An Introduction To Automorphic Representations: Jayce R. Getz, Heekyoung Hahn

Jayce R.
Getz, Heekyoung Hahn
An Introduction to Automorphic
Representations
with a view toward Trace Formulae
August 26, 2019
Springer
To Angela and Adsila, with love
Preface
The instructor of an introductory course on automorphic representations, the

student beginning their foray into the subject, and the experienced mathe-
matical researcher in another discipline trying to obtain conversational knowl-
edge in the field are all faced with a formidable task. The prerequisites are
essentially infinite, as the theory of automorphic representations draws on,
and makes substantial contributions to, much of algebraic geometry, har-
monic analysis, number theory, and representation theory. Moreover, it is a
subject in which one can spend a career moving in any direction one chooses.
The student should not be overly discouraged, however, because there is no
one alive who has the necessary prerequisites to really understand the entire
subject (and probably no one in the future will either). This is meant as no
disrespect to the luminaries in the field that, either through their work or per-
sonal contact, have made a profound impact on the mathematical community
and the authors of this book. It is simply that broad and deep a subject of
research. Extremely few important results that were proven by one individual
(or even by a group working on a single project). Most of the important re-
sults in the field have been obtained by individuals or small teams with very
different specialties working on various pieces of a larger whole, sometimes
over the course of decades. We say this to encourage the reader; one need not
know everything in order to get started and make important contributions.
In the authors’ experience, after scrounging around the literature one
learns enough to begin discovering mathematics connected to their partic-
ular point of view. The goal of this book is to make this process easier. The
more particular aim is to develop enough of the language and machinery of
the subject that after reading this book one can start reading original research
papers. We have also tried to be concise enough that the reader doesn’t get
mired in so many details that they are unable to see the overarching themes
and goals of the subject. This means that we have not made any systematic
attempt to prove every result that we use in the book. However, we have
made an effort to provide precise references where the reader can find more
details.
vii
viii Preface
This book is written so that it can be used as a text for a semester or

year-long course, a resource for self-study of more advanced topics, and as
a reference for researchers. We hope that our efforts to provide definitions,
proofs or precise references for proofs will be helpful to the last group. We
treat general reductive groups over arbitrary global fields.
We now describe several outlines for possible courses. The sections we have
not included have valuable information that may be substituted or added as
desired. Here is an outline for the sections one might cover for a semester-long
introduction to automorphic representation theory:
Algebraic groups §1.2, §1.3, §1.5, §1.7, §1.8
Adeles §2.1, §2.2, §2.3, §2.4, §2.6
Automorphic Representations §3.1, §3.2, §3.3, §3.4, §3.5, §3.6
Archimedean Representation Theory §4.2, §4.3, §4.4, §4.7
Representations of Totally Disconnected Groups §5.1, §5.2, §5.3, §5.4, §5.5,
§5.6, §5.7
Automorphic Forms §6.1, §6.2, §6.3, §6.4, §6.5
Unramified Representations §7.1, §7.2, §7.3, §7.5, §7.6, §7.7
It is useful to say in words what these chapters cover. Given a global field F
and a reductive algebraic group G over F , an automorphic representation of
G in the L2 -sense is an admissible representation G(AF ) which is isomorphic
to a subquotient of L2 (G(F )\G(AF )). The first goal of the course outline
above is to make sense of this definition. The second goal, realized in Chapter
6, is to give a refinement of it that is technically very useful and make the
connection with classical automorphic forms transparent. Finally in Chapter
7 one finds a rough form of the Langlands functoriality conjecture.
For a second semester or an advanced class one has more flexibility. Chap-
ter 8 covers deeper topics in nonarchimedean representation theory, including
the crucial related notions of Jacquet modules and supercuspidal representa-
tions. It also includes a statement of the Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification
(see §8.4). These topics, though important, come up only in passing later in
the book, and could be omitted. Chapter 9 on the cuspidal spectrum gives a
complete proof of the fact that the cuspidal spectrum decomposes discretely.
It is a basic fact that is hard to extract from the literature, but it could easily
be treated as a black box if desired. Chapter 10 outlines the theory of Eisen-
stein series. This foundational theory lies at the heart of many constructions
(and analytic difficulties) in the theory of automorphic representations. How-
ever, the book is written so that Chapter 10 can be skipped without much
loss of continuity.
With these comments in mind, a second course that does not cover simple
relative trace formulae might have an outline as follows:
Rankin-Selberg L-functions §11.2, §11.3, §11.4, §11.5, §11.6, §11.7, §11.9
Langlands Functoriality §12.1, §12.2, §12.3, §12.4, §12.5, §12.6, §12.7
Known Cases of Langlands Functoriality §13.3 §13.4, §13.5, §13.6, §13.7,
§13.8
Preface ix
Distinction and Period Integrals §14.2, §14.3, §14.4, §14.5

The Cohomology of Locally Symmetric Spaces §15.2, §15.3, §15.4, §15.5,
§15.6, §15.8
The last three chapters of the book together give a proof of a simple ver-
sion of the (relative) trace formula. This implies the trace formula, twisted
trace formula, etc. in simple cases. In a course these three chapters should
be covered together, and they rely in particular on §14.3. If covering the sim-
ple relative trace formula is a priority for the instructor, they may consider
dropping Chapter 15 or postponing it to the end of the semester.
The spectral side of the trace formula is considered in §16.1 and §16.2. The
geometric side is the focus of Chapter 17. Chapter 9 on the discreteness of
the cuspidal spectrum and Chapter 17 are easily the most technical chapters
of the book. The first requires some analysis and the second some algebraic
geometry. In some sense they are the also the most important, because they
give complete proofs of results that are very difficult to extract from the
literature, if they exist at all. That said, just as much of Chapter 9 can be
taken as a black box, the same is true of Chapter 17.
In a course it might make sense to treat §17.1 and §17.3 only superficially
and focus on the definition of the local relative orbital integrals in §17.4 and
the definition of global relative orbital integrals in §17.7. Moving forward
the key result is in Theorem 17.7.2. After this preparatory work the general
simple relative trace formula in §18.2 follows easily. The sections §18.3, §18.4
§18.5 provide specializations of the simple relative trace formula that are
important for illustrating what the formula means. Readers interested in
analytic number theory should peruse §18.7, §18.8, and §18.9 to obtain a
complete derivation of the famous Kuznetsov formula in a form suitable for
applications to analytic number theory. After all the hard work required to
derive (even simple versions) of relative trace formulae, it would be remiss
not to discuss some applications. These are contained in Chapter 19. The
most important sections are §19.2 and §19.3, but to really understand the
theory in §19.3 the examples and clarifications in the remaining sections of
that chapter are invaluable. Some suggestions for further work are contained
in §19.6.
Most of the material in this book has appeared in one form or another
in the literature. We have made an honest attempt to give accurate attribu-
tions for both results and expository treatments. We would appreciate being
informed of any serious errors we have made either in mathematics or in at-
tributing results. We have made an effort to work as much as possible with
arbitrary reductive groups over arbitrary global fields. In particular, we have
allowed global fields of positive characteristic. We have also refrained from
assuming that the affine algebraic groups under consideration are reductive
until necessary. This both emphasizes the results that really depend on the
fact that G is reductive and develops the preliminaries necessary to under-
stand, for example, unitary representations of nonreductive groups. This is
x Preface
not vacuous, as the theory of Jacobi forms already plays a role in automorphic
forms [BS98].
The results on orbital integrals in Chapter 17 and the simple relative
trace formula in Chapter 18 are based partially on work of the second author
[Hah09] and both authors [GH15]. However they have not appeared previ-
ously in the generality in which we prove them here. In particular we treat
arbitrary reductive groups over arbitrary global fields. Thus we allow positive
characteristic.
In the interest of full disclosure, we should say a word about set theoretic
foundations. In §17.5 we make use of some more serious algebraic geometry
involving sheaves of sets on a site, and this puts us up against the usual
set-theoretic difficulties. To handle these we assume the universe axiom and
assume (implicitly) that all our categories are small and contained in some
universe. For more details we refer to [Poo17, Appendix A]. It is likely that the
reliance on the universe axiom could be removed at the cost of complicating
the definition of the sets of torsors we consider.
Durham, NC, Jayce R. Getz

August, 2019 Heekyoung Hahn
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Francesc Castella, Andrew Fiori and Cameron Franc for
typsetting the first draft of the lecture notes that formed the germ of this
book, and thank Brian Conrad, Tasho Kaletha, Minhyong Kim, Jason Polak,
Leslie Saper, and Chad Schoen for many useful corrections and comments.
Many people have been generous in answering questions as this book was
written, including Avner Ash, David Ginzburg, Rahul Krishna, Erez Lapid,
Freydoon Shahidi, Michal Zydor, and any others who we may have forgotten.
The authors give special thanks to Alex Youcis for his very careful reading
of the first two chapters, which lead to the clarification of many details. The
authors also thank Ken Ono for suggesting this book project. The first author
wishes to thank the National Science Foundation for support at various times
during the preparation of this book. Part of this book was written while both
authors were members at the Institute for Advanced Study in the spring of
2018, we thank the institute for its hospitality and providing us with excellent
working conditions. Finally, we truly appreciate the encouragement of Madhi
Asgari, Peter Sarnak and many graduate students.
xi
Contents
1 Algebraic Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Affine schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Group schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Extension and restriction of scalars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5 Reductive groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.6 Lie Algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.7 Tori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.8 Root data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1.9 Parabolic subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2 Adeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.1 Adeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.2 Adelic points of affine schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.3 Relationship with restricted direct products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.4 Hyperspecial subgroups and models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.5 Approximation in algebraic groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.6 The adelic quotient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.7 Reduction theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3 Automorphic Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.1 Representations of locally compact groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.2 Haar measures on locally compact groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.3 Convolution algebras of test functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.4 Haar measures on local fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
3.5 Haar measures on the points of algebraic groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.6 Automorphic representations in the L2 -sense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.7 Decomposition of representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.8 The Fell topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
xiii
xiv Contents
3.9 Type I groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

3.10 Why affine groups? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4 Archimedean Representation Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

4.1 The passage between analysis and algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4.2 Smooth vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.3 Restriction to compact subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.4 (g, K)-modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.5 Hecke algebras with K-types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.6 Infinitesimal characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.7 Classification of (g, K)-modules for GL2R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4.8 Matrix coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
4.9 The Langlands classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
5 Representations of Totally Disconnected Groups . . . . . . . . . . 97

5.1 Totally disconnected groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.2 Smooth functions in td groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
5.3 Smooth and admissible representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.4 Contragredients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
5.5 The unramified Hecke algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.6 Restricted tensor products of modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
5.7 Flath’s theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6 Automorphic Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

6.1 Smooth functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.2 Classical automorphic forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.3 Adelic automorphic forms over number fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
6.4 Adelic automorphic forms over function fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.5 The cuspidal subspace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
6.6 From modular forms to automorphic forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
6.7 Ramanujan’s ∆-function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7 Unramified Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

7.1 Unramified representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.2 Satake isomorphism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
7.3 The Langlands dual group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
7.4 Parabolic subgroups of L-groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
7.5 The Satake isomorphism for quasi-split groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
7.6 The Principal series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
7.7 Weak global L-packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Contents xv
8 Nonarchimedean Representation Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
8.2 Parabolic induction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
8.3 Jacquet modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
8.4 The Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
8.5 Traces, characters, coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
8.6 Parabolic descent of representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
8.7 Parabolic descent of orbital integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
9 The Cuspidal Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
9.2 The cuspidal subspace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
9.3 Deduction of the discreteness of the spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
9.4 The function field case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
9.5 Estimates for the Fourier transform of the kernel . . . . . . . . . . . 184
9.6 The basic estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
9.7 Rapidly decreasing functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
9.8 Cuspidal automorphic forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
10 Eisenstein Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

10.1 Induced representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195
10.2 Intertwining operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
10.3 Eisenstein series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
10.4 Decomposition of the spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
10.5 Local preparation for isobaric representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
10.6 Isobaric representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
10.7 A theorem of Moeglin and Waldspurger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
11 Rankin-Selberg L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

11.1 Paths to the construction of automorphic L-functions . . . . . . . 211
11.2 Generic characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
11.3 Generic representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
11.4 Formulae for Whittaker functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
11.5 Local Rankin-Selberg L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
11.6 The unramified Rankin-Selberg L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
11.7 Global Rankin-Selberg L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
11.8 The nongeneric case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
11.9 Converse theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
xvi Contents
12 Langlands Functoriality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

12.1 The Weil group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
12.2 The Weil-Deligne group and L-parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
12.3 The archimedean Langlands correspondence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
12.4 Local Langlands for GLn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
12.5 The local Langlands conjecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
12.6 Global Langlands functoriality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
12.7 Langlands L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
12.8 Algebraic representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
13 Known Cases of Global Langlands Functoriality . . . . . . . . . . 255

13.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
13.2 Parabolic induction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
13.3 L-maps into general linear groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
13.4 The strong Artin conjecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
13.5 Base change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
13.6 The Langlands-Shahidi method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
13.7 Functoriality for the classical groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
13.8 Endoscopic classification of representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
13.9 The function field case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
14 Distinction and Period Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

14.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
14.2 Distinction in the local setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
14.3 Global distinction and period integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277
14.4 Spherical subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
14.5 Symmetric subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
14.6 Relationship with the endoscopic classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
14.7 Gan-Gross-Prasad type period integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
14.8 Necessary conditions for distinction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
15 The Cohomology of Locally Symmetric Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

15.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295
15.2 Locally symmetric spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
15.3 Local systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
15.4 (g, K∞ )-cohomology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
15.5 The cohomology of Shimura manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
15.6 The relation to distinction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
15.7 More on (g, K∞ )-cohomology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307
15.8 Shimura varieties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
Contents xvii
16 Spectral Sides of Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315

16.1 The automorphic kernel function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
16.2 Relative traces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
16.3 The full expansion of the automorphic kernel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
16.4 Functions with cuspidal image . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
17 Orbital Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

17.1 Group actions, orbits and stabilizers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
17.2 Luna’s slice theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
17.3 Local geometric classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
17.4 Local relative orbital integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
17.5 Torsors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
17.6 Adelic classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
17.7 Global relative orbital integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
18 Simple Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363

18.1 A brief history of trace formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
18.2 A general simple relative trace formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
18.3 Products of subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371
18.4 The simple trace formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372
18.5 The simple twisted trace formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
18.6 A variant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375
18.7 The Petersson-Bruggeman-Kuznetsov formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376
18.8 Kloosterman integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
18.9 Sums of Whittaker coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
19 Applications of Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

19.1 Existence and comparison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
19.2 The Weyl law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392
19.3 The comparison strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
19.4 Jacquet-Langlands transfer and base change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
19.5 Twisted endoscopy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
19.6 The interplay of distinction and twisted endoscopy . . . . . . . . . . 400
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
A The Iwasawa Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407

A.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
A.2 The smooth case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
A.3 The dynamic method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410
A.4 Proof of Theorem A.1.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
A.5 An addendum in the hyperspecial case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
xviii Contents
B Poisson Summation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

B.1 The standard additive characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
B.2 Local Schwartz spaces and Fourier transforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
B.3 Global Schwartz spaces and Poisson summation . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
Exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Hints to selected exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433
Chapter 1
Algebraic Groups
Before Genesis, God gave the

devil free reign to construct much
of creation, but dealt with
certain matters himself, including
semi-simple groups.
attributed to Chevalley by
Harish-Chandra
Abstract In this chapter we briefly recall some of the basic notions related
to affine algebraic groups. If the reader knows the definition of a reductive
algebraic group (which can be found in §1.5) then the rest of the chapter can
probably be skipped and then referred to later as needed.
1.1 Introduction
Someone beginning to learn the theory of automorphic representations does

not need to internalize the content of this chapter. For the most part, one
can get by with much less. For example, one can think of GLn , which is
really an affine group scheme over the integers, as a formal notational device
already familiar from an elementary course in algebra: for commutative rings
R the notation GLn (R) refers to the invertible matrices with coefficients
in R. Likewise, one knows that, e.g., Sp2n (R) is the group of matrices with
coefficients in R that fix the standard symplectic form on R2n . One can think
of an reductive group G as some gadget of this type that assigns a group to
every ring of some type (say Q-algebras) and behaves like GLn . In fact, for
a first reading of this book, whenever one sees the assumption that G is a
reductive group one could assume that G = GLn for some integer n and not
lose a lot of the flavor.
1
2 1 Algebraic Groups
That said, at some point it is not a bad idea for any student of automor-
phic representation theory (and really, any mathematician) to come to grips
with the “modern” (e.g. post 1960s) terminology of algebraic geometry and
algebraic groups. It is useful, beautiful, and despite its reputation not really
that counterintuitive or difficult. Thus we will use it in this chapter, mostly
as a means of fixing notation and conventions, and make minor use of it later
in the book.
Much of the material in this chapter can be found in one form or another in
the references in algebraic groups [Bor91, Hum75, Spr09]. Unfortunately they
were all written in the archaic language of Weil used before Grothendieck’s
profound reimagining of the foundations of algebraic geometry. The most
complete reference is [DG74], but it is hard to penetrate if one doesn’t have
solid preparation in algebraic geometry. The reference [Wat79] is more acces-
sible, but covers less. Fortunately J. Milne has reworked the three standard
references in modern language. His book [Mil17] was instrumental in the
preparation of this chapter.
1.2 Affine schemes
Throughout this chapter we let k be a commutative Noetherian ring with

identity. Let Algk denote the category of commutative k-algebras with iden-
tity. For a k algebra A, one obtains a functor
Spec(A) : Algk −→ Set (1.1)

R 7−→ HomAlgk (A, R).
Moreover, if φ : A → B is a morphism of k-algebras, then we obtain for each

k-algebra R a map
Spec(B)(R) −→ Spec(A)(R) (1.2)

ϕ 7−→ ϕ ◦ φ .
This collection of maps is an example of what is known as a natural transfor-

mation of functors. More precisely, to give a natural transformation X → Y
of set-valued functors on Algk is the same as giving for each k-algebra R a
map
X(R) −→ Y (R) (1.3)
such that for all morphisms of k-algebras R → R0 the following diagram

commutes:
1.2 Affine schemes 3
X(R) −−−−→ Y (R)

 
(1.4)
 
y y
X(R0 ) −−−−→ Y (R0 ).
One can check that (1.2) is a natural transformation of functors.

Definition 1.1. An affine scheme over k is a functor on the category of k-
algebras of the form Spec(A). A morphism of affine schemes is a natural
transformation of functors.
This definition gives us a category AffSchk of affine schemes over k,
equipped with a contravariant anti-equivalence of categories
Spec : Algk −→ AffSchk
(see Exercise 1.3). In other words, the category of affine schemes over k is
the category of k-algebras “with the arrows reversed.” If k is understood we
often omit explicit mention of it. By way of terminology, if X is an affine
scheme then
X(R)
is called its R-valued points.
Definition 1.2. A functor S : Algk −→ Set is representable by a ring A
if S = Spec(A). In this case we write
O(S) := A
and refer to it as the coordinate ring of S.

To ease comparison with other references, we note that we are defining
schemes using their functors of points, whereas the usual approach is to define
schemes as a topological space with a sheaf of rings on it satisfying certain
desiderata and then associate a functor of points to the scheme. The two
approaches are equivalent. The usual approach is desirable for many purposes,
but the approach via the functor of points is more suitable for the study of
algebraic groups. For more details on the usual approach and on the scheme
theoretic concepts mentioned below we point the reader to [Har77, EH00,
Mum99, GW10]. The functor of points approach is used in [DG74].
In order to work with affine schemes in practice one must usually impose
additional restrictions on the representing ring A.
Definition 1.3. An affine scheme Spec(A) is of finite type if A is a finitely
generated k-algebra.
Therefore Spec(A) is of finite type if and only if
A∼
= k[t1 , . . . , tn ]/(f1 , . . . , fm )
for some (finite) set of indeterminates t1 , . . . , tn and finite set of polynomials

f1 , . . . , fm . An important example of a scheme of finite type is affine n-space:
Gna := Spec(k[t1 , . . . , tn ]).
This is also denoted by An , but we avoid this notation because we will use
the symbol A for the adeles (which will be defined in Definition 2.5).
Here are two other nice properties that the schemes of interest to us will
often enjoy:
Definition 1.4. An affine scheme X is reduced if O(X) has no nilpotent
elements and irreducible if O(X) has a unique minimal prime ideal, or,
equivalently, if its nilradical is prime.
It is important to note that an affine scheme can be both reduced and irre-
ducible (Exercise 1.4).
Assume for the moment that k is a field. An affine scheme Spec(A) of finite
type over k is smooth if the coordinate ring A is formally smooth. Here a
k-algebra A is said to be formally smooth if for every k-algebra B with ideal
I ≤ B of square zero and any k-algebra homomorphism A → B/I one has a
morphism A → B such that the diagram
AO / B/I
O
!
k /B
commutes.
For example, an affine scheme is smooth if it is isomorphic to an affine
scheme

Spec k[t1 , . . . , tn ]/(f1 , . . . , fn−d ) (1.5)
where the ideal in k[t1 , . . . , tn ] generated by the fi and all the (n−d)×(n−d)
minors of the matrix of derivatives (∂fi /∂xi ) is the whole ring k[t1 , . . . , tn ].
We have not and will not define open subschemes and Zariski covers of
schemes, but for those familiar with this language we remark that one can
always cover a smooth affine scheme by open affine subschemes of the form
(1.5).
We now discuss closed subschemes.
Definition 1.5. A morphism of affine schemes
X −→ Y
is a closed immersion if the associated map O(Y ) −→ O(X) is surjective.

Remark 1.1. If X → Y is a closed immersion then X(R) → Y (R) is injective
for all k-algebras R (see Exercise 1.5).
1.2 Affine schemes 5
If X → Y is a closed immersion then O(X) ∼ = O(Y )/I for some ideal I

of O(Y ). Motivated by this observation, one defines a closed subscheme
of the scheme Y to be a scheme of the form Spec(O(Y )/I) for some ideal
I ⊆ O(Y ). Thus schemes of finite type over k are all closed subschemes of
Gna for some n. One thinks of the closed subscheme k[t1 , . . . , tn ]/(f1 , . . . , fm )
as being the zero locus of f1 , . . . , fm , although some care is required when
applying this intuition when k is not an algebraically closed field, or even a
field for that matter.
The definition of a closed subscheme can also be given from a topologi-
cal perspective as we now explain. There is a topological space attached to
Spec(A) which is also denoted by Spec(A). It is the collection of all primes
p ⊆ A equipped with the Zariski topology. To define this topology, for
every subset S ⊆ A we let
V (S) = {p ∈ Spec(A) : p ⊇ S}.
One checks that the sets V (S) are closed under infinite intersections and
finite unions. Thus we can define the Zariski topology on Spec(A) to be the
topology with V (S) as its closed sets. A morphism of schemes induces a
morphism of the associated topological spaces, and the image of an injective
morphism
Spec(A/I) −→ Spec(A)
is V (I) (see Exercise 1.1).
We close this section with the notion of fiber products. This is a simple
and useful method to create new schemes from existing ones. Let
X = Spec A, Y = Spec B, Z = Spec C
be k-schemes equipped with morphisms f : X → Y and g : Z → Y . We can

then form the fiber product
X ×Y Z := Spec(A ⊗B C)
where A and C are regarded as B-algebras via the maps B → A and B → C

induced by f and g, respectively. This scheme has the property that for k-
algebras R one has
(X ×Y Z)(R) = X(R) ×Y (R) Z(R)
where the fiber product on the right is that in the category of sets:
X(R) ×Y (R) Z(R) := {(x, z) ∈ X(R) × Z(R) : f (x) = g(z)}. (1.6)
By far the case that will be used the most frequently in the sequel is the so-
called absolute product in the category of k-schemes. To define it note that
every k-scheme X = Spec A comes equipped with a morphism X → Spec k,
namely the morphism induced by the ring homomorphism k → A that gives

A the structure of a k-algebra. This morphism X → Spec k is called the
structure morphism. Thus for any pair of k-schemes X, Z we can form the
absolute product
X × Z := X ×k Z := X ×Spec k Z.
It follows from (1.6) that for k-algebras R,
(X × Z)(R) = X(R) × Z(R).
1.3 Group schemes
Definition 1.6. An affine group scheme over k is a functor
Algk −→ Group
representable by a k-algebra. A morphism of affine group schemes H → G

is a natural transformation of functors from H to G.
Here a natural transformation of functors is defined as in the previous section,

though this time we require the associated maps
X(R) −→ Y (R)
to be group homomorphisms, not just maps of sets. It is clear that an affine

group scheme over k is in particular an affine scheme over k. In this book we
will only be interested in affine group schemes (as opposed to elliptic curves,
for instance), so we will often omit the word “affine.”
The most basic examples of affine group schemes are the additive and
multiplicative groups:
Example 1.1. The additive group Ga is the functor assigning to each k-

algebra R its additive group,
Ga (R) := (R, +).
It is represented by the polynomial algebra k[x]:
Homk (k[x], R) = R.
Example 1.2. The multiplicative group Gm is the functor assigning to each

each k-algebra R its multiplicative group,
Gm (R) = R× .
1.3 Group schemes 7
It is represented by k[x, y]/(xy − 1).

These affine group schemes are both abelian in the sense that their R-
valued points are always abelian. The most basic example of a nonabelian
group scheme is the general linear group GLn . It is the functor taking a k-
algebra R to the group of n × n invertible matrices (xij ) with coefficients xij
in R. The representing ring is
k[xij ][y]/(det(xij ) · y − 1).
Note that GL1 = Gm . If one wishes to be coordinate free, then for any finite
rank free k-module V one can define
GLV (R) := {R-module automorphisms V → V }.
A choice of isomorphism V ∼ = k n induces an isomorphism GLV ∼= GLn .

