This paper introduces mixed modular symbols, extending classical modular symbols to encode more information about Eisenstein series, and constructs related 1-motives connected to the Jacobian of modular curves.
Contribution
It defines and studies the space of mixed modular symbols, linking them to 1-motives and generalized Jacobians, and relates the construction to p-adic periods for specific subgroups.
Findings
01
Mixed modular symbols extend classical symbols and capture more Eisenstein series information.
02
Construction of 1-motives related to the generalized Jacobian of modular curves.
03
Connection to p-adic periods of modular curves for specific subgroups.
Abstract
We define and study the space of mixed modular symbols for a given finite index subgroup Γ of SL2(Z). This is an extension of the usual space of modular symbols, which in some cases carries more information about Eisenstein series. We make use of mixed modular symbols to construct some 1-motives related to the generalized Jacobian of modular curves. In the case Γ=Γ0(p) for some prime p, we relate our construction to the work of Ehud de Shalit on p-adic periods of X0(p).
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.
Full text
Mixed modular symbols and the generalized cuspidal 1-motive
Emmanuel Lecouturier
Abstract.
We define and study the space of mixed modular symbols for a given finite index subgroup Γ of SL2(Z). This is an extension of the usual space of modular symbols, which in some cases carries more information about Eisenstein series. We make use of mixed modular symbols to construct some 1-motives related to the generalized Jacobian of modular curves. In the case Γ=Γ0(p) for some prime p, we relate our construction to the work of Ehud de Shalit on p-adic periods of X0(p).
1. Introduction
Overview and motivations
Consider the torsion free abelian group M generated by the symbols {α,β} where (α,β)∈P1(Q)2 with the following relations
[TABLE]
for (α,β,γ)∈P1(Q)3. We denote by GL2+(Q) the subgroup of GL2(Q) consisting of positive determinant matrices. We let GL2+(Q) act on the left on P1(Q). If Γ is a finite index subgroup of SL2(Z), we denote by MΓ the largest torsion-free quotient of M on which Γ acts trivially. This group is usually called the group of modular symbols of level Γ (and weight 2). The group MΓ is canonically isomorphic to the relative homology group H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z), where XΓ is the compact modular curve associated to Γ and CΓ is the set of cusps of XΓ. By intersection duality, we have a canonical isomorphism MΓ∼HomZ(H1(YΓ,Z),Z) where YΓ=XΓ−CΓ is the open modular curve.
If Γ is a congruence subgroup, there is a Hecke-equivariant injective map of R-vector spaces
[TABLE]
given by c⊗1↦(f↦∫c2iπf(z)dz). Here, M2(Γ) is the complex vector space of modular forms of weight 2 and level Γ (this includes Eisenstein series). The map pΓ is not surjective in general, since the dimension of the left hand side is 2g(Γ)+c(Γ)−1 whereas the dimension of the right hand side is 2g(Γ)+2⋅(c(Γ)−1), where g(Γ) (resp. c(Γ)) is the genus (resp. the number of cusps) of XΓ. Dually one copy of Eisenstein series is missing to the space MΓ⊗ZC, which is a well-known Hodge theoretic phenomenon for non-projective smooth curves.
In this note, we define an extension M~Γ of MΓ, called the space of mixed modular symbols of level Γ, with rank equal to 2dimCM2(Γ). The definition does not require any assumption on Γ (in particular, it could be a non-congruence subgroup of SL2(Z)). The map pΓ extends to a Hecke-equivariant map p~Γ⊗R:M~Γ⊗ZR→HomC(M2(Γ),C). The construction makes use of a cocycle construction by Glenn Stevens [18], and involves special values of L-functions.
We define and study various objects related to the space of mixed modular symbols, namely Hecke operators, the complex conjugation, Manin symbols, intersection duality and its relation with the extended Petersson pairing of Don Zagier [23] and Vinsentiu Pasol and Alexandru A. Popa [16], relation with generalized Jacobians and the associated ℓ-adic Galois representations. We also study in more details the particular case Γ=Γ0(p) were p is prime. In this case, we relate our construction to the one of Ehud de Shalit on generalized p-adic periods [4]. This will be used in our forthcoming work on the Mazur-Tate conjecture in conductor p [9]. We now describe in more details our main results.
1.1. Definition of mixed modular symbols
Consider the torsion-free abelian group M~ generated by the symbols {g,g′} where (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2 with the following relations:
(i)
{g,g′}+{g′,g′′}+{g′′,g}=0 for all (g,g′,g′′)∈SL2(Z)3;
2. (ii)
{g,g′}−{ϵ1g,ϵ2g′}=0 for all (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2 and (ϵ1,ϵ2)∈{1,−1}2;
3. (iii)
{g,gTn}−n⋅{g,gT}=0 for all g∈SL2(Z), n∈Z. In this note, we let T=(1011).
There is a left action of SL2(Z) on M~, given by g⋅{g′,g′′}={gg′,gg′′} for all (g,g′,g′′)∈SL2(Z)3. We let M~Γ be the largest torsion-free quotient of M~ on which Γ acts trivially. There is a surjective group homomorphism
[TABLE]
given by πΓ({g,g′})={g∞,g′∞}. We show in Proposition 2.2 that Ker(πΓ) is isomorphic to the cokernel of the group homomorphism Z→Z[CΓ] given by 1↦dΓ1∑c∈CΓec⋅[c], where ec is the width of the cusp c and dΓ=gcd(ec)c∈CΓ. In particular, M~Γ has the required rank. There is a boundary map ∂Γ:M~Γ→Z[CΓ]0 (the upper [math] meaning the augmentation subgroup), whose kernel contains H1(YΓ,Z)↪M~Γ with finite index equal to dΓ1∏c∈CΓec.
1.2. The generalized period map p~Γ
In §2.2, we extend the period map pΓ to a group homomorphism
[TABLE]
One of the main properties of p~Γ is that it encodes the special values of L-functions. More precisely, for any g∈SL2(Z) and any f∈M2(Γ), we have p~Γ({g,gS})=L(f∣g,1) where S=(01−10) and as usual (f∣g)(z)=(cz+d)−2⋅f(cz+daz+b). The map pΓ⊗R is not always an isomorphism (equivalently injective), for instance if Γ is a principal congruence subgroup of level divisible by 6. Nevertheless, we prove the following result.
Theorem 1.1**.**
The map p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism if Γ is a congruence subgroup of level pn for some prime p and integer n≥1.
If Γ=Γ0(N) or Γ=Γ1(N) for some integer N≥1, let T be the Hecke algebra over Z acting faithfully on M2(Γ). We define in §2.3.2 an action of T on M~Γ⊗ZZ[2N1]. More precisely, if n≥1 is an integer prime to 2N, then the Hecke operator Tn stabilises M~Γ. However, it turns out that if p is a prime dividing N (resp. 2) then Up (resp. T2 or U2) sends M~Γ into p1⋅M~Γ, so it may not stabilises M~Γ in general. The reason for this non-integrality phenomenon is that there is a priori no direct way to define a general double coset action on M~Γ: while GL2+(Q) acts naturally on P1(Q), it does not acts naturally on SL2(Z). To resolve this issue, we embed M~Γ as a lattice inside a Q-vector space on which there is a natural action of the double coset operators (this vector space is defined in a similar way as M~Γ, replacing SL2(Z) by GL2+(Q)). We also define similarly an action of the Atkin–Lehner involution WN on M~Γ⊗ZZ[N1]. In §2.3.1, we define an action of the complex conjugation on M~Γ. The action of Hecke operators and the complex conjugation are compatible with the projection πΓ and with the embedding H1(YΓ,Z)↪M~Γ.
be the map defined by ξ~Γ(Γg)={g,gS} for all g∈PSL2(Z). This is the Manin map, and the element ξ~Γ(Γg) is the Manin symbol in M~Γ associated to Γg. We give a simple and concrete description of the image of ξ~Γ. In particular, we prove the following.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let p≥5 be a prime and n∈N. If Γ=Γ1(pn) or Γ=Γ0(pn), then the image of ξ~Γ has index dividing 3, the divisibility being strict of and only if p≡1 (modulo 3) and Γ=Γ0(pn).
If Γ=Γ1(N) or Γ=Γ0(N) for some odd N≥1, we were not able to determine when the image of ξ~Γ has finite index in M~Γ (we know it is not of finite index when N is even). The question seems to be related to additive number theory in (Z/NZ)×. See Remark 2.3 for more details.
We also give a description of the Manin relations, *i.e. *of the group Ker(ξ~Γ). It turns out that the 2-terms Manin relations ξ~(Γg)+ξ~(ΓgS)=0 are satisfied, but the 3-terms Manin relations ξ~(Γg)+ξ~(ΓgU)+ξ~(ΓgU2)=0, where U=(11−10), are not satisfied in general. Instead, we have to replace them with a subgroup of relations which is described in Theorem 2.14.
1.4. Duality theory and the generalized Petersson product
In §2.5, we study an anti-symmetric bilinear pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩:M~Γ∗×M~Γ∗→61⋅Z defined by the formula
[TABLE]
where M~Γ∗=HomZ(M~Γ,Z).
By tensoring with C, ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ extends to an anti-symmetric bilinear pairing on HomZ(M~Γ,C). The map p~Γ induces a map p~Γ∗:M2(Γ)→HomZ(M~Γ,C). Following Zagier, Pasol and Popa [16] extended the Pertersson pairing on M2(Γ), using a procedure of renormalization of divergent integrals. They generalize a formula of Klaus Haberland and Loïc Merel as follows: for any f1, f2∈M2(Γ), we have
[TABLE]
We expect that ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ is Z-valued and non-degenerate. More precisely, we expect that the determinant of the pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ is dΓ1⋅∏c∈CΓec. In this direction, we prove the following result.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Assume that the cusps of XΓ are fixed by the complex conjugation (if Γ=Γ1(N), this is the case if and only if N divides 2p for some prime p). Then ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ is perfect after inverting 2 and the lcm of the widths of the cusps of XΓ.
See also Remark 2.4 and Proposition 2.20 for a partial result in the general case where the cusps are not assumed to be real.
1.5. Relation with the generalized Jacobian
Assume in this paragraph that Γ is a congruence subgroup of SL2(Z), whose level is denoted by N. Recall that for each cusp c∈CΓ, we have denoted by ec the width of c. Fix an algebraic closure Q of Q and an embedding Q↪C. We let ζN=eN2iπ∈Q. Let k be the number field of definition of XΓ in Q; this is a subfield of Q(ζN).
Let JΓ be the Jacobian variety of XΓ over k. Let JΓ# be the generalized Jacobian variety of XΓ over k with respect to the cuspidal divisor, *i.e. *the sum of the closed points of XΓ\YΓ over k. By definition, JΓ# parametrizes degree zero divisors supported on YΓ modulo the divisors of functions which are constant (=0,∞) on the cusps.
We have a canonical exact sequence of group schemes over k:
[TABLE]
where k(c)⊂C is the field of definition of the cusp c and Resk(c)/k denotes the Weil restriction.
Let CΓ⊂JΓ be the cuspidal subgroup, *i.e. *the subgroup generated by the image of the difference of the cusps of XΓ. This is a finite group by the Manin–Drinfeld theorem [5]. Our goal is to try to define a reasonable ``lift'' CΓ# of CΓ in JΓ#. For technical (but seemingly necessary) reasons, we only define a lift CΓ♮ of CΓ in JΓ♮:=JΓ#/∏c∈XΓ\YΓResk(c)/k(μN), where μn⊂Gm is the group of nth roots of unity. Note that there is a canonical projection
[TABLE]
induced by the projection
[TABLE]
Let δΓ:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ be the map sending a divisor to its class in JΓ.
We define two maps δΓ♮,alg:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮(C) and δΓ♮,an:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮(C) such that
[TABLE]
The map δΓ♮,alg is defined in an algebraic way using uniformizers at cusps, whereas the map δΓ♮,an is defined in an analytic way (via an Abel-Jacobi map) using mixed modular symbols and the generalized period map p~Γ. The fact that we were only able to define δΓ♮,alg as a map valued in JΓ♮(C) and not in JΓ#(C) is explained by the fact that our choice of a uniformizer at a cusp c is canonical only up to a ec-th root of unity. Similarly, the fact that we were only able to define δΓ♮,an as a map valued in JΓ♮(C) and not in JΓ#(C) is explained by the fact that the index of H1(YΓ,Z) in M~Γ is dΓ1⋅∏c∈CΓec.
