Kohnen introduced the "plus" space as a subspace of the space of modular forms of half integral weight, first in his 1980 paper and then generalized the work in a later 1982 paper. Why is the condition $N$ odd, square-free and $\chi$ quadratic necessary?

To elaborate: Let $S_{k+1/2}\left(4N,\left(\frac{4\chi(-1)}{.}\right)\chi\right)$ denote the space of half-integral weight modular forms of level $4N$ and character $\left(\frac{4\chi(-1)}{.}\right)\chi$, where $\chi$ is a Dirichlet character of modulus $N$ and $\left(\frac{a}{b}\right)$ is the Kronecker symbol. Kohnen defines the plus sub-space $S_{k+1/2}^+\left(4N,\left(\frac{4\chi(-1)}{.}\right)\chi\right)$ by attaching certain conditions on the Fourier coefficients of the modular forms, and then develops nice theory analogous to the Atkin-Lehner-Li theory of newforms in the case of integral weight modular forms.

Question: Why are the conditions $N$ odd, sqaure-free and $\chi$ quadratic necessary in the second paper? Kohnen remarks that these are not necessary for few of the stated results, but I cannot figure out where exactly these are required.

The question is motivated by the fact that several authors (like Ueda, Yamana, Manickam-Ramakrishnan-Vasudevan) have generalized this work to other levels (like $8N,16N,32N$) and non-quadratic characters, and also to the full-space (a nice history can be found (but not restricted to) in the introduction of this paper and this paper); but this condition $N$ odd and square free is still there, and in some places $\chi$ is quadratic. I could not find the reason for these conditions.


1 Answer 1


This is not an answer and I cannot comment due to lack of reputation, but it seems to first pop up in his Lemma 4 on p. 50. This occurs after a long, very technical discussion about double coset operators. The goal is to show that two specific representations of the Hecke algebra are equivalent (one whose image lies in $End_{\mathbb{C}}(S_{k+1/2}(N, \chi))$ and the other in $End_{\mathbb{C}}(S_{2k}(N))$). The Lemma:

Lemma 4 (p. 50). Every elliptic or hyperbolic conjugacy class in $\Gamma_{0}(4N)C_{n}\Gamma_{0}(4N)$ contains an element $\begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{pmatrix}$ with $d > 0$, $(b, d) = 1$, and $\left( \frac{b}{f}, \frac{t^{2} - 64n^{2}}{f^{2}} \right) = 1$. Here, $t := a + d$ and $f := (d-a, b, c)$.

Now, for squarefree $M$ set

$$\mu(t, f, n, M) := \prod_{p \mid (M, f)} (1+p)\cdot \#\{x \in \mathbb{Z} : 1 \leq x \leq M, (x, M) = 1, x^{2} - tx + n \equiv 0 \mod (fM, M^{2})\},$$

Lemma 5. Let $A \in GL_{2}(\mathbb{Z})$ be an elliptic or hyperbolic matrix with $\det A = 16n^{2}$, $t \equiv 0 \mod{4}$ and $f$ odd. Then for $N$ odd and squarefree there are $\mu(\frac{t}{4}, f, n^{2}, N)$ matrices $B \in \Gamma(1)/\Gamma_{0}(4N)$ with $B^{-1}AB \in \Gamma_{0}(4N)C_{n}\Gamma_{0}(4N)$.

So it seems that the definition of $\mu$ depends on $M$ being squarefree, and in turn this allows Kohnen the counting argument in Lemma 5. I don't know why squarefree-ness is needed from this, though. But maybe this information can help you or someone else determine the answer.


Answer: If $N$ is not squarefree, there exists a case such that all common eigen-subspaces of $S_{k+1/2}^{+}(4N, \chi)$ for Hecke operators have dimension at least 2, whence a strong multiplicity one theorem does not hold (see Ueda's On twisting operators and newforms of half-integral weight).

We may try to decompose our cusp space into eigen-subspaces of twisting operators (why??). Let $$M := \prod_{\substack{p \mid N \\ ord_{p}(N) \geq 2}} p^{ord_{p}(N)}, \quad \Pi := \{p \text{ prime} : p \mid M\}.$$ One can decompose the Kohnen space as

$$S_{k+1/2}^{+}(4N, \chi) = \left( \bigoplus_{\kappa: \Pi \rightarrow \{\pm 1\}} S^{0, \kappa} \right) \oplus Ker\left(R_{\Pi}; S_{k+1/2}^{+}(4N, \chi) \right),$$

where $S^{0, \kappa} := \{f \in S_{k+1/2}^{+}(4N, \chi) : f \mid R_{l} = \kappa(l)f, \forall l \in \Pi\}$ and $R_{\Pi}, R_{l}$ are the twisting operators of the characters $\prod_{l \in \Pi} \left( \frac{*}{l} \right)$ resp. $\left( \frac{*}{l} \right)$. The 'kernel' part consists of oldforms, and each $S^{0, \kappa}$ is stable under the Hecke operators $T(n^{2})$ for $(n, 4N) = 1$.

Why we need squarefree: There exists a case such that $S^{0, \kappa} \cong S^{0, \kappa'}$ as Hecke modules for distinct $\kappa, \kappa': \Pi \rightarrow \{\pm 1\}$. Hence when $M \neq 1$ Kohnen's theory does not work.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

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