We isolate a particularly important class of morphisms with the following
definition:
Definition 1.7. A representation of an affine group scheme G is a
morphism of affine group schemes r : G → GLV . It is faithful if it is a closed
embedding.
Assume that k is a field and r is injective in the sense that r : G(R) →
GLV (R) is injective for all k-algebras R. Then r is faithful [Mil17, Corollary
3.35].
Definition 1.8. An affine group scheme G is said to be linear if it admits
a faithful representation G → GLV for some V .
We will usually be concerned with linear group schemes. We shall see below
in Theorem 1.5.1 that this is not much loss of generality if k is a field.
Much of the basic theory of abstract groups goes through for affine al-
gebraic groups over a field without essential change, but the proofs are far
more complicated. We will not develop the theory; we refer the reader to
[Mil17] for details. However, it is useful to define injections and quotient in
this category:
Definition 1.9. Let k be a field. A morphism H → G of affine algebraic
groups over k is a monomorphism (resp. quotient map) if the corre-
sponding map O(G) → O(H) is surjective (resp. injective).
If H → G is a monomorphism then it is easy to verify that H(R) → G(R)
is injective for all k-algebras R (see Exercise 1.5). However, if H → G is
surjective, then H(R) → G(R) need not be surjective for a given k-algebra
R. An trivial example is the map Gm → Gm of group schemes over Q given
on points by x 7→ xn for an integer |n| > 1. It is true, however, that if H → G
is a quotient map then H(k sep ) → G(k sep ) is surjective and a converse holds
whenever G is smooth [Mil17, Proposition 5.32].
Definition 1.10. Let G be a group scheme over k. A subgroup scheme

H ≤ G is a subscheme of G such that H(R) ≤ G(R) is a subgroup for all
k-algebras R.
It is known that if k is a field and H and G are affine groups schemes of

finite type over with H ≤ G then H is automatically a closed subscheme of
G [Mil17, Proposition 1.41].
1.4 Extension and restriction of scalars
Let k → k 0 be a homomorphism of rings. Given a k-algebra R, one obtains

a k 0 -algebra R ⊗k k 0 . Moreover, given a k 0 algebra R0 , one can view it as a
k-algebra in the tautological manner. This gives rise to a pair of functors
Algk −→ Algk0 and Algk0 −→ Algk
known as base change and restriction of scalars, respectively. These func-

tors are useful in that they allow us to change the base ring k.
For affine schemes we similarly have a base change functor
k0 : AffSchk −→ AffSchk0
given by Xk0 (R0 ) = X(R0 ); the ring representing Xk is simply O(X) ⊗k k 0 .

In fact this is a special case of the fiber product construction of §1.2: in the
notation of that section one takes Y = Spec k and Z = Spec k 0 and let us
equipped with the map Z → Y induced by k → k 0 .
The functor in the opposite direction is a little more subtle. One can always
define a set valued functor
Resk0 /k X 0 (R) := X 0 (k 0 ⊗k R)
called the Weil restriction of scalars. A priori this is just a set valued
functor on Algk , but if k 0 /k satisfies certain conditions then it is representable,
and hence we obtain a functor
Resk0 /k : AffSchk0 −→ AffSchk .
For example, it is enough to assume that k 0 /k is a field extension of finite

degree, or more generally that k 0 /k is finite and locally free [BLR90, Theorem
4, §7.6].
Example 1.3. The Deligne torus is
S := ResC/R GL1 .
1.5 Reductive groups 9
One has S(R) = C× and S(C) = C× × C× . If V is a real vector space, then to

give a representation S → GL(V ) is equivalent to giving a Hodge structure
on V [Mil05].
√
Example 1.4. Let d be a square free integer and L = Q( d). If we view L as
a two-dimensional vector-space over Q one obtains an embedding of L× into
GL2 (Q). This can be refined into an embedding
ResL/Q (Gm ) −→ GL2
of reductive groups over Q. One can choose the embedding so the R-valued
points of its image is a db
b a ∈ GL2 (R)
for Q-algebras R.
1.5 Reductive groups
We now assume that k is a field and let k sep ≤ k be a separable (resp. alge-
braic) closure of k. Much of the theory simplifies in this case.
One has the following definition:
Definition 1.11. An (affine) algebraic group over k is an affine group

scheme of finite type over k.
In other words G is algebraic if G is represented by a quotient of k[x1 , . . . , xn ]

for some n (namely O(G)). There is a natural action of G on O(G); if we
think of O(G) as functions on G, then the action is that induced by right
translation. For any k-subspace of O(G) invariant under G we obtain a rep-
resentation of G, and this representation can be chosen to be faithful. If one
fills in the details of this discussion one obtains the following theorem [Wat79,
§3.4]:
Theorem 1.5.1 An algebraic group admits a faithful representation. t
u
Thus algebraic groups are linear. Another nice feature of algebraic groups is
that they are often smooth (see [Mil17, Proposition 1.26, Theorem 3.23]):
Theorem 1.5.2 An algebraic group G over a field k is smooth if k has char-

acteristic zero or if Gk is reduced. t
u
We will also require the notion of connectedness. An affine scheme is con-
nected if the only idempotents in O(X) are 0 and 1. A group scheme is
connected if its underlying topological space is connected. Though it is not
true for general affine schemes, a group scheme is connected if and only if Gk
is irreducible [Wat79, §6.6]. Using this fact one shows that if k is a subfield
of C, then G is connected if and only if G(C) is connected in the analytic

topology. Every algebraic group has a normal subgroup G◦ ≤ G that is the
maximal connected subgroup of G containing the identity. It is called the
neutral component of G.
We now discuss the Jordan decomposition. Let Mn denote the scheme of
n by n matrices over k. One reference for the following is [Wat79, Chapter
9].
Definition 1.12. Let k be a perfect field. An element x ∈ Mn (k) is said to be

semisimple if there exists g ∈ GLn (k) such that g −1 xg is diagonal, nilpo-
tent if there exists a positive integer n such that xn = 0, and unipotent
if (x − I) is nilpotent. For an arbitrary linear group we say that an element
x ∈ G(k) is semisimple, (resp. unipotent) if r(x) is so for some faithful
representation r : G → GLV .
It turns out that if x ∈ G(k) has the property that r(x) is semisimple
(resp. unipotent) for some faithful representation r then it is semisimple
(resp. unipotent) for any faithful representation r.
Theorem 1.5.3 (Jordan decomposition) Let G be an algebraic group

over a perfect field k. Given x ∈ G(k) there exist unique xs , xu ∈ G(k)
such that xs is semisimple, xu is unipotent x = xs xu = xu xs . t
u
This leads us to the notion of a unipotent group. An algebraic group
over k is unipotent if every representation of G has a fixed vector. If G is
smooth then G(k) consists of unipotent elements if and only if G is unipotent
[Mil17, Corollary 14.12]. We remark that unipotent groups are always upper-
triangularizable. More precisely, an algebraic group G is unipotent if and only
if there exists a faithful representation r : G → GLn such that the image of G
is a closed subgroup of the group of upper triangular matrices in GLn [Mil17,
Theorem 14.5].
To define the weaker notion of a solvable group we recall that the derived
subgroup Gder := DG of an algebraic group G is the intersection of all
normal subgroups N ≤ G such that G/N is commutative. If G is connected
then Gder is connected. One has
Gder (k) = {xyx−1 y −1 : x, y ∈ G(k)}.
In analogy with the case of abstract groups, we define
Dn G := D(Dn−1 G)
inductively for n ≥ 1 and say that G is solvable if Dn G is the trivial group

for n sufficiently large.
Definition 1.13. Let G be a smooth algebraic group. The unipotent rad-

ical Ru (G) of G is the maximal connected unipotent normal subgroup of G.
1.5 Reductive groups 11
The (solvable) radical is the maximal connected normal solvable subgroup

of G.
We remark that since a unipotent group is always solvable we have Ru (G) ≤

R(G).
Definition 1.14. A smooth connected algebraic group G is said to be re-

ductive if Ru (Gk ) = {1} and semisimple if R(Gk ) = {1}.
If k is a perfect field, then Ru (Gk ) = Ru (G)k . However, this is false in general

for nonperfect fields. For more details see [CGP10].
For n > 1 the group of upper triangular matrices in GLn is not reductive.
The most basic example of a reductive group is GLn . It is not semisimple since
ZGLn = Ru (GLn ). Here ZG denotes the center of the algebraic group G. The
subgroup SLn ≤ GLn is the derived group of GLn and is semisimple (which
◦
implies reductive). In fact for any reductive group G one has ZG = Ru (G)
der
[Mil17, Corollary 17.62] and G is semisimple [Mil17, Proposition 19.21].
Suppose that G is a reductive group. Then
◦ der
G = ZG G (1.7)
[Mil17, §21.f]. We note that

ZG ∩ Gder
is the (finite) center of Gder . For example, when G = GLn the derived sub-
group is SLn and the center ZG consists of the diagonal matrices of determi-
nant 1.
We warn the reader that one has to be a bit careful with the statement
◦ der
that G = ZG G , and with similar statements involving products of algebraic
◦ der
groups in a larger group below. The statement that G = ZG G means that
◦ der
the product map ZG × G → G is a quotient map. In particular,
◦
ZG (k) × Gder (k) → G(k)
is surjective, but
◦
ZG (k) × Gder (k) → G(k)
need not be. This is false even for k = Q and G = GL2 .
We close this section by recalling the following theorem of Mostow [Mos56],
which states that we can always break an algebraic group in characteristic
zero into a reductive and unipotent part:
Theorem 1.5.4 Let G be an algebraic group over a characteristic zero field.
Then there is a subgroup M ≤ G such that M ◦ is reductive and
G = M Ru (G).
All such subgroups M are conjugate under Ru (G). t

u
The decomposition G = M Ru (G) is called a Levi decomposition and M is

called a Levi subgroup. The Levi decomposition is often written G = M N ,
where N is the unipotent radical.
1.6 Lie Algebras
Now that we have defined reductive groups, we could ask for a classification of
them, or more generally for a classification of morphisms H → G of reductive
groups. The first step in this process is to linearize the problem using objects
known as Lie algebras. We will return to the question of classification in §1.7
and Theorem 1.8.3 below.
Definition 1.15. Let k be a ring. A Lie algebra (over k) is a free k-module

g of finite rank together with a bilinear pairing
[·, ·] : g × g −→ g
satisfying the following assumptions:

(a) [X, X] = 0 for all X ∈ g.
(b) For X, Y, Z ∈ g,
[[X, Y ], Z] + [[Y, Z], X] + [[Z, X], Y ] = 0. (1.8)
Morphisms of Lie algebras are simply k-module maps preserving [·, ·].
The pairing [·, ·] is known as the Lie bracket of the Lie algebra g and
the identity (1.8) is known as the Jacobi identity. We remark that if R is
a k-algebra then g ⊗k R inherits the structure of a Lie algebra over R in a
natural manner.
Let LAGk denote the category of linear algebraic groups over k and let
LieAlgk denote the category of Lie algebras over k. There exists a functor
Lie : LAGk −→ LieAlgk
defined by
Lie G = ker(G(k[t]/t2 ) → G(k)).
From the definition just given it is not clear that Lie G is a Lie algebra,
or even a k-algebra, for that matter. At the moment it is only a set-valued
functor. There is one important special case where it is easy to deduce a Lie
algebra structure. Let G = GLV for a free finite rank k-module V . In this
case it is not hard to see that
Lie G = {IV + Xt : X ∈ Endk-linear (V )}−→End

˜ k-linear (V )
1.6 Lie Algebras 13
IV + Xt 7−→ X.
This Lie algebra is traditionally denoted glV , or simply gln when V = Rn .

One defines the bracket via
[X, Y ] = X ◦ Y − Y ◦ X
and verifies that it satisfies the axioms for a Lie bracket.

In order to deduce that Lie G is a Lie algebra in general we essentially just
embed Lie G in glV , but in a functorial way. The first step is to give Lie G a
k-algebra structure. Let
: O(G) −→ k
be the coidentity, i.e. the homomorphism corresponding to the identity ele-
ment of G(k).
Lemma 1.6.1 There is a canonical bijection
2
Lie G−→Hom
˜ k-linear (ker()/ ker() , k).
In particular Lie is a functor from LAGk to the category of free k-modules

of finite rank.
Using the k-algebra structure of g given above, one checks that for any
k-algebra R
Lie G(R) := (Lie G) ⊗k R
Proof. An element of Lie G is a k-algebra homomorphism
ϕ : O(G) −→ k[t]/t2
such that the composite with the natural map k[t]/t2 → k is . Thus ϕ
maps the ideal ker() into t and hence factors through O(G)/ ker(). Since
O(G)/ ker()2 = k ⊕ ker()/ ker()2 (see Exercise 1.9) we obtain a bijection
Lie G −→ Homk-linear (ker()/ ker()2 , k)

ϕ 7−→ ϕ|ker()/ ker()2
as claimed. We leave it to the reader to check the functoriality assertion. t

u
The group G always admits a representation
Ad : G −→ AutLie G .
To define it, note that for any k-algebra R the morphism R −→ R[t]/t2 giving
R[t]/t2 its R-algebra structure gives rise to a map G(R) −→ G(R[t]/t2 ). Thus
the conjugation action of G(R) on itself gives rise to a conjugation action of
G(R) on G(R[t]/t2 ) which preserves Lie G(R). This is the action denoted Ad
and it is known as the adjoint representation.
We finally give the reader a definition of the bracket on Lie G. For this we
note that by functoriality of Lie as a k-module valued functor the morphism
Ad gives rise to a morphism of free k-modules of finite rank
ad : Lie G −→ Lie AutLie G = glLie G .
We then define
[A, X] = ad(A)(X).
One checks that this is indeed a Lie bracket and that when G = GLV this
recovers the earlier definition of the bracket.
In practice, to compute the Lie algebra of a linear algebraic group G one
just chooses an embedding G −→ GLV and computes Lie G in terms of the
conditions that cut the group G from GLV . One then obtains the bracket for
free; it is just the restriction of the bracket on GLV .
Example 1.5. If G = SLn , the special linear group of matrices in GLn of

determinant 1, then
det(In + Xt) = 1 + tr(X)t (mod t2 )
by Taylor expansion, so
sln := Lie SLn = {X ∈ gln : tr(X) = 0}.
Notice how the use of the Taylor expansion amounted to differentiating

some equation once and then taking the zero term; this method of determin-
ing Lie algebras works for at least all the classical groups, which are roughly
subgroups of GLV defined as the subgroup fixing various perfect pairings on
V (see Exercise 1.9).
1.7 Tori
Throughout this section we assume that k is a field with separable closure

k sep and algebraic closure k. Set
Galk := Gal(k sep /k).
Definition 1.16. An algebraic torus or simply torus is a linear algebraic

group T over k such that Tk ∼
= Gnm for some n. The integer n is called the
rank of torus.
We remark that if T is a torus of rank n over k then there is a finite

separable extension L/k over which T splits, in other words, TL ∼ = Gnm
[Con14, Lemma B.1.5].
1.7 Tori 15
Definition 1.17. A character of an algebraic group G is an element of
X ∗ (G) = Hom(G, Gm ).
A co-character is an element of
X∗ (G) = Hom(Gm , G).
For k-algebras k 0 one usually abbreviates X ∗ (G)k0 := X ∗ (Gk0 ), etc. We warn

the reader that usually the notation X ∗ (G) is used for what we would call
X ∗ (G)k . Therefore, if there is danger of confusion we will often write X ∗ (G)k
for X ∗ (G), though strictly speaking this is redundant.
One indication of the utility of the notion of characters is the following
theorem [Wat79, §7.3]:
Theorem 1.7.1 The association
T 7−→ X ∗ (T )ksep
defines a contravariant equivalence of categories between the category of al-

gebraic tori defined over k and finite rank Z-torsion free continuous Z[Galk ]-
modules. t
u
Here a Z[Galk ]-module V is continuous if the associated map
Galk −→ GLV (Z)
is continuous where we give Galk the usual profinite topology and GLV (Z)
the discrete topology.
We now record a few examples of tori.
Example 1.6. We define a special orthogonal group SO2 ≤ GL2 by stipulating

that for Q-algebras R one has
2 2
a b
SO2 (R) = −b a : a, b ∈ R and a + b = 1 .
Over any field containing a square root of −1 one has

1 −i
1 1 i a b
= a−bi a+bi .

2 ( i 1 ) −b a −i 1 (1.9)
It follows that SO2Q(i) ∼

= Gm .
Example 1.7. Let L/k be a separable extension and let
NL/k : ResL/k Gm −→ Gm
Q
be the norm map; it is given on points by x 7→ τ ∈Homk (L,k) τ (x). Then the
kernel of NL/k is an algebraic torus. When L = Q(i) and k = Q this torus is
isomorphic to the group SO2 of the previous example.
Example 1.8. If L/k is any (separable) field extension then ResL/k (Gm ) is an
algebraic torus. Moreover one can show that:
M
X ∗ (ResL/k (Gm ))L ' Zτ
τ
where the summation runs over the embeddings τ : L → k sep of L into a k.

In the special case where L/k is Galois the left hand side admits a natural
action of Gal(L/k), and as a representation of Gal(L/k)
X ∗ (ResL/k (Gm ))L ⊗Z C

Gal(L/k)
is isomorphic to the induced representation Ind1 (1), where 1 denotes
the trivial representation (of the trivial group).
The examples above illustrate that though an algebraic torus T satisfies

= Gnm , it may not be the case that T ∼
Tksep ∼ = Gnm . This motivates the following
definition:
Definition 1.18. An algebraic torus T over a field k is said to be split if

T ' Gnm over k or if equivalently X ∗ (T )k ∼= Zrank(T ) . An algebraic torus T
is said to be anisotropic if X ∗ (T )k = {id}.
Any torus T can be decomposed as T = T ani T spl where T spl is the maximal
split subtorus, T ani is the maximal anisotropic subtorus, and T ani ∩ T spl is
finite.
Definition 1.19. A torus T ≤ G is maximal if Tk is maximal among all

tori of Gk .
Theorem 1.7.2 Every connected algebraic group admits a maximal torus.

All maximal tori in Gk are conjugate under G(k). t
u
Proof. In the generality we are considering the first result is due to Grothendieck
(see, e.g. [Con14, Appendix A]). The second is [Bor91, IV.11.3]. t
u
In view of the second assertion of Theorem 1.7.2, the rank of a maximal torus
of G is an invariant of G; it is known as the rank of G.
For the remainder of this section G is a reductive group and T ≤ G is a
torus. Let NG (T ) be the normalizer of T in G and ZG (T ) is the centralizer of
T in G. The torus T is maximal if and only if ZG (T ) = T [Mil17, Corollary
17.84].
Definition 1.20. The Weyl Group of T in G is W (G, T ) := NG (T )/ZG (T ).
This brief definition hides some important subtleties as we now explain. A

possible reference is [Con14, §3]. The basic reference for quotients by reductive
groups in the affine case is [MFK94, §0]. The group schemes NG (T ), ZG (T )
1.7 Tori 17
are algebraic subgroups of G and W (G, T ) the GIT quotient of NG (T ) by

ZG (T ). This is explained in some detail in §17.1.
It turns out that W (G, T ) is again a smooth (even étale) group scheme of
finite type over k. Moreover one has
W (G, T )(k sep ) = NG (T )(k sep )/ZG (T )(k sep ). (1.10)
To describe W (G, T )(R) for general k-algebras R is involved, but at least

for subfields k ≤ L ≤ k sep we can describe it as follows. Since NG (T ) and
ZG (T ) are schemes over k the set NG (T )(k) comes (equipped with an action
of Galk preserving ZG (T )(k sep ); hence we also obtain an action of Galk on
W (G, T )(k sep ). Then
sep
W (G, T )(L) = W (G, T )(k sep )Gal(k /L)
.
A nice discussion of this point, which is a special case of what is known

as Galois descent, is contained in [Mum99, §II.4]. We wish to discuss these
concepts in the special case where G = GLn . Before beginning we record the
following definition:
Definition 1.21. The group G is said to be split if there exists a maximal

torus of G that is split.
If T ≤ GLn is the torus of diagonal matrices then T is a split max-

imal torus, and hence GLn is split. For any field k 0 /k the Weyl group
W (T, GLn )(k 0 ) can be identified with the group of permutation matrices and
hence in this case W (T, GLn )(k 0 ) is Sn , the symmetric group on n letters.
More generally, if T ≤ G is a split maximal torus one has
W (G, T )(k 0 ) = NG (k 0 )/ZG (k 0 ) (1.11)
[Mil17, Proposition 21.1].

In general, if L/k is an étale k-algebra of rank n (for example a field
extension of degree n) then choosing a basis for k we obtain an embedding
ResL/k Gm −→ GLn .
In particular if L/k is Galois then W (GLn , T )(k) ∼

= Gal(L/k). Every maximal
torus in GLn arises in this manner for some L/k (compare Exercise 1.11).
After spending all this time discussing tori we give one important moti-
vation for introducing them. Suppose that G is a split reductive group and
that T ≤ G is a split maximal torus. Given any representation
r : G −→ GLV
it follows from the fact that T is abelian and reductive that we can decompose
V as
V = ⊕α∈X ∗ (T ) Vα (1.12)
where Vα = {v ∈ V : r(t).v = α(t).v}. The α occurring in this decomposition

are known as weights and the Vα are known as weight spaces.
One has the following basic theorem:
Theorem 1.7.3 The collection of weights α together with the weight multi-
plicities dim Vα determine the representation V up to isomorphism. t
u
It is not hard to see that the set of weights is invariant under the natural
action of W (T, G)(k) on X ∗ (T ) which leaves the multiplicities of the weight
spaces dim Vα fixed.
In fact, there is an partial ordering one can put on the space X ∗ (T ) such
that each representation of G admits a highest weight with respect to the or-
dering, unique up to the action of W (T, G)(k). Moreover, one can characterize
the set of highest weights that can occur. This is known as Cartan-Weyl
highest weight theory.
One key fact one can take from this discussion is that the representa-
tion theory of G is determined by the restriction of the representation to a
sufficiently large subgroup (in this case a maximal torus). Happily, the rep-
resentation theory of a maximal torus is fairly simple and can be studied via
linear algebra. The idea of studying representations by studying their restric-
tion to subgroups is an incredibly useful one; it will come up in various guises
throughout this book.
1.8 Root data
Let G be a split reductive group over a perfect field k and let T ≤ G be a

split maximal torus. Our next goal is to associate to such a pair (G, T ) a root
datum Ψ (G, T ) = (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ ). The root datum is a refinement of the related
notion of a root system (also defined below) that Demazure introduced to
systematically keep track of the central torus of G [DG74, Expose XXII]. The
root datum characterizes G, and in fact Demazure proves that it characterizes
(split) G even in the case where k is replaced by Z. This in some sense
completed work of Chevalley who proved the analogous statement for semi-
simple groups over fields [Che58].
Let g denote the Lie algebra of G. As we saw in §1.6 one has an adjoint
representation
Ad : G −→ GL(g). (1.13)
For example, when G = GLn this is the usual action of GLn on the space of
n × n matrices gln by conjugation.
Since Ad(T ) consists of commuting semi-simple elements the action of T
on g is diagonalizable. For a character α ∈ X ∗ (T ), let
1.8 Root data 19
gα := {X ∈ g | Ad(t)X = α(t)X for all t ∈ T (k)}. (1.14)
Definition 1.22. The nonzero α ∈ X ∗ (T ) such that gα 6= 0 are called the

roots of T in G. We let Φ(G, T ) be the (finite) set of all such roots α, and
call the corresponding gα root spaces.
Just as in (1.12) we have a decomposition
M
g=t⊕ gα
α∈Φ(G,T )
where t := Lie T . It turns out that each of the root spaces gα are one dimen-
sional.
One turns the set of roots Φ(G, T ) into a combinatorial gadget as follows.
Let
V := hΦ(G, T )i ⊗Z R,
where hΦ(G, T )i ⊂ X ∗ (T )(k) denotes the (Z-linear) span of Φ(G, T ). The pair
(Φ(G, T ), V ) satisfies remarkable symmetry properties that are axiomatized
in the following:
Definition 1.23. Let V be a finite dimensional R-vector space, and Φ a
subset of V . We say that (Φ, V ) is a root system if the following three
conditions are satisfied:
(a) Φ is finite, does not contain 0, and spans V ;
(b) For each α ∈ Φ there exists a reflection sα relative to α (i.e. an involution
of V with sα (α) = −α and restricting to the identity on a subspace of V
of codimension 1) such that sα (Φ) = Φ;
(c) For every α, β ∈ Φ, sα (β) − β is an integer multiple of α.
A root system (Φ, V ) is said to be of rank dimR V , and is said to be reduced
if for each α ∈ Φ, ±α are the only multiples of α in Φ.
We will not need the notion until §1.9, but a subset
∆⊂Φ (1.15)
is a base if it is a basis of V and each α ∈ Φ can be uniquely expressed as

`
X
ci αi
i=1
where the ci ’s are all integers that have the same sign. We define
Φ+ ⊂ Φ (resp. Φ− ⊂ Φ)
to be the set of roots expressible as a sum of positive (resp. negative) linear

combinations of the elements in the base. Then Φ = Φ+ q Φ− . One can also
define a system of positive roots a priori and use it to define bases; see, for
example, [Hum78, §10].
The Weyl group of (Φ, V ) is the subgroup of GL(V ) generated by the
reflections sα :
W (Φ, V ) := hsα : α ∈ Φi ⊆ GL(V ).
The following is [Mil17, Corollary 21.38]:
Proposition 1.8.1 If (Φ, V ) is the root system associated with the split max-
imal torus T ≤ G then (Φ, V ) is reduced and
W (Φ, V ) ∼
= W (G, T )(k).
t
u
If Φ ⊂ V is a finite spanning set not containing 0 then (Φ, V ) is a root
system if and only if there is a map
Φ −→ V ∨ := Hom(V, R)
α 7−→ α∨
such that α∨ (α) = 2, α∨ (Φ) ⊂ Z, and the reflection
sα (x) := α∨ (x)α
preserves Φ. If such a map Φ → V ∨ exists it is unique [Mil17, C.14]. The

image of the map Φ → V ∨ is denoted Φ∨ and called the set of coroots.
Lemma 1.8.2 The pair (Φ∨ , V ∨ ) is a root system. t
u
A fundamental result (Theorem 1.8.3) is that the quadruple
Ψ (G, T ) = (X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), Φ, Φ∨ )
attached to T ⊂ G contains enough information to characterize G, at least

over k. To be more precise suppose that we have a quadruple (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ )
consisting of a pair of free abelian groups X, Y with a perfect pairing h , i :
X × Y → Z and a bijective correspondence
Φ −→ Φ∨
α 7−→ α∨ .
For each α ∈ Φ we let sα : X → X and sα∨ : Y → Y be the endomorphism

given by
sα (x) := x − hx, α∨ iα
sα∨ (y) := y − hy, αiα∨ .
Definition 1.24. The quadruple (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ ) is a root datum if