For convenience, we refer to section 3 for the precise definitions of δΓ♮,alg and δΓ♮,an.
While the map δΓ♮,alg is easily seen to take values in JΓ♮(Q(ζN)), it is unclear a priori whether the map δΓ♮,an takes values in JΓ♮(Q). This is in fact the case, as we show in the following comparison result between δΓ♮,alg and δΓ♮,an.
Theorem 1.4**.**
(i)
Let n be the order of the cuspidal subgroup CΓ of JΓ. Then we have
[TABLE]
In particular, δΓ♮,an takes values in JΓ♮(Q(ζN,ζn2)).
2. (ii)
Assume that N is odd, that (−1001) normalizes Γ, and that all the cusps in CΓ are fixed by the complex conjugation, i.e. for all qp∈P1(Q) we have Γ⋅(−qp)=Γ⋅qp. Then we have δΓ♮,alg≡δΓ♮,an up to some element in the image of ∏c∈CΓ{±1} in JΓ♮(C).
1.6. Additional results in the case Γ=Γ0(p)
Assume in this paragraph that Γ=Γ0(p) for some prime p. The modular curve XΓ0(p) has two cusps, namely Γ0(p)∞ and Γ0(p)0. Let n be the order of the cuspidal subgroup of JΓ0(p); Barry Mazur proved that n=dp−1 where d=gcd(p−1,12). Let j:XΓ0(p)→P1 be the usual j-invariant map. Let T be the Hecke algebra over Z acting faithfully on M2(Γ0(p)).
1.6.1. The generalized cuspidal 1-motive
We define maps
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
lifting our previous maps δΓ0(p)♮,alg and δΓ0(p)♮,an. The reason we were able to construct δΓ0(p)#,alg is that there is a canonical uniformizer at the cusp Γ0(p)∞ (resp. Γ0(p)0), namely j−1 (resp. (j∘wp)−1 where wp is the Atkin–Lehner involution). The reason we were able to construct δΓ0(p)#,an is that there is a canonical map M2(Γ0(p))→C given by f↦−L(f,1) where L(f,s) is the complex L-function attached to f. This map, together with the (generalized) Abel–Jacobi isomorphism, gives a point in δΓ0(p)♮,an corresponding to δΓ0(p)#,alg((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)). For convenience, we refer to §3.2 for the precise definitions of δΓ0(p)#,alg and δΓ0(p)#,an.
We prove the following result, which is a refinement of Theorem 1.4.
Theorem 1.5**.**
(i)
The maps δΓ0(p)#,alg and δΓ0(p)#,an are T-equivariant.
2. (ii)
The element n⋅δΓ0(p)#,alg((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)) of JΓ0(p)#(Q) is the image of (1,pd12)∈Q××Q×.
3. (iii)
We have δΓ0(p)#,alg≡δΓ0(p)#,an modulo the image of μgcd(2,n)×μgcd(2,n) in JΓ0(p)#(C). In particular, δΓ0(p)#,an takes values in JΓ0(p)#(Q).
The map δΓ0(p)#,alg can be considered as a 1-motive Z→JΓ0(p)# over Q, which we call the generalized cuspidal 1-motive. Theorem 1.5 (iii) describes the Betti realization of this 1-motive (up to a sign ambiguity).
1.6.2. Relation with the generalized p-adic period pairing of de Shalit
There is a p-adic analogue of the constructions of §1.5, coming from the work of de Shalit [4] which we briefly recall below. Fix an algebraic closure Qp of Qp, and let K⊂Qp be the quadratic unramified extension of Qp. We also fix an algebraic closure Cp of the p-adic completion of Qp. Let S be the set of isomorphisms classes of supersingular elliptic curves over Fp. This is a finite set since the j-invariant of an element of S is known to lie in Fp2. More precisely, we have Card(S)=g+1 where g is the genus of X0(p); we write S={e0,...,eg}. We denote by Z[S] the free Z-module with basis the elements of S (this is usually called the supersingular module) and by Z[S]0 its augmentation subgroup (the degree zero elements). There is a canonical bilinear pairing called the p-adic period pairing
[TABLE]
inducing a map q0:Z[S]0→Hom(Z[S]0,K×) via the formula q0(x)(y)=Q(x,y). The theory of p-adic uniformization gives a canonical Gal(Cp/K)-equivariant isomorphism
extending Q0 and
with the property that there is a canonical Gal(Cp/K)-equivariant isomorphism
[TABLE]
where q:Z[S]→Hom(Z[S],K×) is such that q(x)(y)=Q(x,y). We apologize to the reader for not recalling the precise construction of Q, as it is quite involved and is beautifully done in [4]. As de Shalit notes, the pairing Q0 is canonical, but the choice of Q depends on a choice of a tangent vector at the cusp Γ0(p)∞ [4, §1.1]. This corresponds to the choice of the uniformizer j−1 at Γ0(p)∞. de Shalit also proved that Q is non-degenerate (this is even true after composing with the p-adic valuation K×→Z since we essentially get the Kronecker pairing, cf. [4, §1.6 Main Theorem]). This means that q is injective.
There is a group homomorphism
[TABLE]
defined by
[TABLE]
via (2) for any x∈Z[S] of degree 1 (this does not depend on x).
We prove the following comparison result in §3.2.2.
Theorem 1.6**.**
We have δ#,p-adic=δ#,alg.
1.6.3. The ℓ-adic realization
As an application of the above results of §1.6, we construct certain modular Galois representations in a ``geometric'' way.
Let ℓ≥2 be a prime and m be a maximal ideal of T of residue characteristic ℓ. The ℓ-adic Tate module of the generalized cuspidal 1-motive δΓ0(p)#,alg:Z[CΓ0(p)]0→JΓ0(p)#(Q) is denoted by Vℓ, and its m-adic completion is denoted by Vm(*cf. *§3.2.3 for the precise definition). We prove in Proposition 3.9 that Vm is a free Tm-module of rank 2, except possibly if ℓ=2 and m is supersingular (here, Tm is the m-adic completion of T). If m is non-Eisenstein (meaning it does not contain the Eisenstein ideal defined by Mazur), then Vm is canonically isomorphic to the usual Galois representation constructed from the m-adic Tate module of JΓ0(p). We prove in §3.2.3 the following result if m is Eisenstein.
Theorem 1.7**.**
Assume that m is Eisenstein (in particular, ℓ divides the numerator of 12p−1).
We can choose a basis of Vm as a Tm-module such that the following properties hold for the associated representation ρ:Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(Tm).
(i)
The reduction of ρ modulo m is the residual representation ρ:Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(Fℓ) given by ρ=(χℓ0b1), where χℓ:Gal(Q/Q)→Zℓ× is the ℓ-adic cyclotomic character, χℓ is the reduction of χℓ modulo ℓ and b:Gal(Q/Q)→Fℓ is a Kummer cocycle in Z1(Gal(Q/Q),χℓ) whose kernel cut out a number field isomorphic to Q(pℓ1).
2. (ii)
The representation ρ is unramified outside p and ℓ, has determinant χℓ and is finite flat at ℓ.
3. (iii)
There is a free Tm-submodule of rank one in Vm which is pointwise fixed by the inertia subgroup at p.
4. (iv)
For all primes q=ℓ,p, the trace of ρ(Frobq) is the Hecke operator Tq, where Frobq is any (arithmetic) Frobenius element at q.
5. (v)
If ℓ≥5 then the representation ρ is universal for the above properties, so we have an isomorphism R∼Tm where R is the universal deformation rings with the prescribed above properties.
Theorem 1.7 is similar to a result of Frank Calegari and Matthew Emerton [2, Theorem 1.5], although the residual Galois representation they consider is (χℓ001). Property (v) is an immediate consequence of a result of Preston Wake and Carl Wang-Erickson [20, Corollary 7.1.3] (the restriction ℓ≥5 comes from there, but we expect that the result still holds for ℓ∈{2,3}). Our contribution here is really to the construction of the Galois representation ρ satisfying the above properties. While we could maybe prove the existence of ρ using a gluing argument using Ribet's Lemma, the construction here is more geometric in nature since it is related to the generalized Jacobian of X0(p).
Remark 1.1**.**
There exists a perfect pairing of Galois modules Vℓ×Vℓ→Zℓ(1), where as usual Zℓ(1) is Zℓ with the Galois action given by χℓ (*cf. *Proposition 3.10). It seems therefore reasonable to expect that the 1-motive Z→JΓ0(p)# itself is self-dual.
If Γ is a congruence subgroup of level N and ℓ is a prime not dividing N, then we can define similarly a canonical Hecke and Galois module by considering the ℓ-adic realization of the 1-motive δΓ♮,alg. We do not know whether this module is self-dual up to twist. An interesting case would be Γ=Γ1(p), since it would simplify some of our arguments in [9].
1.7. Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my former Phd advisor Loïc Merel for his helpful suggestions and continuous support. I would also like to thank Takao Yamazaki for answering some questions about generalized Jacobians, and pointing out the usefulness of the Weil reciprocity law in §3.1.3. This research was funded by Tsinghua University and the Yau Mathematical Sciences Center.
There is a group homomorphism iΓ:Γ→M~Γ given by γ↦{1,γ}. We have a surjective group homomorphism
[TABLE]
sending γ∈Γ to the image in YΓ of the geodesic path in the upper-half plane between z0 and γ(z0) (for any z0 in the upper-half plane). The kernel of ΠΓ is generated by commutators and elliptic elements. Thus, the map iΓ factors through ΠΓ, so induces a group homomorphism
[TABLE]
Recall the following construction due to Stevens [18, §2.3]. Let M2 be the C-vector space of weight 2 modular forms with arbitrary level (in particular, this includes modular forms for non-congruence subgroups). Recall that there is a right action of GL2+(Q) on M2, given by (f∣g)(z)=det(g)⋅(cz+d)−2⋅f(cz+daz+b) where g=(acbd) and f∈M2. For any f∈M2, we denote by a0(f) the Fourier coefficient at infinity of f.
Fix z0 in the upper-half plane. Following Stevens [18, Definition 2.3.1 p. 51], we define a map
[TABLE]
by
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.1** (Stevens).**
(i)
The map S does not depend on the choice of z0.
2. (ii)
If g∈Γ and f is modular of level Γ, then
[TABLE]
3. (iii)
The map S is a cocycle, i.e. for all (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q)2 and f∈M2, we have
[TABLE]
4. (iv)
For all f∈M2, we have S(a0bd)(f)=db⋅2iπ⋅a0(f).
5. (v)
Using Proposition 2.1, we check that there exists a unique group homomorphism
[TABLE]
such that p~Γ({g,g′})(f)=S(g−1g′)(f∣g)=S(g′)(f)−S(g)(f) for all (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2 and f∈M2(Γ).
If c∈CΓ is a cusp, let ec be the ramification index at the cusp c of the map XΓ→XSL2(Z). Let N be the l.c.m of the indices ec; following [7] we call N the general level of Γ. If Γ is a congruence subgroup of general level N, then Γ has (usual) level N or 2N [7, Proposition 3].
Proposition 2.2**.**
(i)
The map ιΓ:H1(YΓ,Z)→M~Γ is injective. Thus, we can (and do) indentify H1(YΓ,Z) with a subgroup of M~Γ.
2. (ii)
The element {g,gT} of M~Γ only depends of the cusp c=Γg∞ of XΓ, and ec⋅{g,gT} is the image by ιΓ of a small oriented circle around the cusp c. In particular, we have in M~Γ:
[TABLE]
3. (iii)
Consider the boundary map ∂Γ:M~Γ→Z[CΓ]0 given by ∂Γ({g,g′})=[Γg′∞]−[Γg∞]. The kernel of ∂Γ is spanned by H1(YΓ,Z) and the elements {g,gT} for g∈SL2(Z). In particular, the torsion subgroup of the coimage of ιΓ has exponent N, and we have an exact sequence
[TABLE]
4. (iv)
The kernel of πΓ:M~Γ→MΓ is spanned by the elements {g,gT} for g∈SL2(Z). Thus, we have an exact sequence
[TABLE]
Here, the map Z→Z[CΓ] is given by 1↦dΓ1∑c∈CΓec⋅[c], and the map Z[CΓ]→M~Γ is given by [c]↦{g,gT} where g∈SL2(Z) is such that c=Γg∞.
Proof.
Proof of (i). It suffices to show that the map p~Γ∘ιΓ:H1(YΓ,Z)→HomC(M2,C) is injective. This follows from Lemma 2.1 (ii) and the fact that the period map is injective.
