. We compute the quotient (Lpalg(Tmin,(i)))(Lpalg(T(i))). By Lemma 4.2, it is enough to assume that T is a free lattice. Furthermore by the second assertion of Theorem 4.1, it is enough to assume T∈T. Then we have F+T(i)=F+Tmin,(i) and there exists a factor A of J∗∗ such that
[TABLE]
by the second assertion of Theorem 4.1. Since Q∞ is totally real, κ~∣GR is a trivial character. Thus by applying Ochiai’s theorem (Theorem 3.8) to the T(i) and Tmin,(i), we have
[TABLE]
Since the correspondence between A∣J∗∗ and T∈T is one-to-one by the second assertion of Theorem 4.1, this completes the proof of Theorem 4.1.
∎
By Theorem 4.1-(2), there exists an I-free lattice Tmax∈T such that
[TABLE]
By the proof of Theorem 4.1, we have that the algebraic p-adic L-function Lpalg(Tmax,(i)) for the lattice Tmax is maximal under divisibility among the set of Lpalg(T(i)) for all GQ-stable lattices of VF. Now we give a geometric characterization of the lattices Tmin and Tmax. Let Hord:=Hord(N,Zp[χ]) be Hida’s ordinary Hecke algebra over Λχ as in [9] and hord:=hord(N,Zp[χ]) the quotient of Hord corresponding to cusp forms. Let M:=M(χω−1,1) be the Eisenstein maximal ideal of Hord as in [21, §1.2, (1.2.9)]. Note that I is an extension of a quotient of hMord. By combining Theorem 4.1 with a result of Ohta [21, §3.4], we have the following corollary.
Corollary 4.10**.**
Let us keep the assumption of Theorem 4.1. Assume further that rings HMord and hMord are Gorenstein. Then we have the following equalities
[TABLE]
up to homothety.
Proof.
Since the proof of the assertions on Tmin and Tmax are done in the same way, we only prove the assertion on Tmin. Let
[TABLE]
By Ohta [20, (3.2.5) and (3.2.6)], we have that TF is a GQ-stable lattice of VF (note that the normalization of the above TF is dual to that of Ohta’s paper [20]). We have that TF is a dual lattice of r≥1limHeˊt1(X1(Npr)⊗QQ,Zp[χ])Mord⊗HMordI⊗IK. Hence TF is a reflexive. Thus, under the assumption that I is regular, TF is free over I.
Let I:=I(χω−1,1) denotes the Eisenstein ideal of HMord (cf. [21, §1.2, (1.2.9)]). Then by [22, Corollary 4.1.12], J is the image of I under the homomorphism HMord→I by the duality between I-adic forms and their Hecke algebras (cf. [21, Corollary 1.5.4]). Thus under the assumption that HMord and hMord are Gorenstein, we have that J is principal by [21, Theorem 3.3.8].
In order to prove Corollary 4.10 by contradiction, we assume that TF and Tmin are not homothetic. Then by Theorem 4.1-(2), there exist an element x∈K× and a proper ideal a∣J such that x−1TF∈T and
[TABLE]
Hence TF/xTmin→∼I/a(1). Let us consider the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
By combining the assumption (Dp-dst) and the snake lemma, we have
[TABLE]
and the following exact sequence
[TABLE]
Then by combining (Dp-dist) and (21), we have F+TF=F+(xTmin) and
[TABLE]
Since HMord and hMord are Gorenstein, by the proof of [21, Corollary 3.4.13], we have the following exact sequence
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
Then we have
[TABLE]
by the same arguments as the proof of Lemma 4.8 and Lemma 4.9. Since F+TF, F−TF and J are free I-modules of rank one, so are the I-modules F+TF′ and F−TF′. Thus TF′ is an I-free lattice. By (24), we have F+(J−1TF′)=F+TF and
[TABLE]
Thus xTmin⊂J−1TF′ and F+(xTmin)=F+(J−1TF′). Let us consider the following commutative diagram
Then T(b) is a GQ-stable I-free lattice. This implies that the number of GQ-stable I-free lattices up to homothety is greater than or equal to p∈P1(I)∏(ordpaJ+1). Since a⊊I, this contradicts to Theorem 4.1-(1). Thus, TF and Tmin must be homothetic and we complete the proof.