1.8 Root data 21
(a) hα, α∨ i = 2, and

(b) if for each α ∈ Φ, then sα (Φ) ⊂ Φ, and the group hsα | α ∈ Φi generated
by {sα } is finite.
We say that a root datum is reduced if α ∈ Φ only if 2α ∈
/ Φ.
∼
An isomorphism of root data (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ ) − → (X 0 , Y 0 , Φ0 , Φ0∨ ) is a group
∼ ∼
isomorphism X − → X sending Φ to Φ whose dual Y 0 −
0 0
→ Y sends Φ0∨ to Φ∨ .
We note that an isomorphism of reductive groups over k gives rise to an iso-
morphism of their underlying root data. Indeed, if G → G0 is an isomorphism
of reductive groups over k, then upon precomposing the isomorphism with an
inner automorphism of G and postcomposing with an inner automorphism of
G0 we can assume that the isomorphism maps a given maximal torus T of G
to a given maximal torus T 0 of G0 , and hence induces an isomorphism of the
underlying root data. The following result not only implies that every root
datum comes from an algebraic group, it implies that every isomorphism of
root data arises in this manner:
Theorem 1.8.3 (Chevalley, Demazure) Assume k = k. The map

isomorphism classes of isomorphism classes of
−→
reductive groups over k reduced root data
G 7−→ Ψ (G, T )
˜ (G0 , T 0 ) is
is bijective. Moreover, every isomorphism of root data Ψ (G, T )→Ψ
induced by an isomorphism G→G ˜ 0 sending T to T 0 , unique up to the conju-
gation actions of T (k) and T 0 (k). t
u
This theorem tells us that if we can classify root data, then we can classify
split reductive groups. In fact, Killing obtained a classification of the under-
lying root systems (up to some mistakes) in [Kil88, Kil90]. Killing’s work was
revisited and corrected in E. Cartan’s thesis.
If (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ ) is a root datum, then so is (Y, X, Φ∨ , Φ). The associated
reductive algebraic group over C is denoted G b and is called the complex
dual of G. We note that there is an isomorphism
W (G, T )k̄ −→W

˜ (G,
b Tb)(C) (1.16)
sα 7−→ sα∨ .
The complex dual G b is a key component in the definition of Langlands dual

group (see §7.3 ).
One might ask if one could define in a natural way a morphism of root data,
and thereby use root data to classify morphisms between reductive groups.
If such a definition exists, we do not know it, and there are reasons to be
pessimistic. However, it is the case that a great deal of information about
morphisms between reductive groups can be deduced by considering root
data. A systematic account of this for classical groups is given in Dynkin’s

work [Dyn52].
We now record arguably the most basic example of a root datum:
Example 1.9. Let G = GLn . The group of diagonal matrices

t1
×
T (R) := ..
. | t i ∈ R
tn
is a maximal torus in G. The groups of characters and of cocharacters of T

are both isomorphic to Zn via
t1
k1 kn
(k1 , . . . , kn ) 7−→ ..
. →
7 t1 · · · tn
tn
and !!
tk1
(k1 , . . . , kn ) 7−→ t 7→ ..
. ,
tkn
respectively. Note that with these identifications, the natural pairing h , i :

X ∗ (T ) × X∗ (T ) → Z corresponds to the standard “inner product” in Zn . The
roots of G relative to T are the characters
t1
eij : ..
. 7→ ti t−1
j
tn
for every pair of integers (i, j), 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n with i 6= j, and the corresponding
root spaces gln,eij are the linear span of the n × n matrix with all entries zero
except the (i, j)-th component. The coroot e∨ ij associated with eij is the map
sending t to the diagonal matrix with t in the ith entry and t−1 in the jth
entry and 1 in all other entries.
1.9 Parabolic subgroups
We assume in this subsection that G is a reductive group over a perfect field

k with algebraic closure k.
Definition 1.25. A closed subgroup B ≤ G is a Borel subgroup if Bk is

a maximal smooth connected solvable subgroup of Gk . A smooth subgroup
P ≤ G is a parabolic subgroup if Pk contains a Borel subgroup of Gk .
The group Gk trivially has Borel subgroups, and hence G always has at
least one parabolic subgroup, namely G itself. A proper parabolic subgroup
is a parabolic subgroup of G not equal to G. In general, a reductive group
need not have proper parabolic subgroups. For example, if D is a division
1.9 Parabolic subgroups 23
algebra with center k of dimension bigger than 1 over k and G is the algebraic
group defined by
G(R) = (D ⊗k R)× , (1.17)
then G does not have a proper parabolic subgroup (Exercise 1.12).

It is useful to isolate a weakening of the notion of a split reductive group:
Definition 1.26. A reductive group G is said to be quasi split if it contains
a Borel subgroup.
Note that G is split only if it is quasi split, but that the converse is not
true. Indeed, take G to be the unitary group U (1, 1) over the real numbers
defined by
G(R) = g ∈ GL2 (C ⊗R R) : g t −1 −1 g = −1 −1

where the bar denotes complex conjugation. Then the subgroup of upper
triangular matrices in G is a Borel subgroup of G. Thus G is quasi split. It
is not, however, split.
From the optic of finite-dimensional representation theory the behavior of
a split reductive group is essentially as simple as a group over an algebraically
closed field (compare §1.7). Quasi-split groups are a little more technical to
handle, but the existence of the Borel subgroup makes the theory not much
more difficult. The fact that a general reductive group does not have a Borel
subgroup (over the base field) creates more substantial problems. In this
case one has to do with a minimal parabolic subgroup. Of course, in the
quasi-split case, a minimal parabolic subgroup is simply a Borel subgroup.
Basic facts about parabolic subgroups come up constantly in the theory of
automorphic representations. For example, they are used to understand the
structure of adelic quotients at infinity (see §2.7) and are used to describe
the representation theory of a reductive group inductively (see §4.9, §8.2 and
Chapter 10). Thus we record some of the basic structural facts about the set
of parabolic subgroups of G in this section. One reference is [Bor91, §20-21].
It is convenient to start with split tori in G. If there is no split torus con-
tained in G then G is said to be anisotropic. In this case the only parabolic
subgroup of G is G itself. Otherwise G is said to be isotropic. If G is isotropic
then there exists a maximal split torus T ≤ G unique up to conjugation. Just
as in the case when G is split (discussed in §1.8), we can decompose g under
the adjoint action (1.13) into eigenspaces under T :
M
g := m ⊕ gα (1.18)
α∈Φ(G,T )
where gα is defined as in (1.14). Here Φ(G, T ) is set of nonzero weights occur-

ring in the decomposition above, and m is the 0 eigenspace. The set Φ(G, T )
is usually referred to as the set of relative roots (or more precisely, roots
relative to k as opposed to k), but we will avoid this terminology because we

will later discuss relative trace formulae, which have nothing to do with this
notion of relative. The set Φ(G, T ) ⊂ X ∗ (T ) ⊗Z R is a root system, but it is
not in general reduced.
Just as all the maximal split tori in G are conjugate under G(k), the
minimal parabolic subgroups are also conjugate under G(k). Moreover, every
minimal parabolic subgroup contains the centralizer Z(T ) of a maximal split
torus T ≤ G. Thus to describe all minimal parabolic subgroups it suffices to
fix a maximal split torus T ≤ G and describe all minimal parabolic subgroups
containing Z(T ). Let ∆ ≤ Φ(G, T ) be a base. Then we can consider the set
of positive roots Φ+ with respect to ∆. Then there is a unique minimal
parabolic subgroup P0 ≥ Z(T ) whose unipotent radical N0 ≤ P0 satisfies
M
Lie N0 = gα .
α∈Φ+
Theorem 1.9.1 The correspondence described above defines a bijection
{bases ∆ ⊆ Φ(G, T )} −→
˜ {P0 ≥ Z(T ) : P0 minimal parabolic subgroups} . t
u
If we fix a minimal parabolic subgroup P0 then the parabolic subgroups

containing P0 are called standard. Every parabolic subgroup is conjugate
under G(k) to a unique standard parabolic subgroup, and two standard
parabolic subgroups are G(k)-conjugate if and only if they are equal. Thus
to describe all parabolic subgroups of G it suffices to fix a minimal parabolic
subgroup P0 of G and describe all standard parabolic subgroups (with respect
to P0 ).
To accomplish this, let J ≤ ∆ be a subset. Let
Φ(J) := ZJ ∩ Φ
There is a unique parabolic subgroup PJ ≥ P0 with unipotent radical NJ

such M
Lie NJ = gα .
α∈Φ+ −(Φ(J)∩Φ+ )
For the proof of the following theorem see [Bor91, Proposition 21.12]:
Theorem 1.9.2 There is a bijective correspondence
{J ⊂ ∆}−→˜ {standard parabolic subgroups of G}

J 7−→ PJ .
The two bijections in theorems 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 allow us to define the no-
tion of a parabolic subgroup opposite to a given parabolic subgroup. More
precisely, suppose we are given a standard parabolic subgroup P ≤ G with
unipotent radical N containing the centralizer of a maximal split torus T of

G: Z(T ) ≤ P ≤ G. Then one has an opposite parabolic P − constructed as
follows: If P = P0 is minimal, then we take P0− to be the minimal parabolic
subgroup attached to the base
−∆ := {α ∈ Φ : −α ∈ ∆}.
If P = PJ , then we define P − to be the parabolic subgroup containing the

minimal parabolic subgroup P0− that is attached to the subset
−J := {α ∈ Φ : −α ∈ J} ⊆ −∆.
It turns out that

P ∩ P − = M,
the Levi subgroup of P . The unipotent radical of P − is usually denoted N − .
Example 1.10. The subgroup B ≤ GLn of upper triangular matrices is a

Borel subgroup. Throughout this book when we speak of standard parabolic
subgroups in GLn we will mean parabolic subgroups that are standard with
respect to this choice of Borel subgroup. The base of Φ(G, T ) and set of
positive roots associated to B are
∆ : = {ei,i+1 : 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1}
Φ+ : = {ei,j : i < j}
respectively. In particular there is a bijection

d
X
{ subsets of ∆}−→{n
˜ 1 , . . . , nd ∈ Z>0 : ni = n}
i=1
where n1 is the first index such that en1 ,n1 +1 is not an element of the subset,
n2 is the second index such that en2 ,n2 +1 is not an element of the subset, etc.
Unwinding these equivalences, we see that the standard parabolic sub-
groups of GLn correspond Pd bijectively to ordered tuples of positive integers
n1 , . . . , nd such that i=1 ni = n. The corresponding parabolic subgroup is
the product of B and the block diagonal matrices of the form
  
 x1
 

 ..
M (R) :=  : x ∈ GL (R)

 .  i n i

xd
 
We refer to this parabolic subgroup as the (standard) parabolic subgroup of

type (n1 , . . . , nd ). The subgroup M (R) is referred to as the standard Levi
subgroup of type (n1 , . . . , nd ).
Finally, it is sometimes useful to generalize the notion of roots still further.

If T is any split torus in G, we can decompose g into eigenspaces as before.
We let Φ(G, T ) be the set of nonzero eigenspaces. Suppose that P ≤ G is a
parabolic subgroup and that T ≤ P is a maximal split torus in the center
of P . In this case, the set of roots need not be a root system [Kna86, §V.5].
However, we can still define a partition Φ+ q Φ− = Φ(G, T ) such that Φ+ is
the set of roots contained in the unipotent radical of P . This is the set of
positive roots defined by P . We will also require the notion of a positive
Weyl chamber in this context. Let Λ ⊂ X ∗ (T ) ⊗Z R denote the union of the
hyperplanes on which an element of Φ(G, T ) vanishes. A Weyl chamber is
a connected component of X ∗ (T ) ⊗Z R \ Λ; they are permuted transitively by
W (G, T ). The positive Weyl chamber attached to P is the unique Weyl
chamber whose elements are positive R-linear combinations of the positive
roots.
Exercises
1.1. Prove that a morphism of affine schemes induces a continuous map of

the underlying topological spaces. Prove that if
Spec(A/I) −→ Spec(A)
is an embedding then the image of the topological space of Spec(A/I) in

Spec(A) is V (I).
1.2. Assume that X = Spec(C[t1 , . . . , tn ]/(f1 , . . . , fn−d )) is a smooth scheme
over the complex numbers. Show that X(C) may be identified with a smooth
complex manifold, namely the zero locus of the fi .
1.3. Let X and Y be affine schemes over the ring k. Prove that giving a
natural transformation of functors X → Y is equivalent to giving a morphism
of k-algebras O(Y ) → O(Y ). Deduce that Spec induces an equivalence of
categories from the category of k-algebras to the category of affine k-schemes.
1.4. Give examples of affine schemes of finite type over C that are nonreduced,
reducible, and reduced and irreducible.
1.5. Prove that if X → Y is a closed immersion of affine schemes over k then
X(R) → Y (R) is injective for all k-algebras R.
1.6. Let X, Y, Z be affine k-schemes equipped with morphisms f : X → Y
and g : Z → Y . Prove that
X ×Y Z(R) = X(R) ×Y (R) ×Z(R)
for k-algebras R.
1.7. Let G be an affine scheme over k. Let Id : G −→ G denote the identity

morphism, let
pi : G × G −→ G
denote the two projections, and let
diag : G −→ G × G
denote the diagonal map. We say that G is a group object in the category
of k-schemes if there exist morphisms of k-schemes
m : G × G −→ G
e : Spec k −→ G
inv : G −→ G
such that the following diagrams commute:
G×G×G
Id×m
/G
m×Id m

G
m /G
Spec k × G
e×Id
/ G×G o Id×e
G × Spec k
m
' w
G
(inv,Id) (Id,inv)
G / G×G o G
m

Spec k
e /Go e
Spec k
Prove that G is a group scheme if and only if it is a group object in the
category of k schemes.
1.8. For R-algebras R define
Un (R) := {g ∈ GLn (C ⊗R R) : gḡ t = In }
where the bar denotes the action of complex conjugation. Show that Un is
an algebraic group over R, that Un (R) is compact, and that
UnC ∼
= GLnC .
The group Un is called the definite unitary group over R.

1.9. Prove that
O(G)/ ker()2 = k ⊕ ker()/ ker()2
as k-algebras.
1.10. Assume k is a field of characteristic not 2 and J ∈ GLn (k) is an invert-

ible symmetric or skew-symmetric matrix. For k algebra R, if
G(R) := {g ∈ GLn (R) : g t Jg = J}
then
Lie G = {X ∈ gln : X t J + JX = 0}.
1.11. Let k be a perfect field. Prove that the set of conjugacy classes of
maximal tori T ≤ GLn/k is in natural bijection with étale k-algebras of
degree n.
1.12. If D is a division algebra over a field k and G is the algebraic group

defined by
G(R) = (D ⊗k R)× ,
then G has no proper parabolic subgroups (over k).
1.13. Show that for a perfect field k the set of GLn (k)-conjugacy classes of
parabolic subgroups of GLn is in bijective correspondence with the partitions
of n. Here a partition of n is a nonincreasing set of positive integers whose
sum is n.
1.14. Let H ≤ G be affine algebraic groups over a perfect field k. Show that
there is an exact sequence of pointed sets

1 → H(k) → G(k) → G/H(k) → ker H 1 (k, H) → H 1 (k, G) .
Chapter 2
Adeles
Adeles make life possible.

J. Arthur
Abstract Automorphic representations are defined as certain representations

of the adelic points of reductive algebraic groups. In this chapter, we introduce
the adele ring and recall the basic properties of the adelic points of reductive
groups. They play a central role in the arithmetic theory of algebraic groups
and the class field theory.
2.1 Adeles
The arithmetic objects of interest in this book are constructed using global
fields and their adele rings. We recall the construction of the adeles in this
section; references include [CF86, Neu99, RV99].
Definition 2.1. A global field F is a field which is a finite extension of Q

or of Fp (t) for some prime p. Global fields over Q are called number fields
while global fields over Fp (t) are called function fields.
To each global field F one can associate an adele ring AF . Before defining
this ring, we recall the related notions of a valuation (or a finite place) of a
global field.
Definition 2.2. Let F be a field. A (nonarchimedean) valuation on F is a

map
v : F −→ R ∪ ∞
such that for all a, b ∈ F , v satisfies the following:
(a) v(a) = ∞ if and only if a = 0.
(b) v(a) + v(b) = v(ab).
29
30 2 Adeles
(c) v(a + b) ≥ min(v(a), v(b)).

These axioms are designed so that if one picks 0 < α < 1 then
| · |v : F −→ R≥0 (2.1)
x 7−→ αv(x)
is a nonarchimedean absolute value on F in the sense of the following defini-

tion:
Definition 2.3. Let F be a field. An absolute value
| · |v : F −→ R≥0
is a function satisfying the following axioms:

(a) |a|v = 0 if and only if a = 0.
(b) |ab|v = |a|v |b|v .
(c) |a + b|v ≤ |a|v + |b|v .
It is nonarchimedean if it satisfies the following strengthening of (c):
(c’)|a + b|v ≤ max(|a|v , |b|v ).
If | · |v satisfies (c) but not (c’) we say | · |v is archimedean.
We point out that (c’) implies (c), but not conversely. We often implicitly
exclude the trivial absolute value given by |a|v = 1 for all a ∈ F × .
An absolute value |·|v induces a metric on F known as the v-adic metric.
The completion of F with respect to this metric is denoted Fv . This comple-
tion is a local field, that is, a field equipped with a nontrivial absolute value
that is locally compact with respect to the induced metric. All local fields
arise as the completion of some global field [Lor08, §25, Theorem 2].
Definition 2.4. A place of a global field F is an equivalence class of ab-
solute values, where two absolute values are said to be equivalent if they
induce the same topology on F . A place is (non)archimedean if it consists of
(non)archimedean absolute values.
We now describe these places and fix representative absolute values in each
place. These representative absolute values are said to be the normalized
absolute values. The places of a global field F fall into two categories: the
finite and infinite places.
The finite places are in bijection with the prime ideals of OF . The place
v associated to a prime p of OF is the equivalence class of an absolute value
attached to the valuation
v(x) := max{k ∈ Z : x ∈ pk OF }.
The normalized absolute value in this equivalence class is

2.1 Adeles 31
|x|v = qv−v(x)
where qv := |OF /p|. These valuations are all nonarchimedean.

The infinite places of a number field are all archimedean. They are indexed
by embeddings τ : F ,→ C up to conjugation; the associated normalized
absolute value is (
|τ (x)| if τ (F ) ≤ R
|x|v :=
τ (x)τ (x) if τ (F ) 6≤ R.
Here on the right the | · | denotes the usual absolute value on R and the
bar denotes complex conjugation. Notice that in the complex case (i.e. where
τ (F ) 6≤ R) this is the square of the usual absolute value.
The infinite places of a function field are those attached to extensions of
the absolute value
f (t) degg−degf
g(t) := p

∞
on Fp (t). If Fv is the completion of F with respect to such a valuation, the

associated normalized absolute value is
1/[Fv :F((t))]
|x|v := |NFv /Fp ((t)) ((x))|∞ .
These valuations are archimedean, in contrast to the archimedean case.

Henceforth we will always take | · |v to be the unique normalized absolute
value attached to v.
We note that the set of infinite places of F is often denoted by ∞, and
one often writes v|∞ or v - ∞ as shorthand for “v is an infinite place of F ”
and “v is a finite place of F ,” respectively.
For any place v, write Fv for the completion of F with respect to some
choice of absolute value associated to v. Since the absolute values correspond-
ing to v all induce the same topology on F , the field Fv is independent of
this choice. If v is finite, then the ring of integers of Fv is
OFv = {x ∈ Fv : |x|v ≤ 1};
it is a local ring with a unique maximal ideal
$v OFv := {x ∈ Fv : |x|v < 1}.
Here $v is a uniformizer for Fv , that is, a generator for the maximal ideal of
OFv .
Let us make these constructions explicit when F = Q. If p ∈ Z is a prime,
then completing Q at the p-adic absolute value gives rise to the local field
Qp . Its ring of integers is Zp and the maximal ideal is pZp . The residue field
is Zp /pZp ∼= Z/pZ ∼ = Fp , so the normalized absolute is just the usual p-adic
norm. There is only one infinite place of Q, denoted ∞, and Q∞ ∼ = R. The
normalized archimedean norm | · |∞ is the usual Euclidean norm on R.
32 2 Adeles
The normalization allows one to prove that the following product for-
mula holds:
Proposition 2.1.1 For x ∈ F × one has
Y
|x|v = 1
v
where the product is over all places v of F . t

u
Definition 2.5. Let F be a global field. The ring of adeles of F , denoted

by AF , is the restricted direct product of the completions Fv with respect to
the rings of integers OFv . In other words,
( )
Y
AF = (xv ) ∈ Fv : xv ∈ OFv for all but finitely many places v . (2.2)
v
The restricted product is usually denoted by a prime:

Y0
AF = Fv .
v
Q
Note that AF is a subring of the full product v Fv . If S is a finite set of
places of F then we write
Y0
ASF = Fv
v6∈S
 
 Y 
: = (xv ) ∈ Fv : xv ∈ OFv for all but finitely many places v ,
 
v6∈S
Y
FS := AF,S = Fv .
v∈S
Thus we may identify FS × ASF = AF . We write ∞ for the set of infinite

places of F . Instead of writing v ∈ ∞ it is traditional to write v | ∞ and
similarly v - ∞ instead of v 6∈ ∞. For any finite sets of places S 0 ⊆ S we set
0 Y
FSS := Fv . (2.3)
v∈S−S 0
We endow AF with the restricted product topology. This is defined

by stipulating that open sets are sets of the form
Y
US × OFv
v6∈S
2.1 Adeles 33
where S is a finite set of places of F including the infinite places and US ⊆ FS

open set. We give ASF = 0 × ASF ⊂ AF the subspace topology and
is an Q
FS = v∈S Fv the product topology. Then the identification FS × ASF = AF
becomes an isomorphism of topological rings. We will often use the following
useful notation: if S is a set of places of F
Y
bFS :=
O OFv . (2.4)
finite v∈S
It agrees with the profinite completion of OFS , the ring of S-integers of F ,

that is, elements of F that are integral outside of the finite places in S.
The topology on AF is not the same as the topology
Q induced
Q on AF by
regarding it as a subset of the direct product v Fv . While v Fv is not
locally compact, for AF one has the following:
Proposition 2.1.2 The adele ring AF of a global field F is a locally compact
Hausdorff topological ring.
Proof. We prove that AF is locally compact and leave the other details to
the reader. For any finite set S of places F including the infinite places, the
subset Y
Fv × ObS (2.5)
F
v∈S
is an open subring of AF for which the induced topology coincides with

the product topology. In particular (2.5) is locally compact by Tychonoff’s
theorem. Every x ∈ AF is contained in a set of the form (2.5), which shows
that AF is locally compact. t
u
There is a natural diagonal embedding F ,→ AF given by sending an
element of F to all of its completions.
Lemma 2.1.3 The image of F in AF under the diagonal embedding is closed
and discrete.
Proof. Choose x ∈ F × . We will construct a neighborhood of x in AF con-
taining no other element of F . Since AF is a topological group under addition
this will suffice to complete the proof.
For each finite place v of F let nv = v(x), so that x ∈ $vnv but x 6∈ $vnv +1
for all v. Note that nv = 0 for all but finitely many places. For each infinite
place v let  
 Y 
Uv := y ∈ Fv : |y − x|v < |x|−|∞|
v
 
v-∞
(here |∞| is the number of infinite places of S). Consider the open subset of
AF defined by Y Y
U= Uv × $vnv .
v|∞ v-∞
34 2 Adeles
By construction, x ∈ U . Suppose that y ∈ U . Then |x − y|v ≤ |x|v for all

finite places v. Thus
Y Y Y
|x − y|v ≤ |x|v × |x − y|v < 1.
v v-∞ v|∞
since |x−y|v ≤ |x|v for all finite places v. By the product formula we conclude
that x = y. t
u
We often identify F with its image under the diagonal embedding. Given
Lemma 2.1.3 the following theorem can be surprising the first time one sees
it:
Theorem 2.1.4 (Strong Approximation) If S is any finite nonempty set
of places of F then F is dense in ASF . t
u
Thus omitting one place is enough to move F from being discrete to being
dense. The proof can be found in any standard reference, see [Cas67, §15] for
example.
We close this section by remarking that one can construct analogues of
the finite adeles in more general situations, e.g. schemes of finite type over
the ring of integers of a global field [Hub91]. The construction is quite a bit
more involved than that given above.
2.2 Adelic points of affine schemes
Weil and Grothendieck both gave approaches (under different hypotheses) to

topologizing the points of schemes of finite type over a topological ring (for
example, AF ). Conrad gave a beautiful exposition/elaboration in [Con12b].
We lift Theorem 2.2.1 below and its proof from loc. cit. with little modifica-
tion.
Theorem 2.2.1 Let R be a topological ring. There exists a unique way to
topologize X(R) for all affine schemes X of finite type over R such that
(a) the topology is functorial in X; that is if X → Y is a morphism of affine
schemes of finite type over R, then the induced map on points X(R) →
Y (R) is continuous;
(b) the topology is compatible with fibre products; this means that if X → Y
and Z → Y are morphisms of affine schemes, all of finite type over R,
then the topology on X ×Y Z(R) is exactly the fibre product topology;
(c) closed immersions of schemes X ,→ Y induce topological embeddings
X(R) ,→ Y (R);
(d) if X = Spec R[t] then X(R) is homeomorphic with R under the natural
identification X(R) ∼= R.
2.2 Adelic points of affine schemes 35
If R is Hausdorff or locally compact, then so is X(R). Moreover, if R is Haus-

dorff then closed immersions induce closed embeddings, not just topological
embeddings.
In the proof and throughout this book we take the convention that locally
compact spaces are Hausdorff.
If the reader is uncomfortable with fiber products then they can omit the
assertions in the theorem involving them and their proof. The only conse-
quence of these facts we really need in the sequel is that with the definition
of the topology on Gna (R) given above the natural bijection
Gna (R)−→R
˜ n
is a homeomorphism if we give the right hand side the product topology.
Proof. Let X be an affine R-scheme. Pick an R-algebra isomorphism
A := O(X) ∼
= R[t1 , . . . , tn ]/I (2.6)
for an ideal I, and identify X(R) with the subset of Rn on which the elements
of I (thought of as polynomials on Rn ) vanish.
We start with uniqueness. By our assumption on compatibility with fiber
products the natural bijection
˜ n
Spec R[t1 , . . . , tn ](R)−→R
is a homeomorphism provided that we give the right hand side the product
topology. By assumption, this induces a topological embedding X(R) ,→ Rn .
This completes the proof of uniqueness and also shows that X(R) is Hausdorff
if R is Hausdorff. If R is Hausdorff, then 0 ∈ R is closed, so viewing X(R) as
the the vanishing locus of f ∈ I (viewed as polynomials on Rn ) we see that
X(R) is closed. Thus if R is locally compact X(R) then is as well.
We now prove existence. Note that there is a canonical and tautological
injection
X(R) = Hom(A, R) −→ RA . (2.7)
We claim that the topology defined using (2.6) as above is the same as the
subspace topology defined by the canonical injection X(R) ,→ RA , so it
is independent of the choice of (2.6). Let a1 , . . . , an ∈ A correspond to t1
(mod I), . . . , tn (mod I) via (2.6), so the injection X(R) ,→ Rn defined by
(2.6) is the composition of the natural injection X(R) ,→ RA and the map
RA → Rn given by projection to the factors indexed by (a1 , . . . , an ). There-
fore every open set in X(R) is induced by an open set in RA because RA → Rn
is continuous. Since every element of A is an R-polynomial in a1 , . . . , an and
R is a topological ring, it follows that the map X(R) → RA is also continuous.
Thus X(R) has been given the subspace topology from RA . This completes
36 2 Adeles
the proof of the claim. It also implies that the formation of the topology on
X(R) is functorial (i.e. morphisms of affine schemes induce continuous maps
on R-points).
Consider a closed immersion
i : X := Spec A ,→ X 0 := Spec A0
corresponding to a surjective R-algebra map h : A0 → A. The map