Proof of (ii). Let (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2 such that Γg∞=Γg′∞. There exists γ∈Γ and n∈Z such that g′=±γgTn. We have, in M~Γ:
[TABLE]
This proves the first claim. For the second claim, note that the image by ιΓ of a small oriented circle around c is iΓ(gTecg−1)={1,gTecg−1}. Furthermore, we have in M~Γ:
[TABLE]
where γ=gTecg−1∈Γ. This proves the second claim. The equality
[TABLE]
is known to be true in H1(YΓ,Z), and hence in M~Γ.
Proof of (iii). It is clear that Ker(∂Γ) contains H1(YΓ,Z) and {g,gT} for all g∈SL2(Z). Note that M~Γ is spanned by elements of the form {1,g} for g∈SL2(Z). Let ∑g∈SL2(Z)λg⋅{1,g} be an element of Ker(∂Γ). For each cusp c∈CΓ, fix a gc∈SL2(Z) such that c=Γgc∞. For each c=Γ∞, we have ∑g∈SL2(Z),c=Γg∞λg=0. If c=Γg∞, then we have g=±γgcTn for some γ∈Γ and n∈Z. Thus {1,g}={1,γ}+{γ,γgcTn}={1,γ}+{1,gc}+n⋅{gc,gcT}. Since {1,γ}∈H1(YΓ,Z) and ∑g∈SL2(Z),c=Γg∞λg=0, the element ∑g∈SL2(Z),c=Γg∞λg⋅{1,g} is in the span of H1(YΓ,Z) and the elements {g,gT}.
Proof of (iv). By (ii) and (iii), the kernel of πΓ is equal to the image of Z[CΓ] in M~Γ. Furthermore, the exact sequence (3) shows that the kernel of Z[CΓ]→M~Γ must be free of rank one over Z. Since the kernel of Z[CΓ]→M~Γ contains ∑c∈CΓec⋅[c] by (ii) and M~Γ is torsion-free, this kernel must be spanned by dΓ1∑c∈CΓec⋅[c].
∎
2.2. Image of the period map p~Γ⊗R
By Proposition 2.2, M~Γ is a free Z-module of rank dimRM2(Γ)=2⋅g(Γ)+2⋅(c(Γ)−1). It thus makes sense to ask whether the map p~Γ⊗R:M~Γ⊗ZR→HomC(M2(Γ),C) is an isomorphism (or equivalently a surjective map) of R-vector spaces. Note that if Γ′ is a subgroup of Γ, then we have a commutative diagram of R-vector spaces
[TABLE]
where the two vertical maps are the canonical ones, and are surjective. In particular, if p~Γ′⊗R is surjective, then p~Γ⊗R is also surjective. Thus, if Γ is a congruence subgroup containing the principal congruence subgroup Γ(N), the map p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism if the map p~Γ(N)⊗R is surjective. During the rest of this paragraph, we assume that Γ is a congruence subgroup.
We have a decomposition of C-vector spaces M2(Γ)=S2(Γ)⊕E2(Γ), where S2(Γ) is the subspace of cuspidal modular forms and E2(Γ) is the subspace of Eisenstein series. Let ρCusp,Γ:HomC(M2(Γ),C)→HomC(S2(Γ),C) and ρEis,Γ:HomC(M2(Γ),C)→HomC(E2(Γ),C) be the maps induced by the inclusions S2(Γ)↪M2(Γ) and E2(Γ)↪M2(Γ) respectively.
Lemma 2.3**.**
The map ρCusp,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R) is surjective. Thus, p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism if and only if ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R) is surjective.
Proof.
By Proposition 2.2 (iv), ρCusp,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R) factors through πΓ⊗ZR:M~Γ⊗ZR→H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z)⊗ZR. The map H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z)⊗ZR→HomC(S2(Γ),C) is surjective, since its restriction to H1(XΓ,Z)⊗ZR is known to be an isomorphism.
∎
We thus need to understand the image of ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R). We first recall some facts about Eisenstein series. We refer the reader to [19, §1] for details. The C-vector space E2 is spanned by those f∈M2(Γ) such that f(z)dz induces a meromorphic differential form on XΓ with integer residues at the cusps – such a differential is called a differential of the third kind. An example of differential of the third kind is the logarithmic derivative dlog(u) of a modular unitu, *i.e. *a meromorphic function on XΓ whose divisor is supported on CΓ. The set of f∈E2(Γ) such that f(z)dz=dlog(u) for some modular unit u is denoted by E2(Γ,Z); this is a Z-module of rank dimCE2(Γ) by the Manin-Drinfeld theorem. If M is a subgroup of C, we let E2(Γ,M) be the subgroup of E2(Γ) generated by the elements λ⋅E where λ∈M and E∈E2(Γ,Z). We have E2(Γ)=E2(Γ,C).
If Γ=Γ(N) for some N≥1, Stevens gave a spanning family for the Q-vector space E2(Γ,Q), together with the set of all possible relations. We refer to [18, §2.4] for details. If (x,y)∈(Q/Z)2\{(0,0)} has order dividing N, then Stevens defined an Eisenstein series ϕ(x,y)∈E2(Γ(N)), whose q-expansion at the cusp Γ(N)⋅∞ is
[TABLE]
where q(z)=e2iπz and B2(x)=(x−E(x))2−(x−E(x))+61 is the second periodic Bernoulli polynomial function. Note that ϕ(−x,−y)=ϕ(x,y).
We have 2iπϕ(x,y)(z)dz=dlog(g(x,y)) where g(x,y) is a Siegel unit defined by Kubert-Lang in [8, Chapter 2 §1 Formula K4]. By [8, Chapter 2, Theorem 1.2], the function g(x,y)12N is modular of level Γ(N). Thus we have 2iπϕ(x,y)∈12N1⋅E2(Γ,Z), and in particular 2iπϕ(x,y)∈E2(Γ,Q). By [18, Chapter 2, §2.4], the Eisenstein series 2iπϕ(x,y) span E2(Γ,Q), and the linear relations between them are the so called distribution relations [18, Chapter 2, Remark 2.4.4].
Theorem 2.4**.**
If Γ(pn)⊂Γ for some prime p≥2 and some integer n≥1, then p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism.
Proof.
Let E=E2(Γ,R)⊂E2(Γ) and E′=E2(Γ,i⋅R)=i⋅E⊂E2(Γ). The R-vector space E2(Γ) is the direct sums its two R-vector subspaces E and E′. We get a canonical isomorphism of R-vector spaces
[TABLE]
given by taking restrictions and real parts. We denote by p:HomC(E2(Γ(pn)),C)→HomR(E,R) and p′:HomC(E2(Γ(pn)),C)→HomR(E′,R) the associated projections. By Lemma 2.3, p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism if and only if p∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)):M~Γ⊗ZR→HomR(E,R) and p′∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)):M~Γ⊗ZR→HomR(E′,R) are surjective R-linear maps. To conclude the proof of Theorem 2.4, it thus suffices to prove the following two lemmas.
Lemma 2.5**.**
The map p′∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)) is surjective (we need not assume anything on Γ, except that it is a congruence subgroup).
Proof.
We have a R-linear isomorphism E′∼Div0(CΓ,R) given by E↦∑c∈CΓ2iπ⋅Resc(E)⋅(c), where Resc(E) is the residue at c of the differential form on XΓ induced by E(z)dz. Here, we have denoted by Div0(CΓ,R) the group of degree zero divisors with coefficients in R supported on the set CΓ. We thus get a R-linear isomorphism f:HomR(E′,R)∼HomR(Div0(CΓ,R),R). We need to prove that the map f∘p′∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)):M~Γ⊗ZR→HomR(Div0(CΓ,R),R) is surjective. The image of a little oriented circle around the cusp c by the latter map is the restriction to Div0(CΓ) of the element of HomR(Div(CΓ,R),R) sending [c′] to [math] if c′=c and [c] to 1. This concludes the proof of Lemma 2.5.
∎
Lemma 2.6**.**
The map p∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)) is surjective.
Proof.
For notational simplicity, denote by φ the map p∘(ρEis,Γ∘(p~Γ⊗R)).
By the discussion at the beginning of §2.2, we can assume without loss of generality that Γ=Γ(pn). The distribution relations show that a spanning family of the R-vector space E is given by the Eisenstein series 2iπϕ(pna,pnb) where (a,b)∈(Z/pnZ)2/±1 is such that gcd(a,b,p)=1. For simplicity, we write 2iπϕ(a,b) for 2iπϕ(pna,pnb). The set of such (a,b) is denoted by S. The only linear relation between these Eisenstein series is
[TABLE]
There is a right action of SL2(Z/pnZ) on S, given by g↦(a,b)⋅g. Note that SL2(Z/pnZ)≃Γ(pn)\SL2(Z) also acts on E via the slash operation, and we have [18, Chapter 2, Remark 2.4.4]:
[TABLE]
By [18, Chapter 2, Proposition 2.5.4 (b)], for all (g,g′)∈SL2(Z) and (a,b)∈S, we have:
[TABLE]
where F:S→R is given by
[TABLE]
Here, δa=0 if a=0 and δa=1 otherwise. Consider the matrix M whose rows are indexed by S and columns are indexed by CΓ, and such that the coefficient of M at position ((a,b),Γg∞) is F((a,b)⋅g). Note that M is a square matrix. We fix an ordering of S and CΓ as follows. Let B be the subgroup of SL2(Z/pnZ) consisting of upper-triangular matrices. Write SL2(Z/pnZ)/B=⋃i=1kgiB for some fixed elements g1, …, gk. If x∈(Z/pnZ)×, let γx=(x00x−1)∈B. We then write
[TABLE]
We also write
[TABLE]
This gives a decomposition of M as a block matrix with k2 blocks of size Card((Z/pnZ)×/±1). We easily check that the non-diagonal blocks are zero, and the diagonal blocks are all equal to the matrix M′:=(−log∣1−epn2iπx−1y∣)(x,y)∈(Z/pnZ)×/±1. To conclude the proof of Lemma 2.6, it suffices to prove that the matrices M′ and
[TABLE]
are invertible. By [21, Lemma 5.26 (a), (b)], we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where χ goes through the (resp. non-trivial) even Dirichlet characters of level pn. By the well-known formula for L functions of primitive even Dirichlet characters [21, Theorem 4.9], we get:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where fχ is the conductor of χ and τ(χ) is the Gauss sum attached to the primitive Dirichlet character associated to χ.
These two quantities are known to be non-zero [21, Corollary 4.4].
∎
∎
Remark 2.1**.**
In general, p~Γ⊗R is not an isomorphism, as one can check numerically for instance if Γ=Γ(6) using the method of the proof of Theorem 2.4. Consequently, for any integer N≥1, p~Γ⊗R is not an isomorphism if Γ=Γ(6N).
2.3. Hecke operators and the complex conjugation
*In the rest of this paragraph, we assume that Γ=Γ1(N) or Γ=Γ0(N) for some integer N≥1. *
Let T be the Hecke algebra acting faithfully on M2(Γ), generated by the Hecke operator Tn for n≥1 and by the diamond operators. The abelian groups MΓ≃H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z) and H1(YΓ,Z) both carry a faithfull action of T and of the complex conjugation (*cf. *for instance [14]). The goal of this paragraph is to define a natural action of T and of the complex conjugation on M~Γ.
2.3.1. The complex conjugation
If M is an abelian group equipped with an action of an involution m↦m, we denote by M(1) the abelian group M equipped with the involution m↦−m. We also let M+={m∈M,m=m} and M−={m∈M,m=−m}.
The action of the complex conjugation (denoted by a bar) on MΓ and H1(YΓ,Z) is induced by the map z↦−zˉ in the upper-half plane. Thus, we have {α,β}={−α,−β} in MΓ for all (α,β)∈P1(Q)2. If g=(acbd)∈GL2+(Q), we let g=(a−c−bd)∈GL2+(Q). Note that we have g⋅g′=g⋅g′ if (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q). The complex conjugation acts on Γ as via g↦g, and this induces an action on H1(YΓ,Z) via ΠΓ:Γ→H1(YΓ,Z).
There are canonical exact sequences of abelian groups, which are equivariant for the action of complex conjugation:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Here, the action of the complex conjugation on Z[CΓ] and Z[CΓ]0 is induced by the natural action on CΓ, and the action on Z is trivial.
The action of the complex conjugation on M~Γ is defined by {g,g′}:={g,g′}. One easily checks that this is well-defined, and that the exact sequences (3) and (4) are equivariant with respect to the complex conjugation.
