I have a question related to Coefficients of Symmetric power $L$-functions and I would be grateful if you could answer it. Let $\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)$ be the $n$th Dirichlet coefficient of $L(Sym^rf,s).$ I want to get a bound for the following sum $\sum_{n \leq x}|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2 .$ So, I started by the paper (SUMS OF FOURIER COEFFICIENTS OF CUSP FORMS) of YUK-KAM LAU AND GUANGSHI LU and I found that $$|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2 \leq \lambda_{Sym^rf \times Sym^rf}(n),$$ where $\lambda_{Sym^rf \times Sym^rf}(n)$ is the $n$th Dirichlet coefficients of the Rankin-Selberg $L$-functions attached to $Sym^rf$ and $Sym^rf$ and $f$ is a primitive cusp form for the full modular group $SL_2(Z).$ Also, I read the paper of Huixue Lao (Mean square estimates for coefficients of symmetric power $L$-functions) and I found that $$|\lambda_{Sym^rf \times Sym^rf}(n)|\leq d_{r+1}(n)^2,$$ where $d_{r+1}(n)$ is the $n$ th coefficient of the Dirichlet series $\zeta^{r+1}(s).$ My question is: Is there a bound for the sum $\sum_{n \leq x} d_{r+1}(n)^2$ or directly a bound for the sum $$\sum_{n \leq x}|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2? $$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ An $L$-function has no Fourier coefficients. Instead, it has Dirichlet coefficients. I edited your post accordingly. $\endgroup$ – GH from MO Aug 22 '15 at 19:45

It is classical to bound $\sum_{n\leq x}d_{r+1}(n)^2$. Using the fact that $$\sum_n\frac{d_{r+1}(n)^2}{n^s}=\prod_p\left(1+\frac{(r+1)^2}{p^s}+\frac{O_r(1)}{p^{2s}}\right)$$ one can show by Mellin transform techniques (i.e. by the residue theorem) that $$ \sum_{n\leq x}d_{r+1}(n)^2 \sim c_r x(\log x)^{r^2+2r}, $$ where $c_r>0$ can be given explicitly (it is a scaled residue at $s=1$ of a certain Euler product). More precise asymptotic expansions can also be given.

So you can definitely bound $\sum_{n \leq x}|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2$ as $$ \sum_{n \leq x}|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2 \ll_r x(\log x)^{r^2+2r}. $$ However, this will be crude in general, because we expect the coefficients $\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)$ to oscillate. More precisely, by the Langlands functoriality conjecture, we expect the corresponding $L$-function $\sum_n\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)n^{-s}$ to be the $L$-function of an automorphic representation $\pi$, and in the generic case we expect $\pi$ to be cuspidal (there are exceptions of course). Assuming this is the case, including the cuspidality of $\pi$, then $L(s,\pi\otimes\tilde\pi)$ is analytic on $\mathbb{C}\setminus\{1\}$ with a simple pole at $s=1$, and its $n$-th Dirichlet coefficient is bounded from below by $|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2$ when $n$ is supported on the unramified primes (cf. Proposition 6 in Molteni: Upper and lower bounds at $s=1$ for certain Dirichlet series with Euler product). It follows, using standard bounds for the local parameters at the ramified primes, that in this case (i.e. when $\pi$ exists and it is cuspidal) $$ \sum_{n \leq x}|\lambda_{Sym^rf}(n)|^2 \ll_{f,r} x. $$ The implied constant can be estimated as $\ll_{\epsilon,r} C^\epsilon$, where $C$ is the analytic conductor of the original $\mathrm{GL}_2$ cusp form $f$ (cf. Theorem 2 in Li: Upper bounds on $L$-functions at the edge of the critical strip). For $r$ small, one can weaken the hypotheses due to known cases of functoriality.

P.S. My answer is valid for any $\mathrm{GL}_2$ cusp form $f$, including Maass forms of arbitrary level and nebentypus.

| cite | improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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