arXiv reader

Certain Siegel Cusp Forms with Level are Determined by their Fundamental Fourier Coefficients

Sidney Washburn

arXiv
2507.17002v2 · PDF · 13 August 2025
Categories
math.NT
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

We prove that vector-valued Siegel cusp forms for \Gamma_0^n(N) with certain nebentypus are determined by their fundamental Fourier coefficients with discriminants coprime to the level N, assuming N is odd and square-free. In the case of genus 3, we strengthen this to Fourier coefficients corresponding to maximal orders in quaternion algebras. We also prove that Jacobi forms of fundamental index with discriminant coprime to the odd level N are determined by their primitive theta components.

Items 22

Proposition

Proposition 2.1

AU0H

(Proposition 3.4 in [BD]) Let F \in S_\rho(\Gamma_0^n(N),\chi) be a nonzero Siegel modular form. If \varphi_\mathfrak{T} is a nonzero Fourier–Jacobi coefficient of F, then there exists a nonzero scalar-valued component of \varphi_\mathfrak{T} which is a scalar-valued Jacobi form of level \Gamma_0(N), index \mathfrak{T}, nebentypus \chi, and weight k' \geq k(\rho).

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 2.1

Böcherer and Das prove this in [BD] in the case of level 1. The proof for the case of general level is identical and we refer the reader to [BD] for the proof.

Theorem

Theorem 3.1

BS5H

Let F \in S_\rho(\Gamma_0^n(N), \chi) be a nonzero Siegel cusp form of odd and square-free level N and arbitrary genus n. Assume k(\rho) - n/2 \geq 2 Further assume the following conditions on \chi:

  1. \mathfrak{f}_\chi = N.

  2. For each p \vert N, p divides the conductor of \chi \epsilon_p, where \epsilon_p is the natural quadratic character attached to the number field \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p}).

Then there exists a fundamental T \in \Lambda_n^+ so that a_F(T) \neq 0 and (d_T,N) = 1.

Used by Proof
Theorem

Theorem 3.2

PI5G

Let F \in S_\rho(\Gamma_0^3(N), \chi) be a nonzero cusp form of odd and square-free level N and genus 3. Assume that k(\rho) - 3/2\geq 2. Further assume that \chi satisfies conditions (1) and (2) as in Theorem 1. Then there exists a T \in \Lambda_3^+ so that a_F(T) \neq 0, (\text{disc}(T),N) = 1, and T corresponds to a maximal order in a quaternion algebra.

Theorem

Theorem 3.3

O1A2

Let \varphi \in J^{\text{cusp}}_{k, T}(\Gamma_0(N),\chi) be a nonzero Jacobi form with fundamental index T \in \Lambda_n^+, nebentypus \chi, and odd level N. If (\text{disc}(T),N) = 1, then there exists \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/2T\mathbb{Z}^n with so that h_\mu \neq 0 and T^{-1}[\mu/2] has maximum possible denominator, equal to \mathrm{lvl}(T).

Theorem

Theorem 3.3

WM41

Let \varphi:\mathbb{H} \times \mathbb{C}^n \to \mathbb{C} be a non-zero scalar-valued Jacobi form of odd and square-free level \Gamma_0(N), nebentypus \chi, fundamental index T. Also assume (N,2d_T) = 1. Let \varphi = \sum_\mu h_\mu \Theta_\mu be the theta decomposition, \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^{n}/2T\mathbb{Z}^n. Then there exists \mu so that h_\mu \neq 0 and T^{-1}[\mu/2] has maximal possible denominator, equal to \mathrm{lvl}(T)

Proof of Theorem 3.3

We proceed by reducing to a calculation already carried out by Anamby in [anamby]. This reduction follows the same steps of Böcherer and Das [BD].

From now on, if \mu has the property that T^{-1}[\mu/2] has maximal possible denominator, we call \mu primitive and the corresponding theta component h_\mu a primitive component of \varphi. We proceed in aim of a contradiction.

Assume all the primitive components of \varphi vanish. From the transformation formulas (?) and (?) of the \Theta_\mu and the modularity of \varphi_T under \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ N & 1 \end{pmatrix}, we find that

(N\tau + 1)^k \sum_\eta h_\eta \Theta_\eta = \sum_\mu h_\mu\left(\frac{\tau}{N\tau+1}\right) \left(\det(2T)^{-1}(N\tau+1)^{n/2} \sum_{\eta,\nu} \exp\left(^t (\mu - \eta - N\frac{\nu}{2})(2T)^{-1}\nu\right) \Theta_\eta\right)

Comparing coefficients, we acquire

(N\tau+1)^kh_\eta(\tau) = \det(2T)^{-1} (N\tau+1)^{(n-1)/2} \sum_{\mu, \nu} h_\mu\left(\frac{\tau}{N\tau+1}\right) \exp\left(^t( \mu - \eta - N\frac{\nu}{2})(2T)^{-1}\nu\right)

