Non-vanishing mod p of derived Hecke algebras of multiplicative groups over number fields, II

Theorem 4.6, combined with the equation (?), implies Theorem A.

Recall that we assumed that F is neither \mathbb Q nor an imaginary quadratic field. In particular, r_p>0. Now Theorem 4.5 and Corollary 4.8, combined with the equation (?), imply Theorem B.

Theorem A, combined with Proposition 3.9, implies Theorem C.

By the proof of [KimKwon2024, Proposition 2.1 (3)], the regulator map identifies the space E(\mathfrak{N})\backslash F_{\mathbb{R},+}^\times/U with the product of \mathbb R and an r-torus whose first homotopy group is isomorphic to E(\mathfrak N). Therefore E(\mathfrak{N})\backslash F_{\mathbb{R},+}^\times/U is a K(E(\mathfrak{N}),1). As E(\mathfrak{N}) is discrete, this proves the assertion.

Immediate from the definition of \iota_a and Y(\mathfrak{N}).

We give a brief proof; see [KimKwon2024, Proposition 3.4] for details. The classifying maps give the following homotopy-commutative diagram:

The bottom left arrow is induced by the canonical projection. Each square follows from the map of bundles. By Proposition 2.1, we identify the cohomology of E(\mathfrak{N})\backslash F_{\mathbb{R},+}^\times/U with H^\bullet(E(\mathfrak{N}),R). Applying H^\bullet(-,R) to the diagram (Proof), we obtain that \iota_a^*(\langle\alpha\rangle)=i_{v,\mathfrak{N}}^*(\alpha) under the identification. Then, we are done since \iota_a^* is a map of cohomology rings.

The case m=0 is immediate. For m\geq 1, use Proposition 3.3 repeatedly.

The claim (1) follows from equation (?) for a=1 and the fact that H^0(Y(\mathfrak N),R) is generated by 1_a’s. (2) follows from Lemma 2.3 and equation (?). For (3), \mathbb{T}_R^\bullet is spanned over R by finite products of operators h_{1,\alpha}h_{z,1}. Then equation (?) allows us to move all degree-zero operators to the left. Their product belongs to \mathbb{T}_R^0, which proves (3).

Suppose that the restiction of h\in\mathbb T_R^\bullet is zero. Choose a\in C(\mathfrak N) and c\in H^\bullet(Y(\mathfrak N),R). For h=h_{z,1}h_{1,\underline\alpha}, Proposition 3.4 and equations (?), (?), (?) give the equations

From this, we obtain

By Proposition 3.7, every h\in\mathbb T_R^\bullet is an R-linear combination of h_{z,1}h_{1,\underline\alpha}. Therefore, the formula (Proof) extends linearly to every h\in\mathbb T_R^\bullet. From our assumption and Proposition 2.2, we deduce that hc=0. As h\in\mathbb T_R^\bullet, we obtain that h=0.

The map of the statement is surjective by Proposition 3.7 (1). Choose h\in\mathbb T_R^0 and assume that h1_1=0. By Proposition 3.7 and the commutativity of \mathbb T^0_R, we have hc=0 for any c\in H^0(Y(\mathfrak N),R). By Proposition 3.8, we get h=0. Hence the map h\mapsto h1_1 is injective. So we are done.

By Proposition 3.9, the domain of \Psi_R^\bullet can be identified with \mathbb T_R^\bullet. Under this identification, the map \Psi_R^\bullet can be identified with the map h\mapsto h1_1. Suppose that h1_1=0. By using Proposition 3.7 and (?), we obtain that hc=0 for each c\in H^0(Y(\mathfrak N),R). By Proposition 3.8, we are done.

By Proposition 3.7 (1), the image \operatorname{Im}(\Psi^\bullet) coincides with \mathbb{T}^\bullet 1_1. By Proposition 3.7 and equation (?),

where \underline\alpha runs over the m-copy of \bigsqcup_{v\in T_1}H^\bullet(\kappa_v^\times,\mathbb{F}_p). The summands are linearly disjoint for a\in C(\mathfrak N), as h_{1,\underline\alpha}1_a’s are cohomology classes supported on the distinct connected components. Therefore, we obtain from the above equation that

By Proposition 3.4, we have

Thus under the injection \iota_1^* (Proposition 2.2), the space on the right maps to

by Proposition 3.4. Its dimension is d_p by definition. So we are done.