There is a natural action of the complex conjugation on HomC(M2(Γ),C), given by φ↦φ, where φ:f↦φ(f). Here, f∈M2(Γ) is defined by f(z)=f(−z). Equivalently, if the q-expansion of f at Γ∞ is ∑n≥0anqn, then the q-expansion of f at Γ∞ is ∑n≥0anqn.
Proposition 2.7**.**
The map p~Γ:M~Γ→HomC(M2(Γ),C) commutes with the action of the complex conjugation.
Proof.
Recall that p~Γ({g,g′})(f)=S(g′)(f)−S(g)(f) where
[TABLE]
for any z0∈h. It thus suffices to prove that for any f∈M2(Γ) and g∈SL2(Z), we have S(g)(f)=S(g~)(f). We shall make use the following straightforward result.
Lemma 2.8**.**
For any f∈M2, g∈SL2(Z) and z∈h, we have f∣g=f∣g~ and −g(z)=g~(−z).
We analyse separately the three terms in the definition of S(g)(f). We have:
[TABLE]
We have:
[TABLE]
Finally, we have:
[TABLE]
We have thus proved that S(g)(f)=S(g~)(f).
This concludes the proof of Proposition 2.7.
∎
2.3.2. Hecke operators
We are going to define a natural action of T on M~Γ. We first briefly recall how T acts on MΓ and H1(YΓ,Z). Let g∈GL2+(Q) and consider the double-coset ΓgΓ=⨆i∈IΓgi for some finite set I and gi∈GL2+(Q). The Hecke operator Tg acts XΓ via the correspondance (Γz)↦∑i∈I(Γgiz), where z∈H∪P1(Q) and H is the upper-half plane. This does not depend on the choice of the elements gi. If g=(100p) for some prime p, the Hecke operator Tg is denoted by Tp if p does not divide N and Up otherwise. If g=(acbd)∈Γ0(N), the Hecke operator Tg is denoted by ⟨d⟩ (a so-called diamond operator).
This induces an action of Tg on H1(YΓ,Z) and MΓ, which is explicitly given as follows. For any {α,β}∈MΓ, we have Tg{α,β}=∑i∈I{giα,giβ}. For H1(YΓ,Z), the action of Tg is similarly given in terms of geodesic paths in H, but it will be more convenient to describe this action using the map ΠΓ. For all i∈I and γ∈Γ, we have
[TABLE]
for unique ti,Γ(γ)∈Γ and σγ(i)∈I. Note that ti,Γ:Γ→Γ and σγ:I→I are bijective maps. The following result is well-known.
Proposition 2.9**.**
For all γ∈Γ, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Fix z0∈H. Let α:H→YΓ be the quotient map. Let S=α(GL2+(Q)⋅z0). We have an inclusion H1(YΓ,Z)⊂H1(YΓ,S,Z) where H1(YΓ,S,Z) is the relative homology group with respect to the pair (YΓ,S). We will do our computations inside H1(YΓ,Z,Z). If z1,z2∈GL2+(Q)⋅z0, let {z1,z2} be the image in H1(YΓ,S,Z) of the geodesic path between z1 and z2 in H. For all γ∈Γ we have in H1(YΓ,S,Z):
[TABLE]
where in the last equality we have used that
[TABLE]
To conclude the proof of Proposition 2.9, we have to prove that ∑i∈I{giz0,gσγ(i)z0}=0. This follows formally from the fact that σγ is a permutation of I and the Chasles relations on symbols {.,.}.
∎
One difficulty to define an action of T on M~Γ comes from the fact that while GL2+(Q) acts on H∪P1(Q), it does not act on SL2(Z) so it does not make sense to talk about the symbols {gig,gig′} in M~Γ for (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2. We are going to solve this issue by introducing a Q-vector space M~Q,Γ containing M~Γ as a lattice and for which there is a natural action of double cosets Hecke operators.
Consider the Q-vector space M~Q generated by the symbols {g,g′}Q where (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q)2 with the following relations:
(i)
{g,g′}Q+{g′,g′′}Q+{g′′,g}Q=0 for all (g,g′,g′′)∈GL2+(Q)3;
2. (ii)
{g,g′}Q−{λ1g,λ2g′}Q=0 for all (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q)2 and (λ1,λ2)∈(Q×)2;
3. (iii)
{g,g(a0bd)}Q−db⋅{g,gT}Q=0 for all g∈GL2+(Q) and (a0bd)∈GL2+(Q).
There is a left action of GL2+(Q) on M~Q, given by g⋅{g′,g′′}={gg′,gg′′} for all (g,g′,g′′)∈GL2+(Q)3. We let M~Q,Γ be the largest quotient of M~Q on which Γ acts trivially. There is a canonical map
[TABLE]
given by {g,g′}↦{g,g′}Q for (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2. By Proposition 2.1, there is a unique well-defined Q-linear map
[TABLE]
such that p~Q,Γ({g,g′}Q)=S(g′)(f)−S(g)(f) for all (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q)2. We have p~Γ=p~Q,Γ∘ψ.
Proposition 2.10**.**
The map ψ induces an isomorphism of Q-vector spaces ψ⊗Q:M~Γ⊗ZQ∼M~Q,Γ. Thus, we can consider M~Γ as a lattice inside M~Q,Γ.
Proof.
We first show that ψ⊗Q is surjective. Let (g,g′)∈(GL2(Q)+)2. Write g=α(a0bd) and g′=α′(a′0b′d′) for some (α,α′)∈SL2(Z)2 and (a0bd),(a′0b′d′)∈GL2+(Q). We then have, in M~Q,Γ:
[TABLE]
This proves that ψ⊗Q is surjective. To prove that ψ⊗Q is an isomorphism, it suffices to prove that dimQM~Q,Γ≥dimQ(M~Γ⊗ZQ)=2g(Γ)+2⋅(c(Γ)−1). There is a surjective Q-linear map
[TABLE]
given by {g,g′}Q↦{g∞,g′∞}. Its kernel contains the elements {g,gT}Q for all g∈SL2(Z), so it suffices to show that the Q-vector space C spanned by these elements has dimension ≥c(Γ)−1. The map (ψ⊗Q)∘(ιΓ⊗Q):H1(YΓ,Z)⊗ZQ→M~Q,Γ is injective, since
[TABLE]
is injective. Thus, we can identify H1(YΓ,Z)⊗ZQ with a Q-vector subspace of M~Q,Γ. We know that C is the subspace of H1(YΓ,Z)⊗ZQ of dimension c(Γ)−1 spanned by the little circles around the cusps. This concludes the proof of Proposition 2.10.
∎
Let g∈GL2+(Q), and write as before ΓgΓ=⨆i=1nΓgi. There is a well-defined double coset operator
[TABLE]
given by {h,h′}Q↦∑i=1n{gih,gih′}Q. If p is a prime and g=(100p), we denote Tg,Q by Tp,Q if p∤N and by Up,Q otherwise. If d is an integer coprime to N and g∈Γ0(N) is such that its lower-right coefficient is congruent to d modulo N, we denote Tg,Q by ⟨d⟩Q. Finally, if g=(0N−10), then we denote Tg,Q by WN,Q.
Theorem 2.11**.**
There is a unique action of T on M~Γ,Q such that the following hold.
(i)
If p is a prime dividing (resp. not dividing) N, then Up (resp. Tp) acts as Up,Q (resp. Tp,Q). If d is an integer coprime to N, then ⟨d⟩ acts as ⟨d⟩Q.
2. (ii)
The map p~Q,Γ:M~Q,Γ→HomC(M2(Γ),C) is T and WN,Q-equivariant.
3. (iii)
The exact sequences (3) and (4) tensorized by Q are T and WN,Q-equivariant after identifying M~Γ⊗ZQ with M~Q,Γ via ψ⊗Q.
4. (iv)
For all integer d coprime to N, the diamond operator ⟨d⟩ stabilizes the lattice M~Γ. For all prime p not dividing 2N, Tp stabilizes M~Γ. More precisely, write
[TABLE]
where g∞=(p001) and gi=(10ip). Then we have in M~Γ, for all (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2:
[TABLE]
5. (v)
If p divides 2N, the operator Tp (or Up if p∣N) sends M~Γ into M~Γ+p1⋅∑c=Γg∞∈CΓ{g,gT}⊂p1⋅M~Γ.
6. (vi)
The operator WN,Q induces an endomorphism of M~Γ⊗ZZ[N1], which we denote by WN and call the Atkin–Lehner involution.
7. (vii)
Assume that all the cusps of XΓ are fixed by the complex conjugation. Then the exact sequences (3) and (4) induce a canonical T and WN-equivariant isomorphism
[TABLE]
Remark 2.2**.**
If Γ=Γ1(N), the cusps of XΓ are fixed by the complex conjugation if and only if N divides 2p for some prime number p≥2. If Γ=Γ0(N), the cusps of XΓ are fixed by the complex conjugation if and only if N is squarefree or four times a squarefree integer.
Proof.
Lemma 2.12**.**
(i)
The map πΓ⊗Q:M~Q,Γ→H1(XΓ,CΓ,Q) is Hecke equivariant. This means the following. If p is a prime dividing (resp. not dividing) N, then (πΓ⊗Q)∘Up,Q=Up∘(πΓ⊗Q) (resp. (πΓ⊗Q)∘Tp,Q=Tp∘(πΓ⊗Q)). Similarly for the diamond operators and the Atkin-Lehner involution.
2. (ii)
The map ιΓ⊗Q:H1(YΓ,Q)→M~Q,Γ is Hecke equivariant.
3. (iii)
The map p~Q,Γ:M~Q,Γ→HomC(M2(Γ),C) is Hecke equivariant.
4. (iv)
The map
[TABLE]
is injective and Hecke equivariant.
Proof.
Point (i) follows by definition of Hecke operators. We now prove (ii). We first check the compatibility of diamond operators. Let d be an integer coprime to N. Let g be a matrix whose lower right corner is congruent to d modulo N. For all γ∈Γ, we have in M~Q,Γ:
[TABLE]
The first equality follows from Proposition 2.9. The second equality is justified as follows:
[TABLE]
where we have used the fact that gγg−1∈Γ.
This proves the compatibility of ιΓ⊗Q to diamond operators. We now consider the Hecke operator Tp (or Up) for a prime p. Write Γ(100p)Γ=⋃i∈IΓgiΓ. By Proposition 2.9, for all γ∈Γ, we have in M~Q,Γ:
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have:
[TABLE]
where in the last equality we have used the fact that ti,Γ(γ)∈Γ, so {gσγ(i),ti,Γ(γ)gσγ(i)}Q={1,ti,Γ(γ)}Q. Since σγ:I→I is a bijection, we have ∑i∈I{gi,gσγ(i)}Q=0. This proves (ii).
Lemma 2.12 (iii) is an immediate consequence of the definition of Hecke operators as double coset operators, and of the formula p~Q,Γ({g,g′}Q)(f)=S(g−1g′)(f∣g) for all (g,g′)∈GL2+(Q)2 and f∈M2(Γ).
We finally prove Lemma 2.12 (iv). The map p~Q,Γ×(π~Γ⊗Q) is Hecke equivariant by (i) and (iii), so we only need to prove that it is injective. This follows from the facts that the map p~Γ⊗Q:H1(YΓ,Z)⊗ZQ→HomC(M2(Γ),C) is injective and that the kernel of π~Γ⊗Q is contained in H1(YΓ,Z)⊗ZQ (considered as a subspace of M~Q,Γ via ιΓ⊗Q). This concludes the proof of Lemma 2.12.
∎
By Lemma 2.12 (iv), there is an action of T on M~Q,Γ satisfying Theorem 2.11 (i). This action is obviously unique. Theorem 2.11 (ii) and (iii) also follow from Lemma 2.12.
We now prove Theorem 2.11 (iv) and (v). The assertion about diamond operators is straightforward. Let p be a prime. If p∣N, then by convention the diamond operator ⟨p⟩ is zero. We have:
[TABLE]
where I={−2p−1,...,2p−1}, g∞=(p001) and gi=(10ip). Recall that for all g∈SL2(Z), we have gig=ti,SL2(Z)(g)gσg(i) for some ti,SL2(Z):SL2(Z)→SL2(Z) and σg:I∪{∞}∼I∪{∞}.
