4
$\begingroup$

Let $n \geq 0$ be an integer, let $A = (a_{ij})$ be the $(2n+1) \times (2n+1)$ matrix defined by $a_{ij} = 0$ unless $i + j = 2n+2$, in which case $a_{ij} = 1$. Let $G$ be the group scheme over $\mathbb{Z}$ consisting of $(2n+1) \times (2n+1)$ matrices of determinant equal to $1$ that are orthogonal for the bilinear form defined by $A$. (So $G$ is a split special orthogonal group scheme.)

Question: How does one compute the volume of $G(\mathbb{Z}_2)$ (with respect to the Haar measure)?

What I know: Let $p$ be an odd prime. Then $G$ is smooth over $\mathbb{Z}_p$, and so the map $\pi_p \colon G(\mathbb{Z}_p) \to G(\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})$ is surjective. Let $G'_p = \ker \pi_p$. Then we have that $G(\mathbb{Z}_p) = \bigcup_{g \in G(\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})} g \cdot G'_p$, so if we normalize the Haar measure so that $\operatorname{Vol}(G'_p) = p^{-\dim G}$, we find that $$\operatorname{Vol}(G(\mathbb{Z}_p)) = \frac{\#G(\mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z})}{p^{\dim G}}.$$ Now suppose $p = 2$. The above argument fails because $G$ is not smooth over $\mathbb{Z}_2$. For example, for each $m \geq 1$, the involution $$\left[\begin{array}{ccc} 1 & 0 & 2^{m-1} \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{array}\right] \in G(\mathbb{Z}/2^m\mathbb{Z})$$ does not admit a lift to $G(\mathbb{Z}/2^{m+1}\mathbb{Z})$. I'm not at all familiar with it, but if I understand correctly, the theory of Bruhat and Tits gives a model $\mathcal{G}$ that is smooth over $\mathbb{Z}_2$ and such that for any etale $\mathbb{Z}_2$-algebra $R$, we have that $\mathcal{G}(R) = G(R)$. In particular, this means that $\mathcal{G}(\mathbb{Z}_2) = G(\mathbb{Z}_2)$, and the image of the mod-$2$ reduction map $\pi_2\colon G(\mathbb{Z}_2) \to G(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$ is equal to $\mathcal{G}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$. Am I right to then conclude that $$\operatorname{Vol}(G(\mathbb{Z}_2)) = \operatorname{Vol}(\mathcal{G}(\mathbb{Z}_2)) = \frac{\#\mathcal{G}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})}{2^{\dim G}} = \frac{\#\operatorname{image}(\pi_2)}{2^{\dim G}}?$$ Is there a reference that computes $\#\operatorname{image}(\pi_2)$? According to the post https://mathoverflow.net/a/19327/76440, in the context of $2n \times 2n$ orthogonal matrices, the subgroup of $\operatorname{O}_{2n}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$ generated by the elementary orthogonal matrices "presumably" has index $2$. Since the image of $\operatorname{O}_{2n}(\mathbb{Z}_2) \to \operatorname{O}_{2n}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})$ contains the elementary orthogonal matrices, I think this image also has index at most $2$.

$\endgroup$
13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ What's the "usual $p$-adic Haar measure"? I can think only of a well-defined element of $\mathbf{Z}/(p-1)\mathbf{Z}$. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Jul 28, 2019 at 21:53
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I understand none of these two answers. Yes, the measure will depend on the charts. Maybe for a semisimple $\mathbf{Q}_p$-group $G$ some subtlety ensures that there's a canonical normalization depending only on the structure of algebraic group over $\mathbf{Q}_p$ (certainly we shouldn't expect any such canonical normalization for a unipotent group). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Commented Jul 28, 2019 at 22:31
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ As @YCor says, the measure depends on the charts; there's no reason randomly chosen measures on local charts should even agree on the overlap. Certainly there is a Haar measure, but it's unique only up to normalisation. One reasonably common choice is to declare that the measure of a hyperspecial maximal compact, such as yours, is 1, in which case the answer is easy. Waldspurger considers a measure whose definition is less natural but behaves better; according to it the measure of a hyperspecial maximal compact is the square root of the order of the associated finite-field Lie algebra. $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Jul 28, 2019 at 22:42
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Echoing other comments: on adele groups the ambiguities in the aggregate local Haar measures admit normalization ("Tamagawa measure"). At p-adic places, as @LSpice comments, some variant of the uniqueness-up-to-conjugation of Iwahori subgroups (manifest, for example, in somewhat subtle facts about hyperspecial maximal compacts) can give a canonical normalization. The minor hazard of giving local Iwahoris measure $1$ (which is incompatible with global/adelic measure considerations) is overcome by making a canonical choice of maximal compacts (e.g., hyperspecial), to be compatible with global. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 28, 2019 at 23:47
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I see that you have edited "the normalised Haar measure" to "a normalised Haar" measure—which, really, is just a longer way of saying "Haar meaasure"—but I just want to be repetitive to make sure it's clear: your statement "since $\operatorname{Vol}(G'_p) = p^{-\dim G}$" in the odd-$p$ case is a choice; it does not, and cannot, follow from any of what has been said previously (since one can normalise the Haar measure to assign any fixed open, compact subset any fixed positive, finite measure). So the question is really "what is vol. of hyperspecial parahoric wrt this choice of measure?" $\endgroup$
    – LSpice
    Commented Jul 31, 2019 at 17:52

0

You must log in to answer this question.