Now sending \tau \mapsto \tau/(-N\tau +1), this reduces to

h_\eta\left(\frac{\tau}{-N\tau+1}\right) = \det(2T)^{-1} (-N\tau+1)^{n/2 - k} \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu,\eta) h_\mu(\tau)

where \displaystyle \varepsilon(\mu,\eta) := \sum_\nu \exp\left(^t (\mu - \eta - N\frac{\nu}{2})(2T)^{-1}\nu\right). Assuming that h_\eta = 0 for every \eta primitive, we acquire the relation

0 = \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu,\eta) h_\mu(\tau)

for every \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/2T\mathbb{Z}^n and every primitive \eta. For every integer t, we see directly from the Fourier expansion of h_\mu that h_\mu(\tau + t) = \exp(- T^{-1}[\mu/2] t) h_\mu(\tau) for every integer t. Note that t \mapsto \exp(-T^{-1}[\mu/2] t) is a character of \mathbb{Z}. With this in mind, we get that for every t \in \mathbb{Z},

0 = \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu, \eta) \exp(-T^{-1}[\mu/2] t) h_\mu(\tau)

By linear independence of characters, we conclude that for every fixed \mu_0, we have

0 = \sum_{\mu \sim \mu_0} \varepsilon(\mu,\eta) h_\mu(\tau)

where \mu \sim \mu_0 if and only if t \mapsto \exp(-T^{-1}[\mu/2] t) and t \mapsto \exp(-T^{-1}[\mu_0/2] t) define the same character of \mathbb{Z}. This is equivalent to the condition T^{-1}[\mu/2] - T^{-1}[\mu_0/2] \in \mathbb{Z}.

We will have reached a contradiction if the matrix (\varepsilon(\mu,\eta))_{\eta,\mu} has maximal rank for every \mu_0 imprimitive, where \eta runs over primitive columns and \mu runs over columns equivalent to \mu_0. Indeed, this would imply that every imprimitive theta component vanishes and hence all the theta components vanish.

We now split into the cases when n is even and n is odd.

n odd: In this case, \mathrm{lvl}(T) = 4d_T (see Equation ?). We first simplify \varepsilon(\mu,\eta) by reducing to the case of scalars (i.e. \mu,\nu,\eta,T are all scalars). Put M := 2T, U \in \text{SL}_n(\mathbb{Z}), \widetilde{M} := M[U]. Pick U so that, for some f \geq 2, \widetilde{M} \equiv \text{diag}( \ast, \ast, \cdots , \ast, \ast p) mod p^f for each odd prime divisor p \vert \det(\widetilde{M}) = 2d_T and \widetilde{M} \equiv \mathbb{H}\perp \mathbb{H}\perp \cdots \perp (\mathbb{H}\ \text{or} \ \mathbb{F}) \perp \ast 2 mod 2^f. Here \ast denotes a p-adic unit, \mathbb{H} := 2xy, and \mathbb{F} = 2x^2 + 2xy + 2y^2. Refer to the proof of Proposition 3.5 in [BD] for details on why such a U exists.

Changing variables \widetilde{( \cdot )} \ = \ ^tU ( \cdot ), we get

\varepsilon(\mu,\nu) = \varepsilon(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\nu}) := \sum_{\tilde{\nu}} \exp\left(^t (\tilde{\mu} - \tilde{\eta} - N\frac{\tilde{\nu}}{2})\widetilde{M}^{-1} \tilde{\nu}\right).

By the congruence conditions on \widetilde{M}, the collection \{\tilde{\nu}_t \ \vert \ t \ \text{mod} \ 2d_T\}, \tilde{\nu}_t := \ ^t (0 \ 0 \ \cdots \ 0 \ t), forms a set of representatives for \mathbb{Z}^{n} / \widetilde{M}\mathbb{Z}^{n}.

Now \varepsilon(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\nu}) evaluates to

\varepsilon(\tilde{\mu}_s,\tilde{\eta}_r) = \sum_{t \ \text{mod} \ 2d_T} \exp\left( ^t(\tilde{\mu}_s - \tilde{\eta}_r - N\frac{\tilde{\nu}_t}{2}) \widetilde{M}^{-1} \tilde{\nu}_t\right)

Let m be the n \times n entry of the adjugate of \widetilde{M}. Then by Cramer’s rule, we have

\tilde{\mu}_s \widetilde{M}^{-1} \tilde{\nu}_t = smt / (2d_T)

So

\varepsilon(\tilde{\mu}_s,\tilde{\eta}_r) = \varepsilon(s,r) = \sum_t e^{\frac{2\pi i }{2 d_T} m((s-r)t - Nt^2/2)}
= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{t \ \text{mod} \ 4 d_T} e^{\frac{2\pi i }{4 d_T} m(2(s-r)t - Nt^2)} = \frac{1}{2} G(-Nm, 2(s-r)m, 4d_T)

