Automorphic Representations
Daniel Bump
Abstract
Daniel Bump
Abstract
There exists a satisfactory theory of automorphic representations of GL ( n ). One may associate an automorphic representation of GL (1) with a Dirichlet character, and one may associate an automorphic representation of GL (2) with a modular form or Maass form. Thus, automorphic representations are attached to classical objects of fundamental importance in number theory. We will discuss Tate's (1950) thesis, which is essentially the theory of automorphic representations of GL (1), before defining the general notion of an automorphic representation on GL ( n ). Insofar as we can in a brief account, we will (at least in Section 3.3) give statements that are valid for GL ( n ), but proofs that are valid only for n = 2. In places, we will give proofs that are only complete when the ground field is ℚ, though the only serious obstacle to filling these gaps is our omission in Chapter 2 of the representation theory of GL (2, ℂ). In Section 3.2, we will extend our discussion of the “classical” problem of decomposing L 2 (Γ\ PGL (2, ℝ) + ) to the case when the quotient is noncompact – for example, when Γ = SL (2, ℤ) or one of its congruence subgroups.
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
There exists a satisfactory theory of automorphic representations of GL ( n ). One may associate an automorphic representation of GL (1) with a Dirichlet character, and one may associate an automorphic representation of GL (2) with a modular form or Maass form. Thus, automorphic representations are attached to classical objects of fundamental importance in number theory. We will discuss Tate's (1950) thesis, which is essentially the theory of automorphic representations of GL (1), before defining the general notion of an automorphic representation on GL ( n ). Insofar as we can in a brief account, we will (at least in Section 3.3) give statements that are valid for GL ( n ), but proofs that are valid only for n = 2. In places, we will give proofs that are only complete when the ground field is ℚ, though the only serious obstacle to filling these gaps is our omission in Chapter 2 of the representation theory of GL (2, ℂ). In Section 3.2, we will extend our discussion of the “classical” problem of decomposing L 2 (Γ\ PGL (2, ℝ) + ) to the case when the quotient is noncompact – for example, when Γ = SL (2, ℤ) or one of its congruence subgroups.
Key concepts: Automorphic L-function, Automorphic form, Langlands–Shahidi method, Converse theorem, Representation (politics), Mathematics, Character (mathematics), Pure mathematics