For all (g,g′)∈SL2(Z)2, we have in M~Q,Γ:
[TABLE]
For all i∈I∪{∞}, we have {ti,SL2(Z)(g)gσg(i),ti,SL2(Z)(g)}Q∈p1Z⋅{ti,SL2(Z)(g),ti,SL2(Z)(g)T}Q and {ti,SL2(Z)(g′),ti,SL2(Z)(g′)gσg′(i)}Q∈p1Z⋅{ti,SL2(Z)(g′),ti,SL2(Z)(g′)T}Q. This proves Theorem 2.11 (v). Assume now that p∤2N. To conclude the proof of Theorem 2.11 (iv), it suffices to show that for all g∈SL2(Z), we have
[TABLE]
Write g=(acbd). We consider two cases. First, assume that p∣c. Then σg(∞)=∞ and σg induces a permutation of I. We have:
[TABLE]
Since p=2, we have ∑i∈Iσg(i)=∑i∈Ii=0, so to prove (8) it suffices to prove that {ti,SL2(Z)(g)T,ti,SL2(Z)(g)}Q is independant of i, *i.e. *that the cusp Γti,SL2(Z)(g)∞ is independant of i. We have ti,SL2(Z)(g)∞=gig∞=pca+ic. Since p∣c and gcd(a,c)=1, the fraction pca+ic is irreducible. Since Γ=Γ1(N) or Γ=Γ0(N) and p∤N, we see that Γpca+ic=Γpca is independant of i.
Assume now that p∤c. Let j∈I such that p∣a+jc. Then σg(j)=∞ and σg(∞)=j′ where j′∈I is such that j′≡dc−1 (modulo p). We have:
[TABLE]
Since p=2, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, to prove (8) it suffices to prove that the elements ⟨p⟩{t∞,SL2(Z)(g)T,t∞,SL2(Z)(g)}Q and {ti,SL2(Z)(g)T,ti,SL2(Z)(g)}Q for all i∈I\{j} coincide. Equivalently, it suffices to prove that the cusps ⟨p⟩Γt∞,SL2(Z)(g)∞ and Γti,SL2(Z)(g)∞ are the same, for all i∈I\{j}. We have ⟨p⟩Γt∞,SL2(Z)(g)∞=⟨p⟩Γcpa and Γti,SL2(Z)(g)∞=Γpca+ic. The facts that p∤a+ic if i=j, Γ=Γ1(N) or Γ=Γ0(N) and p∤N imply that these cusps are all the same. This concludes the proof of (8).
Theorem 2.11 (vi) follows from the fact that for any g∈SL2(Z), we can write (0N−10)g=g′⋅(a0bd) for some g′∈SL2(Z) and a,b,d∈Z with ad=N. Theorem 2.11 (vii) follows from (iii). This concludes the proof of Theorem 2.11 .
∎
defined by Γg↦{g0,g∞}. Let S=(01−10) and U=(11−10). We have S2=U3=(−100−1).
Theorem 2.13** (Manin).**
(i)
The map ξΓ is surjective.
2. (ii)
We have
[TABLE]
where for any g∈SL2(Z), Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]g denotes the subgroup of elements fixed by the right multiplication by g.
Recall that in §1.3 we defined a map ξ~Γ:Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]→M~Γ by ξ~Γ(Γg)={g,gS} for all g∈PSL2(Z). We have ξΓ=πΓ∘ξ~Γ. Let Z[CΓ]0 be the quotient of Z[CΓ] by the element dΓ1∑c∈CΓec⋅[c] where ec is the width of c. If c∈CΓ, we denote by (c) the image of [c] in Z[CΓ]0. We have a canonical injective group homomorphism Z[CΓ]0↪M~Γ coming from the exact sequence (4).
Theorem 1.2 is a consequence of the following result.
Theorem 2.14**.**
Let φΓ:Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]→Z[CΓ]0 be the group homomorphism given by φΓ([Γg])=(Γg∞).
(i)
The coimage of ξ~Γ is canonically isomorphic to the coimage of the restriction of φΓ to Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]U.
2. (ii)
Let p≥5 be a prime and n∈N. If Γ=Γ1(pn) or Γ=Γ0(pn), then the image of ξ~Γ has index dividing 3, the divisibility being strict of and only if p≡1 (modulo 3) and Γ=Γ0(pn).
3. (iii)
The kernel of ξ~Γ is spanned by the following two subgroups of Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]:
•
The subgroup Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]S.
•
The kernel of the restriction of φΓ to Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]U.
Proof.
We prove (i). By Theorem 2.13, πΓ∘ξ~Γ is surjective and the coimage of ξ~Γ in M~Γ equals the coimage in Ker(πΓ) of the restriction of ξ~Γ to Z[Γ\SL2(Z)]U+Z[Γ\SL2(Z)]S. Note that the restriction of ξ~Γ to Z[Γ\SL2(Z)]S is zero.
Lemma 2.15**.**
For all g∈SL2(Z), we have in M~Γ:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Using the following equalities: US=−T, U2S=−UT and U2T=S, we have:
[TABLE]
∎
By Lemma 2.15, the restrictions of ξ~Γ and φΓ to Z[Γ\SL2(Z)]U are equal. This proves (i). We now prove (ii). Let p≥5 be a prime and n∈N.
Lemma 2.16**.**
Assume Γ=Γ1(pn) or Γ=Γ0(pn). Consider the map
fΓ:Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]→Z[CΓ] sending [Γg] to [Γg0]+[Γg1]+[Γg∞]. The image of fΓ consists of the elements of degree divisible by 3 in Z[CΓ].
Proof.
Since fΓ is functorial in Γ, it suffices to prove Lemma 2.16 when Γ=Γ1(pn). Recall that if (a,b,a′,b′)∈Z4 and gcd(a,b)=gcd(a′,b′)=1, then we have Γ⋅ba=Γ⋅b′a′ if and only if (a′b′)≡±(a+kbb) (modulo pn) for some k∈Z. The class of the vector (ab) modulo the previous equivalence relation is denoted by {ab}, and such a symbol is uniquely identified with an element of CΓ. If r≥0 is an integer, we denote by CΓ(r)⊂CΓ the set of {ab} with gcd(b,pn)=pr. We have CΓ=⨆r=0nCΓ(r).
We first show that the elements of Z[CΓ(0)] of degree divisible by 3 are contained in Im(fΓ). First note that there is a bijection (Z/pnZ)×/±1∼CΓ(0) given by x↦{0x}. For any x,y∈(Z/pnZ)× such that x+y is prime to p, we have [{0x}]+[{0y}]+[{0x+y}]∈Im(fΓ). Note in particular that 2⋅[{0x}]+[{02x}]∈Im(fΓ). If x−y is prime to p, we also have [{0x}]+[{0y}]+[{0x−y}]∈Im(fΓ). Thus, for any x,y∈(Z/pnZ)× with x±y prime to p, we have [{0x+y}]−[{0x−y}]∈Im(fΓ). Since p is odd, for any x,y∈(Z/pnZ)× with x±y prime to p we have [{0x}]−[{0y}]∈Im(fΓ). Since p>3, by letting x=2 and y=1 we get [{02}]−[{01}]∈Im(fΓ). We also have 2⋅[{01}]+[{02}]=fΓ(Γ(1101))∈Im(fΓ). We thus get 3⋅[{01}]∈Im(fΓ). It remains to show that for all x∈(Z/pnZ)×, we have [{0x}]−[{01}]∈Im(fΓ). We already know this if x≡±1 (modulo p). If x≡±1 (modulo p) then since p>3 we have 2x≡±21≡±1 (modulo p), so we get [{02x}]−[{01}]∈Im(fΓ). Since we know that [{0x}]+2⋅[{02x}]∈Im(fΓ), we get [{0x}]−[{01}]∈Im(fΓ).
We now conclude the proof of Lemma 2.16. Let r be an integer such that 1≤r≤n. Let {vupr}∈CΓ(r), where (v,u)∈Z2 is such that gcd(v,upr)=1 and u≡0 (modulo p). Let g=(acbd)∈SL2(Z) be such that gcd(c,p)=gcd(d,p)=1, c+d≡upr (modulo pn) and d≡v−1 (modulo pr). Then we have fΓ([Γg])=[{0c}]+[{0d}]+[{vupr}]. Thus, we have [{vupr}]−[{01}]∈Im(fΓ).
∎
By Theorem 2.14 (i) and Lemma 2.16, the index of the image of ξ~Γ in Z[CΓ]0 is divisible by 3. Moreover, this index is one if and only if either there exists an element of Z[Γ\PSL2(Z)]U of degree 1 or ∑c∈CΓec is relatively prime to 3. If Γ=Γ1(pn), we check that these conditions never hold. If Γ=Γ0(pn), we check that these two conditions hold if p≡1 (modulo 3) and none of them hold otherwise. This proves Theorem 2.14 (ii)
Theorem 2.14 (ii) follows from Theorem 2.13 (ii) and Lemma 2.15. This concludes the proof of Theorem 2.14.
∎
Remark 2.3**.**
It would be interesting to compute the index of ξ~Γ if Γ=Γ0(N) or Γ=Γ1(N) for any N≥1. If N is even, then this index is infinite (it suffices to check that for N=2). If N is odd, we do not know if this index finite (the numerical computations seem to indicate that this index divides 3). The proof would rely on a generalization of Lemma 2.16, which seems to be hard if N is highly composite.
2.5. Self-duality and Zagier's Petersson inner product
In this paragraph, we do not assume anything about Γ, which could in particular be a non-congruence subgroup. We denote by N the general level of Γ.
By taking duals, the map p~Γ:M~Γ→HomC(M2(Γ),C) induces a map p~Γ∗:M2(Γ)→HomZ(M~Γ,C). If f∈M2(Γ) and g∈SL2(Z), recall that by construction we have p~Γ∗(f)({g,gS})=L(f∣g,1) and p~Γ∗(f)({g,gT})=2iπ⋅a0(f∣g), where S=(01−10) and T=(1011).
Following Zagier [23] we can extend the usual Petersson Hermitian pairing on cuspidal forms to the whole space of modular forms M2(Γ). We now recall the definition. For any real number T>1, define the truncated fundamental domain FT={z∈h such that ∣z∣≥1,∣ℜ(z)∣≤21 and ℑ(z)<T}, where h is the upper-half plane. Then according to Zagier, if f1,f2∈M2(Γ), we define the Petersson pairing of f1 and f2 to be
[TABLE]
We get a Hermitian bilinear pairing on M2(Γ). Although the restriction of the Petersson pairing to cuspidal modular forms is non-degenerate, it can be degenerate on M2(Γ). Nevertheless, Pasol and Popa proved the following result [17, Theorems 4.4 and 4.5], which seems related to Remark 2.1.
Theorem 2.17** (Pasol and Popa).**
(i)
Assume Γ=Γ0(N) or Γ=Γ1(N). The Petersson pairing M2(Γ)×M2(Γ)→C is non degenerate if N is a prime power.
2. (ii)
The Petersson pairing is degenerate if Γ=Γ1(N) and N is divisible by pq with p=q primes such that q is not a primitive residue modulo p (e.g. if N is divisible by 6). It is also degenerate if Γ=Γ1(N) and N is divisible by p2q with p=q primes.
3. (iii)
The Petersson pairing is degenerate if Γ=Γ0(N) and N is square-free and not prime.
It is natural to ask whether the Petersson pairing can be expressed in terms of a pairing on HomZ(M~Γ,C)via the map p~Γ∗. This was done by Merel when restricting to cuspidal modular forms [15, Théorème 2]. In the general case, this was done by Pasol and Popa. More precisely, the following result is a reformulation of [16, Theorem 8.6 a)].
Theorem 2.18** (Pasol and Popa).**
For any f1,f2∈M2(Γ), we have:
[TABLE]
Recall that in §1.4, we have defined an anti-symmetric pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ on the Z-dual M~Γ∗ of M~Γ. We easily check that ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ is anti-invariant for the complex conjugation c acting on M~Γ, namely for all φ1,φ2∈M~Γ, we have
[TABLE]
By tensoring with C, ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ extends to an anti-symmetric bilinear pairing on HomZ(M~Γ,C). If φ∈HomZ(M~Γ,C), we define φ∈HomZ(M~Γ,C) by the formula φ(m)=φ(m) for all m∈M~Γ.
The pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ takes values in Z and has determinant dΓ1∏c∈CΓec.
2. (ii)
The pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ exchanges the Hecke operators with their duals, *i.e. *for all φ1,φ2∈M~Γ∗ and T∈T, we have
[TABLE]
after inverting 2N.