0
j : RA −→ RA
(ra ) 7−→ (rh(a0 ) )
is visibly a topological embedding; it topologically identifies RA with the sub-

0
set of RA cut out by a collection of equalities among components. Moreover
j is a closed embedding when R is Hausdorff. We have
X 0 (R) ∩ j(RA ) = j(X(R))
because a set theoretic map A → R is an R-algebra homomorphism if and

only if its composition with h is an R-algebra map. Hence i : X(R) → X 0 (R)
is an embedding of topologival spaces and it is a closed embedding when R is
Hausdorff. By forming products of closed immersions into affine spaces Gna ,
we see that
(X ×Spec R X 0 )(R) → X(R) × X 0 (R)
is a topological ismomorphism via reduction to the trivial special case when
X and X 0 are affine spaces.
Finally, we prove that for given maps X → Y and Z → Y between affine
R-schemes the bijection (X ×Y Z)(R) → X(R) ×Y (R) Z(R) is a topological
isomorphism. Consider the (tautological) isomorphism
X ×Y Z ∼
= (X ×R Z) × Y ×R Y
and its topological counterpart. The product map
O(Y ) ⊗R O(Y ) −→ O(Y )
is surjective and hence

Y −→ Y ×R Y
is a closed immersion (i.e. affine schemes are separated).
Since we have already checked compatibility with fiber products over
Spec R, we see that we are reduced to the case in which one of the map
defining the fiber product is a closed immersion. We have already proven
that closed immersions yield topological embeddings, so we deduce compati-
bility with fiber products. t
u
2.3 Relationship with restricted direct products 37
2.3 Relationship with restricted direct products
In practice we will be interested in the topological space X(AF ) when X is

an algebraic group. To explain how this works, consider first the case where
X = GLn . There is a closed immersion GLn ,→ Mn × Ga given on points in
a Z-algebra R by
GLn (R) −→ Mn (R) × Ga (R) (2.8)

−1
g 7−→ (g, det g ).
Here Mn is the affine scheme of n × n matrices. It is the affine scheme

whose points in a Z-algebra are the R-linear endomorphisms of Rn ; it can be
2
identified as a scheme with Gna . Thus for any topological ring R the group
GLn (R) is endowed with the subspace topology if we view it as a subspace
of Mn (R) × Ga (R) via (2.8). For example, if v is an archimedean place of F ,
then by this recipe GLn (Fv ) acquires its usual topology.
To describe the topology for nonarchimedean v, we recall that to describe
a topology on a space it suffices to give a neighborhood base for every point
x, that is, a set of open neighborhoods
x ∈ Uα
such that every neighborhood of x contains some Uα . In a topological group,

it suffices to just give a neighborhood base of the identity, since we can take
translates of this neighborhood base to be neighborhood bases at every other
point.
Now if $v is a uniformizer for OFv then
{(In + $vk Mn (OFv )) × (1 + $vk OFv ) : k ∈ Z≥1 }
forms a neighborhood base of the point (In , 1) ∈ Mn (Fv ) × Fv . It follows that
{In + $vk Mn (OFv ) : k ∈ Z≥1 }
forms a neighborhood base of the identity in GLn (Fv ). Note that this is
the same topology we would obtain if we just gave GLn (Fv ) ⊂ Mn (Fv ) the
subspace topology.
On the other hand, if S is any finite set of places of F including the infinite
places then
n o
(In + mMn (O bS )) × (1 + mO bS ) : m ⊂ OS
F F F
forms a neighborhood basis for (In , 1) ∈ Mn (ASF ) × ASF . Here m runs over
proper ideals of OFS , and
38 2 Adeles
Y
bFS ) :=
mMn (O $vv(m) Mn (OFv ).
v6∈S
If we intersect one of these neighborhoods with the image of GLn (ASF ) under
(2.8) then we obtain
Y Y
(In + mMn (OFv )) × GLn (OFv ).
v6∈S v6∈S
v(m)6=0 v(m)=0
v(m)
Here mMn (OFv ) = $v Mn (OFv ). This is not the same as the topology
obtained by giving GLn (ASF ) ⊂ Mn (ASF ) the subset topology.
Finally, for any set of places S of F including the infinite places it is not
hard to see by modifying this argument that one has a topological isomor-
phism of locally compact groups
GLn (AF ) = GLn (FS ) × GLn (ASF ).
If F is a local field and G is an algebraic group over F to define the

topology on G(F ) we choose an embedding G ,→ GLnF and give G(F ) the
subspace topology. Theorem 2.2.1 tells us that this topology is independent
of the choice of embedding G ,→ GLnF . If F is global instead we similarly
obtain the topology on G(AF ).
A helpful way to organize these comments is to introduce the notion of a
restricted direct product of topological spaces (we already encountered this
notion in a special case when we defined the topology on AF in the previous
section). Let {Xα }α∈A be a set of locally compact topological spaces indexed
by a countable set A, and for all α outside a finite subset S0 of A let Kα ⊆ Xα
be a collection of compact open subsets of Xα . Then the restricted direct
product of the Xα with respect to the Kα is the set
0
( )
Y Y
Xα := (xα ) ∈ Xα : xα ∈ Kα
α∈A α∈A
with topology given by declaring a subset of X to be open if it is of the form

Y
U× Kα
α∈A\S
where S is a finite subset of A including S0 and U ⊆ XS is an open subset.

One verifies that this is indeed a topology and with respect to this topology
X is locally compact. Note that ifQthe Xα are topological groups and the Kα
0
are topological subgroups then α∈A Xα is again a topological group. We
also note that the topology does not change if we replace S0 by any larger
finite subset of A.
2.4 Hyperspecial subgroups and models 39
Now assume that G is an algebraic group over the global field F . Choose
a faithful representation
G −→ GLn .
Identify G with its image in GLn and define, for all v - ∞,
Kv := G(Fv ) ∩ GLn (OFv ).
Then Kv is a compact open subgroup of G(Fv ). Our discussion of the adelic

topology on G(AF ) above can be summarized as follows:
Proposition 2.3.1 One has an isomorphism of topological groups
0
G(AF ) ∼
Y
= G(Fv )
v
where the restricted direct product is defined with respect to the subgroups
Kv . t
u
In fact, in most references G(AF ) is defined using Proposition 2.3.1. This
has the advantage of being concrete, but it makes it awkward to rigorously
prove that the topology satisfies good functorial properties.
2.4 Hyperspecial subgroups and models
Let G be an algebraic group over a nonarchimedean local field F and let

G → GLn be a faithful representation. Identify G with its image in GLn . In
the previous section we made use of the fact that K := G(F ) ∩ GLn (OF ) is
a compact open subgroup of G(F ). This construction is actually algebraic in
nature in the sense that K is the OF -points of an affine group scheme over
OF . We explain this in more detail in this section and use it as motivation to
introduce the notion of a hyperspecial subgroup. The reader should feel free
to skip this section since the construction will only come up in passing later
in the book. Our presentation in this section was influenced by [Yu].
We start with a Dedekind domain O with fraction field F . For example, O
could be the ring of S-integers OFS of a number field F for a finite of places S
of F including the infinite places or the ring of integers of a local field. Let Z
be an affine scheme over O. The generic fiber of Z is ZF . If F is local, then
O has a unique prime ideal $; in this case we let k = O/$ be the residue
field. The scheme Zk is known as the special fiber of Z.
Suppose we are given an affine scheme Y over F ; often it is useful consider
schemes Y that have Y as their generic fiber and satisfy certain desiderata:
Definition 2.6. A model Y of Y over O is an affine scheme of finite type

over O of the form Spec A where A ≤ O(Y ) and A ⊗O F = O(Y ).
40 2 Adeles
The assertion that an affine O-scheme Spec A is flat is equivalent to the

assertion that A is flat as an O-module, which is equivalent to the assertion
that A is torsion-free since O is a Dedekind domain. Thus we see that models
are flat schemes. Suppose conversely we are given an affine scheme of finite
type Y = Spec A over O together with an isomorphism YF ∼ = Y . Assume
moreover that Y is flat, which is to say that A is flat as an O-module. Thus
the map A → O(Y ) induced by the isomorphism YF ∼ = Y is injective and we
obtain a model of Y .
Sometimes there are obvious models for affine schemes. For example, we
can view GLn as an affine group scheme over O, and it is clearly a model of
its generic fiber GLnF . However, there are many other models of GLn (see
Exercise 2.8 for an example).
We now describe a particular type of model of a reductive group. Assume
that F is a local nonarchimedean field.
Definition 2.7. A reductive group G over F is unramified if it is quasisplit
and there is a finite degree unramified extension E/F such that GE is split.
The following theorem is foundational for the theory of automorphic rep-
resentations. It is an amalgamation of several results of Bruhat and Tits, see
[Mac17, §1.2] for precise references.
Theorem 2.4.1 The reductive group G is unramified if and only if there
exists a model G of G over OF such that the special fiber of G is reductive. If
G is model of G over OF such that the special fiber of G is reductive then the
subgroup G(OF ) ≤ G(F ) is a maximal compact subgroup of G(F ). t
u
Definition 2.8. A subgroup of G(F ) of the form G(OF ) for a model G as in

Theorem 2.4.1 is called a hyperspecial subgroup.
Example 2.1. When G = GLn , it is clear that GLn (OF ) is a hyperspecial sub-
group of GLn (F ). It turns out that all maximal compact subgroups of GLn (F )
are conjugate to GLn (OF ) [Ser06, Chapter IV, Appendix 1]. In loc. cit. one
also finds a proof that GLn (OF ) is maximal in GLn (F ).
We quickly discuss conjugacy classes of hyperspecial subgroups. The group

G/ZG (F ) acts on G(F ) by conjugation. In general orbits under this action are
larger than the orbits of G(F ) on itself by conjugation. The set of hyperspecial
subgroups is permuted transitively by the action of G/ZG (F ) [Tit79, §2.5].
However not all hyperspecial subgroups are conjugate under G(F ) in general.
Now suppose that we are given an unramified reductive group G. One
might ask how one ought to go about finding a hyperspecial subgroup of G.
One method proceeds via constructing schematic closures as we now explain.
We again revert to the assumptions at the beginning of this section, so O is
a Dedekind domain with fraction field F . Let Y be a scheme of finite type
over F and let Y be a model of Y . Suppose in addition we are given a closed
immersion of F -schemes
2.4 Hyperspecial subgroups and models 41
X −→ Y ; (2.9)
we identify X with a closed subscheme of Y . Let
A := Im(O(Y) → O(Y ) → O(X)).
Since O(Y) → O(Y ) is injective and (2.9) is a closed immersion we see that
X := Spec A comes equipped with a closed immersion X → Y and XF = X.
We leave the proof of the following lemma as an exercise (see Exercise 2.4)
Lemma 2.4.2 The scheme X is a model of X and
X (O) = X(F ) ∩ Y(O).
For the proof of this lemma, see Exercise 2.5. The scheme X earns its moniker
as a schematic closure via a universal property.
If Y = GLn , viewed as an affine group scheme over O, then the condition
that O(GLn ) → O(GLnF ) is injective is clearly satisfied. Thus given any
faithful representation G −→ GLn , we can form the schematic closure G of
G; it is a scheme over O with generic fiber G. In the special case where F is
a local field and O = OF is its ring of integers we obtain
G(OF ) := G(F ) ∩ GLn (OF ),
which we denoted by K earlier. Thus in our construction of the restricted

direct topology from the previous section we implicitly used schematic clo-
sures.
Now suppose that F is global and that we are given a faithful represen-
tation G → GLn of a connected reductive group G. We can then take the
schematic closure G of G in GLnOF . One has the following proposition:
Proposition 2.4.3 For almost all nonarchimedean places v of F the sub-

group G(OFv ) is hyperspecial.
Thus taking a “global” schematic closure gives us hyperspecial subgroups at
almost all places. This proposition and variants of it are extremely useful in
applications, so we indicate the proof after giving some preparation.
Recall that an O-scheme Y is smooth if it is flat and of finite type and
for all algebraically closed fields k that admit a nonzero O-algebra morphism
O → k the fiber Yk is smooth. The following lemma is a very special case of
[GW10, Proposition 6.18]:
Lemma 2.4.4 Let S0 be a finite set of finite places of F (possibly empty),
let Y be a smooth OFS0 -scheme and let X ≤ YF be a smooth subscheme of its
generic fiber. Let X be the schematic closure of X in Y. Then there is a finite
set S of finite places containing S0 such that XOFS is smooth over OFS . t
u
We now indicate the proof of Proposition 2.4.3:
42 2 Adeles
Proof of Proposition 2.4.3: The schematic closure G is again a group scheme

over OF (compare Exercise 2.6 below). It is also smooth over OFS for a suf-
ficiently large finite set S of finite places of F . The result now follows from
[Con14, Proposition 3.1.9]. 2
2.5 Approximation in algebraic groups
For a global field F and a nonempty finite set S of places of F , the image of F
under the diagonal embedding F → FS is dense. This is fairly easy to prove
and can be viewed as a generalization of the Chinese remainder theorem. If
X is an affine scheme of finite type over F and S is a finite set of places of
F then one can ask if a similar phenomenon holds:
Definition 2.9. Let S be a nonempty finite set of places of F . The affine

scheme X satisfies weak approximation with respect to S if the image of
the diagonal embedding X(F ) → X(FS ) is dense. It satisfies strong ap-
proximation with respect to S if X(F ) is dense in X(ASF ).
Here when we speak of density we are of course using the canonical topologies
on X(FS ) and X(ASF ) afforded by Theorem 2.2.1.
Despite the relative ease of proving weak approximation when X = Ga ,
establishing whether or not weak approximation holds for a general affine
scheme is very difficult. In general it is false. We refer to [Har04] for a more
detailed discussion.
Our goal in this section is to describe when weak and strong approximation
hold in settings related to algebraic groups. To simplify the discussion we
often assume that F is a number field; additional complications come up in
the general case. Our primary reference is [PR94, Chapter 7]. We start with
the following proposition, the proof of which we leave as an exercise:
Proposition 2.5.1 Let G be a connected algebraic group over a number field
F with Levi decomposition G = M N . Then G admits weak (resp. strong)
approximation with respect to a finite set S of places of F if and only if M
does. t
u
Thus in the number field case studying strong and weak approximation of
algebraic groups is equivalent to studying it for the smaller set of reductive
groups. It turns out that under suitable restrictions on the set of places S
weak approximation always holds:
Theorem 2.5.2 Let G be a connected algebraic group over a number field
F . There is a finite set S0 of finite places of F such that G has weak approx-
imation for any finite set of places of F not containing S0 . t
u
2.5 Approximation in algebraic groups 43
We refer to [PR94, §7.3] for the proof.

If we wish to guarantee that we can take S0 to be empty we need to assume
additional arithmetic conditions on the group G. To state them, recall that
a central isogeny of connected algebraic groups G → H over a field k is a
surjective homomorphism whose kernel is finite and contained in the center
of G. A semisimple group G is simply connected if any central isogeny
H → G is an isomorphism, and adjoint if any central isogeny G → H is an
isomorphism.
If G → H is a central isogeny between two semisimple k groups then G
and H have the same root system, but not necessarily the same root datum.
In general, simply connected groups have the largest center out of the set of
semisimple groups with the same root system and adjoint groups have trivial
center. For example, SLn is simply connected and PGLn is adjoint. The
quotient map SLn → PGLn is a central isogeny. See [Bor91, Hum75, Spr09].
For the following theorem we refer again to [PR94, §7.3]:
Theorem 2.5.3 A simply connected or adjoint semisimple group G over a

number field F admits weak approximation with respect to any set finite S of
places F . t
u
We finish our discussion of weak approximation by considering the case
where X is not an algebraic group, but a particular type of homogeneous
space. Let G be a reductive group over a number field F and let H ≤ G be
a reductive subgroup. Then there is a natural action of G on
X := G/H := Spec(O(G)H ).
For the definition of O(G)H we refer to (17.8). If F is an algebraic closure of

F and F ≤ L ≤ F is a subfield then
X(L) = (G(F )/H(F ))Gal(F /L )
with the natural Galois action (see Proposition 17.1.5). For more details on
algebraic group actions we refer to [MFK94] or §17.1.
To state weak approximation theorems in this context, we recall that an
algebraic torus T is quasi trivial if X ∗ (T ) is a permutation Gal(F /F )-
module. A reductive group G is quasi trivial if the torus G/Gder is quasi
trivial and Gder is simply connected. We record the following theorem of
Borovoi [Bor09, 3.12], which generalizes Theorem 2.5.2:
Theorem 2.5.4 Let G be a reductive quasi trivial group and assume that H
is a connected subgroup. There is a finite set S0 of finite places of the number
field F such that G/H has weak approximation for any finite set of places of
F not containing S0 . t
u
In particular, G/H always has strong approximation with respect to ∞.
Similarly we have a generalization of Theorem 2.5.3:
44 2 Adeles
Theorem 2.5.5 Assume that G is a reductive quasi trivial group with a

connected subgroup H. Suppose that H/H der splits over a cyclic extension of
F . Then G/H satisfies weak approximation for any finite set S of places of
F. t
u
This is [Bor09, Corollary 3.14]. We note that Borovoi actually works in a more
general context where G is not necessarily reductive, but we have restricted
to the situation above for simplicity.
We now turn to a discussion of strong approximation. We recall that a
connected algebraic group over a global field F is almost simple if Lie G is
a simple Lie algebra, that is, a Lie algebra with no proper ideals. The basic
result on strong approximation is the following. For the proof see [Pra77]:
Theorem 2.5.6 Let G be a connected absolutely almost simple algebraic
group over a global field F and let S be a finite set of places of F . If G
is simply connected and G(FS ) is noncompact then G satisfies strong approx-
imation relative to S. t
u
At least in the number field case there is a converse to this theorem, see
[PR94, Theorem 7.12]. We point out in particular that the semisimplicity
assumption is necessary. Even in the case even in the case G = GL1 strong
approximation is false in general. Indeed,
× b×
F × \(A∞
F ) /OF
is the class group of F which is finite, but often nontrivial.

Here is an analogue of Theorem 2.5.6 for certain homogeneous spaces
[Rap14, Proposition 2.4]:
Theorem 2.5.7 Assume that H ≤ G are almost simple algebraic groups that
are simply connected and semisimple. Then G/H satisfies strong approxima-
tion relative to S if and only if (G/H)(FS ) is noncompact. t
u
2.6 The adelic quotient
Let G be an affine algebraic group over a global field F (so we do not assume G
to be reductive or connected). Then the subgroup G(F ) ≤ G(AF ) is discrete
(compare Exercise 2.2) and we can consider the quotient G(F )\G(AF ). In this
section we recall basic facts on the topology of G(F )\G(AF ). More precise
results will be recalled in the following section.
The first result we recall is the following (see [Con12a] for the proof):
Theorem 2.6.1 (Borel, Conrad, Oesterlé, Prasad) For any finite set
S of places of F containing the infinite places and for any compact open
subgroup K S ≤ G(ASF ) the quotient
2.6 The adelic quotient 45
G(F )\G(ASF )/K S
is finite. t
u
We note that one does not even have to assume that G is smooth (al-
though this is automatic in the characteristic zero case, see Theorem 1.5.2).
Theorem 2.6.1 is known as finiteness of class numbers (for affine algebraic
groups). Indeed, in the special case G = GL1 , K ∞ := O b× the set above can
F
be identified with the class group of F , and hence the theorem implies the
finiteness of the class group.
It is not hard to see that in general the quotient G(F )\G(AF ) itself is
infinite. However, we could ask when the quotient is compact or finite volume
with respect to a suitable measure (see §3.5), and there is a complete answer
to this question which we recall in Theorem 2.6.2 below. However, it is useful
to first eliminate a trivial obstruction to the quotient G(F )\G(AF ) being
finite volume or compact.
The units F × of F embed into A× F diagonally as a discrete subspace. Since
there the idelic norm | · |AF provides a continuous nontrivial homomorphism
Y
| · |AF := | · |v : F × \A×
F −→ R>0 ,
v
we conclude that F × \A×F is noncompact and actually it has infinite volume

with respect to the Haar measure (for more on Haar measures see §3.2 below).
An analogous phenomenon occurs for other groups, and this motivates the
following definition:
\
G(AF )1 := ker(| · | ◦ χ : G(AF ) → R>0 ). (2.10)
χ∈X ∗ (G)
Here |x| := |x|AF = v |x|v . Note that G(F ) is contained G(AF )1 in virtue of
Q
the product formula Proposition 2.1.1. Moreover, G(F ) is discrete in G(AF )1
(see Exercise 2.2).
We now define a subgroup
AG ≤ G(F∞ ) ≤ G(AF ) (2.11)
such that
AG G(AF )1 = G(AF ),
the product being direct.
When F is a number field we let AG be the identity component of the
R-points of the greatest Q-split torus in ResF/Q ZG . When F is a function
field of characteristic p temporarily write Z for the largest Fp (t)-split torus
in the center of
ResF/Fp (t) ZG .
46 2 Adeles
Then if Z has rank d there is an isomorphism Z(Fp (t)∞ ) ∼ = (Fp ((t))× )d .

Z d
We let AG be the subgroup (t ) . We note that in either case when G is
reductive the inclusion G(AF )1 → G(AF ) induces an isomorphism G(AF )1 ∼ =
AG \G(AF ). Thus it is largely a manner of taste as to whether one works with
G(AF )1 or AG \G(AF ).
The adelic quotient of G is the quotient
[G] := G(F )\G(AF )1 . (2.12)
The isomorphism G(AF )1 −→A

˜ G \G(AF ) induces a canonical isomorphism
[G]−→G(F
˜ )AG \G(AF ) (2.13)
that intertwines the action of G(AF )1 on the left hand side and the action
of AG \G(AF ) on the left. We will therefore allow ourselves to let the symbol
[G] denote either AG G(F )\G(AF ) or G(F )\G(AF )1 . The group G(AF )1 is
unimodular by Lemma 3.5.4 below, and hence admits a Haar measure (the
notion of a Haar measure and a unimodular group will be recalled in §3.2).
The basic topological and measure theoretic properties of [G] are summa-
rized in the following theorem:
Theorem 2.6.2 (Borel, Conrad, Harder, Oesterlé) Assume that G is
smooth and connected. The quotient [G] defined in (2.12) has finite volume
with respect to the measure induced by a Haar measure on G(AF )1 . The adelic
quotient [G] is compact if and only if for every F -split torus T ≤ G one has
TF ≤ R(GF ).
Proof. The first assertion is [Con12a, Theorem 1.3.6]. See [Con12a, Theorem
A.5.5] for a proof of the last assertion. t
u
For comparison with the classical theory of automophic forms it is con-
venient to relate the adelic quotient to locally symmetric spaces (compare
Chapter 6). For this purpose, if K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ) is a compact open subgroup
let
h := h(K ∞ ) = |G(F )\G(A∞ ∞
F )/K |.
By Theorem 2.6.1, h < ∞. Let t1 , . . . , th denote a set of representatives for

G(F )\G(A∞ ∞
F )/K . We then have a homeomorphism
h
a
Γi (K ∞ )\G(F∞ ) −→ G(F )\G(AF )/K ∞ (2.14)
i=1
given on the ith component by
Γi (K ∞ )g∞ 7−→ G(F )g∞ ti Γi (K ∞ ),
where
Γi (K ∞ ) := G(F ) ∩ ti · G(F∞ )K ∞ · t−1
i .
2.7 Reduction theory 47
Notice that the Γi (K ∞ ) are discrete subgroups of G(F ) and they are moreover
arithmetic in the following sense:
Definition 2.10. Let G ≤ GLn be a linear algebraic group. A subgroup

Γ ≤ G(F ) is arithmetic if it is commensurable with G(F ) ∩ GLn (Z).
The notion of arithmeticity does not depend on the choice of representation

G ≤ GLn (see Exercise 2.13). The subgroups of G(F ) that are intersections
of a compact open subgroup of G(A∞ F ) and G(F ) are known as congruence
subgroups. Not every arithmetic group is a congruence subgroup in general,
although for some groups G this is the case. For more information the reader
can consult the literature on the so-called congruence subgroup problem.
We end this section by considering the special case where G = GL2/Q .
Then K ∞ = GL2 (Z) b is a maximal compact open subgroup, where Z b = Q Zp
p
is the profinite completion of Z. Moreover, if we denote by

ab
K0 (N ) : = ∈ GL2 (Z) : N |c
b and
cd
Γ0 (N ) : = K0 (N ) ∩ GL2 (Z)
then
Γ0 (N )\GL2 (R) = GL2 (Q)\GL2 (AQ )/K0 (N ).
If we let K∞ = SO2 (R) then :
Γ0 (N )\(C − R)→GL
˜ 2 (Q)\GL2 (AQ )/K∞ K0 (N )
= GL2 (Q)\(C − R) × GL2 (A∞
Q )/K0 (N ),
where on the left Γ0 (N ) acts via Möbius transformations:

ab az + b
· z := .
cd cz + d
2.7 Reduction theory
Reduction theory allows us to control the adelic quotient [G] when it is non-
compact. To be more precise about this assume that G is a reductive group
over a global field F . In the number field case this assumption can be weak-
ened to allow for arbitrary connected affine groups of finite type over F at
the cost of introducing more notation [PR94, §4.3].
The following theorem provides what is known as the Iwasawa decom-
position:
Theorem 2.7.1 Let G be a reductive group over a global field F and let
P ≤ G be a parabolic subgroup. There exists a maximal compact subgroup
48 2 Adeles
K ≤ G(AF ) such that
G(AF ) = P (AF )K. (2.15)
We sketch the proof of this theorem in Appendix A.

