MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top


What is the statement of the Eichler-Shimura relation for Shimura curves? And where can one find a proof?


share|cite|improve this question
That's the Eichler-Shimura relation for elliptic modular curves. I'm interested in the Shimura curve case. – Nicolás Jun 7 '11 at 15:47
@unknown: Oops sorry – S.C. Jun 7 '11 at 15:50
Take a look at Zhang's paper in – A. Pacetti Jun 7 '11 at 16:13
If you choose $p$ prime to the discriminant of the quaternion algebra, I would expect it to be exactly the same as in the classical modular case. Is this not so? – Pete L. Clark Jun 7 '11 at 17:16
@Kevin: I guess you mean you have to stop to define the Hecke operator as a correspondence on the cusps, so we are quibbling about whether generalized enhanced elliptic curves are harder than (non-generalized) enchanced QM abelian surfaces? Anyway, no big deal either way... – Pete L. Clark Jun 7 '11 at 18:30
up vote 4 down vote accepted

In the general case of Shimura curves over totally real number fields, a nice exposition of the Eichler-Shimura relation is given, for example, in $\S 1.14$ of this article of J. Nekovář, where you can find pointers to the relevant literature (in particular, a standard reference is Carayol's paper mentioned therein).

share|cite|improve this answer
Though one should point out that in fact the exposition in 1.14 of this article is faulty: the expression given is valid for the arithmetic Frobenius, but the geometric Frobenius is used. Carayol's Sur la mauvaise réduction des courbes de Shimura section 10.3 is impeccable. – Olivier Jun 7 '11 at 20:32
Thanks a lot for the comment, Olivier! I admit that, having usually referred to Carayol's paper, I had overlooked this issue in Nekovář's article (which - with this point of caution in mind - offers a somewhat more friendly exposition of the Eichler-Shimura stuff, in my opinion). – Stefano V. Jun 7 '11 at 20:54
And now Christophe Cornut tells me that one should double check Carayol's article too: apparently, he overlooked the sign error in Deligne's Corvallis article. So maybe the best reference is Cornut Vatsal CM Points and Quaternion Algebras section 3.2.3. – Olivier Jun 8 '11 at 5:25

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.