Since E(\mathfrak{N}) is free abelian of rank r, its cohomology ring is isomorphic to the exterior algebra on H^1(E(\mathfrak{N}),\mathbb{F}_p) and has dimension 2^r. The subspace defining t_p generates an exterior subalgebra of dimension 2^{t_p}, contained in the graded subalgebra defining d_p. So we are done.

Denote by i_v\colon \mathcal{O}_F^\times \to \kappa_v^\times the reduction map. Then i_{v,\mathfrak N} is the restriction of i_{v}. Thus, for a finite subset T of T_1, the map

factors through \mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_F^\times,\mathbb{F}_p) via the map (\phi_v)_{v\in T}\mapsto\sum_{v\in T}i_v^*(\phi_v), followed by restriction to E(\mathfrak N). By [KimKwon2024, Lemma 4.6], which is an isomorphism theorem induced by Grunwald–Wang theorem, there is a finite subset S\subset T_1 such that the map (\phi_v)_{v\in S}\mapsto\sum_{v\in S}i_v^*(\phi_v) is an isomorphism onto \mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_F^\times,\mathbb{F}_p). Using the exact sequence

the assertion of the lemma follows.

We consider the derived Hecke action with coefficients in \overline{\mathbb{F}}_p. The result will be equal to the base change of the derived Hecke action with \mathbb F_p-coefficients, as explained in [venkatesh2016derived, 2.12].

Also note that the natural map induces an isomorphism H^j(Y(\mathfrak{N}),\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p)\simeq H^j(Y(\mathfrak{N}),\mathbb{F}_p)\otimes_{\mathbb{F}_p}\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p, because \mathbb F_p \to \overline{\mathbb{F}}_p is flat.

Let \lambda:\mathbb{T}^0\rightarrow\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p be a Hecke eigensystem on H^0(Y(\mathfrak{N}),\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p) and c\in H^0(Y(\mathfrak{N}),\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p) an eigenvector for the given Hecke eigensystem. Note that c can be written as a linear combination of 1_a’s over \overline{\mathbb{F}}_p. Let 1\leq j\leq r_p-\delta_p. By Lemma 4.3, we can choose v_1,\ldots,v_j\in T_1 and \alpha_i\in H^1(\kappa_{v_i}^\times,\mathbb{F}_p) such that i_{v_1,\mathfrak{N}}^*(\alpha_1),\ldots,i_{v_j,\mathfrak{N}}^*(\alpha_j) are linearly independent in H^1(E(\mathfrak{N}),\mathbb{F}_p). Since E(\mathfrak{N}) is free, its cohomology ring is isomorphic to the exterior algebra on H^1(E(\mathfrak{N}),\mathbb{F}_p). Thus, for \underline{\alpha}=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_j), I_{\mathfrak{N}}(\underline{\alpha})\neq 0. Choose a\in C(\mathfrak{N}) with \iota_a^*(c)\neq 0. By Proposition 3.4,

Hence h_{1,\underline{\alpha}}c is a non-zero class in H^j(Y(\mathfrak{N}),\overline{\mathbb{F}}_p). Then for any h_0\in\mathbb{T}^0, Proposition 3.7 and equation (?) give h_0h_{1,\underline{\alpha}}c =h_{1,\underline{\alpha}}h_0c =\lambda(h_0)h_{1,\underline{\alpha}}c. So we are done.

The first assertion of the theorem follows from Lemma 4.3.

Suppose first that \delta_p=r_p-r. Then t_p=r, so Lemma 4.2 gives d_p=2^r. By Lemma 4.1, \Psi^\bullet is surjective, hence an isomorphism by Proposition 3.10.

Conversely, suppose that \delta_p\neq r_p-r. Since t_p\leq r, the first assertion implies t_p<r. The dimension formula for \Psi^1 was proved in [KimKwon2024, Lemma 4.3] by an argument analogous to the proof of Lemma 4.1. It gives

Therefore \Psi^1 is not surjective. Since \Psi^\bullet preserves degrees, it cannot be an isomorphism.