Here, G(a,b,c) = \sum_{t \ \text{mod} \ c} e^{\frac{2\pi i }{c} (at^2 + bt)} is the generalized quadratic Gauss sum. In this setting of scalars, r is primitive iff (r,2d_T) = 1 and s \sim s_0 iff s^2 - s_0^2 \equiv 0 \ \text{mod} \ 4d_T (both facts arise from fact that m is coprime to 4d_T). Now the problem has turned into showing that for every fixed imprimitive s_0, the matrix (\varepsilon(s,r))_{r,s} has maximal rank, where r runs over (\mathbb{Z}/2d_T)^\times and s runs over \mathbb{Z}/2d_T with s^2 = s_0^2 mod 4d_T. Note that the number of rows is \prod_{p \vert 2d_T} (p-1) and the number of columns is 2^{t'}, where t' is the number of odd primes dividing 2d_T but not s_0. Thus, the number of rows is at most the number of columns and so proving maximality of the rank really does suffice for the desired contradiction.

We do one more simplification of \varepsilon(s,r). By completing the square along with a calculation from Anamby, we have

\varepsilon(s,r) = G(-Nm,0,4d_T) \cdot \exp \left({-m \overline{N} \frac{(s-r)^2}{4d_T}}\right)

where \overline{N} \in \mathbb{Z} so that \overline{N} N \equiv 1 mod 4d_T. From this, we see that it suffices to show the matrix

\left(\exp \left({-m \overline{M} \frac{(s-r)^2}{m_1^2}}/(4m_2)\right)\right)_{r,s}

has maximal rank. This is done in [anamby] (Lemma 3.3, take \ell = -m \overline{M})). Thus, we have reached a contradiction since s_0 may be chosen to be any imprimitive.

n even: In this case, \mathrm{lvl}(T) = d_T. We proceed as in the odd case and pick U \in \text{SL}_n(\mathbb{Z}) so that \widetilde{M} \equiv \text{diag}(\ast,...,\ast, \ast p) mod p^f for each odd prime divisor p \vert \det(\widetilde{M}) = d_T and \widetilde{M} \equiv \mathbb{H} \perp \cdots \perp (\mathbb{H} \ \text{or} \ \mathbb{F}) mod 2^f. As before, the set \{\tilde{\nu}_t \ \vert \ t \in \mathbb{Z}/d_T\} forms a set of representatives for \mathbb{Z}^n/\widetilde{M}\mathbb{Z}^n. Changing variables \widetilde{( \cdot )} = \ ^tU ( \cdot ), we find

\varepsilon(\tilde{\mu}_s, \tilde{\eta}_r) = \varepsilon(s,r) = G(-Nm', 0, d_T) \exp(-Nm'(s-r)^2/d_T).

Here, m' := m/2, where m is the n \times n entry of the adjugate of \widetilde{M}. Note that m is even in this case because of the form of \widetilde{M} mod 2^f. Hence, it remains to show that for every s_0 \in \mathbb{Z}/d_T\mathbb{Z} not coprime to d_T, the matrix

\left( \exp(-Nm'(s-r)^2/d_T )\right)_{r,s}

has maximal rank, where r runs over (\mathbb{Z}/d_T\mathbb{Z})^{\times} and s runs over \mathbb{Z}/d_T\mathbb{Z} so that s^2 \equiv s_0^2 mod d_T. Anamby does not quite prove this in [anamby], so we prove it here, formulated as the following lemma:

Lemma.

Let d be an odd, square-free integer and a \in \mathbb{Z} coprime to d. For an integer s_0, define the matrix \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) := \left( \exp(a(s-r)^2/d)\right)_{r,s}, where r runs over (\mathbb{Z}/dZ)^\times and s runs over \mathbb{Z}/d\mathbb{Z} so that s^2 \equiv s_0^2 mod d. Then \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) has maximal rank, equal to the number of columns, 2^t, where t is the number of primes dividing d but not s_0.

The proof of Lemma ? is an induction on the number of prime divisors of d. If d = 1, \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) is a column and so the maximal rank condition is equivalent to \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) having a nonzero entry. Every entry is nonzero, so this is clear.

If d = p is an odd prime, we have two cases: p \vert s_0 and p \not\vert s_0. When p \vert s_0, \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) is again a column and the claim is clear. If p \not\vert s_0, then \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) has two columns, one corresponding to s_0 and the other corresponding to -s_0. The 2 \times 2 minors are of the form:

\exp\left( \frac{a((s_0-r)^2 + (s_0+r')^2)}{p} \right) - \exp\left( \frac{a((s_0-r')^2 + (s_0+r)^2)}{p}\right)

where r,r' \in (\mathbb{Z}/p)^\times. With a short calculation, noting that p is odd and (s_0,p) = 1, we see that the expression above vanishes iff r = r' mod p. Hence, \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) has a nonzero 2 \times 2 minor and has rank 2.