∎
Now let us assume (Λ). Note that under the assumption (Λ), the ideal J is principal and is generated by the Kubota-Leopoldt p-adic L function Lp(χ;γ′) (see [29, Corollary 3.9] for example). Thus under the assumption (Λ), we have that the ideal I(ωk−2,1) is principal. This implies that HMord and hMord are Gorenstein (cf. [3, Lemma 3.24]). Thus Theorem A follows by combining Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.10.
5 A calculation of the two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1 from now on to the end of this paper. In this section, we calculate the set Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(i)) of all algebraic p-adic L-functions when i≡0(modp−1) under certain conditions. By Theorem 4.1-(3), it is enough to calculate Lpalg(Tmin,(0)) for the lattice Tmin in Theorem 4.1-(2).
Theorem 5.1**.**
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1. Assume further the following conditions
(Tame)
The tame level N=1 or N is square-free.
(Prim)
The character χ is primitive and χ∣(Z/pZ)×=ω.
(pFour)
The ideal J defined in Theorem 4.1 is principal and is generated by a(p,F)−1.
Then Lpalg(Tmin,(0)) is a unit in R and Lpalg(ρFn.ord,(0))=D(a(p,F)−1).
We prove Theorem 5.1 by specialization. The specialization method is developed by Ochiai [18, §7] for the residually irreducible case. We consider the residually reducible case. Recall that Tmax is the GQ-stable I-free lattice which satisfies (20).
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1. Let ϕ be an arithmetic specialization. Let Tϕmax=Tmax⊗Iϕ(I) and ϖϕ a fixed uniformizer of ϕ(I). Assume further that the ideal J is principal. Then we have the following non-split exact sequence of ϕ(I)[GQ]-modules
[TABLE]
Proof.
First we show that ϕ(J)=0. Since J=I(ρF) by Lemma 4.5, we have ϕ(J)=I(ρfϕ) by [29, Lemma 3.7], where I(ρfϕ) is the ideal of reducibility of ϕ(I) corresponding to ρfϕ. Thus we have the following equality:
[TABLE]
by [29, Proposition 3.4]. Since ρfϕ is irreducible, ♯L(ρfϕ) must be finite. Hence ϕ(J)=0 by the equality (26).
Since J is principal, we have
[TABLE]
by (20). We denote by Tϕmin the image of Tmin under Tmax↠Tϕmax. Since ϕ(J)=0, we have that Tϕmin is a GQ-stable lattice of ρfϕ by (27). We have the following isomorphism:
[TABLE]
Let lϕ=ordϖϕϕ(J) by the equality (26). For any 0≤j≤lϕ, let
[TABLE]
We have Tϕ,j and Tϕ,j′ are not isomorphic if j=j′ by the proof of [29, Proposition 3.4]. Then by (26), the following chain of lattices:
[TABLE]
is a system of representatives of L(ρfϕ). We have the following isomorphism of ϕ(I)[GQ]-modules for any j=1,⋯,lϕ−1:
[TABLE]
This implies that ϕ(I)[GQ]-modules Tϕ,j/ϖϕTϕ,j are semi-simple for all j=1,⋯,lϕ−1. Thus Tϕmax/ϖϕTϕmax and Tϕmin/ϖϕTϕmin must be not semi-simple ϕ(I)[GQ]-modules by Ribet’s lemma (cf. [24, Proposition 2.1]). We have the following exact sequence of ϕ(I)[GQ]-modules:
[TABLE]
Thus it must be non-split.