We now assume that P is a minimal parabolic subgroup of G with unipo-
tent radical N . Fix a Levi subgroup M ≤ P . Let T0 be a maximal split torus
◦
of Gder contained in M , then T := T0 ZG is a maximal split torus of G. As
recalled in §1.9 the set of nonzero weights of T acting on Lie P is a base
∆ ⊂ Φ(G, T ) for the set of roots of T in G.
A Siegel set in G(AF )1 is a set of the form
S(t) := SΩ (t) = ΩAT0 (t)K, (2.16)
where Ω ⊂ N (AF )M (AF )1 is a relatively compact subset, t ∈ R>0 , and
AT0 (t) := {x ∈ AT0 : |α(x)| ≥ t for all α ∈ ∆}. (2.17)
Here | · | denotes the usual norm on R when F is a number field and the
canonical norm on Fp ((t)) when F is a function field of characteristic p.
The basic result of reduction theory is the following:
Theorem 2.7.2 (Reduction theory) There exists a Siegel set such that
G(F )AG S(t) = G(AF ).
Proof. See [Spr94]. To aid the reader we note that in loc. cit. the group G(F )
acts on the right. Thus one has to take an inverse to move G(F ) to the left,
and this changes the inequality in the analogue of AT0 (t) in loc. cit. to that
we used in defining AT0 (t). t
u
To understand what is going on in Theorem 2.7.2 it is useful to consider
what is arguably the simplest nontrivial case, that when G = GL2 . In this
case we can take K = O2 (R)GL2 (Z)b and let B = P be the Borel subgroup
of upper triangular matrices (since it is a Borel subgroup it is a minimal
parabolic subgroup). Then ∆ consists of the single root
α : T (R) −→ R×
t1 −1

t2 7−→ t1 t2 .
In this setting reduction theory tells us that there is a compact subgroup

Ω ≤ N (AF ) such that
GL2 (AF ) = ΩAGL2 AT0 (t)K.
for small enough t ∈ R>0 . This is the content of Exercise 2.15. We remark
that it is this example that gives reduction theory its name. Indeed, a slight
strengthening of Theorem 2.7.2 in this case yields the familiar fact from the
reduction theory of positive definite binary quadratic forms over Q, namely

that every form of a given discriminant is representable by a reduced form.
We end this section by explaining how reduction theory is used in practice.
Let ϕ : [G] → C be a continuous function. Reduction theory implies that if we
can control the restriction of ϕ to AT0 (t) then we can control the function on
all of [G]. This observation motivates growth conditions we place on functions
on [G] (see Lemma 6.3.1) and plays a key role in convergence arguments. See,
for example, §9.4, §9.5 and the proof of Proposition 14.3.3.
Exercises
2.1. Prove Proposition 2.1.1.
2.2. Let R → R0 be a continuous map of topological rings and let X be an

affine scheme of finite type over R. Show that X(R) −→ X(R0 ) is continuous.
Show moreover that if R → R0 is a
(a) topological embedding
(b) open topological embedding
(c) closed topological embedding
(d) topological embedding onto a discrete subset
then so is X(R) → X(R0 ).
2.3. Let G be an algebraic group over a local field F , let ρ : G → GLn be a

faithful representation, and let K ≤ GLn (F ) be a compact open subgroup.
Prove that ρ(G(F )) ∩ K is a compact open subgroup of ρ(G(F )).
2.4. Prove Lemma 2.4.2.
2.5. Let O be a Dedekind domain with fraction field F and let Y be a flat
O-scheme. Suppose that X → Y := YF is a closed immersion. Let X be the
schematic closure of X in Y. Then for any closed immersion Z → Y whose
generic fiber is an isomorphism onto X there is a unique closed immersion
X → Z such that the following diagram commutes:

Z /Y
2.6. Let O be a Dedekind domain with fraction field F . Let G/O be a flat
group scheme of finite type with generic fiber G := GF . Let H be a group
scheme over F equipped with a morphism of group schemes H −→ G that is
a closed immersion. Show that the schematic closure H of H in G is a group
scheme.
50 2 Adeles
2.7. Let S be a finite set of places of a global field F . Prove that F is dense
in FS .
2.8. Let m > 1 be an integer. Let

A := Z[xij , tij , y]1≤i,j≤n / det(xij )y − 1, (xij ) − 1 + m(tij ) .
Here we view (xij ), (tij ) as matrices in order to make sense out of the poly-
nomial relations. Show that G := Spec(A) is a model of GLn over Z and
that
G(Z) := {g ∈ GLn (Z) : g ≡ 1 (mod mMn (Z))}.
2.9. Let X1 , X2 be affine schemes of finite type over a global field F . Show
that X1 and X2 admit weak (resp. strong) approximation with respect to a
finite set S of places F if and only if X1 × X2 does. Deduce that if G is an
algebraic group over a number field F then G is satisfies weak (resp. strong)
approximation with respect to a finite set S of places F if and only if a Levi
subgroup of G does.
2.10. Let F be a global field. Show that GLn admits weak approximation
with respect to any proper subset of the places of F .
2.11. Assume that the affine algebraic group G over the global field F satisfies
strong approximation with respect to a finite set S of places F . Show that
|G(F )\G(ASF )/K S | = 1
for any compact open subgroup K S ≤ G(ASF ).

2.12. Let F be a number field. Show that GLn does not admit strong ap-
proximation with respect to the set of infinite places of F if the class number
of F is not 1.
2.13. Let ρi : G → GLni , i ∈ {1, 2} be a pair of faithful representations of the
affine algebraic group G over the number field F . Let Gi be the schematic clo-
sure of ρi (G) in GLni OF . Show that a subgroup Γ ≤ G(F ) is commensurable
with G1 (OF ) if and only if it is commensurable with G2 (OF ).
2.14. Let Bn ≤ GLn be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices.
Show that
GLn (R) = Bn (R)On (R)GLn (C) = Bn (C)Un (R)
and that for a nonarchimedean local field F
GLn (F ) = Bn (F )GLn (OF ).
Here for R-algebras R, On (R) := {g ∈ GLn (R) : gg t = In } and Un (R) :=

{g ∈ GLn (C ⊗R R) : gḡ t = In }. Deduce the adelic Iwasawa decomposition for
GLn (AF ).
2.15. Let
Ω = {( 1 1t ) : t ∈ [0, 1]} .
Show that GL2 (AQ ) = GL2 (Q)ΩAGL2 AH (t) K for t sufficiently small.
2.16. Let G be a smooth algebraic group over a global field F with unipotent
radical N . Prove that under the map
G(AF ) −→ G/N (AF )
the group AG is mapped isomorphically onto AG/N .
2.17. For each integer N ≥ 1 let Γ (N ) ≤ GLn (Z) be the kernel of the
reduction map
GLn (Z) −→ GLn (Z/N ).
Prove that a subgroup of GLn (Q) is a congruence subgroup if and only if it
contains Γ (N ) for some N as a subgroup of finite index.
Chapter 3
Automorphic Representations
In mathematics you don’t

understand things. You just get
used to them
J. von Neumann
Abstract In this chapter we give a definition of an automorphic represen-

tation in the category of unitary representations of the adelic points of an
algebraic group. This definition will subsequently be refined, by enlarging
the category of representations considered to the category of admissible rep-
resentations, and then later by replacing representations of the archimedean
component of the adelic group by (g, K)-modules.
3.1 Representations of locally compact groups
Our goal in this section is to give a definition of an automorphic representa-

tion that is completely natural from the point of view of trace formulae.
We will start by introducing some basic abstract representation theory
(i.e. representation theory that requires no more structure than a locally
compact group). Our basic reference is [Fol95]. Throughout this chapter we
let G be a locally compact (Hausdorff) topological group (for example G(R)
for a locally compact topological ring R such as the adele ring AF ). Let V
be a topological vector space over C and let
End(V )
be the space of all continuous linear maps from V to itself. We let GL(V ) ⊂
End(V ) be the group of invertible continuous linear maps with continuous
inverse.
53
54 3 Automorphic Representations
Often we will be concerned with the case where V is a Hilbert space,

that is, a complex inner product space complete with respect to the metric
induced by the inner product that admits a countable orthonormal basis. In
particular, Hilbert spaces will always be assumed to be separable. The inner
product will be denoted ( , ) and the norm by k·k2 . In this case we let U(V )
be the subgroup of GL(V ) preserving ( , ).
Definition 3.1. A representation (π, V ) of G is a continuous group homo-

morphism
π : G −→ GL(V ).
If V is a Hilbert space and π maps G to the subspace of unitary operators,
that is
(π(g)ϕ1 , π(g)ϕ2 ) = (ϕ1 , ϕ2 )
for all ϕ1 , ϕ2 ∈ V and g ∈ G, then π is said to be unitary.
Often one omits explicit mention of the space of π. If we wish to specify that
π acts on a ?-space (e.g. Fréchet, Hilbert, locally convex) we often to π as a
?-representation.
A morphism of representations (or a G-intertwining map) is a morphism
of topological vector spaces that is G-equivariant; it is an isomorphism if
the underlying morphism of topological vector spaces is an isomorphism.
If two representations are isomorphic then they are also called equivalent.
Two unitary representations (π1 , V1 ) and (π2 , V2 ) are unitarily equivalent
if there is a G-equivariant isomorphism of Hilbert spaces V1 → V2 . Thus
unitary equivalence implies equivalence, but not conversely.
A subrepresentation of (π, V ) is a closed subspace W ≤ V that is pre-
served by π, a quotient of π is a topological vector space W equipped with
an action of G and a G-equivariant continuous linear surjection V → W , and
a subquotient is a subrepresentation of a quotient.
We will mostly be interested in unitary representations, and we need lan-
guage to describe when a representation that is not originally presented as
a unitary representation actually “is” unitary. First, we say that a repre-
sentation on a Hilbert space is unitarizable if it is equivalent to a unitary
representation. Sometimes the natural representations to study are not on
Hilbert spaces, or even complete spaces (see, for example, Chapter 5). How-
ever, one can still discuss unitarity in this situation as follows. Recall that a
pre-Hilbert space is a complex inner product space that admits a countable
orthonormal basis. Thus a Hilbert space is simply a pre-Hilbert space that
is complete with respect to the metric induced by the inner product. We can
still define U (V ) as before. A representation π of G on a pre-Hilbert space V
extends by continuity to the completion V of V (which is a Hilbert space).
With this in mind we say that a representation π on a pre-Hilbert space V
is pre-unitary if π(G) ≤ U(V ). Thus for every pre-unitary representation
of G we obtain, by continuity, a canonical unitary representation of G on V .
Finally, we say that a representation is pre-unitarizable if it is equivalent
3.1 Representations of locally compact groups 55
to a pre-unitary representation. Of course, in practice, these distinctions are

often ignored, and one sometimes calls a unitarizable representation, or even
a pre-unitarizable representation, simply a unitary representation.
We now discuss the basic means of constructing unitary representations.
Assume one has a continuous right action
X × G −→ X (3.1)
(x, g) 7−→ xg
where X is a locally compact Hausdorff space equipped with a G-invariant

Radon measure dx. The Radon measure gives rise to an L2 -space, namely the
space L2 (X, dx) of square-integrable complex valued functions on X endowed
with the inner product
Z
(ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) := ϕ1 (x)ϕ2 (x)dx. (3.2)
X
We obtain a left action of G on L2 (X, dx) via
π(g)ϕ(x) := ϕ(xg). (3.3)
Theorem 3.1.1 The action of G on L2 (X, dx) defined as in (3.3) is contin-

uous.
We refer to the action of G on L2 (X, dx) just constructed as the natural
action or the regular action.
For the proof we follow [Fol95, Proposition 2.41]:
Proof. Let
Cc (X) ≤ L2 (X, dx)
be the subspace of compactly supported continuous functions. Let U ⊂ G
be an open neighborhood of the identity 1 ∈ G with compact closure, let
ϕ ∈ Cc (X), and let W = supp(ϕ)U ⊂ X. Then W is relatively compact, and
π(g)ϕ is supported in W if g ∈ U . Thus
kπ(g)ϕ − ϕk2 ≤ vol(W )1/2 kπ(g)ϕ − ϕk∞ .
This goes to zero as g → 1 (see Exercise 3.1).

Since X is locally compact and dx is a Radon measure Cc (X) is dense
in L2 (X, dx), given ϕ1 ∈ L2 (X, dx) we can choose ϕ2 ∈ Cc (X) such that
kϕ1 − ϕ2 k2 < ε for any ε > 0. Then
kπ(g)ϕ1 − ϕ1 k2 ≤ kπ(g)(ϕ1 − ϕ2 )k2 + kπ(g)ϕ2 − ϕ2 k2 + kϕ2 − ϕ1 k2

≤ 2ε + kπ(g)ϕ2 − ϕ2 k2
which, by what we’ve already shown, goes to zero as g → 1. t

u
3.2 Haar measures on locally compact groups
To give more concrete examples of representations it is useful to recall the

notion of Haar measure. If G is a locally compact group then there exists a
positive Radon measure dr g on G that is right invariant under the action of
G:
Z Z
f (gx)dr g = f (g)dr g for all x ∈ G. (3.4)
G G
[Fol95, Theorem 2.10].

Moreover, this measure is unique up to multiplication by an element of
R>0 . A right Haar measure is a choice of such a measure. There is also
a left invariant positive Borel measure d` g = dr (g −1 ), again unique up to
scalars. Such a measure is known as a left Haar measure.
The existence of the right Haar measure gives via the recipe of (3.1) a
representation of G on L2 (G) = L2 (G, dr g) called the (right) regular rep-
resentation.
Definition 3.2. A locally compact group G is unimodular if any right Haar

measure is also a left Haar measure.
We note that an abelian group is trivially unimodular. Moreover a compact

(Hausdorff) group is unimodular (see Exercise 3.2).
Example 3.1. The points of Borel subgroups are, in general, not unimodular.
For example, if B ≤ GL2 is the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices
then for any local field F with normalized valuation | · | we can write

a 1t
B(F ) = : a, b ∈ F × , t ∈ F .
b 1
With respect to this decomposition one can take

dadbdt dadbdt
d` g := and dr g := .
|a||b| |b|2
where da, db and dt are Haar measures on the additive group F .
The failure of a group to be unimodular is measured by an abelian qua-

sicharacter called the modular quasicharacter. If G is a locally compact
group with right Haar measure dr g, then the modular quasi-character is the
homomorphism
δG : G −→ R>0
defined by:
dr (hg) = δG (h)dr g. (3.5)

3.2 Haar measures on locally compact groups 57
We note that one can alternately define δG (g) via the relation
d` (g −1 ) = δG (g)d` g (3.6)
(compare Exercise 3.3).

Remark 3.1. Some references define the modular quasicharacter to be the
multiplicative inverse of δG . In particular, in [Fol95], ∆(g) := δG (g)−1 . The
choice of normalization we use in this book seems to be consistent with most
of the literature in automorphic representation theory; one motivation to
define things this way is provided by Proposition 3.5.1.
The following proposition provides a useful means of decomposing Haar
measures:
Proposition 3.2.1 Suppose that S and T are closed subgroups of G with
compact intersection and that the product map S × T → G is open with
image of full measure with respect to d` g. Then one can normalize the left
and right Haar measures on S and T so that
Z Z
δT (t)
f (g)d` g = f (st) d` sd` t
G S×T δ G (t)
Z
f (st)
= d` sdr t.
S×T G (t)
δ
In particular, if G is unimodular, then

Z Z
f (g)dg = f (st)d` sdr t.
G S×T
Proof. The first assertion is [Kna86, Theorem 8.32] in the case where G is
a Lie group. The proof is the same in general. We also note that in the
notation of loc. cit. one has ∆G := δG , ∆S := δS , and ∆T := δT . For the
second equality we use (3.6). t
u
Sometimes we will require a slight generalization of the notion of a Haar

measure. Let G be a locally compact group and let H ≤ G be a closed
subgroup. We will sometimes wish to integrate over the quotient H\G. The
following theorem tells us precisely when this is possible (see, e.g. [Fol95,
Theorem 2.49] for a proof):
Theorem 3.2.2 There is a right G-invariant Radon measure µ on H\G if
and only if δG |H = δH . In this case, µ is unique up to a constant factor, and
for a suitable choice of right Haar measures dg (resp. dh) on G (resp. on H)
one has
Z Z Z
f (g)dg = f (hg)dh dµ(Hg)
G H\G H
for f ∈ Cc (G). t
u
dg
The measure dµ in the theorem will be denoted by dh . We remark that in
loc. cit. the author considers right invariant measures on G/H instead, but
the result above follows in the same manner, or from the version with H\G
replaced by G/H.
3.3 Convolution algebras of test functions
To any locally compact group G we can associate the space of integrable

functions
Z
L1 (G) := dr g-measurable f : G → C : |f (g)|dr g < ∞
G
and the subspace of compactly supported continuous functions Cc (G). This

space is endowed with the structure of a C-algebra with product
Z
f1 ∗ f2 (g) := f1 (gh−1 )f2 (h)dr h. (3.7)
G
This product is associative (Exercise 3.15).
Example 3.2. When G = R, the convolution f1 ∗ f2 is exactly the usual con-

volution from Fourier analysis.
Given a representation π : G → GL(V ) of G, if f ∈ Cc (G) one obtains a

linear map
π(f ) : V −→ V
Z
ϕ 7−→ π(g)f (g)ϕdr g.
G
If π is unitary then this map is bounded, and in fact in the unitary case it is
well-defined for all f ∈ L1 (G) (Exercise 3.16). The definition (3.7) is chosen
so that
π(f1 ∗ f2 ) = π(f1 ) ◦ π(f2 )
(see Exercise 3.17). Thus, in particular, representations π of G give rise to
algebra representations of Cc (G), that is, C-algebra homomorphisms
Cc (G) −→ End(V ).
3.4 Haar measures on local fields 59
3.4 Haar measures on local fields
Let F be a local field, that is, a field equipped with an absolute value that is
compact with respect to the topology induced by the absolute value (see §2.1).
All infinite locally compact fields arise as the completion of some global field
[Lor08, §25, Theorem 2] with respect to some absolute value. In this section
we define Haar measures on the additive group of F .
Assume first that F is archimedean, so F is isomorphic to R or C. The
standard Haar measure on R is the usual Lebesgue measure, and twice the
standard Haar measure on C. If z = x + iy with x, y ∈ R, then this Haar
measure is |dz ∧ dz̄| = 2dx ∧ dy where dx and dy are the Lebesgue measure
on R.
Let F be a nonarchimedean field with ring of integers OF and let $ be
a uniformizer. Since the additive group of F is a locally compact topologi-
cal group, it admits a Haar measure dx. The set OF ⊂ F , being compact,
has finite measure, so to specify the Haar measure it suffices to specify the
measure dx(OF ) of OF . We often assume dx(OF ) = 1, but sometimes other
normalizations are convenient.
Open sets in F of the form a + $k OF where a ∈ F and k ∈ Z>0 form a
neighborhood base. Using additivity and invariance of the Haar measure one
can compute the measure of such sets:
Lemma 3.4.1 If dx is a Haar measure on F then
dx(a + $k OF ) = q −k dx(OF ).
t
u
Thus for every local field F we have a Haar measure dx. Via the usual
procedure we then obtain a product measure on any F -vector space. It is
again an Haar measure with respect to addition.
Given a Haar measure dx on F we obtain a Haar measure
dx
dx× :=
|x|
on the unit group F × . Similarly, we can define a Haar measure on GLn (F )

by viewing it as an (open) subset of the n by n matrices gln (F ) and then
taking the measure
dX
| det X|n
where dX is the (additive) Haar measure on gln (F ) (see Exercise 3.11. This
construction will be generalized to treat the F -points of affine algebraic
groups in the following section.
3.5 Haar measures on the points of algebraic groups
Let G be an (affine) algebraic group over a local or global field F . It is

useful to more explicitly describe the Haar measures on G(R) for a locally
compact topological F -algebras R using differential forms. We will do this in
the current section.
Let n = dimF G. Then there is a nonzero top-dimensional left-invariant
differential form
ω` ∈ ∧n g
which is unique up to multiplication by an element of F × . For every place v
of F we therefore obtain a differential form ω` := ω`v upon localizing. This
allows us to define for each v a Radon measure
Cc (G(Fv )) −→ C
Z
f 7−→ f (g)d|ω` |v (g).
G(Fv )
Since ω` is left G(Fv )-invariant, the measure d|ω` |v is left G(Fv )-invariant,
and hence is a left Haar measure. This is explained in more detail in the
archimedean case in [Kna86, Chapter VIII.2], and in the nonarchimedean
case in [Oes84, §2].
Proposition 3.5.1 One has

δG(Fv ) (g) = | det Ad(g) : g(Fv ) → g(Fv ) |v . (3.8)
Proof. One has

Ad(g)ω` = c(g)ω`
where
c(g) := det Ad(g) : g(Fv ) → g(Fv ) .
We write this in terms of Haar measures:
d|ω` |v (hg −1 ) = d|ω` |v (ghg −1 ) = |c(g)|v d|ω` |v (h).
On the other hand

d` (hg −1 ) = δG(Fv ) (g)d` (h)
for any left Haar measure d` h on G(Fv ) by Exercise 3.3. We deduce that
|c(g)| = δG(Fv ) (g). t
u
Corollary 3.5.2 If G is reductive, then G(Fv ) is unimodular.
Proof. Let ZG be the center of G and Gder its derived group. We then have
a commutative diagram
3.5 Haar measures on the points of algebraic groups 61
a
ZG × Gder −−−−→ Gm
 
 
by yId
c
G −−−−→ Gm
where a and c are given on points by
g 7→ det(Ad(g) : g → g),
the left vertical map b is the product map, and the right vertical map is the
identity. The map a is trivial on ZG and it is trivial on Gder since X ∗ (Gder )
is trivial. Since b is a quotient map, c is trivial as well, and we deduce the
corollary. t
u
This provides us with a description of the left Haar measures dg` on G(Fv )
for every v. We similarly obtain right Haar measures dr (g) := d` (g −1 ). One
now wishes to obtain a right Haar measure on G(AF ). To do this let S be a
finite set of places of F including the archimedean places and let
Y
KS = Kv ≤ G(ASF )
v6∈S
be a maximal compact open subgroup. We then define a right (resp. left)

Haar measure on G(AF ) via
Y Y
d` g = d` gv and dr g = dr gv , (3.9)
v∈S v∈S
where we assume that d` gv (Kv ) = dr gv (Kv ) = 1 for all v 6∈ S. Then it is

easy to see that the measures d` g, dr g so defined are left and right Haar mea-
sures on G(AF ), respectively (see Exercise 3.6). If we wish, we can apply an
analogous procedure and obtain left and right Haar measures on AG \G(AF ).
We can now prove the following lemma:
Lemma 3.5.3 Any right Haar measure on G(AF ) is left invariant under
G(F ).
Proof. Since the right Haar measure is constructed as the product of local
Haar measures one has
Y
δG(AF ) (g) = δG(Fv ) (gv ) = | det Ad(g) : g(AF ) → g(AF ) |AF . (3.10)
v
By the product formula we deduce that δG(AF ) (γ) = 1 for γ ∈ G(F ). t

u
The proof here amounted to observing that δG(AF ) is trivial on G(F ).