Now assume that \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) has maximal rank whenever d is composed of no more than t \geq 1 prime factors. Suppose that d = p_1 p_2 \cdots p_t p_{t+1} is the prime decomposition of d. Put d' := d/p_{t+1}. Decompose s = p_{t+1}s' + d's'', where s' is determined modulo d' and s'' is determined modulo p_{t+1}. Similarly, decompose r = p_{t+1}r' + d' r''. Then

(s-r)^2 = p_{t+1}^2(s'-r')^2 + (d')^2(s''-r'')^2 \ \text{mod} \ d

As r',r'' and s',s'' run over the sets (\mathbb{Z}/d'\mathbb{Z})^\times, (\mathbb{Z}/p_{t+1}\mathbb{Z})^\times and \{s' \in \mathbb{Z}/d'\mathbb{Z} \ \vert \ (s')^2 \equiv (s_0')^2 \ \text{mod} \ d'\}, \{s'' \in \mathbb{Z}/p_{t+1}\mathbb{Z} \ \vert \ (s'')^2 \equiv (s_0'')^2 \ \text{mod} \ p_{t+1}\}, r and s run over the sets (\mathbb{Z}/d\mathbb{Z})^\times and \{s \in \mathbb{Z}/d\mathbb{Z} \ \vert \ s^2 \equiv s_0^2 \ \text{mod} \ d\}. Hence, \mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) decomposes into the tensor product

\mathcal{E}_{a,d}(s_0) = \mathcal{E}_{ap_{t+1}, d'}(s_0') \otimes \mathcal{E}_{ad', p_{t+1}}(s_0'')

By the well-known formula \text{rank}(A \otimes B) = \text{rank}A \cdot \text{rank}B, Lemma ? is proven and this completes the proof of Theorem 3.3

Lemma

Lemma 5.1 (Lemma 1 in)

WU7N

Let k \in \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z} and f \in S_{k}(\Gamma_0(N),\chi). For any prime p, the function \displaystyle g(\tau) := \sum_{(n,p) = 1} a_f(n) q^n \in S_{k-1/2}(\Gamma_0(Np^2),\chi).

Used by Proof, Proof, Proof
Lemma

Lemma 5.2 (Lemma 7 in)

4Q9W

Let k \in \mathbb{Z}. f \in S_{k-1/2}(\Gamma_0(4N),\chi). Fix a prime p. Suppose that a_f(n) = 0 whenever (n,p) = 1. Then p \vert \frac{N}{4}, \chi \varepsilon_p has conductor dividing N/p, and g(\tau) := f(\tau/p) \in S_{k-1/2}(\Gamma_0(N/p), \chi \varepsilon_p). Here, \varepsilon_p is the unique quadratic character attached to \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p}).

Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 5.3

AR0I

Let k \in \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z} and f \in S_{k}(\Gamma_0(4N),\chi) be an elliptic cusp form. Assume that k \geq 5/2. Suppose that a_f(n) \neq 0 for some (n,N) = 1. Then there exists m odd and square-free so that (m,N) = 1 and a_f(m) \neq 0.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 5.3

Let q_1,...,q_t be the distinct primes dividing N. Define g_{-1} := f, \displaystyle g_0 := \sum_{(\ell,2) = 1} a_{g_0}(\ell) q^\ell, and \displaystyle g_{k+1}(\tau) := \sum_{(\ell, q_{k+1})=1} a_{g_k}(\ell) q^\ell. We have g_t \neq 0 because a_{g_t}(n) =a_f(n) \neq 0. By Lemma 5.1, g_t is modular with respect to \Gamma_0(16N(q_1 \cdots q_t)^2) and nebentypus \chi. We claim g_t has nonzero odd and square-free Fourier coefficients, proving the lemma. When k is a half-integer, this follows from Proposition 3.7 of [Saha]. If k is an integer, this follows from Theorem 4.6 in [BD].

Lemma

Lemma 5.4

MPKZ

Let T \in \Lambda_n^+ be fundamental with discriminant d_T. Fix any \mathbb{Z}-module isomorphism \alpha:\mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n \to \mathbb{Z}/d'\mathbb{Z}, where d' = d_T if n is even and d' = 2d_T if n is odd. Then \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n is primitive if and only if \alpha(\mu) \in (\mathbb{Z}/d'\mathbb{Z})^\times.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 5.4

We split into cases when n is even or odd.