∎
Let T be a GQ-stable I-free lattice of VF. Let T(i)=T⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1)⊗ωi and A=T(i)⊗RR∨. Let P=Ker(ϕ)R be a height-one prime ideal of R for ϕ∈Xarith(I). We define SelA[P] as follows:
[TABLE]
Let rs,A be the following map induced by A[P]↪A:
[TABLE]
Now we study the control theorem for Selmer groups in the sense of [18, Proposition 5.1 and Proposition 5.2]. Note that [18, Proposition 5.1 and Proposition 5.2] are proved under the assumption that the residue representation ρF(mI) is irreducible. We consider the residually reducible case.
Lemma 5.3**.**
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1. Then we have the following statements for a height-one prime ideal P.
(1)
Assume i≡0(modp−1) and ωi=χ−1. Then for any GQ-stable I-free lattice T, the map rs,A is injective.
2. (2)
Assume i≡0(modp−1) and that the ideal J is principal. Then when we choose T to be Tmax in (20), the map rs,Amax:SelAmax[P]→SelAmax[P] is injective, where Amax=Tmax⊗^ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~cyc)⊗RR∨.
3. (3)
Assume further the condition (Tame) in Theorem 5.1, then the map rs,A is surjective for any GQ-stable I-free lattice T.
Proof.
Let us consider the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
We have the isomorphism PH0(QΣ/Q,A)H0(QΣ/Q,A)→∼((T(i),∗)GQ[P])∨.
Since the first and the second assertions are proved in the same way, we prove the second assertion. By the above argument, it is sufficient to prove that the module (Tmax,∗)GQ is zero. By taking the base extension ⊗RR/MR, we have the surjection of R-modules
[TABLE]
Since Tmax is free of rank two over R, the R/MR-vector space (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ has dimension less than or equal to two. Assume that (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ has dimension two. Then (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ is isomorphic to Tmax,∗/MRTmax,∗. This contradicts to the fact that ρF(mI) is GQ-distinguished since the determinant detρF is an odd character. Assume that (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ has dimension one. Then (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ is a type 1 quotient of Tmax,∗/MRTmax,∗. By Lemma 5.2 we have the following non-spit exact sequence:
[TABLE]
Since Tmax is a projective R-module, we have the following isomorphism
[TABLE]
by induction on the minimal number of generators of MR (see [3, Lemma A.12] for example). Then we have the following non-split exact sequence by (32):
[TABLE]
This implies that Tmax,∗/MRTmax,∗ has no type 1 quotient which contradicts to our assumption. Thus (Tmax,∗)GQ/MR(Tmax,∗)GQ is zero. Then (Tmax,∗)GQ is zero by Nakayama’s lemma. This completes the proof of the second assertion.
Now we prove the third assertion. We have that Coker(rs,A) is isomorphic to a sub-quotient (Uϕ)∨ by the same proof of [18, Proposition 5.1 and Proposition 5.2], where
[TABLE]
Under the assumption that N is square free and χ is primitive, we have that the automorphic representation πl(fϕ) associated to fϕ is principal series for every l∣N by [6, Proposition 4.1.1]. Thus the image of Il under GQ→AutI(T) is a finite group by the proof of [5, Lemma 2.14]. Then for every prime l∣N, there exist a ring of integers Ol⊂I of a finite extension of Qp and integers rl,rl′∈Z≥0 such that (T∗)Il≅I/(ϖ)rl⊕I/(ϖ)rl′ by [18, Theorem 3.3-(1)], where ϖ is a fixed uniformizer of Ol. Thus we have that (T∗)Il[P] is trivial for every prime l∣N. This completes the proof of Lemma 5.3.
∎
Let T be a GQ-stable I-free lattice and A=T(i)⊗RR∨. Let P=Ker(ϕ)R be a height-one prime ideal of R for ϕ∈Xarith(I). We define Hur1(Dl,A) and Hur1(Dl,A[P]) for every prime l∣N as follows:
[TABLE]
We define HGr1(Dp,A) and HGr1(Dp,A[P]) as follows:
[TABLE]
We introduce the following lemma:
Lemma 5.4** (Ochiai).**
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1. Then under the assumption that R is Gorenstein, the following localization maps
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
are surjective.