In fact there is a much larger subgroup of G(AF ) on which the modular
quasicharacter is trivial, namely G(AF )1 , defined as in §2.6:
Lemma 3.5.4 The group G(AF )1 is unimodular. If G is reductive, then

G(AF ) is unimodular.
Proof. The mapping

g 7→ det Ad(g) : g → g
defines an element of X ∗ (G), the character group of G. Since the modular

quasicharacter of G(AF ) is just this character followed by the adelic norm by
(3.10) we deduce that G(AF )1 is unimodular.
Finally, if G is reductive, then the modular quasicharacter of G(AF ) is the
product of the local modular quasicharacters by our construction of the Haar
measure, so we deduce that G(AF ) is unimodular by Corollary 3.5.2. t
u
Now G(F ) is a discrete subgroup of G(AF ) and G(AF )1 . It is in particular

closed in either of these groups. Thus in view of Lemma 3.5.3 and Lemma
3.5.4 dr g induces a right G(AF )-invariant Radon measure on
G(F )\G(AF )
(see [Fol95, Theorem 2.49]). This quotient only has finite volume if G(AF ) =
G(AF )1 . Similarly any Haar measure on G(AF )1 induces a right G(AF )-
invariant Radon measure on [G]. The latter quotient always has finite volume
(see Theorem 2.6.2).
The way we obtained the Haar measure on G(A QF ) is a little unnatural.
It would be more natural to just take the product v dωv directly. However,
this product is often not convergent. One can introduce a canonical family of
positive real numbers λv such that
Y
λv d|ω|v
v
is convergent, and in this way one obtains the so-called Tamagawa measure
on G(AF ). Upon choosing a suitable measure on AG we obtain a measure
on G(AF )1 and can thereby obtain the so-called Tamagawa measure on [G].
The measure of [G] with respect to the Tamagawa measure is called the
Tamagawa number of G. This number is intimately connected with the
arithmetic of G. We refer to the reader to [Kot88] and the references therein
for more details.
3.6 Automorphic representations in the L2 -sense
Now assume that G is an affine algebraic group over a global field F . Consider
the quotient
[G] := G(F )\G(AF )1
3.6 Automorphic representations in the L2 -sense 63
as in (2.12).
By Lemma 3.5.3 a right Haar measure on G(AF ) is left invariant under
G(F ) and with respect to it the space [G] has finite volume (compare Theorem
2.6.2). Thus we have a well-defined Hilbert space
L2 ([G])
with inner product defined as in (3.2) (but with X replaced by [G] and dx
replaced by the right Haar measure dr g).
Definition 3.3. An automorphic representation of G(AF )1 is an irre-
ducible unitary representation π of G(AF )1 that is equivalent to a subquo-
tient of L2 ([G]).
Here a subquotient is a subrepresentation of a quotient representation. The
reason we must consider subquotients, and not just subrepresentations, is
discussed in §3.7 below. We mention a variant of the definition that we will
also use. When G is reductive, an automorphic representation of AG \G(AF )
is an irreducible unitary representation that is equivalent to a subquotient
of L2 (G(F )AG \G(AF )). When G is reductive we can identify automorphic
representations of G(AF )1 and AG \G(AF ) via the commutative diagram
G(AF )1 × L2 ([G]) −−−−→ L2 ([G])

 
(3.11)
∼ ∼
y y
AG \G(AF ) −−−−→ L2 (AG G(F )\G(AF ))
where the horizontal arrows are the action maps and the vertical arrows are
the isomorphisms induced by G(AF )1 →A ˜ G \G(AF ).
Note that contrary to the usual convention we have not assumed that G
is reductive. Even without this assumption the preceding definition makes
sense. It is only when one starts talking about admissible representations
that the assumption of reductivity is really necessary. A concrete example of
this is given right after [BS98, Proposition 3.2.11]. The nonreductive case has
not received as much attention as the reductive case, but see [Sli84].
We end this chapter with §3.7 through 3.10. Sections 3.7 through 3.9
discuss how one can decompose unitary representations of locally compact
groups in general, and §3.10 discusses why we have restricted our attention
to affine algebraic groups instead of certain natural larger classes of groups.
All of these sections can be omitted on a first reading.
Before delving into these sections we note that our definition of an auto-
morphic representation leaves much to be desired in that it is unclear how one
would go about studying these objects and how they are fit into arithmetic
and geometry. In the subsequent two chapters we will develop the basic al-
gebra of convolution operators on automorphic representations that are used
to study them. It is a refinement of the algebra L1 (G(AF )) discussed in §3.3
above. For F a number field and the decomposition
G(F∞ ) × G(A∞
F )
naturally gives rise to a decomposition of L1 (G(AF )); the first factor is the
archimedean factor which will be discussed in Chapter 4 and the second factor
is the nonarchimedean factor which will be discussed in chapters 5 and 8.
This gives us tools to study automorphic representations, but it still does
not shed much light into how they appear in geometry and arithmetic. The
link with geometry will be made precise in Chapter 6. The primary link with
arithmetic is much more profound, subtle, and conjectural; it is the content
of the Langlands functoriality conjectures, explained in Chapter 12.
3.7 Decomposition of representations
If V is a finite dimensional complex representation of a finite group G, then

it is completely reducible, i.e. admits a direct sum decomposition
V = ⊕i Vi
where the Vi are irreducible representations of G (see Exercise 3.13). Thus

a subquotient of V in this case is just a subrepresentation. When G is no
longer a finite group, these sorts of decompositions may no longer hold (see
Exercise 3.14).
However, there is a very general theory which guarantees some sort of
decomposition exists if we restrict our attention to unitary representations.
Let G be a locally compact (Hausdorff) second-countable group (for example,
G(AF ) or AG \G(AF ) for some affine algebraic group G over a global field
F ). Recall that a Borel space (a.k.a. measurable space) is called standard if
it is isomorphic in the category of measurable spaces to R (with the standard
Lebesgue measure), Z, or a finite set (with the counting measure). For any
unitary representation π : G → GL(V ) there is a standard Borel space X with
a measure µ and a measurable field of unitary representations (πx , Vx )x∈X
equipped with a G-equivariant Hilbert space isomorphism
Z ⊕
V −→
˜ Vx dµ(x). (3.12)
X
This is called a direct integral decomposition. We will not make these no-
tions precise here; a nice introduction to these concepts (but without proofs)
is given in [Fol95, §7], for proofs one can consult [Dix77]. Two motivating
examples to keep in mind are the right regular representation of R on L2 (R)
and the representation L2 (Z\R) induced by it. Fourier analysis tells us that
Z ⊕
L2 (Z\R) = ⊕n∈Z Vn and L2 (R) = Vt dt. (3.13)
t∈R
3.8 The Fell topology 65
Here Vt is the one-dimensional C-vector space on which R acts via t 7→ e2πint .

The decomposition of L2 (Z\R) is said to be discrete and the decomposition
of L2 (R) is said to be continuous; this will be discussed in greater generality
in §3.9 below.
Decompositions like the decomposition of L2 (R) abound in the theory of
automorphic forms (compare §10.4). This allows us to explain why one takes
an automorphic representation of G(AF )1 to be a subquotient, not just a
subrepresentation, of L2 ([G]). Indeed, one would like to consider all of the Vt
occurring in (3.13) as pieces of the representation on L2 (R), but they are not
subrepresentations. They are only subquotients:
Lemma 3.7.1 For every t ∈ R there is a continuous linear R-intertwining
map
L2 (R) −→ Vt .
There is no R-intertwining continuous linear maps
Vt −→ L2 (R).
Proof. For each t one has a continuous R-intertwining linear map
L2 (R) −→ Vt
Z
f 7−→ f (x)e−2πitx dx
R
by Fourier theory.
For the converse statement, note that a linear R-intertwining map
Vt −→ L2 (R)
is either zero or has image contained in the C-span of x 7→ e2πitx . On the other
hand x 7→ e2πitx is not L2 (R), so we deduce that any linear R-intertwining
map Vt → L2 (R) is zero. t
u
Unfortunately the direct integral decomposition (3.12) is not unique and

is fairly badly behaved for general locally compact topological groups. If one
restricts to the class of groups that are of type I then the situation is much
more pleasant. We will discuss this in §3.9.
3.8 The Fell topology
To describe the refined decomposition that exists for type I groups G it is

useful to define the unitary dual G b of G. Our basic reference is [Fol95,
§7.2]. As a set, G is the set of unitary equivalence classes of unitary rep-
b
resentations. The unitary dual is G
b equipped with the Fell topology. The
procedure for defining this topology is very similar to the procedure for defin-
ing the Zariski topology as in §1.2. To define this topology, we recall from
§3.3 every representation (π, V ) of G gives rise to an algebra homomorphism
Cc (G) −→ End(V ) which extends to L1 (G) if π is unitary. We can extend
this homomorphism still further by completing. If we define
kf k∗ = sup[π]∈Gb kπ(f )k1
then kf k∗ ≤ kf k1 and k·k∗ is a seminorm (here [π] is the equivalence class of

π). We define C ∗ (G) to be the completion of L1 (G) with respect to k·k∗ . The
convolution operation extends by continuity to C ∗ (G), and endows it with
the structure of an algebra, called the C ∗ -algebra of the group G. Thus for
each unitary representation (π, V ) of G we obtain a representation of algebras
C ∗ (G) −→ End(V ).
This is the motivating example of a C∗-algebra, but we will not give the
(elementary) definition of a C∗ -algebra, referring instead to [Fol95, §1.1]. Now
given a unitary representation π of G, we obtain a closed two-sided ideal
ker(π) = {f ∈ C ∗ (G) : π(f ) = 0}.
If π is irreducible, this ideal is called a primitive ideal of C ∗ (G). In fact

it depends only on the equivalence class of π in the category of unitary
representations. The set of all primitive ideals in C ∗ (G) is called Prim(G):
Prim(G) := {ker(π) : [π] ∈ G}.

b
If we think of this as the analogue of the prime spectrum of a ring, then

proceeding as follows is reasonable: For any subset S ⊂ Prim(G) we let
 
 \ 
V (S) := p ∈ Prim(G) : p ⊃ q .
 
q∈S
By convention V (∅) = ∅. Then one checks that the V (S) just defined form the
closed sets of a topology on Prim(G), called the hull-kernel or Jacobson
topology. Now we have a natural map
b −→ Prim(G)
G
[π] 7−→ ker(π)
and we can pull back the topology on Prim(G) to obtain a topology on G. b

In other words the open sets in G are just the inverse images of open sets in
b
Prim(G). This is the Fell topology. Since the Fell topology is a topology
the set of Borel sets on G
b is defined; this give Gb the structure of a Borel
3.9 Type I groups 67
space. When speaking of measures and measurable functions on G b we will

always mean measures and measurable functions with respect to this Borel
structure (i.e. set of measurable sets). It is useful to point out that if G is of
type I then as a Borel space it is standard [Fol95, Theorem 7.6].
3.9 Type I groups
We have not (and will not) given the definition of a type I group. However,
we can give a characterization using the following theorem [Fol95, Theorem
7.6]:
Theorem 3.9.1 If G is a second countable locally compact group then the
following are equivalent:
(a) The group G is of type I.
(b) The Fell topology on G
b is T0 .
(c) The map G b −→ Prim(G) is injective. t
u
We point out that the groups of primary concern to us in this book are
fortunately of type I:
Theorem 3.9.2 If G is an algebraic group over a local field F then G(F ) is
of type I. t
u
Proof. For the archimedean case see [Dix77, §13.11.12]. For the nonar-
chimedean case see [Sli84]. t
u
One can find a proof of the following in [Clo07, Appendix]:
Theorem 3.9.3 If G is a reductive group over a global field F then G(AF )
is of type I. t
u
It should be pointed out that if G is not reductive then G(AF ) need not be
of type I [Moo65].
For π ∈ Gb let Vπ be the space of (a particular realization of) π. The basic
refinement of (3.12) is the following (see [Clo07, Theorem 3.3]):
Theorem 3.9.4 Let (ρ, V ) be a unitary representation of G. Then there ex-
ists a Borel measurable multiplicity function
b −→ {1, 2, . . . , ∞}
G
π 7−→ m(π)
and a positive measure µ on G

b such that
!
Z ⊕ M m(π)
(ρ, V ) = Vπ dµ(π).
d
G
b
The decomposition is unique up to changing the measures and multiplicity

functions on sets of measure zero. t
u
One application of this theorem is that it allows us to define the discrete
spectrum of a representation V . Since µ is a measure on a standard Borel
space Lebesgue’s decomposition theorem implies that there is a unique de-
composition
µ = µpt + µcont
where µpt is zero outside a countable set and µcont is zero on every countable
set. The discrete spectrum of V is then
 
Z ⊕ m(π)
M
Vdisc :=  Vπ  µpt (π) (3.14)
G
b
and the continuous spectrum is

 
Z ⊕ m(π)
M
Vcont :=  Vπ  µcont (π). (3.15)
G
b
We note that since the measure in (3.14) is supported in a countable set this
direct integral is really a direct sum.
Of course in practice it would be better to have an explicit description of
the decomposition of Theorem 3.9.4 for naturally occurring representations
V . Langlands’ profound and foundational work on Eisenstein series provide
such a decomposition in our primary case of interest, namely when V =
L2 ([G]). We will return to this point in §10.4 below.
3.10 Why affine groups?
In the preceding discussion we have always assumed that G is an affine alge-

braic group. There are two possible avenues for generalization. First, we could
look at covering groups of G(AF ) that are not algebraic. There is a great deal
of beautiful theory that has developed around this topic and it is starting to
become systematic. However, due to the authors’ lack of experience with the
theory and additional complications that come up we have decided not to
treat this topic.
If we forgo covering groups we could still generalize from affine groups to
algebraic groups that are not necessarily affine. To get some idea of how this
enlarges the set of groups in question we recall that a general algebraic group
G over a number field F (not necessarily affine) has a unique linear algebraic
subgroup Gaff E G such that GA := G/Gaff is an abelian variety by a famous
theorem of Chevalley [Con02].
3.10 Why affine groups? 69
Now consider an abelian variety A. In [Con12b] one finds a proof of a result

of Weil stating that A(AF ) can still be defined as a topological space. In fact it
is compact [Con12b, Theorem 4.4]. Moreover A(F ) ≤ A(AF ) is still a discrete
subgroup. However, it fails to be closed as soon as it is infinite [Con12b,
Theorem 4.4] because A is proper over F . Thus the quotient A(F )\A(AF )
is not even Hausdorff. Thus A(AF ) and the adelic quotient A(F )\A(AF ) are
very different objects than in the affine case, and we do not know whether or
not it makes sense to pursue automorphic forms in this setting.
Exercises
3.1. In the situation of the proof of Theorem 3.1.1 prove that if ϕ ∈ Cc (X)
then kπ(g)ϕ − ϕk∞ → 0 as g → 1.
3.2. Prove that compact (Hausdorff) topological groups are unimodular.
3.3. Show that for a locally compact topological group G the following are
equivalent:
dr (hg) = δ(h)dr g,
d` (gh) = δG (h)−1 d` g,
dr (g −1 ) = δG (g)−1 dr g,
d` (g −1 ) = δG (g)d` g.
Show in addition that
dr g = δG (g)d` g.

3.5. Let G be a reductive algebraic group over a global field F , let P ≤ G be
a parabolic subgroup, and let K ≤ G(AF ) be a maximal compact subgroup
such that the Iwasawa decomposition
G(AF ) = P (AF )K
holds (see Theorem 2.7.1). Show that the Haar measures on G(AF ), P (AF ),
and K can be normalized so that
dg = d` pdk.
3.6. Show that if Ω ⊂ G(AF ) is a compact set, then there is a finite set of
places S of F depending on Ω such that the projection of Ω to G(ASF ) is
contained in a maximal compact open subgroup K S ≤ G(ASF ). Deduce that
the products (3.9) are left and right Haar measures on G(AF ), respectively.
3.7. Let F be a nonarchimedean local field. Let dx be a Haar measure on

F , normalized so that dx(OF ) = 1, and let dx× be a Haar measure on F × ,
normalized so dx× (OF× ) = 1. Show that
1
dx(OF× ) = dx× (OF× )
1 − q −1
where q is the order of the residue field of OF .
3.8. Let F be a nonarchimedean local field and let dg be the Haar measure
on GL2 (F ) such that dg(GL2 (OF )) = 1. For n ≥ 0 compute
dg({g ∈ gl2 (OF ) ∩ GL2 (F ) : | det g| = q −n }).
3.9. Suppose that G is a connected reductive group over a global field F and
that AG 6= 1. Prove that G(F )\G(AF ) has infinite volume with respect to
the measure induced by a Haar measure on G(AF ).
3.10. Suppose that G is a connected reductive group over a global field F .
Show that [G] has finite volume using reduction theory (Theorem 2.7.2).
3.11. Prove that
∧i,j dxij
d (xij ) =
| det xij |
is a (right and left) Haar measure on
GLn (R) := {(xij ) ∈ gln (R) : det(xij ) ∈ R× }
if R is either a local field or the adeles of a global field and | · | is the norm
on the local field or the adelic norm, respectively.
3.12. Let F be a global field and let R be an F -algebra. For (xij ) ∈ GL2 (R)
let
dx11 ∧ dx21 ∧ dx12 ∧ dx22
ω=
x11 x22 − x21 x12
viewed as a left-invariant top-dimensional differential form on G. For a nonar-
chimedean place v of F , compute
d|ω|v (GL2 (OFv )).
Prove that Y
d|ω|v (GL2 (OFv ))
v
does not converge, but that

Y d|ω|v (GL2 (OF ))
v
v
ζF (1)
does converge.
3.10 Why affine groups? 71
3.13. Prove that representation of a finite group G on a finite-dimensional

(complex) vector space is completely reducible, i.e. it decomposes into a finite
direct sum of irreducible representations.
3.14. Let B ≤ GL2 be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices.

Prove that the natural representation
B(C) −→ GL2 (C)
is not completely reducible; that is, it does not decompose into a direct sum
of irreducible subrepresentations.
3.15. Let G be a locally compact group. Prove that the convolution product
on Cc (G) is associative.
3.16. If π : G → GL(V ) is a unitary representation of G then show that

π(f ) ∈ End(V ) for all f ∈ L1 (G).
3.17. Let G be a locally compact group and let f, g ∈ Cc (G). Prove that for
any representation π of G one has π(f ∗ g) = π(f ) ∗ π(g).
Chapter 4
Archimedean Representation Theory
I have often pondered over the

roles of knowledge or experience,
on the one hand, and imagination
or intuition, on the other, in the
process of discovery. I believe
that there is a certain
fundamental conflict between the
two, and knowledge, by
advocating caution, tends to
inhibit the flight of imagination.
Therefore, a certain naivete,
unburdened by conventional
wisdom, can sometimes be a
positive asset.
attributed to Harish-Chandra by
Langlands
Abstract In this chapter we introduce the basic players in representation the-

ory on real Lie groups. In particular we define admissibility, (g, K)-modules,
infinitesimal characters, and end the chapter with a brief discussion of the
Langlands decomposition.
4.1 The passage between analysis and algebra
For the moment let F be a number field and let G be an affine algebraic
group over F . Consider a Hilbert space representation V of
Y
G(F∞ ) = G(Fv ).
v|∞
73
74 4 Archimedean Representation Theory
Since we are interested in automorphic representations, the example one

should keep in mind, given Definition 3.3, is L2 ([G]). The fact that V is
often not a space of smooth functions is often inconvenient. It is also not
consonant with the classical theory of automorphic forms (to be discussed in
Chapter 6), which defines automorphic forms as space of smooth, even real
analytic functions satisfying specific differential equations.
The goal of this chapter is to explain how one passes from the abstract
representation V to a space of smooth, even real analytic functions that
essentially determines the original space. An added benefit of taking on this
process is that it allows us to pass back and forth from representations of
G(F∞ ), which involve analysis, (g, K)-modules, which can be studied via
algebraic means. The §4.2 through §4.4 establish crucial vocabulary for the
remainder of the book. At the end of §4.4 we will use this vocabulary to
describe the remaining sections of the chapter, which could be omitted on a
first reading and then referred back to as needed.
Before continuing we note that much of [Bum97, §2.4] is reproduced here
without essential change. The presentation in loc. cit. seemed nearly perfect
so we did not feel the need to modify it. We have of course added material
that frames these basic results in a form suitable for our purposes later in
the book.
There is a substantial literature dealing solely with archimedean repre-
sentation theory, and we have passed over much of it in silence. We cannot,
however, omit explicit mention of Harish-Chandra. Anyone studying reduc-
tive Lie groups must at some point walk the roads laid by him. His original
papers are still the only reference for certain results. We mention that Knapp
[Kna02] and Wallach [Wal88, Wal92] have written lucid introductions to the
theory in complementary styles.
4.2 Smooth vectors
In this section G denotes an algebraic group over the archimedean field F .

Recall that there exists an exponential map
exp : g −→ G(F ).
In the case where G = GLn , the Lie algebra gln is the collection of n × n
matrices. The exponential is simply the matrix exponential in this case:
∞
X Xj
exp(X) := .
j=0
j!
In general, if one has a faithful representation G → GLn , then this induces

an inclusion g → gln , and the exponential on g is just obtained by restriction.
4.2 Smooth vectors 75
Let (π, V ) be a Hilbert representation of G(F ). Given ϕ ∈ V we write
d
π(X)ϕ = π(exp(tX))ϕ|t=0
dt

π(exp(t + h)X)ϕ − π(exp(tX))ϕ
= lim |t=0
h→0 h
if the limit exists. We will sometimes simply write Xϕ for π(X)ϕ. We say
that a vector ϕ ∈ V is C 1 if for all X ∈ g, the derivative Xϕ is defined. We
define C k inductively by stipulating that ϕ ∈ V is C k if ϕ is C k−1 and Xϕ
is C k−1 for all X ∈ g. A vector ϕ ∈ V is C ∞ if it is C k for all k ≥ 1.
Definition 4.1. A vector ϕ ∈ V is said to be smooth if ϕ is C ∞ . The

subspace of smooth vectors is denoted by Vsm ≤ V .
Lemma 4.2.1 The space Vsm is invariant under G(F ).
Proof. Let g ∈ G(F ) and let X ∈ g. Then

1
X(π(g)ϕ) = lim (π(exp(tX)g)ϕ − π(g)ϕ)
t→0 t
1
= π(g) lim (π(exp(t Ad(g −1 )X)ϕ − ϕ)
t→0 t
where Ad(g −1 )X = g −1 Xg. The limit exists if ϕ is C 1 . This implies that

π(g)ϕ is C 1 . One shows that if ϕ is C k then π(g)ϕ is C k for all k by induction.
t
u
Lemma 4.2.2 Let (π, V ) be a Hilbert space representation of G(F ). Then

the action of g defined above is a Lie algebra representation.
Proof. Recall that C ∞ (G(F )) is a representation of the Lie algebra g where

the action is given by sending X ∈ g to dX, that is, differentiation in the
direction of X. The strategy of the proof is to reduce to this case.
Let ϕ0 ∈ V . We claim that one has a g-equivariant map
I := Iϕ0 : Vsm −→ C ∞ (G(F ))

ϕ 7−→ (g 7→ hπ(g)ϕ, ϕ0 i) .
To prove that I is an intertwining map it suffices to verify that
(dX ◦ I)ϕ(g) = (I ◦ X)ϕ(g)
(see [God15, §25-26] for more details, especially [God15, Theorem 39]). For
this we compute:
d d
(I(ϕ))(g exp(tX)) = hπ(g)π(exp(tX))ϕ, ϕ0 i

dt t=0 dt t=0
= hπ(g)Xϕ, ϕ0 i
= (I ◦ X)(ϕ)(g).
Since we are assuming that ϕ is smooth, we see that this function is smooth
as well.
In order to verify that Vsm is a representation of g, we must check that
X(Y ϕ) − Y (Xϕ) = [X, Y ]ϕ
for all X, Y ∈ g and all ϕ ∈ Vsm . By duality, it suffices to prove that this
identity holds after pairing with ϕ0 for all ϕ0 ∈ V , in other words, that
Iϕ0 (X(Y ϕ)) − Iϕ0 (Y (Xϕ)) = Iϕ0 ([X, Y ]ϕ)
for all ϕ, ϕ0 . This is a consequence of the fact that C ∞ (G(F )) is a represen-

tation of g as recalled at the beginning of the proof. t
u
Thus Vsm affords a representation of G(F ) and of g. Note that so far we
don’t even know if Vsm is nonzero; it ought to be large in order for this
notion to be useful. Fortunately, it is indeed large. To make this precise, if
f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) then define
Z
π(f )ϕ = f (g)π(g)ϕdr g
G(F )
where dr g is a right Haar measure. Let d` g = δG(F ) (g)−1 dr g. It is a left Haar

measure.
Proposition 4.2.3 If f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) and ϕ ∈ V then π(f )ϕ ∈ Vsm . More-
over the space Vsm is dense in V .
Proof. For X ∈ g let
d
fX (g) = f (exp(−tX)g) .

dt t=0
Then fX ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) and

Z Z
fX (g) d
π(g)ϕdr g = f (exp(−tX)g)π(g)ϕd` g

δ
G(F ) G(F ) (g) dt G(F ) t=0
Z
d
= f (g)π(exp(tX)g)ϕd` g

dt G(F ) t=0
d −1

= π(exp(tX))π(f δG(F )ϕ

dt )
t=0
−1
= Xπ(f δG(F ) )ϕ.
Since f is arbitrary, this implies that π(f )ϕ ∈ C 1 . By induction we see that

π(f )ϕ ∈ Vsm .
4.3 Restriction to compact subgroups 77
For the second claim let ε > 0. The action map
G(F ) × V −→ V
(g, ϕ) 7−→ π(g)ϕ
is continuous. This implies that for all ε > 0 there exists a neighborhood
U ⊆ G(F ) of the identity such that |π(g)ϕ − ϕ| < ε for all g ∈ U . Choose a
nonnegative function f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) supported in U such that
Z
f (g)dr g = 1.
G(F )
Then
Z

kπ(f )ϕ − ϕk2 = f (g)(π(g)ϕ − ϕ)dr g

G(F )
2
Z
≤ f (g)kπ(g)ϕ − ϕk2 dr g ≤ ε
G(F )
which implies that π(f )ϕ is as close to ϕ as we wish. Hence Vsm is dense. t

u
The subspace of Vsm spanned by vectors of the form π(f )ϕ for some f ∈
Cc∞ (G(F )) is known as the Gårding subspace. Note that what we actually
proved was that the Gårding subspace is contained in Vsm and is dense in V .
In fact, one has the following [DM78]:
Theorem 4.2.4 (Dixmier-Malliavin theorem) The Gårding subspace is
equal to Vsm .
Another result from the same paper, known as the Dixmier-Malliavin lemma,
also comes up often in practice:
Theorem 4.2.5 (Dixmier-Malliavin lemma) Every function f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ))
can be written as a finite sum of convolutions:
X
f= hi1 ∗ hi2
i
where hij ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )). t

u
4.3 Restriction to compact subgroups
The representation theory of compact groups is much simpler than the rep-
resentation theory of noncompact groups. For example, any irreducible rep-
resentation of a compact group is unitarizable and finite-dimensional (see
Theorem 4.3.3 below). A profitable strategy in representation theory is to
analyze the restriction of a given representation to subgroups. We will apply

this strategy to reductive groups over the reals in the following section, but
in this section we start by recalling what we require from the representation
theory of compact groups.
Let G be a locally compact (Hausdorff) topological group and let K ≤ G
be a compact subgroup.
Lemma 4.3.1 Let π be a representation of G on a Hilbert space V . There
exists a Hermitian inner product ( , ) : V × V → C which gives the same
topology as the given pairing on V but with respect to which π|K is unitary,
i.e.
(π(k)ϕ1 , π(k)ϕ2 ) = (ϕ1 , ϕ2 )
for all k ∈ K and ϕ1 , ϕ2 ∈ V .
In particular, taking G(F∞ ) to be compact we see that any representation
of a compact Lie group is unitarizable.
Proof. Let h , i denote the original Hilbert space pairing and k·k2 the original
norm. Define Z
(ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) = hπ(k)ϕ1 , π(k)ϕ2 idk.
K
By construction it is K-invariant so we need only check the claim about the
topology. The maps K → C given by
k 7−→ hπ(k)ϕ, π(k)ϕi
where ϕ 6= 0 form a family of non-vanishing continuous functions. Thus the

operators {π(k) : k ∈ K} are a bounded family of operators which implies by
the uniform boundedness principle that their operator norm is bounded. In
particular there is some nonzero constantC such that kπ(k)ϕk2 < Ckϕk2 . We
can likewise find a similar bound for π(k −1 ) and so C −1 kϕk2 ≤ kπ(k)ϕk2 ≤
Ckϕk2 . From this we find that
Z
kϕk22,new := hπ(k)ϕ, π(k)ϕidk
K
satisfies
C −2 meas(K)kϕk22 < kϕk22,new < C 2 meas(K)kϕk22 .
This implies the result. t
u
We now prepare to state the Peter-Weyl theorem, which says that all of
the representation theory of a compact Lie group K is contained in L2 (K).
Definition 4.2. Let (π, V ) be a continuous representation of G on a Hermi-

tian vector space V . A matrix coefficient of π is a function of the form
m : G −→ C
4.3 Restriction to compact subgroups 79
g 7−→ (π(g)ϕ1 , ϕ2 )
for some ϕ1 , ϕ2 ∈ V .
The following proposition implies that irreducible representations of K can
be recovered from their matrix coefficients:
Proposition 4.3.2 Suppose K is a compact Lie group and (π1 , V1 ) and
(π2 , V2 ) are two representations of K with π2 unitary. If there exist matrix
coefficients m1 , m2 for π1 , π2 respectively that are not orthogonal in L2 (K)
then there exists a non-trivial intertwining operator I : V1 → V2 .
Proof. Write ( , )i for the Hermitian pairing on Vi . Let x1 , y1 ∈ V1 and
x2 , y2 ∈ V2 be such that
Z
(π1 (k)x1 , y1 )1 (π2 (k)x2 , y2 )2 dk 6= 0.
K
Let Z
I(ϕ) = (π1 (k)ϕ, y1 )1 π2 (k −1 )y2 dk.
K
We claim that I gives an intertwining map
I : V1 −→ V2 .
Indeed, Z
π2 (g) ◦ I(ϕ) = (π1 (k)ϕ, y1 )1 π2 (gk −1 )y2 dk.
K
If we change variables k 7→ kg this becomes I ◦ π1 (g)ϕ and so I is an inter-

twining operator. We now verify that it is nonzero. One has
Z
(I(x1 ), x2 )2 = (π1 (k)x1 , y1 )1 π2 (k −1 )y2 dk, x2
Z K 2
−1
= (π1 (k)x1 , y1 )1 (π2 (k )y2 , x2 )2 dk
K
Z
= (π1 (k)x1 , y1 )1 (π2 (k)x2 , y2 )2 dk (V2 is unitary)
K
6= 0.
Thus I is nonzero. t
u
The following theorem tells us that all of the representation theory of a
compact Lie group K is contained in L2 (K):
Theorem 4.3.3 (Peter-Weyl Theorem) Let K be a compact Lie group.
(a) The matrix coefficients of finite dimensional unitary representations of K
are dense in C(K) and Lp (K) for all 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞.
(b) Any irreducible unitary representation of K is finite dimensional.