n even: In this case d_T = \det(2T). By standard linear algebra (e.g. Smith normal form), \alpha exists. By Proposition 2.3 of [BD], there exists a primitive \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n and T^{-1}[\mu/2] has denominator d_T. Because d_T is square-free, we have that for every 0 < m < d_T, T^{-1}[m\mu/2] \notin \mathbb{Z}. In particular, m\mu \notin (2T)\mathbb{Z}^n. So \mu is a generator of \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n and we necessarily have \alpha(\mu) \in (\mathbb{Z}/d_T\mathbb{Z})^\times. The set \{m\mu \ : \ 0 \leq m < d_T\} forms a set of representatives for \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n. From the relation T^{-1}[m\mu/2] = m^2T^{-1}[\mu/2], we see that m\mu is primitive if and only if (m,d_T) = 1 if and only if \alpha(m\mu) = m\alpha(\mu) \in (\mathbb{Z}/d_T\mathbb{Z})^\times.

n odd: In this case, 2d_T = \det(2T). As before, \alpha exists and now \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n \cong \mathbb{Z}/2d_T\mathbb{Z}. Again, there exists \mu which is primitive. Here, this means now that T^{-1}[\mu/2] has denominator 4d_T. One follows the exact argument above to complete the proof.

Proposition

Proposition 5.5

5K0W

Let \phi \in J_{k,T}(\Gamma_0(N),\chi) be a nonzero Jacobi form of fundamental index T. Assume (d_T,N) = 1 and that N is odd and square-free. Consider the theta expansion of \phi:

\phi(\tau,z) = \sum_{\mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/2T\mathbb{Z}^n} h_\mu(\tau) \Theta_\mu(\tau,z)

Fix a \mathbb{Z}-module isomorphism \alpha:\mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n \to \mathbb{Z}/d'\mathbb{Z}, where d' is as in Lemma 5.4. For a Dirichlet character \epsilon modulo d', extend the definition of \epsilon to \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n via \alpha, i.e. \epsilon(\mu):=\epsilon(\alpha(\mu)). Define the twisted Eichler–Zagier map h_\epsilon as follows:

h_\epsilon(\tau) := \sum_{\mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n} \epsilon(\mu) h_\mu(\mathrm{lvl}(T) \cdot \tau)

Then h_\epsilon \in M_{k-n/2}(\Gamma_0(\mathrm{lvl}(T)^2N), \chi \cdot \omega), where \omega is a Dirichlet character modulo \mathrm{lvl(T)}, given below:

\omega(d) = \begin{cases} (\epsilon\cdot\chi_T^{-1})(d)\cdot\left(\dfrac{-1}{d} \right)^{(2k-(n+1))/2} & n \ \mathrm{odd} \\ (\epsilon\cdot\chi_T^{-1})(d) & n \ \mathrm{even} \end{cases}

Here, \chi_T is a certain Dirichlet character modulo \mathrm{lvl}(T) (See [Ajouz]).

Proof of Proposition 5.5

When g = \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{pmatrix}\in \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}(T)), we have the following transformation formula for \Theta_\mu (Theorem 2.3.4 in [Ajouz]):

\begin{cases} \Theta_{d\mu}\vert_{n/2, T}g = \left(\frac{c}{d}\right) \epsilon_d^{-1} \chi_T(d)\exp(bdT^{-1}[\mu/2]) \Theta_\mu(\tau,z) & n \ \text{odd} \\ \Theta_{d\mu}\vert_{n/2, T}g = \chi_T(d)\exp(bdT^{-1}[\mu/2]) \Theta_\mu(\tau,z) & n \ \text{even} \end{cases}

For g \in \Gamma_0(N), we have

\phi \vert_{k,T} g = \chi(d) \phi(\tau,z)

Together, we find that for g \in \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}(T) \cdot N),

\begin{cases} h_{d\mu}(g \langle \tau \rangle) = \chi(d)\chi_T^{-1}(d) \left(\frac{c}{d}\right) \epsilon_d^{-1}(d) (c \tau + d)^{k-n/2} \exp(-bdT^{-1}[\mu/2]) h_\mu(\tau) & n \ \text{odd} \\ h_{d\mu}(g \langle \tau \rangle) = \chi(d)\chi_T^{-1}(d) (c \tau + d)^{k-n/2} \exp(-bdT^{-1}[\mu/2]) h_\mu(\tau) & n \ \text{even} \end{cases}

Summing the theta components together, we acquire the function equation below for every g \in \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}(T)N) \cap \Gamma^0(\text{lvl}(T)):

\begin{cases} \sum_\mu \varepsilon(d\mu)h_{d\mu}(g \langle \tau \rangle) = \varepsilon(d)\chi(d) \chi_T^{-1}(d) \left(\frac{c}{d}\right) \epsilon_d^{-1} (c\tau+d)^{k-n/2} \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu)h_\mu(\tau) & n \ \text{odd} \\ \sum_\mu \varepsilon(d\mu)h_{d\mu}(g \langle \tau \rangle) = \varepsilon(d)\chi(d) \chi_T^{-1}(d) (c\tau+d)^{k-n/2} \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu)h_\mu(\tau) & n \ \text{even} \end{cases}

In conclusion, we have shown that h_\varepsilon(\tau/\text{lvl}(T)) = \sum_\mu \varepsilon(\mu)h_\mu(\tau) is modular with respect to \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}(T)N) \cap \Gamma^0(\text{lvl}(T)), having weight k-n/2 and nebentypus \chi \cdot \omega. Here, \Gamma^0(M) is the subgroup of matrices which are lower triangular modulo M. Hence, h_\varepsilon is modular with respect to \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}(T)^2N).