Note that as is mentioned in [19, Lemma 3.3], the above lemma is proved in the same way as [18, Corollary 4.12]. Although [18, Corollary 4.12] is proved under the assumption that ρF(mI) is irreducible, the control theorem of Bloch-Kato’s Selmer groups (cf. [16, Theorem 2.4]) makes the proof feasible in the residually reducible case.
By Lemma 5.4, we deduce the following lemma which is proved in the same way as [18, Lemma 7.2].
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1. Let (SelA)null∨ the maximal pseudo-null R-submodule of (SelA)∨. Let P=Ker(ϕ)R be a height-one prime ideal for some ϕ∈Xarith(I). Assume that N is square-free, then (SelA)null∨/P(SelA)null∨ is a pseudo-null R/P-module.
In [18], we deduce [18, Lemma 7.2] from [18, Corollary 4.12] in the situation when the residual representation is irreducible. The exactly same argument works even if we remove the assumption of the residually irreducibility. Note that the assumption that N is square-free implies that the module Uϕ in the proof of Proposition 5.3 is trivial.
Suppose that I is a regular local ring. Let T be a GQ-stable I-free lattice and A=T(i)⊗RR∨. Assume N=1, then (SelA)∨ has no non-trivial pseudo-null R-submodule.
Under the above preparation, we return to the proof of Theorem 5.1.
Let Tmax be the lattice in (20). By the proof of Theorem 4.1-(3), we have
[TABLE]
Then under the assumption (pFour), we have
[TABLE]
Let P=Ker(ϕ)R for some ϕ∈Xarith(I). By Lemma 5.3, the following map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism. Then under the assumption (Tame), the image of charR(SelAmax)∨ under R↠R/P is equal to charR/P(SelAmax[P])∨ by Lemma 5.5 and Proposition 5.6.
Now we study charR/P(SelAmax[P])∨. Let Tϕmax=T⊗Iϕ(I) and Tϕmax,(0)=Tϕmax⊗ZpZp[[Γ]](κ~−1). By Lemma 5.2 we have that Tmax,(0)/PTmax,(0) is isomorphic to Tϕmax,(0). Under the assumption (Dp-dist), we have that F+Tmax is a direct summand of Tmax by Lemma 4.3. Thus SelAmax[P] is isomorphic to SelAmax, where Amax=Tϕmax,(0)⊗Λϕ(I)cycΛϕ(I)cyc∨. Then by Proposition 3.6, Lemma 5.2 and a calculation of Bellaïche-Pollack [3, Theorem 5.12], we have the following equality
Thus Lpalg(Tmin,(0)) is a unit of R follows by (33). This completes the proof of Theorem 5.1.
∎
We give an example at the end of this paper. Let Δ∈S12(SL2(Z)) be the Ramanujan’s cusp form whose q-expansion is equal to qn=1∏(1−qn)24. Assume that Δ is p-ordinary (the only known primes at which Δ is non-ordinary are p=2,3,5,7,2411 and 7758337633). We have that S12(SL2(Z)) is a rank one Zp-module. Then by Hida’s control theorem of Hecke algebra, the condition (Λ) holds for FΔ and there exists a unique Λ-adic normalized eigen cusp form FΔ=FΔ(X,q)∈Λ[[q]] such that FΔ(u10,q) is the p-stabilization of Δ (cf. [11, §7.6]). By abuse of notation, we denote by the same symbol Δ for its p-stabilization.
