Let F be a local field, and $\pi$ an absolutely cuspidal representation of $GL_2(F)$. Then the Kirillov model of the representation is given by the space of locally constant functions with compact support in $F^\times$.

My question is in the opposite direction, if we start with the space of locally constant functions with compact support in $F^\times$, this is an absolutely irreducible representation of the group $\left(\begin{smallmatrix} a & b \\ 0 & 1\end{smallmatrix}\right)$. In particular (if we fixed a quasi-character to be our central character) we can induce such representation from the Borel subgroup to the whole $GL_2(F)$. Clearly any absolutely compact representation (as the one before) appears in this big representation.

Question: do they appear with multiplicity one?

The answer should be yes assuming some Frobenius reciprocity, but I am making no assumption on the central quasi character, so I do not know if such result holds in this more general context (this could be the original question as well). I guess that if the central character is a character, then Frobenius might follow from the fact that the representations are unitary.


The answer is yes. If $H$ is a closed subgroup of a locally profinite group $G$ then the functor of restriction to $H$ has a right adjoint : the functor of smooth induction (we work in categories of smooth representations). You do not need to assume that your representations are unitary. The reference is :

Bernstein and Zelevinsky : Representations of the group ${\rm GL}(n,F)$, where $F$ is a non-achimedean local field, Russian Math. Surveys, 1976.

where smooth representations are called algebraic. In this paper you can also find the theory of Whittaker (and Kirillov) models for ${\rm GL}(n)$.

In the more general case of ${\rm GL}(n)$, irreducible supercuspidal representations are generic (they have a Whittaker model) and one has multiplicity $1$. This is not true in general (i.e. for certain non supercuspidal representations, or for certain supercuspidal representations of other reductive groups) : representations are not always generic and when they are generic one not necessarily has multiplicity $1$.


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.