Proposition

Proposition 5.6

FFF2

Let \phi \in J_{k,T}(\Gamma_0(N),\chi) be a nonzero Jaccobi form of fundamental index T. Assume that (d_T,N) = 1 and that N is odd and square-free. Then there exists a Dirichlet character \epsilon modulo d' so that the corresponding twisted Eichler–Zagier map h_\epsilon does not vanish. Here, d' = d_T or 2d_T just as in Lemma 5.4.

Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Proposition 5.6

Suppose h_\epsilon = 0 for every \epsilon. This is equivalent to the vanishing of the following expression:

\left( \epsilon(\mu) \right)_{\epsilon,\mu} \cdot (h_\mu)_\mu = A(d') \cdot (h_\mu)_\mu

Here, the matrix A(d') has rows indexed by Dirichlet characters \epsilon modulo d' and columns indexed by primitive components \mu \in \mathbb{Z}^n/(2T)\mathbb{Z}^n. By Lemma 5.4, there are \phi(d') columns, which is equal to the number of rows. So A(d') is a square matrix. From Theorem \ref{3.3}, the column (h_\mu)_\mu does not vanish. Hence, we will have reached a contradiction if A(d') is invertible. We prove this statement now.

We induct on the number of prime factors of d'. When d' = 1 or 2, A(d') is simply the number 1 and this is obvious. Suppose that d' = p is an odd prime. Then, up to rearranging rows and columns, A(p) takes the following form:

A(p) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 & 1 & \cdots & 1 \\ 1 & \zeta_{p-1} & \zeta_{p-1}^2 & \cdots & \zeta_{p-1}^{p-2} \\ 1 & \zeta_{p-1}^2 & (\zeta_{p-1}^2)^2 & \cdots & (\zeta_{p-1}^2)^{p-2} \\ \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \cdots & \vdots\\ 1 & \zeta_{p-1}^{p-2} & (\zeta_{p-1}^{p-2})^2 & \cdots & (\zeta_{p-1}^{p-2})^{p-2} \end{pmatrix}

This follows by noting that (\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})^\times is cyclic of order p-1. So A(p) is a Vandermonde matrix with determinant \displaystyle \prod_{0 \leq i < j \leq p-2} (\zeta_{p-1}^i - \zeta_{p-1}^j). Of course, this is nonzero and so A(p) is invertible.

In general, let d' = p_1 \cdots p_t be the prime factorization of d'. By the Chinese Remainder Theorem, we have A(d') = A(d'/p_t) \otimes A(p_t). By induction on t along with the well-known rank identity \text{rank}(A \otimes B) = \text{rank}(A) \cdot \text{rank}(B), A(d') is invertible and the proof is complete.

Remark

Remark Remark

7ZTI

From the proof of Proposition 5.5, Equation (?), one sees that the theta components alone are modular for the group \Gamma(\text{lvl}(T)N). Via the Eichler–Zagier map, their modularity is improved to \Gamma_0(\text{lvl}^2(T)N) with nebentypus involving \chi. The inherited nebentypus allows us to control where the resulting elliptic cusp form h_\varepsilon lands. Importantly, it allows us to ensure that h_\varepsilon is a newform.

Remark

Remark Remark

LGXT

When defining the Eichler–Zagier maps in Proposition 5.5, note that we specifically chose the twist \epsilon to be a character modulo d'. One can in fact choose characters modulo divisors of d'. Say e is such a divisor and \epsilon is a Dirichlet character modulo e. Then following a similar argument appearing in [Kramer], the corresponding Eichler–Zagier twist h_\epsilon in fact has improved level equal to M\cdot e/d', where M is the level appearing in Proposition 5.5. We note however that despite the improved level, the sum defining h_\epsilon now potentially includes imprimitive theta components, whose Fourier expansions are not necessarily supported away from d'. This becomes important for the proof of Theorems 3.2 and 3.3. Proposition \ref{nonvanishing of twist} also only applies to Dirichlet characters modulo d'. For these reasons, we have omitted the proof of the aforementioned statements for characters of smaller modulus in Proposition 5.5.

Proof

Proof

4ZQ1

The argument is essentially the one appearing in [BD], except we use the twisted Eichler–Zagier map to ensure we can say something with respect to the level.