If N is a prime power, then by Theorem 2.4 and Theorem 2.17 the pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ is non-degenerate and (ii) is satisfied. Even if in general the Petersson pairing (⋅,⋅) can be degenerate, this does not contradicts the conjecture that ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ should be non-degenerate. Indeed, we have seen that the map p~Γ∗ can have a kernel (when N is not a prime power), and by Theorem 2.18, the kernel of the Petersson pairing (⋅,⋅) contains Ker(p~Γ∗). We do not know whether this inclusion is always an equality.
To prove Proposition 2.19, it suffices to prove that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since G− (resp. F+) is the dual of G+ (resp. F−), it suffices to prove (13).
We use an explicit formula to compute the intersection product, due to Merel [13]. Let ρ=e32iπ∈h and i=e2iπ∈h. Let R (resp. I) be the image in YΓ of SL2(Z)⋅ρ (resp. SL2(Z)⋅i). If g∈SL2(Z), we denote by {gi,gρ} the image in H1(YΓ,R∪I,Z) of the geodesic path in h between gi and gρ. Merel proved [13, Théorèmes 2 and 3] that H1(YΓ,R∪I,Z) is generated by the element {gi,gρ} and that
[TABLE]
where τ=(01−11)=ST stabilizes ρ. Furthermore, Merel proved the following formula for the intersection product ∙:H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z)×H1(YΓ,Z)→Z. If x=∑g∈SL2(Z)μg⋅{g0,g∞}∈H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z) and y=∑g∈SL2(Z)λg⋅{gi,gρ}∈H1(YΓ,Z)
then [13, Corollaire 3] we have
[TABLE]
To prove (12), it thus suffices to prove the following result, whose statement and proof are generalization of the first formula in [15, Théorème 2].
Proposition 2.20**.**
We do not make any assumption on Γ (which can thus be a non-congruence subgroup). For all φ∈Hom(H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z),Z)⊂M~Γ∗, we have in H1(YΓ,Z)⊂M~Γ:
[TABLE]
In other words, the pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ induces by restriction a map Hom(H1(XΓ,CΓ,Z),Z)→H1(YΓ,Z) which is inverse to the intersection pairing.
Proof.
Let N be the general level of Γ. We let M~Γ,R∪I be the pushout of the two (injective) morphisms H1(YΓ,Z[6N1])→M~Γ⊗ZZ[6N1] and H1(YΓ,Z[6N1])→H1(YΓ,R∪I,Z[6N1]). Let M~Γ,R∪I′=M~Γ,R∪I⊕Z[6N1]⋅{1,i} (where {1,i} is a formal symbol). For any (g,g′)∈SL2(Z), we define the symbol {g,g′i} in M~Γ,R∪I′ to be {g,1}+{1,i}+{i,g′i}∈M~Γ,R∪I′. Similarly, we define the symbol {g,g′ρ} in M~Γ,R∪I′ to be {g,1}+{1,i}+{i,g′ρ}∈M~Γ,R∪I′. Finally, we define {g′i,g} to be −{g,g′i} and {g′ρ,g} to be −{g,g′ρ}. We can thus talk about symbols {α,β} in M~Γ,R∪I′, where α,β∈{SL2(Z),SL2(Z)⋅i,SL2(Z)⋅ρ}. We easily check that the Chasles relation are satisfied and that for any γ∈Γ, we have {γα,γβ}={α,β}. Since M~Γ⊗ZZ[6N1] embeds into M~Γ,R∪I′, it is legitimate to do all our computations in M~Γ,R∪I′.
On the one hand, by definition of G, we have in M~Γ:
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have in M~Γ,R∪I′:
[TABLE]
We have, using the fact that Si=i:
[TABLE]
We have:
[TABLE]
Since τρ=ρ and φ({g0,g∞})=−φ({gτ0,gτ∞})−φ({gτ20,gτ2∞}), we get
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
Thus, we have:
[TABLE]
Combining the two computations above, we get:
[TABLE]
where in the last equality, we have used the fact that
{gST,gS}={gτ,gτT−1}=−{gτ,gτT}.
Using again the fact that φ({g0,g∞})+φ({gτ0,gτ∞})+φ({gτ20,gτ2∞})=0, we have:
[TABLE]
This concludes the proof of Proposition 2.20, and thus the proof of Proposition 2.19 and Theorem 1.3.
∎
∎
∎
Remark 2.4**.**
Proposition 2.20 is the strongest general result we were able to prove toward Properties (i) and (ii). Note that the pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ must have determinant divisible by the index of H1(YΓ,Z) in M~Γ, i.e. dΓ1∏c∈CΓec.
3. Relation with the generalized Jacobian
We remind the reader that we keep the notation of §1.5. We first define the two maps δΓ♮,alg:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮ and δΓ♮,an:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮ such that
[TABLE]
3.1. Definitions and comparison result
3.1.1. Algebraic definition
We first recall an alternative algebraic description of JΓ#, which the author has learned in [22, §2.2]. Let F be a field extension of k containing the compositum of the fields k(c) for c∈XΓ\YΓ. Let K be the function field of XΓ×kF. If P is a closed point in XΓ×kF, let KP be the completion of K at P and UP⊂KP× be the group of principal unit. Let
[TABLE]
where Div(YΓ)(F) is the group of divisors of YΓ defined over F. We denote by Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(F) the kernel of the degree map Div(XΓ,CΓ)(F)→Z given by
[TABLE]
There is a canonical map K×→Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(F), given by
[TABLE]
where divYΓ(f) is the divisor of the restriction of f to YΓ.
Then there is a canonical Gal(F/k)-equivariant group isomorphism
[TABLE]
sending the class of a divisor D supported on YΓ to the image of (D⊕0) in Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(F)/K×.
Under this identification, the map JΓ#(F)→JΓ(F) corresponds to the map Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(F)/K×→JΓ(F) given by
[TABLE]
We now define the map δΓ♮,alg:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮(C). We apply the discussion above to F=C. For any c∈CΓ, let qcpc∈Q such that c=Γ⋅qcpc and let gc∈SL2(Z) such that gc(qcpc)=∞. Then the function tc:z↦j(ecgcz)−1 of the upper-half plane induces a uniformizer at c, still denoted by tc∈Kc× (we recall that ec is the width of c). The map
δΓ♮,alg sends a degree zero divisor ∑c∈CΓnc⋅(c) to the image of 0⊕(tcnc modulo Uc)c∈CΓ in JΓ♮(C) via the identification (15).
The following result motivates the definition of JΓ♮.
Proposition 3.1**.**
(i)
We have βΓ♮∘δΓ♮,alg=δΓ.
2. (ii)
The map δΓ♮,alg is independant of the choice of the elements qcpc and of gc.
3. (iii)
The map δΓ♮,alg takes values in JΓ♮(Q(ζN)).
4. (iv)
Assume that Γ=Γ0(N) or Γ=Γ1(N) (in which case we have k=Q). Then the map δΓ♮,alg is Gal(Q(ζN)/Q)-equivariant.
Proof.
Point (i) is straightforward. We prove point (ii). First, fix the choice of qcpc. Recall that locally at ∞, we have j(z)−1∼q(z)=e2iπz modulo principal units. Thus, if we replace gc by Tngc for some n∈Z, then tc is replaced by eec2iπn⋅tc. By construction, the image of ∏c∈CΓμec in JΓ♮(C) is trivial, so our construction does not depend on the choice of the elements gc. The fact that tc does not depend on the choice of qcpc is obvious. Point (iii) follows from the following result.
Lemma 3.2**.**
For all c∈CΓ, tc is defined over Q(ζN).
Proof.
Let c∈CΓ and Γ′=Γ∩Γ(ec), where Γ(ec) is the principal congruence subgroup of level ec. Note that Γ(N) is a subgroup of Γ′ since ec divides N and Γ(N)⊂Γ. Let c′=Γ′⋅qcpc; it is a cusp of XΓ′. The covering XΓ′→XΓ is unramified at c′ (where XΓ′ and XΓ are considered over Q(ζN)), since the ramification index of both XΓ′→XSL2(Z) and XΓ→XSL2(Z) is ec at c′ and c respectively. The function j(ecgcz) is modular for the group Γ′, and so it suffices to prove that it is defined over Q(ζN). This is true at the level of the modular curve XΓ(N), so it is true for XΓ′ since the covering XΓ(N)→XΓ′ is defined over Q(ζN).
∎
We now prove point (iv). The action of Gal(Q(ζN)/Q) on Z[CΓ]0 comes from its action on CΓ. If c∈CΓ and g∈Gal(Q(ζN)/Q), we denote by g(c)∈CΓ the cusp corresponding to the action of g on c. Under (15), the action of Gal(Q(ζN)/Q) on Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(F)/K× is given as follows. The action of Gal(Q(ζN)/Q) on K× and Div(YΓ)(F) is the obvious one. If g∈Gal(Q(ζN)/Q), then g acts on ⨁c∈CΓKc×/Uc× by g⋅(fc modulo Uc)c∈CΓ=(g⋅fc)g(c),c∈CΓ. To prove (iv), it suffices to prove that for all c∈CΓ and g∈Gal(Q(ζN)/Q), we have (g⋅fc)eg(c)≡fg(c)eg(c) (modulo Ug(c)). We have fg(c)eg(c)≡j(z) (modulo Ug(c)). Since eg(c)=ec, we have (g⋅fc)eg(c)=g⋅(fcec)≡g⋅j(z)≡j(z) (modulo Ug(c)). We have used the fact that j:XΓ→XSL2(Z) is defined over Q.
∎
3.1.2. Analytic definition
There is a well-known analytic uniformization of the generalized Jacobian JΓ#(C). Namely, there is an isomorphism of complex abelian varieties (called the generalized Abel-Jacobi map)
[TABLE]
sending the class of a divisor D to the class of the morphism φ:M2(Γ)→C given by f↦∫γ2iπf(z)dz where γ is a 1-chain in YΓ whose boundary is D.
Recall that we have a group homomorphism p~Γ:M~Γ→HomC(M2(Γ),C). By Proposition 2.2 (ii) and (iii), the compositum
[TABLE]
factors through ∂Γ:M~Γ→Z[CΓ]0, so we have defined a map
[TABLE]
By Theorem 2.11, the map δΓ♮,an is T-equivariant.
Lemma 3.3**.**
We have βΓ♮∘δΓ♮,an=δΓ.
Proof.
This follows from the fact that for any cuspidal modular form f and any g∈SL2(Z), we have S(g)(f)=2iπ∫∞g(∞)f(z)dz.
∎
3.1.3. Comparison between the algebraic and analytic definitions
We first prove point (i). By Proposition 3.1 (i) and Lemma 3.3, the map δΓ♮,alg−δΓ♮,an takes values in the image of ∏c∈CΓC×/μN inside JΓ♮(C). If (λc)c∈CΓ∈C×, we abusively use the same notation for its image in JΓ♮(C).
Recall (*cf. *paragraph 3.1.1) that for any c∈CΓ, we write c=Γ⋅qcpc and we fix some matrix gc∈SL2(Z) such that gc(qcpc)=∞. We then let tc(z)=j(ecgc(z))−1 and uc(z)=eec2iπgc(z). Note that uc(z)∼tc(z) near qcpc.
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let D=∑c∈CΓnc⋅(c)∈Z[CΓ]0, mD be the order of the image of D in JΓ and u be a modular unit with divisor mD⋅D. We have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
By definition, mD⋅δΓ♮,alg(D) is the image of 0⊕(tcmD⋅nc)c∈CΓ∈Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(C) in JΓ♮(C). Thus, mD⋅δΓ♮,alg(D) is also the image of 0⊕((utcmD⋅nc)(c))c∈CΓ∈Div0(XΓ,CΓ)(C) in JΓ♮(C). This concludes the proof of Lemma 3.4.
∎
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let D=∑c∈CΓnc⋅(c)∈Z[CΓ]0. Lift δΓ♮,an(D) to an element φD∈HomC(M2(Γ),C). Let v be a modular unit of level Γ, and dlog(v)∈M2(Γ) denote the Eisenstein series vv′. The quantity φD(2iπ1dlog(v)) is canonical in C/N2iπZ. We have the following equality in C×/μN:
[TABLE]
Proof.
By construction of δΓ♮,an, we can choose φD so that for any f∈M2(Γ), we have
[TABLE]
where we recall that
[TABLE]
for any g∈SL2(Z) and f∈M2(Γ).