The only one prime p such that the residue representation of ρFΔ(mΛ) is reducible is equal to 691, which is fixed from now on to the end of this section. It is well-known that the Kubota-Leopoldt p-adic L-function Lp(ω11;γ′) is a prime ideal of Λ. In our previous paper [29, §4], we proved ♯L(ρFΔ)=∞. However by our main theorem, we have ♯Lfr(ρFΔ)=2, i.e. there are exactly two GQ-stable Λ-free lattices Tmin and Tmax up to GQ-isomorphism. Moreover we have
[TABLE]
Now let i≡0(modp−1). In [13, Appendix I], Mazur computed the following equality of ideals
[TABLE]
Thus by Theorem 5.1, we have that Lpalg(Tmin,(0)) is a unit of R and Lpalg(Tmax,(0))=Lp(ω11;γ′) up to multiplying by elements of R×.
Thus we calculated the set Lpalg(ρFΔn.ord,(i)) of two-variable algebraic p-adic L-functions when i≡0(modp−1). In a forthcoming paper, we will calculate Lpalg(ρFΔn.ord,(i)) for more general i.
Appendix A The graph structure on Cfr(ρF)
Let A be a complete discrete valuation ring and ρ:G→GL2(A) a continuous representation of a compact group G. Then one can define a graph structure on C(ρ) in the sense of Serre [25, Chap. II, §1] in which we have that the graph C(ρ) is a tree. Then the tree C(ρ) was studied more deeply by Bellaïche-Chenevier [2].
In this appendix, we study the case when ρ comes from a Hida deformation i.e. A becomes a domain of Krull dimension two, which is not a discrete valuation ring. We give a graph structure on Cfr(ρF) by using the arguments in §4.3. Recall that we have ♯Lfr(ρF)=♯Cfr(ρF) by Theorem 4.1-(1). Thus the graph structure enables us to understand the set of isomorphic classes of GQ-stable free lattices more concretely. We keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1 throughout this section. First we give some lemmas as preparation.
Lemma A.1**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1. Let T′⊂T be GQ-stable I-free lattices of VF such that T/T′≅I/p for some p∈P1(I). Then T′/pT≅I/p.
Proof.
Let us consider the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
By combining the assumption (Dp-dist) and the snake lemma, we have
[TABLE]
and the following exact sequence
[TABLE]
Since T/T′ is a cyclic I-module, by the assumption (Dp-dist), we must have F+T=F+T′ or F−T=F−T′.
Let us consider the condition when F+T=F+T′. Then F−T/F−T′ is isomorphic to I/p by (37). Recall that the I-modules F+T,F−T,F+T′ and F−T′ are free of rank one by Lemma 4.3. Then pF−T=F−T′. Thus by the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
When F−T=F−T′, by the same argument, we have
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
∎
Lemma A.2**.**
Let us keep the assumptions and the notation of Theorem 4.1. Let T′⊂T be GQ-stable I-free lattices such that T/T′→∼I/p for some p∈P1(I). Let x,y be elements of K× and a a principal integral ideal of I. We have the following statements.
(1)
Suppose yT′⊂xT and xT/yT′→∼I/a, then a=p and (x)=(y) as fractional ideals.
2. (2)
Suppose xT⊂yT′ and yT′/xT→∼I/a, then a=p and (x)=(y)p as fractional ideals.
Proof.
We prove the first assertion. By the proof of Lemma A.1, we have that T and T′ satisfy one of the following equalities.
(i)
F+T′=F+T,F−T′=pF−T
2. (ii)
F+T′=pF+T,F−T′=F−T
Since the proof under the conditions (i) and (ii) are done in the same way. We only prove under (i). Under the assumption, xT and yT′ satisfy one of the following equalities.
(i)′
F+(yT′)=F+(xT),F−(yT′)=aF−(xT)
2. (ii)′
F+(yT′)=aF+(xT),F−(yT′)=F−(xT)
Assume the condition (ii)′. Since F+T,F−T,F+T′ and F−T′ are free I-modules of rank one, we have I=ap by (i). This contradicts to the assumption that a is an integral ideal. Thus xT and yT′ must satisfy the condition (i)′. Then we have (x)=(y) and a=p by (i).
We prove the second assertion. We have T′/pT→∼I/p by Lemma A.1. Since p is principal, we may replace T to pT. Then the second assertion follows by the first assertion.