Assume n = 1. Up to a change of basis, we may assume that F is valued in \mathbb{C}^m and that the components of F = (F_1,...,F_m) are themselves modular forms of weight k_1,...,k_m. So it suffices to prove the theorem statement for scalar-valued cusp forms. Because the nebentypus \chi is primitive, F is a newform. Hence, F has a nonzero Fourier coefficient a_F(\ell) \neq 0 with (\ell, N) = 1 (see Lemma 2 in [Yamana]). By Lemma 5.3, F has a nonzero Fourier coefficient a_F(\ell') with \ell' odd, square-free, and coprime to N, completing the base case of genus n = 1.

Now assume n \geq 2. For Z \in \mathbb{H}_n, write Z = \begin{pmatrix} \tau & z \\ ^t z & \mathfrak{Z} \end{pmatrix} as before. Taylor expand F around z = 0:

F(\tau, z, \mathfrak{Z}) = \sum_{\lambda \in \mathbb{N}^{n-1}} F_\lambda(\tau, \mathfrak{Z}) z^\lambda.

Let \nu_0 be the minimal integer so that there exists \lambda with \nu(\lambda) = \nu_0 and F_{\lambda} \neq 0. Define a vector-valued function F^{\circ}:\mathbb{H}_1 \times \mathbb{H}_{n-1} \to V \otimes_\mathbb{C} \mathbb{C}[x_2,...,x_n]_{\nu_0} as follows

F^{\circ}(\tau,\mathfrak{Z}) := \sum_{\lambda: \nu(\lambda) = \nu_0} F_\lambda(\tau,\mathfrak{Z}) \otimes x_2^{\lambda_2} \cdots x_n^{\lambda_n}

Consider the embedding

(\cdot)^{\downarrow}:\text{Sp}_{2n-2}(\mathbb{Z}) \hookrightarrow \text{Sp}_{2n}(\mathbb{Z}), g = \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{pmatrix} \mapsto \begin{pmatrix} 1 & & 0 & \\ & a & & b \\ 0 & & 1 & \\ & c & & d \end{pmatrix} = g^\downarrow.

Proposition ([BD] Prop 3.1): We have the following transformation law for F^\circ:

(F \vert_\rho g^{\downarrow})^\circ (\tau,z) = \rho \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & cz+d \end{pmatrix}^{-1} \otimes \text{Sym}^{\nu_0}(cz+d)^{-1} F^\circ (\tau, g \langle z \rangle).

Here, \text{Sym}^{\nu_0} is the symmetric power representation of \text{GL}_{n-1}(\mathbb{C}) on \mathbb{C}[x_2,...,x_n]_{\nu_0} given by (A \cdot f)(x) := f(xA).

Let \rho' denote the restriction of \rho to the embedding

\text{GL}_{n-1} \hookrightarrow \text{GL}_{n}, g \mapsto \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & g \end{pmatrix}.

Then, restated, the proposition simply says that

(F \vert_\rho g^{\downarrow})^\circ (\tau, z) = (F^\circ \vert_{\rho' \otimes \text{Sym}^{\nu_0}} g)(\tau, z)

When g \in \Gamma_0^{n-1}(N), we have by the assumption on F that F \vert_\rho g^{\downarrow} = \chi(\det(d)) F. So together with the proposition, we have that for every fixed \tau,

F^\circ \vert_{\rho' \otimes \text{Sym}^{\nu_0}} g = \chi(\det(d)) F^\circ

In particular, F^\circ \in S_{\rho' \otimes \text{Sym}^{\nu_0}}^{n-1}(\Gamma_0^{2}(N)), \chi) is a non-zero, genus 2 Siegel cusp form with nebentypus \chi. Because k(\rho' \otimes \mathrm{Sym}^{\nu_0}) \geq k(\rho) and k(\rho) - n/2 \geq 3, we have that k(\rho' \otimes \mathrm{Sym}^{\nu_0}) - (n-1)/2 \geq 3. So the assumptions of Theorem ??? hold and by the induction hypothesis, F^\circ has a non-zero fundamental Fourier coefficient a_{F^\circ}(\mathfrak{T}) with (\text{disc}(\mathfrak{T}),N) = 1.

Consider now the Fourier–Jacobi expansion F(Z) = \sum_{\mathfrak{T} \in \Lambda_2} \varphi_{\mathfrak{T}}(\tau, z) q^\mathfrak{T}. A simple calculation gives that the \mathfrak{T}-th Fourier coefficient of F^\circ is given by

a_{F^\circ}(\mathfrak{T}) = \sum_\lambda \frac{1}{\lambda!}\left(\frac{\partial^\lambda}{\partial z^\lambda}\varphi_{\mathfrak{T}}\right) \vert_{z = 0}(\tau) \otimes x_2^{\lambda_2} \cdots x_n^{\lambda_n}

So a_{F^\circ}(\mathfrak{T}) \neq 0 implies \varphi_\mathfrak{T} \neq 0. Hence, there exists a nonzero Fourier–Jacobi coefficient \varphi_{\mathfrak{T}} with fundamental index \mathfrak{T} whose discriminant is coprime to N.