(c) If (π, V ) is a unitary representation of K, then V decomposes into a
Hilbert space direct sum of irreducible unitary subrepresentations. t
u
If we assume that K admits a faithful representation then the proof is not
difficult (see Exercise 4.2). This case suffices for the purposes of this book.
However, the usual proof that K admits a faithful representation uses the
Peter-Weyl theorem [Kna02, §I.5]
4.4 (g, K)-modules
Let G be an affine algebraic group G over the archimedean field F and let
K ≤ G(F ) be a maximal compact subgroup. Our goals in this section are
to introduce the notion of admissibility, define (g, K)-modules, and attach
a (g, K)-module to each admissible representation. With these concepts in
hand, at the end of the section we will describe the content of the remainder
of the chapter.
Let (π, V ) be a representation of K. For each equivalence class of irre-
ducible representation σ of K we write
V (σ) = {ϕ ∈ V : hπ(k)ϕ : k ∈ Ki ∼
= σ}
where the brackets denote the C-span. This is the σ-isotypic subspace. A
vector in V (resp. a subspace) of V is said to have K-type σ if it is an
element (resp. a subspace) of V (σ).
Definition 4.3. A vector ϕ ∈ V is K-finite if ϕ ∈ V (σ) for some irreducible
representation σ of K. The algebraic direct sum
Vfin := ⊕σ∈K
cV (σ)
is the space of K-finite vectors in V .

Here, as in §3.8, Kb is the unitary dual of K. This can be identified with the
set of all equivalence classes of irreducible representations of K because all
representations of K are unitarizable. We will later show in Proposition 4.4.2
that if V is a Hilbert space, then Vfin is dense in V , and hence V is the Hilbert
space direct sum of the V (σ).
Definition 4.4. A representation V of G(F ) is admissible if for each σ ∈ K

b
the dimension of V (σ) is finite.
The notion of admissibility isolates a subcategory of the category of repre-
sentations of G that is closed under many natural operators in representation
theory (for example parabolic induction, see §4.9). This category properly
contains the subcategory of unitary representations [Wal88, Theorem 3.4.10]:
4.4 (g, K)-modules 81
Theorem 4.4.1 (Harish-Chandra) If G is reductive then unitary repre-

sentations of G(F ) are admissible. t
u
Remark 4.1. Unitary representations of nonreductive groups are not in gen-
eral admissible. A precise discussion of this phenomenon together with exam-
ples that are relevant to classical automorphic forms is contained in [BS98,
§3.2].
The basic tool used to analyze admissible representations is the notion of
a (g, K)-module:
Definition 4.5. A (g, K)-module is a vector space V with a representation
of π of g and K which satisfy the following:
(a) The space V is a countable algebraic direct sum V = ⊕i Vi with each Vi
a finite dimensional K-invariant vector space.
(b) For X ∈ k and ϕ ∈ V we have:
d 1
π(X)ϕ = Xϕ = π(exp(tX))ϕ = lim (π(exp(hX))ϕ − ϕ).

dt t=0 h→0 h
In particular, the limit on the right exists.

(c) For k ∈ K and X ∈ g we have π(k)π(X)π(k −1 )ϕ = π(Ad(k)X)ϕ.
We say that the (g, K)-module is admissible if V (σ) is finite dimensional
for all σ ∈ K.
b
A morphism of (g, K)-modules is simply a vector space morphism equivariant
with respect to the action of g and K, and an isomorphism is a morphism
that induces an isomorphism of the underlying vector spaces. One important
difference between (g, K) modules and Hilbert space representations is that
we impose no topology on the former. In particular, a submodule of a (g, K)-
module V is just a vector subspace of V fixed by the actions of g and K. Since
we have not required V to be topological, we do not require the subspace to
be closed. A (g, K)-module V is irreducible if it admits no subspaces fixed
under the action of g and K.
The following proposition states that an admissible representation of G(F )
yields a (g, K)-module:
Proposition 4.4.2 Let (π, V ) be a representation of G(F ) on a Hilbert space
V . Let Vfin ≤ V be the space of K-finite vectors. Then Vfin ∩ Vsm is dense in
V and invariant under the action of g. If V is admissible, then Vfin ≤ Vsm .
Thus the space of K-finite vectors in an admissible Hilbert space representa-
tion of G(F ) is in a natural manner an admissible (g, K)-module. We remark
that every admissible (g, K)-module is canonically the space of K-finite vec-
tors of an admissible representation of G(F ) on a smooth Fréchet space of
moderate growth by a theorem of Casselman and Wallach [Cas89] [Wal92,
Chapter 11].
Before giving the proof we state a lemma which we leave as an exercise:
Lemma 4.4.3 Let k = Lie(K). The following are equivalent:

(a) The vector ϕ ∈ V is K-finite.
(b) The space hπ(k)ϕ|k ∈ Ki is finite dimensional.
If ϕ is smooth, then this is equivalent to
(c) The space hπ(x)ϕ|x ∈ ki is finite dimensional. t
u
Thus K-finiteness can be detected using the Lie algebra of K. Assuming this
lemma we give the proof of Proposition 4.4.2:
Proof of Proposition 4.4.2: We assume without loss of generality that π|K is

unitary. Write
V0 := Vsm ∩ Vfin .
We first prove that V0 is dense in V . Let U be a neighborhood of 1 in G(F )
and let ε > 0. Suppose that f is a nonnegative smooth function on G(F )
with support in KU such that
Z Z
f (g)dr g = 1 and f (g)dr g < ε. (4.1)
G(F ) G(F )−U
By making U and ε sufficiently small we can make π(f )ϕ as close as we like

to ϕ for all ϕ in V by an analogue of the argument in the proof of Proposition
4.2.3.
It therefore suffices to show that for arbitrary U and ε > 0 we can choose an
f satisfying (4.1) such that π(f )ϕ is K-finite. To construct such an f , let let
U1 ⊂ G(F ) and W ⊂ K be neighborhoods of 1 such that W UR1 ⊂ U , and let f1
be a nonnegative smooth function supported in U1 such that G(F ) f1 (g)dr g =
1. By the Peter-Weyl theorem, there exists a matrix coefficient R f0 of a finite
dimensional
R representation of K that is nonnegative such that f (k)dk = 1
K 0
and K−W f0 (k)dk < ε. Let
Z
f (g) := f0 (k)f1 (k −1 g)dk.
K
R
Clearly, f has support contained in KU1 ⊂ KU and G(F ) f (g)dr g = 1.
Moreover, since W U1 ⊂ U , if k ∈ K is such that there exists g ∈ G(F ) − U
with f1 (k −1 g) 6= 0 then k 6∈ W . Indeed, otherwise we would have
g = k(k −1 g) ∈ W U1 ⊂ U.
Therefore
Z Z Z
|f (g)|dr g ≤ |f0 (k)||f1 (k −1 g)|dkdr g
G(F )−U G(F )−U K
Z Z
= |f0 (k)||f1 (k −1 g)|dkdr g
G(F )−U K−W
4.4 (g, K)-modules 83
Z Z
≤ |f0 (k)| |f1 (k −1 g)|dr gdk
K−W G(F )
Z
= f0 (k)dk < ε.
K−W
Thus f satisfies (4.1). Here we have used the fact that δG(F ) (k) = 1 because
K is compact.
We now show that π(f )ϕ is K-finite. Let ρ be a finite dimensional unitary
representation of which f0 is a matrix coefficient. Thus f0 (k) = (ρ(k)ξ, ζ) for
some ξ, ζ in the space of ρ. Then if k1 ∈ K:
Z
−1
f (k1 g) = f0 (k)f1 (k −1 k1−1 g)dk
K
Z
= (ρ(k)ξ, ζ)f1 (k −1 k1−1 g)dk
ZK
= (ρ(k1−1 )ρ(k)ξ, ζ)f1 (k −1 g)dk
K
Z
= (ρ(k)ξ, ρ(k1 )ζ)f1 (k −1 g)dk.
K
−1
Therefore the linear span of the
R functions f (k−11 g) is contained in the linear
span of the functions g 7→ K (ρ(k)ξ, ζ)f1 (k g)dk for varying ξ, ζ in the
space of ρ, and this space isR finite dimensional. Thus
R the space spanned by
the vectors π(k1 )π(f )ϕ = G(F ) f (g)π(k1 g)ϕdg = G(F ) f (k1−1 g)π(g)ϕdg as
k1 varies over K is finite dimensional, so π(f )ϕ ∈ Vfin . Moreover, π(f )ϕ is
smooth for any vector ϕ by Proposition 4.2.3. It follows that V0 is dense in
Vsm , which is dense in V .
Next we prove that Vfin ≤ Vsm if V is admissible. First observe that V0
is K-invariant since Vsm is by Lemma 4.4.3. Let σ be an irreducible unitary
representation of K. Then V0 (σ) ≤ V (σ). Since Vfin is an algebraic direct
sum of the V (σ) it suffices to show that V0 (σ) = V (σ).
Since V (σ) is finite-dimensional by admissibility, V0 (σ) admits a well-
defined orthogonal complement in V (σ) (this is the only part of the proof
where admissibility is used). If ϕ is in this orthogonal complement then ϕ
is orthogonal to all of V0 , because it is orthogonal to V (τ ) for every τ 6= σ.
Therefore ϕ = 0, since V0 is dense. This establishes that V0 (σ) = V (σ), and
hence V0 = Vfin ≤ Vsm .
Finally, must show that Vfin is invariant under g. Let ϕ ∈ Vfin , let W be
the span of ϕ under K, and let
W1 := hY ϕ | Y ∈ g and ϕ ∈ W i,
which is clearly finite dimensional. We claim that W1 is fixed by K.

Indeed, if X ∈ k = Lie(K), and Y ϕ ∈ W1 , then X(Y ϕ) = [X, Y ]ϕ +

Y (Xϕ), which is an element in W1 . Therefore the elements of W1 are K-
finite by Lemma 4.4.3, and hence Y ϕ is K-finite for all Y ∈ g. 2
Two admissible representations are infinitesimally equivalent if their
underlying (g, K)-modules are isomorphic. Certainly equivalent representa-
tions are infinitesimally equivalent, but the converse is not true in general
[Bum97, Exercise 2.6.1]. However, the situation is better if we assume that
both representations are unitary [HC53, Theorem 8]:
Theorem 4.4.4 If G is reductive then two infinitesimally equivalent unitary
representations of G(F ) are unitarily equivalent. t
u
Now that we have introduced the notions of admissibility and the (g, K)-
module of an admissible representation we can begin to make use of them.
One manifestation of the power of admissibility is that allows us to under-
stand the infinite-dimensional space V in terms of finite dimensional sub-
spaces. An example of this is given in §4.5.
There is a useful invariant attached to any irreducible (g, K)-module called
a infinitesimal character; its construction will be recalled in §4.6. We then give
an example of how (g, K)-modules can be computed and classified explicitly
in the simplest nontrivial case in §4.7.
The real power of admissibility is that one can classify admissible repre-
sentations. Thus the description of the unitary dual G(F \) is reduced to the
question of which admissible representations are unitary. This is still very
difficult, and at the present time the unitary dual has not been computed for
general reductive groups.
The classification itself (which has several forms) is known as the Lang-
lands classification. It can be viewed as establishing the local Langlands cor-
respondence for archimedean fields. Historically this was the first case of the
local Langlands conjecture proven. We will review the Langlands classifica-
tion in §4.9 after recalling some prerequisites involving tempered and discrete
series representations in §4.8.
4.5 Hecke algebras with K-types
Let σ be an irreducible representation of K. For k ∈ K let
eσ (k) := dim(σ)−1 tr(σ)(k −1 ) (4.2)
This is a smooth function on K. For any Hilbert representation (π, V ) of

G(F ) the operator π(eσ ) is defined:
4.5 Hecke algebras with K-types 85
π(eσ ) : V −→ V (σ)
(4.3)
Z
ϕ 7−→ eσ (k)π(k)ϕdk
K
These operators are idempotents:

(
Id if σ ∼
= σ0
π(eσ )π(eσ0 ) = (4.4)
0 otherwise.
One also can define the left and right convolution of eσ with any element
f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )):
Z
f ∗ eσ (g) := f (gk −1 )eσ (k)dk (4.5)
K
Z
eσ ∗ f := eσ (k −1 )f (kg)dk. (4.6)
K
These are again elements of Cc∞ (G(F )).

For any finite subset Ξ of the unitary dual K
b of K we define
X
eΞ := eσ
σ∈Ξ
and
V (Ξ) := ⊕σ∈Ξ V (σ).
(algebraic direct sum).
Definition 4.5.1 The Hecke algebra of K-type Ξ is
Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ) := eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F )) ∗ eΞ . (4.7)
We observe that V (Ξ) is naturally a representation of Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ). We

invite the reader to compare this with the nonarchimedean setting discussed
in §5.3. The algebra Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ) is often called the spherical Hecke algebra
of type Ξ, but we will avoid this terminology because it is usually reserved
for the special case where Ξ is one-element set consisting of the the trivial
representation.
If (π, V ) is admissible, then V (Ξ) is finite-dimensional for all Ξ. This ob-
servation is quite useful in practice as it allows us to reduce certain questions
about the infinite-dimensional representation V of G(F ) to the family of
finite-dimensional representations of the algebras Cc∞ (G(F )). We give some
examples in the remainder of this section.
First we state a very general version of Schur’s lemma. Let V be a vector
space and let Λ ⊆ End(V ) be a subset of its set of endomorphisms. We say
that Λ acts irreducibly if for any subspace W of V such that ΛW ≤ W
either W = 0 or W = V . For a proof of the following version of Schur’s

lemma see [Wal88, §0.5].
Lemma 4.1. Assume that V is a vector space of countable dimension and
that Λ ⊆ End(V ) acts irreducibly. If T ∈ End(V ) commutes with every ele-
ment of Λ then T is a scalar multiple of the identity operator. t
u
We also require the following version of the Jacobson density theorem:
Theorem 4.5.2 Let V be a vector space of countable dimension and let A <
End(V ) be a C-subalgebra (possibly without identity) that acts irreducibly.
Then for any ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn , ϕ01 , . . . , ϕ0n ∈ V with ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn linearly independent
there is an a ∈ A such that aϕi = ϕ0i for all i. t
u
We warn the reader that the Jacobson density theorem is usually stated
for modules over rings with identity. For a version that avoids the idenity
assumption we refer to [Jac64, §II.2].
Proposition 4.5.3 A Hilbert space representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is irre-
ducible if and only if V (Ξ) is an irreducible Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ)-module for all
Ξ.
Proof. Suppose V is reducible, that is, V = V1 ⊕ V2 as a representation of

G(F ), where V1 and V2 are closed subrepresentations. Then
V (Ξ) = V1 (Ξ) ⊕ V2 (Ξ)
as Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ)-modules for all finite subsets Ξ ⊂ K.

b By Proposition 4.4.2
V1 (Ξ) and V2 (Ξ) are nonzero for Ξ large enough.
Conversely, suppose V is irreducible, and suppose that
V (Ξ) = V1 ⊕ V2
as Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ)-modules for some Ξ ⊂ K.

b Here V1 and V2 are two subspaces
of V (Ξ). If V1 6= 0 then
V1 = Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ)V1 = eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F )) ∗ eΞ V1 = eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F ))V1 (4.8)
where we have used Theorem 4.5.2 for the first equality. It is clear that
eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F ))V1 is a subspace of V (Ξ). If it is a proper subspace then the
inverse image of eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F ))V1 under
eΞ : V 7→ V (Ξ)
is a proper closed G(F )-invariant subspace subspace of V , contradicting our

irreducibility assumption. Thus eΞ ∗ Cc∞ (G(F ))V1 = V (Ξ), and we deduce
from this and (4.8) that V1 = V (Ξ) and hence V2 = 0. t
u
Combining (4.5.3) and Lemma 4.1 we obtain the following corollary:

4.6 Infinitesimal characters 87
Corollary 4.5.4 If (π, V ) is an irreducible admissible Hilbert space rep-

resentation of G(F ) then T ∈ End(Vfin ) commuting with the action of
Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ) for all finite subsets Ξ ⊂ K
b is a scalar multiple of the identity
operator. t
u
The following proposition will be used in the proof of Proposition 16.2.3.
It is an immediate consequence of Theorem 4.5.2 and Corollary 4.5.4:
Proposition 4.5.5 Let (π, V ) be an admissible Hilbert space representation

of G(F ) and let Ξ ⊂ K b be finite. Let ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn , ϕ0 , . . . , ϕ0n ∈ ⊕σ∈Ξ V (σ)
1
with ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn linearly independent. Then there exists an f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ), Ξ)
such that π(f )ϕi = ϕ0i for all i. t
u
4.6 Infinitesimal characters
Let g be a Lie algebra over an archimedean field F . We let
gC := g ⊗R C.
We use this odd notation as a reminder that if F is complex then gC 6= ∼ g,

whereas gC := g ⊗C C is isomorphic to g in this case.
We denote the universal enveloping algebra of gC by U (g). This is a uni-
tal associative algebra. Any associative algebra becomes a Lie algebra with
bracket [X, Y ] = XY − Y X, and thus we can regard U (g) as a Lie algebra.
The universal enveloping algebra is equipped with an injective Lie algebra
morphism
g ⊗R C −→ U (g)
by the Poincaré-Birkoff-Witt theorem. This morphism is univeral in that
given any Lie algebra homomorphism from gC → A to a unital associative
algebra A (equipped with the Lie algebra structure mentioned above) there
is a unique morphism U (g) → A such that the following diagram commutes:
gC / U (g)
!
A
We denote by Z(g) the center of U (g).

We now present the explicit description of Z(g) (for reductive g) afforded
by the Harish-Chandra isomorphism. Assume that g is reductive and let t ≤ g
be a Cartan subalgebra. For example, we could choose a connected reductive
algebraic group G over F with Lie algebra g and a maximal torus T ≤ G
with Lie algebra t. We then obtain a root system
Φ := Φ(G ×Spec(R) Spec(C), T ×Spec(R) Spec(C))
as in §1.8. Let ∆ ⊂ Φ be a base and let Φ+ ⊂ Φ be the associated set of

positive roots. We define the Harish-Chandra homorphism
γ : Z(g) −→ U (t) −→ Z(t)

X 7−→ X − ρ(X)1
where the first map is the projection, and

X
ρ := 12 α. (4.9)
α∈Φ+
Remark 4.2. This is our first time explicitly mentioning ρ, the ubiquitous
half-sum of positive roots. It is incorporated into the definition to make it
compatible with parabolic induction (see §4.9).
Let W := W (G, T )(C) denote the Weyl group of T in G; it acts on tC and
hence U (t). For the proof of the following theorem of Harish-Chandra, see
[Wal88, Theorem 3.2.3]:
Theorem 4.6.1 The linear map γ is an algebra homomorphism, is indepen-

dent of the choice of base ∆, has image in U (t)W , and induces an isomor-
phism
γ : Z(g) −→ U (t)W .
t
u
The theorem allows us, in particular, to explicitly describe the characters of
Z(g) as we now explain. Suppose we are given λ ∈ (tC )∨ , the C-linear dual of
tC . The linear map λ : tC → C is tautologically a Lie algebra map because tC
is commutative. By the universal property of universal enveloping algebras
this extends uniquely to an algebra morphism λ : U (t) −→ C. We let
χλ := λ|U (t)W ◦ γ : Z(g) −→ C.
This is an algebra morphism (i.e. a character) from Z(g) to C.

Proposition 4.6.2 Every algebra morphism from Z(g) to C is of the form
χλ for some λ ∈ (tC )∨ . Two λ define the same χλ if and only if they are in
the same orbit under W .
Proof. Since tC is a commutative Lie algebra (i.e. its bracket is identically

zero) U (t) is just the symmetric algebra Sym(tC ). This is canonically isomor-
phic to the polynomial algebra C[(tC )∨ ]. Thus we obtain a bijection
Spec(C[(tC )∨ ], C)−→Hom(U
˜ (t), C).
4.7 Classification of (g, K)-modules for GL2R 89
The set on the left can be identified with the maximal ideals of (tC )∨ , which,
by the Hilbert Nullstellensatz, are in natural bijection with elements of (tC )∨ .
Taking W invariants we obtain the proposition. t
u
A g-module V is said to admit an infinitesimal character if Z(g) acts via
a character on V . By Theorem 4.6.1 and Proposition 4.6.2 such a character
can be identified with an element of (tC )∨ .
The following is an immediate corollary of Lemma 4.1:
Corollary 4.6.3 Let V be an irreducible admissible (g, K)-module and let
Λ : V → V be a C-linear map commuting with the actions of g and K. Then
Λ is multiplication by a scalar. t
u
It follows immediately from the corollary that any irreducible (g, K)-module
admits an infinitesimal character. This is a very useful invariant that is sur-
prisingly closely tied to arithmetic.
4.7 Classification of (g, K)-modules for GL2R
In this section we state the classification of admissible irreducible (g, K)-

modules when
g := gl2 and K := O2 (R).
We refer to [Bum97, §2.5] for proofs and many more details.
Define

1 0 01 00 10
H := , X := , Y := , Z := . (4.10)
0 −1 00 10 01
These elements form a basis for g. If we set
∆ = (1/4)(H 2 + 2XY + 2Y X)
then Z(g) = h∆, Zi (see Exercise 4.8). Finally we set

cos θ − sin θ
wθ := .
sin θ cos θ
For every (s, µ) ∈ C2 consider the character
χ : Z(g) −→ C
Z 7−→ µ
∆ 7−→ s(1 − s).
Then for each ε ∈ {0, 1} one has a (g, K)-module
(π, V ) = (πs,µ,ε , Vs,µ,ε )

with infinitesimal character χ constructed as follows. The space is

M
V = Cv` .
`≡ε (mod 2)
The action is given by

1 0

(a) π(wθ )v` = ei`θ v` and π 0 −1 v` = v−`
(b) Xv` = s + 2` v`+2 ,

(c) Y v` = s − 2` v`−2 ,

(d) ∆v` = s(1 − s)v` ,

(e) Zv` = µv` .
This is an admissible (g, K)-module. It is irreducible unless s = k2 where
k is an integer congruent to ε modulo 2. If k ≥ 1 then π k ,µ,ε has has a
2
unique irreducible infinite dimensional subrepresentation denoted by πk . The
set of K-types of πk consist of the v` with |`| ≥ k. The quotient by this
subrepresentation is a finite dimensional representation, and all irreducible
finite dimensional representations are obtained in this manner.
If πs,µ,ε is irreducible it is known as an irreducible principal series
representation. If it is reducible, πk is known as a discrete series represen-
tation if k 6= 1 and a limit of discrete series if k = 1. This terminology
should make more sense after the next two sections. It is clear (upon con-
sidering K-types, for example) that if πk1 ∼ = πk2 then k1 = k2 , and that an
irreducible representation cannot be both in the principal series and in the
discrete series. Moreover, it is easy to see that if
πs1 ,µ1 ,ε1 ∼

= πs2 ,µ2 ,ε2
then µ1 = µ2 , ε1 = ε2 , and either s1 = s2 or s1 = 1 − s2 .

