For a quaternion algebra $D$, introduce the quaternionic similitude unitary groups: \begin{equation} \mathrm{GU}_D = \left\{ g \in \mathrm{GL}(D) \ : \ g^\star \left( \begin{array}{cc} & 1 \\ 1 & \end{array} \right) g = \mu(g) \left( \begin{array}{cc} & 1 \\ 1 & \end{array} \right), \mu(g) \in \mathbf{G}_m \right\} \end{equation}

The $\mathrm{GU}_D $ are the inner forms of $\mathrm{GSp(4)}$ when $D$ describes the quaternion algebras. For almost every places $v$ of $F$, more precisely the split ones, this group is $G_v \simeq \mathrm{GSp(4,F_v)}$.

When are those $\mathrm{GU}_D$ of compact automorphic quotient?

I believe assuming $D$ to be totally definite at infinity (i.e.ramified at archimedean places) is enough, but is it necessary?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Actually, I don't think the form you write down is ever compact (mod center). You should probably take the form given by the identity matrix, or put a minus sign on one of the 1's. $\endgroup$ – Kimball Oct 13 '17 at 2:28
  • $\begingroup$ @Kimball Yes I agree now, following Aurel's answer. I was thinking in varying the quaternion algebra, forgetting to let the quadratic form vary also ;) $\endgroup$ – Desiderius Severus Oct 16 '17 at 10:16

Let me give you the inner forms of $\mathrm{GSp}(4)$ with compact adelic quotient.

Every nonsplit inner form of $\mathrm{GSp}(4)$ is obtained in the following way: take $D$ a division quaternion algebra over $F$, let $V$ be a $D$-Hermitian space of $D$-dimension $2$, and construct $G = \mathrm{GU}(V)$.

By a theorem of Borel and Harish-Chandra, the adelic quotient of $G$ is compact if and only if $G$ modulo its center is anisotropic (in the algebraic group sense: it contains no nontrivial split torus).

This turns out to be equivalent to $V$ being anisotropic (in the quadratic/hermitian form sense: it has no nonzero isotropic vector). Over a number field, by the local-global principle for quadratic forms we can test anisotropy locally: over $p$-adic places, $V$ has $8$ variables as a quadratic form and is therefore isotropic, and over real places, $V$ is anisotropic if and only if it is positive definite or negative definite.

In summary, $G = \mathrm{GU}(V)$ has compact adelic quotient if and only if $F$ admits a real place at which $D$ is definite and $V$ is positive definite or negative definite.

For instance, the $D$-Hermitian form $x\bar{x}+y\bar{y}$ works over a totally definite quaternion algebra, but the one you wrote down is $x\bar{y}+y\bar{x}$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Note that I have interpreted your "automorphic quotient" as being the adelic double quotient of the adjoint group of $G$. This is probably the one you wanted. $\endgroup$ – Aurel Oct 10 '17 at 21:32
  • $\begingroup$ This is pretty much what I wanted to understand, thank you. Is there any standard reference where I can find that description for inner forms of GSp(4)? $\endgroup$ – Desiderius Severus Oct 11 '17 at 5:59
  • $\begingroup$ It is probably all in Platonov and Rapinchuk's "Algebraic groups and number theory". $\endgroup$ – Aurel Oct 11 '17 at 6:43

As you write it, this group always has a non-trivial parabolic subgroup (the Siegel subgroup, given by the intersection of $GU_D$ with upper-triangular matrices in $GL_2(D)$); and hence its symmetric space cannot be compact.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ However, is this group always a non-trivial one? I am thinking of $D$ totally definite at infinity, it gives rise to a compact group at archimedean places? And it suffices to have compacity at one archimedean place to have a compact automorphic quotient, or am I mistaken? I am nearly convinced by what you said, however I found this article of Taibi (hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00675682/document) and in Theorem B, p.6, he considers an inner form of the symplectic group which is compact at archimedean places... so I should be missing something! $\endgroup$ – Desiderius Severus Oct 9 '17 at 13:58
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Compact forms at the archimedean place exist, but they are not of the form that you describe in your question, even if $D$ is definite. The problem is that you are describing the unitary group of the isotropic $D$-Hermitian form. $\endgroup$ – Aurel Oct 9 '17 at 14:46
  • $\begingroup$ @Aurel Oh, so that my question should be (and I am already glad to have clarified this point): are there any inner form of GSp(4) of compact quotient? $\endgroup$ – Desiderius Severus Oct 10 '17 at 20:33

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.