By Proposition 2.1, \varphi_\mathfrak{T} has a nonzero scalar-valued component which is a Jacobi form satisfying the same modularity conditions, with potentially higher weight k'. We abuse notation as usual and refer to this nonzero component as \varphi_\mathfrak{T}. Consider a theta component h_\mu of \varphi_\mathfrak{T}. The Fourier expansion of h_\mu is given:

h_\mu(\tau) = \sum_{\ell > 0} a_F \begin{pmatrix} \ell & ^t\mu/2 \\ \mu/2 & \mathfrak{T} \end{pmatrix} \exp((\ell - \mathfrak{T}^{-1}[\mu/2])\tau)

From the formula \det \begin{pmatrix} \ell & ^t\mu/2 \\ ^t\mu/2 & \mathfrak{T} \end{pmatrix} = (\ell - \mathfrak{T}^{-1}[\mu])\det(\mathfrak{T}), we see that an odd and square-free Fourier coefficient of h_\mu(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}) \cdot \tau) is exactly a fundamental Fourier coefficient of F. Hence, we must prove that h_\mu has a nonzero odd and square-free Fourier coefficient. We prove this now.

By Proposition 5.6, there exists a Dirichlet character \epsilon modulo \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}) so that h_\epsilon(\tau) = \sum_\mu \epsilon(\mu) h_\mu(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})\tau) is nonzero. h_\epsilon is contained in S_{k' - (n-1)/2}(\Gamma_0(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})^2N), \chi \cdot \omega), where \omega is a Dirichlet character modulo \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}). Let N = p_1 \cdots p_t be the prime factorization of N and put g_0 := h_\epsilon. For 0 < i \leq t, define \displaystyle g_{i}(\tau) := \sum_{(n, q_i) = 1} a_{g_{i-1}}(n) q^n.

Because \epsilon is defined modulo \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}), h_\epsilon is a sum of primitive theta components. The Fourier coefficients of primitive theta components are, by construction, supported away from \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}). So if g_t \neq 0, then the proof is complete by Lemma 5.3.

In the case of odd genus n, h_\epsilon \in S_{k-(n-1)/2} (\Gamma_0(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})^2N, \chi \cdot \omega). Note the h_\epsilon has integer weight. Because the Fourier coefficients of h_\epsilon are supported away from \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}), we have by classical old and newform theory (see e.g. Lemma 1 and 2 in [Yamana]) that h_\epsilon has a nonzero Fourier coefficient a_{h_\epsilon}(\ell) \neq 0 with (\ell, N) = 1. Hence, g_t is nonzero and we’re done in this case.

In the case of even genus n, h_\epsilon has half-integer weight. We proceed by induction on i. By construction, g_0 \neq 0. Suppose that g_{i+1} \neq 0 for some 0 \leq i < t and g_{i} \neq 0. By repeated application of Lemma 5.1, g_i is modular with respect to the group \Gamma_0(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})^2N(q_1 \cdots q_i)^2). If g_{i+1} = 0, then by Lemma 5.2, \chi \varepsilon_{q_{i+1}} has conductor dividing \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})^2N(q_1 \cdots q_i)^2/q_{i+1}. This is impossible however because the latter expression is not divisible by q_{i+1} while the conductor is. So claim is proven.

Proof

Proof

YC5M

By Theorem 3.1, there exists a fundamental \mathfrak{T} \in \Lambda_{n-1}^+ with (d_\mathfrak{T},N) = 1 and the corresponding Fourier–Jacobi coefficient \varphi_\mathfrak{T} \neq 0. By Proposition 5.6, there exists a Dirichlet character \epsilon modulo d_\mathfrak{T} so that h_\epsilon \neq 0. h_\epsilon has integer weight (because n is odd), is modular for \Gamma_0(\mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})^2N) with nebentypus \chi \cdot \omega (\omega a character modulo \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T})), and has Fourier coefficients supported away from \mathrm{lvl}(\mathfrak{T}). So by classical old and newform theory, h_\epsilon has a nonzero Fourier coefficient away from N. In particular, h_\epsilon is not an oldform. Hence, by Lemma 5.2 in [BD], h_\epsilon is determined by it’s prime Fourier coefficients, completing the proof.

Remark

Remark Remark

MLIO

In the case of even genus, Theorem 3.2 is expected (i.e. we expect prime discriminants to determine the Siegel modular form). However, the current proof would require the analogous statement for half-integer weights. This is not known currently.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2507.17002v2 by Sidney Washburn, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2507/2507.17002.jsonl.