We can simplify this formula when f=2iπ1vv′, where we view v as a function on the upper-half plane h. For any c∈CΓ, let vc=ucordc(v)v∘gc−1. Fix a logarithm of vc on h, denoted by log(vc) (so by definition we have exp(log(vc))=vc on h). We also fix a logarithm log(v) of v on h; note that log(v)′=2iπf. For all c∈CΓ, we easily see that a0(f∣gc−1)=ec1⋅ordc(v) and 2iπ⋅(f∣gc−1)−2iπ⋅a0(f∣gc−1)=log(vc)′. Thus, we have:
Let (λc)c∈CΓ∈∏c∈CΓC×. Let φ∈HomC(M2(Γ),C) whose class in JΓ#(C) corresponds to (λc)c∈CΓ via the generalized Abel-Jacobi isomorphism AJΓ. For any modular unit v of XΓ, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let f be a meromorphic function on XΓ whose divisor div(f) is supported on YΓ, and such that for all c∈CΓ we have f(c)=λc. We write div(f)=∑i=1mmi(Qi) for some Qi∈YΓ and mi∈Z. By the construction of JΓ# in paragraph 3.1.1, we have in C/2iπZ:
[TABLE]
where the integral is over any 1-chain with boundary div(f). The following computation was given to us by the mathoverflow user abx in his answer [11]. Such a 1-chain can be written as a linear combination of paths γj from Qj1 to Qj2 for some indexes j1 and j2. By choosing a determination of log(v) along the path γj, we get:
Let u be a modular unit of YΓ. Using the generalized Abel-Jacobi isomorphism, lift δΓ♮,alg(div(u)) (resp. δΓ♮,an(div(u))) to an element φualg (resp. φuan) of HomC(M2(Γ),C).
By Lemmas 3.4 and 3.6, for any modular unit v we have in C×/μN:
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by Lemma 3.5 we have in C×/μN:
[TABLE]
By Weil reciprocity law, we have in C×/μN:
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.6, the image of φualg−φuan in JΓ♮(C) is equal to the image of (λc)c∈CΓ in JΓ♮(C) for some λc∈C×/μN such that for all modular unit v, we have in C×/μN:
[TABLE]
In particular, there exists λ∈C×/μN such that for all c∈CΓ we have λcn=λ.
This proves that for all modular unit u, we have
We now prove point (ii). The map δΓ♮,alg−δΓ♮,an takes values in the image of ∏c∈CΓC×/μN in JΓ♮(C), and has finite order by (i). The map δΓ♮,alg−δΓ♮,an is invariant by the action of the complex conjugation by assumption, by Proposition 3.1 (iv) and by Proposition 2.7. Since N is assumed to be odd, an element of finite order in C×/μN fixed by the complex conjugation is equal to ±1. This concludes the proof of Theorem 1.4.
∎
Remarks 1**.**
(i)
By Theorem 1.4 (i), the map δΓ♮,alg:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♮(C) is injective if and only if δΓ♮,an is injective. We easily see that δΓ♮,an is injective if p~Γ⊗R is an isomorphism. By Theorem 2.4, this is the case if Γ has prime power level.
2. (ii)
It would be interesting to remove the hypotheses of Theorem 1.4 (ii). It is not clear to us whether they are necessary.
3. (iii)
Assume that Γ satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 1.4 (ii). Let JΓ♭ be the semi-abelian variety over k defined by JΓ♭=JΓ♮/∏c∈CΓResk(c)/k(μ2). The map δΓ♮,alg (or equivalently δΓ♮,an) gives a natural group homomorphism δΓ♭:Z[CΓ]0→JΓ♭(Q(ζN)). If Γ=Γ1(N) or Γ=Γ0(N) (with N necessarily an odd prime given our assumptions), then by Theorem 1.4 (ii) and Theorem 2.11, the map δΓ♭ is T-equivariant.
3.2. Applications to the modular curve X0(p)
Let p be an odd prime and Γ=Γ0(p). Let wp be the Atkin-Lehner involution acting on X0(p)=XΓ0(p). Note that we have CΓ0(p)={Γ0(p)0,Γ0(p)∞}. These two cusps are defined over Q and there is a canonical uniformizer at Γ0(p)∞ (resp. Γ0(p)0) given by j−1 (resp. (j∘wp)−1). The order of (Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0) in JΓ0(p) is n:=dp−1 where d=gcd(p−1,12). More precisely, n⋅((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)) is the divisor of the modular unit
[TABLE]
where Δ∈S12(SL2(Z)) is Ramanujan's Delta function and z∈H.
We have an exact sequence of semi-abelian schemes over Q:
[TABLE]
which induces (by Hilbert 90) an exact sequence of abelian groups
[TABLE]
By convention, the first copy of Gm in Gm×Gm corresponds to the cusp Γ0(p)∞, while the second copy corresponds to Γ0(p)0. Although we shall not use it, in contrast with the case of JΓ0(p)(Q), the torsion subgroup of JΓ0(p)#(Q) is the image of {±1}×{±1} [22, Theorem 1.1.3].
3.2.1. The generalized cuspidal 1-motive
In this case, we can be a little more precise both on the algebraic and analytic sides.
Let
[TABLE]
be the map sending (Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0) to the image of 0⊕(j−1 modulo UΓ0(p)∞,j∘wp modulo UΓ0(p)0) in JΓ0(p)#(Q) via (15).
Let
[TABLE]
be the map sending (Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0) to the image of (f↦−L(f,1))∈HomC(M2(Γ0(p)),C) via the Abel-Jacobi map AJΓ0(p) (where L(f,1) is the special value at s=1 of the L-function of f).
We now prove Theorem 1.5.
Proof.
Proof of (i). Note that Z[CΓ0(p)] is annihilated by Mazur's Eisenstein idealI, generated by the Hecke operators Tℓ−ℓ−1 for primes ℓ=p and by Up−1. Thus, we only need to show that δΓ0(p)#,alg and δΓ0(p)#,an are annihilated by I.
We first consider the map δΓ0(p)#,alg. Let ℓ=p be a prime number, and consider the usual double coset Γ0(p)(100p)Γ0(p)=Γ0(p)g∞⋃i=0ℓ−1Γ0(p)⋅gi where gi=(10iℓ) and g∞=(ℓ001). Since in our case the Hecke operators are self-dual and fix the two cusps, the action of Tℓ on the image of a point 0⊕(fc)c∈CΓ0(p)∈Div0(X0(p),CΓ0(p)) in JΓ0(p)# is the image of
[TABLE]
If ℓ>2, then we are done since
[TABLE]
and similarly for j∘wp. If ℓ=2, we find
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
But the image of 0⊕(fc)c∈CΓ0(p) in JΓ0(p)# is the same as the image of 0⊕(λ⋅fc)c∈CΓ0(p) for any scalar λ. Thus, we have proved that Tℓ−ℓ−1 annihilates δΓ0(p)#. The case ℓ=p is similar.
We now consider the map δΓ0(p)#,an. Let T be a Hecke operator in the Eisenstein ideal I. We need to show that the map f↦−L(Tf,1)∈HomC(M2(Γ0(p)),C) comes from the integration of an element in H1(Y0(p),Z). If f=E is the unique Eisenstein series of M2(Γ0(p)), then Tf=0 by definition. If f is a cusp form, then there is a unique element e in H1(Y0(p),Q)+ (the so-called winding element of Mazur) such that −L(f,1)=∫e2iπf(z)dz. We know that Te∈H1(Y0(p),Z)+. In particular, we have ∫Te2iπE(z)dz=0 (this is true for any cycle in H1(Y0(p),Z)+ since 2iπE(z)dz is the logarithmic derivative of the modular unit u(z)). Thus, the map f↦−L(Tf,1) of HomC(M2(Γ0(p)),C) coincides with the map f↦∫Te2iπf(z)dz, which concludes the proof of (i) since Te∈H1(Y0(p),Z).
The proof of (ii) and (iii) is essentially a particular case of the proof of Theorem 1.4, but we give the details for the convenience of the reader.
Proof of (ii). By definition, n⋅δΓ0(p)#,alg((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)) is the image of ((uj−n)(Γ0(p)∞),(u(j∘wp)n)(Γ0(p)0)) in JΓ0(p)#(Q). By the q-expansion product formula for u, we see that (uj−n)(Γ0(p)∞)=1. On the other hand, it is well-known that u∘wp=p−d12⋅u−1 (this is noted for instance in [4, p. 471]). Thus, (u(j∘wp)n)(Γ0(p)0)=(u∘wpjn)(Γ0(p)∞)=pd12⋅(uj−n)−1(Γ0(p)∞)=pd12.
Proof of (iii). It suffices to prove that n⋅δΓ0(p)#,alg=n⋅δΓ0(p)#,an. The element n⋅δΓ0(p)#,an((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)) of JΓ0(p)#(C) is the image of (λ∞,λ0)∈R××R×. By Lemma 3.6, we have
[TABLE]
We know that dlog(u) is the Eisenstein series
[TABLE]
Thus, we have L(dlog(u),s)=d24⋅(1−p1−s)ζ(s−1)ζ(s), so L(dlog(u),1)=−d12⋅log(p) and λ∞n⋅λ0−n=p−n⋅d12. Thus, we have λ∞⋅λ0−1=ϵ⋅p−d12 where ϵ∈{−1,1} and ϵ=1 if n is odd. This concludes the proof of (ii).
∎
Remark 3.1**.**
It would be interested to remove the sign ambiguity in Theorem 1.5 (iii).
3.2.2. Comparison with de Shalit's extended p-adic period pairing
The proof makes use of de Shalit's explicit construction of Q, so we will use the results and notation of [4] (especially §1.5) without recalling them. Let f be a meromorphic function on X0(p), defined over Q, and such that f∼j−1 at the cusp Γ0(p)∞ and f∼j∘wp at the cusp Γ0(p)0. Write
[TABLE]
where D=∑i=1mni(Pi) is a divisor supported on Y0(p). Then, by definition, δ#,alg((Γ0(p)∞)−(Γ0(p)0)) is the class of −D in JΓ0(p)#(Q). Recall that de Shalit denotes by Γ a p-adic Schottky group uniformizing X0(p), HΓ the associated p-adic upper-half plane and τ:HΓ→X0(p)(Cp) the p-adic uniformization map. Thus, as a Γ-invariant function on HΓ, we have
[TABLE]
where λ∈Cp×, D is some lift of D to HΓ and Θ(D;z), Θ(z∞(0),z0(0);z) are the theta functions defined in [4, §0.2]. We can assume that D is disjoint from τ−1(CΓ0(p)).
By [4, §1.4], under (2), the class of −D corresponds to the group homomorphism ψD:Z[S]→K× given by
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by definition [4, §1.5] for all i,j∈{0,...,g} we have
[TABLE]
where z and z′ satisfy the constraint τ(z′)=wp(τ(z)).
By [4, §0.2 Properties (e)], we also have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have by assumption:
[TABLE]
Thus, we have ψD(ei)=Q(ei,e0). To conclude the proof of Theorem 1.6, it suffices to prove the following result (expected in [4, §1.5], altough no proof is given).
Proposition 3.7**.**
The pairing Q is symmetric.
Proof.
Recall (cf. [4, §1.2 and 1.3]) that Γ is a free group with generators denoted by {α1,...,αg}, and that for all i∈{0,...,g} we have the relation z∞(i)=αi−1(z∞(0)) (with the convention α0=1). To keep track of indices, let zi (resp. zi′) be what we called z (resp. z′) above (so zi goes to z0(i) and zi′ goes to z∞(i)). As de Shalit did, we can and do assume that z0(i) and zi do not depend on i. By the argument of [4, §3.1], we have zi′=αi−1(z0′). Thus, we have zi′=αi−1αj(zj′) and z∞(i)=αi−1αj(z∞(j)) for all (i,j)∈{0,...,g}2. We have:
[TABLE]
By [4, §0.2 Properties], for any a, b∈HΓ and any α∈Γ, there exists a constant c(a,b;α) such that for all z∈HΓ not in Γ⋅a∪Γ⋅b, we have Θ(a,b;z)=c(a,b;α)⋅Θ(a,b;αz).
Thus, we have:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By construction, we have
[TABLE]
Thus we have:
[TABLE]
But by construction we have c(z∞(i),z0(i),αj−1αi)=Q(ei−ej,ei).
Thus, we have proved that Q(ei,ej)=Q(ej,ei).
∎
∎
We conclude this paragraph by two important properties of Q, which follow easily from the work of de Shalit [4].
Proposition 3.8**.**
(i)
The pairing Q:Z[S]×Z[S]→K× is T-equivariant, i.e. for all T∈T and (x,y)∈Z[S]×Z[S], we have Q(Tx,y)=Q(x,Ty).