∎
For a GQ-stable I-free lattice T, we denote by [T]:={αT}α∈K× its homothetic class. For two points x,x′∈Cfr(ρF), we say that x is a neighbor of x′ if there exist representatives T and T′ of x and x′ respectively such that T/T′→∼I/p for some p∈P1(I). The definition of neighbor is well-defined by Lemma A.2 and is symmetric by Lemma A.1.
We define a graph structure on Cfr(ρF) as follows:
(vert)
The vertex set is Cfr(ρF).
2. (edge)
For two points x,x′∈Cfr(ρF), we draw an edge from x to x′ if x is a neighbor of x′.
Now we study the graph Cfr(ρF). Recall that J is the ideal of I which is generated by a(l,F)−1−χ(l)⟨l⟩κ′−1(⟨l⟩) for all primes l∤Np. When J∗∗=I, the graph Cfr(ρF) reduces to one point by Lemma 4.6. Now we consider the case when J∗∗⊊I. We recall the notation of §4. Let
[TABLE]
and let ni=ordpiJ∗∗(1≤i≤r). We define the graph of r-dimensional rectangle Rect(0,⋯,0)(n1,⋯,nr) as follows.
(vert)
The vertex set is {(j1,⋯,jr)∈Zr∣0≤j1≤n1,⋯,0≤jr≤nr}.
2. (edge)
We draw an edge from (j1,⋯,jr) to (j1′,⋯,jr′) if there exists an integer 1≤s≤r such that
[TABLE]
Propostion A.3**.**
Let us keep the assumptions of Theorem 4.1. Then the graph Cfr(ρF) is isomorphic to Rect(0,⋯,0)(n1,⋯,nr).
Proof.
For each pi∈N and 0≤ji≤ni, let T(j1,⋯,jr) be the GQ-stable I-free lattice which is defined in §4.3. Then we have
Let us take elements (j1,⋯,jr),(j1′,⋯,jr′)∈vertRect(0,⋯,0)(n1,⋯,nr) which satisfy (38). We may assume js′−js=1. Then we have
[TABLE]
Hence we have
[TABLE]
by Lemma 4.9. This implies that [T(j1′,⋯,jr′)] is a neighbor of [T(j1,⋯,jr)] and we complete the proof.
∎
For example, when J∗∗=pe, the graph Cfr(ρF) is a segment. When J∗∗=pqr with p=q=r∈P1(I), the graph Cfr(ρF) becomes a cube.
Bibliography29
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] J. Bellaïche, G. Chenevier, Lissité de la courbe de Hecke de GL 2 aux points Eisenstein critiques. , J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 5 (2006), no. 2, 333-349.
2[2] J. Bellaïche, G. Chenevier, Sous-groupes de G L 2 𝐺 subscript 𝐿 2 GL_{2} et arbres. , J. Algebra 410 (2014), 501-525.
3[3] J. Bellaïche, R. Pollack, Congruences with Eisenstein series and μ 𝜇 \mu -invariants. , Compositio Math. 155 (2019) 863-901.
4[4] N. Bourbaki, Commutative algebra. Chapters 1-7. , Translated from the French. Reprint of the 1989 English translation. Elements of Mathematics (Berlin). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998.
5[5] O. Fouquet, T. Ochiai, Control theorems for Selmer groups of nearly ordinary deformations. , J. Reine Angew. Math. 666 (2012), 163-187.
6[6] K. Fukunaga, Triple product p 𝑝 p -adic L 𝐿 L -function attached to p 𝑝 p -adic families of modular forms. , ar Xiv:1909. 03165.
7[7] R. Greenberg, Iwasawa theory for p 𝑝 p -adic representations. , Algebraic number theory, 97-137, Adv. Stud. Pure Math., 17, Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1989.
8[8] R. Greenberg, Iwasawa theory and p 𝑝 p -adic deformations of motives. , Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), 193-223, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., 55, Part 2, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994.