2. (ii)
Modulo the principal units of K×, the pairing Q takes values in Qp× and is Gal(Fp2/Fp)-equivariant, i.e. for all h∈Gal(Fp2/Fp) and (x,y)∈Z[S]×Z[S], we have Q(hx,hy)=h(Q(x,y)) (modulo principal units).
Proof.
Proof of (i). The restriction of Q⊗ZZℓ to Z[S]0×Z[S] (and thus to Z[S]×Z[S]0 by symmetry of Q) is known to be T-equivariant, since it has an interpretation in termes of the generalized Jacobian JΓ0(p)♯ (cf. [3, §2.3]). It follows that for any T∈T, the quantity λi,j:=Q(ei,Tej)Q(Tei,ej) does not depend on (i,j)∈{0,..,g}2 (recall that we have denoted S={e0,...,eg}). We have λi,i=1 by symmetry of Q, so for all (i,j)∈{0,..,g}2 we have Q(Tei,ej)=Q(ei,Tej). By bilinearity of Q, this proves (i).
Proof of (ii). The fact that Q takes values in Qp× modulo principal units is [4, Lemma 1.7]. Let h be the non-trivial element of Gal(Fp2/Fp). For any i∈{0,...g}, we have h(ei)=Up(ei) where Up is the Hecke operator of index p. Thus,
[TABLE]
where we have used (i) and the fact that Up2=1. Since Q takes values in Qp× modulo principal units, we have h(Q(ei,ej))=Q(ei,ej) modulo principal units.
∎
Remarks 2**.**
(i)
The pairing Q itself should be Qp×-valued (and thus automatically Gal(Fp2/Fp)-equivariant).
2. (ii)
The Hecke-equivariance property is specific to the level Γ0(p). Indeed, an analogue of Oesterlé's conjecture at level Γ(2)∩Γ0(p) (basically replacing the j-invariant by Legendre λ invariant) was proved in [1]. It appears that Q does not commute with the Hecke operator U2 (although it commutes with Tℓ if ℓ=2,p and with Up).
3.2.3. Application to Galois representations
To conclude this paper, we give an application of our results to the construction of Galois representations.
Recall that T is the Hecke algebra acting on M2(Γ0(p)), generated by the Hecke operators Tq for primes q=p and by Up. Let T0 be the cuspidal Hecke algebra, acting faithfully on the cuspidal modular forms S2(Γ0(p)). Let I⊂T be the Eisenstein ideal, generated by the operators Tq−q−1 (q=p prime) and Up−1. A maximal ideal m of T is said to be Eisenstein if I⊂m. We know that T/I=Z and that T0/I=Z/nZ [12, Proposition II.9.7] (recall that n is the numerator of 12p−1). In particular, the residue characteristic ℓ of a maximal Eisenstein ideal divides 12p−1, and such a maximal ideal is unique.
Let G=JΓ0(p)#(Q)/Im(δ#,alg), where Im(δ#,alg) is the image of δ#,alg. If ℓ is a prime, let Vℓ be the ℓ-adic Tate module of G, i.e. Vℓ:=limnG[ℓn]. This is a T[Gal(Q/Q)]-module. Note that Vℓ is also the ℓ-adic Tate module of JΓ0(p)#(C)/Im(δ#,an) if ℓ=2 and of JΓ0(p)#(Qp)/Im(δ#,p−adic) (for all prime ℓ) by Theorems 1.5 and 1.6 respectively. If m is a maximal ideal of residue characteristic ℓ of T, let Tm and Vm:=Vℓ⊗T⊗ZZℓTm be the m-adic completion of T and Vℓ respectively.
Proposition 3.9**.**
The Tm-module Vm is free of rank 2 if and only if J0(p)[m] is free of rank 2 over T0/m (where we view abusively m as an ideal of T0). By Mazur [12, Lemma II.15.1 and Corollary II.15.2], the latter assertion is always true, except possibly if m is a non-Eisenstein maximal ideal of characteristic 2 and m is ordinary (i.e. the image of Up in T0/m is non-zero).
Proof.
If m is not Eisenstein, then this follows from Theorem 1.5 (i) and the fact that the Z[CΓ0(p)] is annihilated by I.
Assume that m is Eisenstein, of residue characteristic ℓ. By Theorem 1.6, Vℓ is the ℓ-adic Tate module of the T-module Hom(Z[S],Qp×)/q(Z[S]). Since we know that q is injective, we get an exact sequence of T⊗ZZℓ-modules
[TABLE]
We get an exact sequence of Tm-modules
[TABLE]
By [6, Theorem 0.5] and [12, Corollary II.16.3], the Tm-modules Z[S]⊗TTm and Hom(Z[S],Z)⊗TTm are free of rank 1. Thus, Vm is free free of rank 2 over Tm. This concludes the proof of Proposition 3.9 (another approach if ℓ=2 would have been to use modular symbols via Theorem 1.5 instead of the supersingular module).
∎
Proposition 3.10**.**
There is a Hecke and Galois equivariant perfect Zℓ-bilinear pairing ⟨⋅,⋅⟩:Vℓ×Vℓ→Zℓ(1) (the equivariance means that for any (x,y)∈Vℓ×Vℓ, T∈T and g∈Gal(Q/Q), we have ⟨gx,gy⟩=χℓ(g)⋅⟨x,y⟩ and ⟨Tx,y⟩=⟨x,Ty⟩).
Proof.
It suffices indeed to prove the analogous statement for Vm for all maximal ideal m of T containing ℓ. If m is not Eisenstein, the pairing Vm×Vm→Zℓ(1) comes from the Weil pairing on J0(p). Assume now that m is Eisenstein. Let Vm∗=HomZℓ(Vm,Zℓ(1)), with the action of Gal(Q/Q) given by (g⋅φ)(x)=χℓ(g)⋅φ(g−1⋅x) for all φ∈Vm∗ and x∈Vm. By Proposition 3.9, we can choose a basis (e1,e2) of the Tm-module Vm. Let (e1∗,e2∗) be the dual basis in Vm∗, where ei∗∈HomZℓ(Tm,Zℓ). By [12, Corollary II.15.2], the Tm-module HomZℓ(Tm,Zℓ) is free of rank one, so that (−e2∗,e1∗) is a basis of the Tm-module Vm∗. The Galois representation Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(Tm) in that basis is equal to ρ, so we get an isomorphism of Tm[Gal(Q/Q)]-modules Vm∗≃Vm.
∎
Assume from now on, and until the end of the paper, that ℓ is a prime dividing the numerator of 12p−1. Fix an embedding Q↪Qp. This fixes the choice of a decomposition group Gp at p in Gal(Q/Q). We denote by Ip⊂Gp the inertia subgroup.
Fix a cocycle b∈Z1(Gal(Q/Q),Zℓ(1)) whose class in H1(Gal(Q/Q),Zℓ(1)) corresponds to the class on pd12 in Q×/(Q×)ℓ via Kummer theory. Let b:Gal(Q/Q)→Fℓ(1) be the reduction of b modulo ℓ. Let ρ:Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(Fℓ) be given by
[TABLE]
Let L be the line in Fℓ2 spanned by the vector (1,0). Note that L is the unique line fixed (pointwise) by ρ(Ip)
We consider the following classical deformation problem. Let C be the category of local Artinian rings with residue field Fℓ. Let Def:C→Set be the functor such that if A∈C, then Def(A) is the set of strict-equivalence classes of morphisms ρ:Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(A) such that the following conditions hold:
(a)
The reduction of ρ modulo the maximal ideal of A is ρ.
2. (b)
The representation ρ is unramified outside p and ℓ.
3. (c)
The determinant of ρ if χp (where we abusively view χp as A× valued via the ring homomorphism Zp→A).
4. (d)
The representation ρ is finite flat at ℓ (meaning that the restriction of ρ to a decomposition group Gal(Qℓ/Qℓ) arises from the Qℓ-points of a finite flat group scheme over Zℓ).
5. (e)
There is a line L in A2 stable by ρ(Ip).
Note that ρ gives an element of Def(Fℓ) so our deformation problem makes sense.
Since the endomorphisms of Fℓ2 commuting with ρ are the scalars, we know that Def is pro-representable by a local Noetherian Zℓ-algebra R. We now prove Theorem 1.7.
Proof.
Let V:=Vm/m⋅Vm. This is a Fℓ-vector space of rank 2, with an action of Gal(Q/Q). The kernel of the projection T→T0 is Z⋅T0 for some T0∈T. One can choose T0 so that T0−n∈I [6, Proposition 1.8]. In particular, we have T0∈m. Let Vm0:=Vm/T0⋅Vm and VmEis:=Vm/I⋅Vm; these are naturally Gal(Q/Q)-modules. Note that VmEis is free of rank 2 over Zℓ.
Lemma 3.11**.**
The projection map f:Vm→VmEis×Vm0 is injective, Gal(Q/Q)-equivariant, and its image has finite index in the fiber product VmEis×VVm0. Furthermore, there is a Zℓ-basis of VmEis such that the action of Gal(Q/Q) is given by (χℓ0b1). In particular, the Gal(Q/Q)-module V is isomorphic to ρ.
Proof.
We have I⋅T0=0 in T, so I⋅Vm∩T0⋅Vm is annihilated by I and by T0, and hence by n since T0−n∈I. Since Vm is a free Zℓ-module, we get I⋅Vm∩T0⋅Vm=0. Thus f is injective and takes values in VmEis×VVm0 since I+(T0)⊂m. Furthermore, the image of f into VmEis×VVm0 has finite index since rkZℓ(Vm)=2⋅rkZℓ(Tm)=rkZℓ(VmEis×VVm0).
There is a Zℓ linear isomorphism T0⋅Tm∼Tm/I⋅Tm sending T0⋅T to the class of T modulo I. This induces a Gal(Q/Q)-equivariant isomorphism T0⋅Vm∼VmEis. The facts that T0⋅JΓ0(p)# is the image of Gm×Gm in JΓ0(p)#, T0−n∈I and n⋅δ#,alg((∞)−(0))=(1,pd12)∈Q××Q× imply that T0⋅Vm is isomorphic to the ℓ-adic Tate module of the 1-motive Z→Gm sending 1 to the class of pd12, which is given by (χℓ0b1). This concludes the proof of Lemma 3.11.
∎
We now prove that Vm gives rise to a continuous homomorphism R→Tm of local Zℓ-algebras. By Lemma 3.11 , there is a Tm basis of Vm giving rise to a representation ρ:Gal(Q/Q)→GL2(Tm) such that the reduction of ρ modulo m is ρ, which is the deformation condition (a). The conditions (b), (c) and (d) follow from the analogous statement for the Gal(Q/Q)-modules VmEis (by Lemma 3.11) and Vm0 (which is well-known). Condition (e) follows from (16). Thus, we get a canonical continuous homomorphism u:R→Tm of local Zℓ-algebras. It remains to show that u is an isomorphism if ℓ≥5. This follows from [20, Corollary 7.1.3]: the authors construct a universal pseudo-deformation ring R′ with an isomorphism v:R′∼Tm. Obviously, v is the composition of a map R′→R and u. Since v is an isomorphism, so is u.
∎
Bibliography23
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] Adel Betina and Emmanuel Lecouturier. On the p 𝑝 p -adic periods of the modular curve X ( Γ 0 ( p ) ∩ Γ ( 2 ) ) 𝑋 subscript Γ 0 𝑝 Γ 2 X(\Gamma_{0}(p)\cap\Gamma(2)) . Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 371(1):413–429, 2019.
2[2] Frank Calegari and Matthew Emerton. On the ramification of Hecke algebras at Eisenstein primes. Invent. Math. , 160(1):97–144, 2005.
3[3] Ehud de Shalit. On certain Galois representations related to the modular curve X 1 ( p ) subscript 𝑋 1 𝑝 X_{1}(p) . Compositio Math. , 95(1):69–100, 1995.
4[4] Ehud de Shalit. On the p 𝑝 p -adic periods of X 0 ( p ) subscript 𝑋 0 𝑝 X_{0}(p) . Math. Ann. , 303(3):457–472, 1995.
5[5] V. G. Drinfeld. Two theorems on modular curves. Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen. , 7(2):83–84, 1973.
6[6] Matthew Emerton. Supersingular elliptic curves, theta series and weight two modular forms. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 15(3):671–714, 2002.
7[7] Ian Kiming, Matthias Schütt, and Helena A. Verrill. Lifts of projective congruence groups. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) , 83(1):96–120, 2011.
8[8] Daniel S. Kubert and Serge Lang. Modular units , volume 244 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Science] . Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1981.