The following is the classification result mentioned in the title of this
section:
Theorem 4.7.1 Any infinite dimensional irreducible admissible (g, K)-module
is isomorphic to πs,µ,ε for some s, µ, ε or πk for some k ≥ 1. t
u
4.8 Matrix coefficients
Let G be a reductive group over the local field F . For the moment we do not
assume that F is archimedean. Let (π, V ) be a representation of G(F ). In
Definition 4.2 above we defined notion of a matrix coefficient. In this section
we explain how matrix coefficients can be used to isolate important classes
of representations of G(F ).
We have already seen in §2.6 that the center of G often causes analytic
problems for somewhat trivial reasons. One often circumvents this difficulty
4.8 Matrix coefficients 91
by defining classes of representations based on their restriction to appropriate

subgroups. In analogy with (2.10) we let
\
G(F )1 := ker (| · | ◦ χ : G(F ) → R>0 ) . (4.11)
χ∈X ∗ (G)
Definition 4.6. An irreducible representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is in the dis-

crete series or square integrable (resp. is tempered) if its matrix coef-
ficients lie in L2 (G(F )) (resp. L2+ε (G(F )) for any ε > 0). It is essentially
square integrable (resp. essentially tempered) if the matrix coefficients
of π|G(F )1 lie in L2 (G(F )1 ) (resp. L2+ε (G(F )1 )).
We concentrate on square integrable and tempered representations in the

following discussion, but similar results hold for essentially square integrable
and essentially tempered representations.
Discrete series representations can be realized as subrepresentations of
L2 (G(F )), and hence are always unitarizable (see [Dix77, Chapter 14] for
details). Additionally, tempered representations are infinitesimally equivalent
to unitary representations in the archimedean case [Kna02, Theorem 8.53]
and equivalent to unitary representations in the nonarchimedean case [Sil79,
Corollary 4.5.13]. We note that in many references, including [Sil79, §4.5],
one finds a more technical definition of temperedness. Once one knows that
tempered representations are unitary, one can prove that the more technical
definition (which we have not and will not give) is equivalent to the easily
stated one above using the arguments of [CHH88].
Now that we have defined these classes of representations, we ought to
comment briefly on their significance. We concentrate on the notion of tem-
peredness. If π is an admissible representation of G(F ) let Bπ be an orthonor-
mal basis of the space of π. For f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) the sum
X
Θπ (f ) = hπ(f )ϕ, ϕi
ϕ∈Bπ
converges absolutely (this is obvious in the nonarchimedean case, see §8.5, and
in the archimedean case it is proven in [Kna02, Theorem 10.2]). Technically
speaking we have not defined admissibility in the nonarchimedean case; it is
defined in §5.3. The linear functional
Θπ : Cc∞ (G(F )) −→ C
is known as the character of π.

In the context of Fourier theory on R, tempered distributions are precisely
those which admit a Fourier transform; in other words, they are analytically
fairly well-behaved. In the archimedean case tempered representations are
precisely those whose characters define a tempered distribution on a certain
Schwartz space containing Cc∞ (G(F )) [Kna02, Theorem 12.23] [Sil79, §4.5].
There is also a version of the Plancherel theorem for G(F ) relating spaces of
functions on G(F ) and tempered representations of G(F ). It takes the form
Z
f (g) = Θπ (g)dµPl (π)
\)
G(F
where µPl (π) is the Plancherel measure on the unitary dual. Though this
is called the Plancherel theorem, it is really more like a Fourier inversion
theorem. In the archimedean case this is [Wal92, Theorem 13.4.1]. In the
nonarchimedean case this is [Wal03].
Finally the condition of temperedness is also a representation theoretic
encapsulation of how well-behaved automorphic L-functions are. This will be
discussed in the context of the Ramanujan conjecture in Conjecture 10.6.4.
4.9 The Langlands classification
The Langlands classification gives a description of representations of reduc-

tive groups over archimedean local fields in terms of tempered representations
of Levi subgroups. We state it in this section. There is a refinement where
the tempered representations are replaced by discrete series representations
and limits of discrete series representations. We will touch on this in §10.5 in
the case G = GLn . For the general case we refer to [Kna86, §XIV.17].
Let G be a reductive group over the archimedean local field F . Fix a min-
imal parabolic subgroup P0 and call a parabolic subgroup P ≤ G standard
if it contains P0 . Let P ≤ G be a standard parabolic subgroup. Since F has
characteristic zero, it admits a Levi decomposition as in Theorem 1.5.4
P = MN
where M is a Levi subgroup of P and N is it unipotent radical. We choose a

maximal compact subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that the Iwasawa decomposition
G(F ) = P (F )K holds (see Appendix A).
We let AM be the identity component in the real topology of the largest
R-split torus T in the center of ResF/R M and we let
\
M (F )1 := ker (| · | ◦ χ : M (F ) −→ R>0 ) ,
χ∈X ∗ (M )
where the reader recalls the notion of X ∗ (M )F in §1.7. Then AM M (F )1 =

M (F ) and the product is direct. The Langlands decomposition of P (F )
is
P (F ) = N (F )M (F )1 AM .
4.9 The Langlands classification 93
If we let aM := Hom(X ∗ (M )F , R) then aM can be identified with Lie AM .

We then have a map
HM : M (F ) −→ aM (4.12)
defined by
hHM (g), χi = log |χ(g)|
∗
for χ ∈ X (M )F and we can identify M (F )1 := ker HM ∩ M (F ). We now
extend HM to HP by extending the characters in X ∗ (M )F to P by declaring
them to be trivial on N . We then obtain HP : P (F ) −→ aM ; this provides
an isomorphism X ∗ (M )F →X
˜ ∗ (P )F .
∗
For each λ ∈ aM C := Hom(aM , C) we therefore obtain a character
P (F ) −→ C×
p 7−→ ehHP (p),λi . (4.13)
Now consider the set of roots of a∗M can be identified with the vector space
underlying the associated root system Φ(G, T ). We let ρ denote half the sum
of the positive roots defined by the parabolic subgroup P (see §1.9). For each
representation (σ, V ) of M (F )1 one can form the representation (σ, λ) of P (F )
by extending σ trivially to P (F ) and twisting by the character hHP (·), λi.
We can then form the (normalized) induced representation
I(σ, λ)
of G(F ). A dense subspace of the space of I(σ, λ) consists of continuous

functions ϕ : G(F ) −→ V such that
ϕ(nmg) = ehHP (m),λ+ρi σ(m)ϕ(g). (4.14)

R
This space is equipped with an inner product hϕ1 , ϕ2 i = K ϕ1 (k)ϕ2 (k)dk.
The whole space is the completion with respect to this inner product. Finally
the action of G(F ) is given by
I(σ, λ)(g)ϕ(x) := ϕ(xg).
The ρ is incorporated so that if σ ⊗ hHP (·), λi is unitary then so is I(σ, λ)

[Kna02, §VII.1]. This also explains the parenthetic “normalized” mentioned
above.
The following is known as the subquotient theorem (see [Kna02, The-
orem 7.24]):
Theorem 4.9.1 If σ is unitary and tempered and λ lies in the positive Weyl
chamber then I(σ, λ) admits a unique irreducible quotient J(σ, λ). t
u
The quotient J(σ, λ) is known as the Langlands quotient and σ, λ are
known as Langlands data.
We can now give the Langlands classification [Kna02, Theorem 8.54]:

Theorem 4.9.2 Every irreducible admissible representation of G(F ) is iso-
morphic to some J(σ, λ). Moreover, if we insist that the parabolic sub-
group defining J(σ, λ) is standard, fix a Levi decomposition of each standard
parabolic subgroup, and stipulate that λ is in the positive Weyl chamber then
every irreducible representation of G(F ) is isomorphic to a J(σ, λ) that is
unique up to replacing σ by another representation of M (F )1 equivalent to
σ. t
u
There is also a version of the Langlands classification in the nonar-
chimedean setting, for this we refer to §8.4.
Exercises
4.1. Let T be a torus over R and let K ≤ T (R) be a maximal compact

subgroup. Show that there exists an isomorphism between the C-vector space
of K-finite functions in Cc∞ (T (R)) and Cc∞ (AT ) ×C C(K).
b Here by C(K)b we
mean the free vector space on the isomorphism classes of irreducible unitary
representations of K.
4.2. Let K be a compact Lie group that admits a faithful representation
K → GLn (C). We can then view K as a subgroup of gln (C) which can be
viewed as a real vector space. Call a function on K polynomial if it is the
restriction to K of a polynomial on this real vector space. Show that every
polynomial function on K is the matrix coefficients of a finite dimensional
representations of K, and deduce part (a) of the Peter-Weyl theorem from this
and the Stone-Weierstrass theorem (Theorem 4.3.3). Using part (a) deduce
parts (b) and (c) as well.
4.4. Let (π, V ) be an irreducible unitary representation of G(F ) where G is
a reductive group over the local field F and V is a Hilbert space. Show that
there is a quasi-character ωπ : ZG (F ) → C× such that π(z) acts via ωπ (z)
on V for all z ∈ ZG (F ). The quasi-character ωπ is called the central quasi-
character of π. Show that if χ : G(F ) → C× is a quasi-character, then the
central quasi-character of π ⊗ χ is χ|ZG (F ) ωπ , where ZG is the center of G.
4.5. Give an example of a reductive group G over R and an irreducible ad-
missible representation of G(R) that is not unitary.
4.6. Let g be a semisimple Lie algebra over an archimedean field F and let
gC := g ⊗R C. Let B be the Killing form on g and denote also by B its
extension to gC . It is nondegenerate. Let {Xi } denote a basis for gC and
denote by X i the dual basis with respect to B. The element
4.9 The Langlands classification 95
X
∆ := Xi X i ∈ U (g)
i
is known as the Casimir element. Prove that ∆ is independent of the choice

of basis and that ∆ ∈ Z(g).
4.7. Prove that the image of eσ is contained in V (σ) as asserted in (4.3).
4.8. Prove that if g := gl2 then Z(g) = hH, ∆i in the notation of (4.7).
4.9. Prove that the space Vs,µ,ε of §4.7 is indeed a (g, K)-module with the
given action.
4.10. In the notation of §4.7 prove that if πk1 ∼ = πk2 then k1 = k2 , and that
if
πs1 ,µ1 ,ε1 ∼
= πs2 ,µ2 ,ε2
then µ1 = µ2 , ε1 = ε2 , and either s1 = s2 or s1 = 1 − s2 .
4.11. Prove that all finite dimensional (gl2 , O2 (R))-modules are quotients
(resp. subrepresentations) of some Vs,µ,ε for some s, µ, ε, and identify the
Vs,µ,ε of which they are quotients (resp. subrepresentations).
Chapter 5
Representations of Totally Disconnected
Groups
I will tell you a false proof. But

like every fairy tale, it has a
kernel of truth.
D. Kazhdan
Abstract In this chapter our goal is to develop enough of the representa-

tion theory of locally compact totally disconnected groups (or td groups for
short) to state a refined definition of an automorphic representation in the
next chapter. At the end of the chapter we prove Flath’s theorem. This funda-
mental result implies that automorphic representations can be factored into
local representations indexed by the places of the global field over which the
representation is defined.
5.1 Totally disconnected groups
We start with the following definition, following [Car79]:
Definition 5.1. A topological group G is td or of td-type if every neigh-

borhood of the identity contains a compact open subgroup.
Here and the rest of this chapter, the letters td stand for totally disconnected.
Our basic examples are given by the next lemma, which follows readily
from the definition of the topology on the points of an algebraic group from
§2.2:
Lemma 5.1.1 Let G be an algebraic group over a local nonarchimedean field
F . Then G(F ) is of td-type. Similarly, if F is a global field and S is a finite
set of places of F including the archimedean places if F is a number field,
then G(ASF ) is a td group. t
u
97
98 5 Representations of Totally Disconnected Groups
A td group is Hausdorff and locally compact, so the theory of §3.1 is

applicable. A td-type group is also totally disconnected, which explains the
terminology (see Exercise 5.1). Thus the topology on a td group is very
different from that of a connected Lie group. In fact, in stark contrast to the
defining property of td-type group, a connected Lie group satisfies has no
small subgroups in a sense made precise in the following lemma:
Lemma 5.1.2 Let G be a connected Lie group. Then there is a neighborhood
U of the identity so that for all g ∈ U − {1} there is an integer N depending
on g such that g N 6∈ U .
Proof. It is a standard result that there are neighborhoods V0 of 0 in Lie(G)
and U1 of 1 in G such that the exponential map exp : V0 → U1 is a diffeomor-
phism. Let U = exp 21 V0 . Then if g = exp( 12 v) ∈ U − {1} for some v ∈ V0
one has
n times
z }| {
n 1 1
g = exp v . . . exp v .
2 2
n
Choosing n large enough that 2v 6∈ V0 we deduce the result. t
u
This proof illustrates the difference between nonarchimedean and archimedean
metrics, see Exercise 5.8.
Our aim in this chapter is to use the special topological properties of td
groups to refine our understanding of their representation theory. We deal
with the basic theory in this chapter, including the local Hecke algebra (see
§5.2), the definition of admissible in this context (see §5.3, and Flath’s the-
orem on decomposition of admissible representations (Theorem 5.7.1). The
reader will notice that in this section we essentially make no use of the fact
that the groups in question arise as the points of reductive groups in nonar-
chimedean local fields. The (deeper) part of the theory that requires this
structure is relegated to Chapter 8.
Unless otherwise specified for the remainder of this chapter we let G be a
locally compact td group.
5.2 Smooth functions in td groups
The first step in understanding the representation theory of a td-group is to

define what we mean by a smooth function:
Definition 5.2. A function f : G → C is smooth if it is locally constant.
The complex vector subspace of C(G) (resp. Cc (G)) consisting of smooth
functions is denoted by C ∞ (G) (resp.Cc∞ (G)).
It turns out that Cc∞ (G) is preserved under convolution, defined as in
§3.3. Thus Cc∞ (G) is an algebra under convolution. It is known as the Hecke
5.2 Smooth functions in td groups 99
algebra of G. If K ≤ G is a compact open subgroup, then we let
Cc∞ (G // K) ≤ Cc∞ (G)
denote the subalgebra of functions that are right and left K-invariant.
Lemma 5.2.1 Any element f ∈ Cc∞ (G) is in Cc∞ (G // K) for some compact
open subgroup K. If f ∈ Cc∞ (G // K), then f is a finite C-linear combination
of elements of the form
1KγK
for γ ∈ G. Here 1X denotes the characteristic function of a set X.
Proof. By local constancy of f for every γ in the support supp(f ) we can
chose a compact open subgroup K(γ) ≤ G so that f is constant on γK(γ).
Then [
γK(γ)
γ
Sn
is an open cover of supp(f ), so it admits
Tn a finite subcover i=1 γi K(γi ) since
f has compact support. Let Kr := i=1 K(γi ); it is a finite intersection of
compact open subgroups so it is itself a compact open subgroup. We see
that f is right Kr -invariant. Similarly we can find a compact open subgroup
K` ≤ G such that f is left K` -invariant, and letting K := K` ∩ Kr we see
that f ∈ Cc∞ (G // K).
Assume f ∈ Cc∞ (G // K). The union
[
KγK
γ∈supp(f )
is an open cover of supp(f ), which therefore admits a finite subcover. The

last claim in the lemma follows. t
u
Note that Cc∞ (G // K) ≤ Cc∞ (G // K 0 ) if K ≥ K 0 . Thus, in view of the

lemma, to explicitly describe the convolution operation on Cc∞ (G) it suffices
to describe
1KαK ∗ 1KβK
for a fixed compact open subgroup K ≤ G and α, β ∈ G. We can write
KαK = qi Kαi and KβK = qj βj K
where both sums are finite and αi , βj ∈ G. We then have
1KαK ∗ 1KβK = 1Kαi βj K .

X
(5.1)
i,j
Example 5.1. All compact open subgroups of GLn (A∞

Q ) are of the form
Y
KS GLn (Zp )
p6∈S
for S a finite set of finite primes and KS is a compact open subgroup of

GLn (QS ). The subgroup GLn (Z) b = Q GLn (Zp ) ≤ GLn (A∞ ) is a maximal
p Q
compact open subgroup, and all maximal compact open subgroups are conju-
gate to this maximal compact open subgroup [Ser06, Chapter IV, Appendix
1]. Examples of nonmaximal compact open subgroups are given by the kernel
of the reduction map
b −→ GLn (Z/m)
GLn (Z)
for integers m.
Let G be an algebraic group over F and assume that we have chosen

a model for G over OF which we denote by the same letter by abuse of
notation. If γ ∈ G(A∞ bS
F ), then γ ∈ G(OF ) for some finite set S of places. If
∞ ∞
K ≤ G(AF ) is a compact open subgroup, then upon enlarging S we can
assume that K S = G(ObS ). For such a choice of S we have
F
1K ∞ γK ∞ = 1KS γS KS ⊗ 1K S
for some finite set of nonarchimedean places S. This reduces the study of
nonarchimedean Hecke algebras to the study of the local Hecke algebras
Cc∞ (G(Fv ))
as v varies over nonarchimedean places v of F . This idea will be formalized

in a very useful manner in §5.7 below.
5.3 Smooth and admissible representations
Definition 5.3. A representation (π, V ) of G on a complex vector space V

is smooth if the stabilizer of any vector in V is open in G.
Equivalently, V is smooth if and only if

[
V = VK
K≤G
where the superscript denotes the subspace of fixed vectors and where the
union is over all compact open subgroups K ≤ G.
In this definition we do not assume that the representation V is continuous,
or for that matter even give a topology on V . In fact, V is smooth if and only
if the representation is continuous if with respect to the given td topology on
G and the discrete topology on V . We note that the smooth representations of
5.3 Smooth and admissible representations 101
a given td group form a category where morphisms are simply G-equivariant

C-linear maps. The category is even abelian.
It is sometimes useful to rephrase the condition of smoothness in terms of
the associated representation of the algebra Cc∞ (G). For this we recall that
a module M for an algebra A is nondegenerate if every element of M can
be written as a finite sum
a1 m1 + · · · + an mn
for some (ai , mi ) ∈ A × M . Of course, this is trivially true if A contains an

identity, but we will be applying this concept when A = Cc∞ (G), which does
not have an identity. However, it has approximate identities in the following
sense. For each compact open subgroup K ≤ G let
1
eK := 1K .
meas(K)
Then eK is the identity element of the algebra
Cc∞ (G // K) = eK ∗ Cc∞ (G) ∗ eK .
If V is a smooth representation of G, then it is naturally a Cc∞ (G)-module

and Cc∞ (G // K) preserves
V K = eK V.
This observation is in fact the key to the proof of the following lemma, which
we leave as an exercise:
Lemma 5.3.1 There is an equivalence of categories between nondegenerate
Cc∞ (G)-modules and smooth representations of G. t
u
Using this equivalence we prove the following irreducibility criterion:
Proposition 5.3.2 A smooth G-module V is irreducible if and only if V K
is an irreducible Cc∞ (G // K)-module for all compact open subgroups K ≤ G.
Proof. Suppose V is reducible, that is, V = V1 ⊕ V2 as Cc∞ (G)-modules,
where V1 and V2 are nonzero. Then
V K = V1K ⊕ V2K
as Cc∞ (G // K)-modules for all compact open subgroups K ≤ G, and for

sufficiently small K the spaces V1K and V2K are nonzero by smoothness.
Conversely, suppose V is irreducible, and suppose that
V K = V1 ⊕ V2
as Cc∞ (G // K)-modules for some compact open subgroup K ≤ G. Here V1

and V2 are two subspaces of V K (necessarily fixed by K). If V1 6= 0 then by
irreducibility of V one has
V1 = Cc∞ (G // K)V1 = eK ∗ Cc∞ (G) ∗ eK V1 = eK ∗ Cc∞ (G)V1 = eK V = V K .
Thus V2 = 0. t
u
We now come to the most important definition of the chapter:
Definition 5.4. A representation V of G is admissible if it is smooth and

V K is finite dimensional for every compact open subgroup K ≤ G. A Cc∞ (G)-
module V is admissible if it is nondegenerate and eK V is finite dimensional
for all compact open subgroups K ≤ G.
It is immediate that a representation V of G is admissible if and only if its

associated Cc∞ (G)-module is admissible.
Jacquet and Langlands introduced this definition in their classic work
[JL70], though some indication of the definition in the real case appeared
in work of Harish-Chandra [HC53]. The importance of the definition is that
it isolates exactly the correct category of representations to study, and at the
same time eliminates extraneous topological assumptions (e.g. the presence
of a Hilbert or pre-Hilbert space structure on V ). One indication that this
is the correct category is the following theorem, which is proven as part of
Theorem 8.3.5 below:
Theorem 5.1. Let F be a nonarchimedean field. Assume that G is the F -

points of a reductive algebraic group over F . Then an irreducible smooth
representation of G is admissible.
Another indication that admissible representations are the correct category

to study is the fact that unitary representations of G give rise to admissible
representations. To explain this we require some preparation. Recall that
in the archimedean setting of §4.4 we passed from Hilbert representations
to their subspace of K-finite vectors (K a maximal compact subgroup of
the relevant group) in order to define a notion of admissibility for them. We
require a similar process here, but it is slightly simpler. Given a Hilbert space
representation V of G we let
[
Vsm := VK ≤V
K
where the union is over all compact open subgroups K ≤ G. Then Vsm ≤
V is evidently a smooth subrepresentation of G. We say that the Hilbert
representation V is admissible if Vsm is admissible. We note that in this
case Vsm is a pre-Hilbert representation.
Lemma 5.3.3 Let V be a Hilbert representation of G. The subspace Vsm ≤ V
is dense and G-invariant. Moreover, if V and W are Hilbert representations
and Vsm → Wsm is a G-intertwining morphism then it extends uniquely to a
G-intertwining continuous morphism V → W . If the morphism Vsm → Wsm
is an isomorphism, then so is V → W .
5.4 Contragredients 103
We leave the proof as an exercise (see Exercise 5.11). Thus, by the lemma,
we can detect isomorphisms of Hilbert representations using the underlying
representations in the smooth category. We also have the following analogue
of Theorem 4.4.4:
Proposition 5.3.4 If V1 , V2 are unitary representations of G and their

spaces of smooth vectors V1sm and V2sm are equivalent then V1 and V2 are
unitarily equivalent.
We give the proof of Proposition 5.3.4 in §5.4. Finally, we have the following
nonarchimedean analogue of Theorem 4.4.1:
Theorem 5.2 (Harish-Chandra, Bernstein). Let F be a nonarchimedean

field and let G be the F -points of a reductive group over F . Then all irreducible
unitary representations of G are admissible. t
u
The proof was reduced to a conjectural estimate on the dimensions of the

V K in [HC70b] (which invoked earlier work of Godement, see loc. cit.). This
estimate was proven in [Ber74].
Taken together, Lemma 5.3.3, Proposition 5.3.4 and Theorem 5.2 tell use
that the study of unitary irreducible representations of G that are the F -
points of reductive groups over F is equivalent to the study of preunitary
admissible representations of this type of group.
5.4 Contragredients
In this section we use the proof of Proposition 5.3.4 as a convenient excuse

for introducing the useful concepts of the contragredient representation of a
given smooth representation of a td group G.
Let (π, V ) of be a smooth representation of G. Then there is an action of
G on the space of C-linear functionals Hom(V, C) on V given by
G × Hom(V, C) −→ Hom(V, C) (5.2)

−1
(g, λ) 7−→ λ ◦ π(g ).
The smooth dual V ∨ ⊆ Hom(V, C) is the subspace of smooth linear

functionals, this is precisely the set of λ that are fixed by some compact
open subgroup K ≤ G. The action (5.2) preserves V ∨ and affords a smooth
representation (π ∨ , V ∨ ) of G.
Definition 5.5. The contragredient representation (π ∨ , V ∨ ) is the rep-

resentation of G on the smooth dual V ∨ given above.
We note that ∨ is a contravariant functor from the category of admissible

representations of G to itself.
We now define a variant of the contragredient representation. For any

C-vector space V let
V := C ⊗(λ7→λ),C V.
This has the same underlying additive group as V , but with scalar multipli-
cation defined by (λ, v) 7→ λv (the bar denoting complex conjugation). The
representation
(π ∗ , V ∗ ) := (π ∨ , V ∨ )
is known as the Hermitian contragredient. The map ∗ again defines a
contravariant functor from the category of admissible representations of G to
itself. If V is admissible then there are natural isomorphisms
V −→ (V ∨ )∨ and V −→ (V ∗ )∗
(see Exercise 5.13).

The following lemma, which is [Lau96, Lemma D.6.3], is easily seen to
imply Proposition 5.3.4:
Lemma 5.4.1 Let (π, V ) be an admissible representation of G. There is a
canonical bijection between the set of G-invariant, definite, Hermitian scalar
products on V and the set of isomorphisms
ι : V −→ V ∗
of smooth representations such that ι∗ = ι. If (π, V ) is irreducible any two

G-invariant, definite (resp. positive definite) Hermitian scalar products on V
are R× (resp. R>0 ) multiples of each other.
Here we use the canonical isomorphism (V ∗ )∗ = V to regard ι∗ as a map
from V to itself.
Proof. The last claim follows from Schur’s lemma (in the form of Exercise 5.5)
and the first claim. Suppose that we have a G-invariant, definite, Hermitian
inner product (·, ·) on V (C-linear in the first variable and C-antilinear in the
second). We then obtain a G-equivariant morphism
V −→ V ∗
ϕ0 7−→ (ϕ 7−→ (ϕ, ϕ0 )). (5.3)
It is clearly injective. Now if K ≤ G is a compact open subgroup, then

dimC ((V ∗ )K ) = dimC ((V ∨ )K ) = dimC (V K ). Thus for all compact open sub-
groups K ≤ G we have that (5.3) induces an isomorphism.
∗ K
V K −→(V
˜ ) .
Hence by the smoothness of V and V ∗ the injection (5.3) is an isomorphism.

Since (ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) = (ϕ2 , ϕ1 ) we deduce that ι = ι∗ . Conversely if ι : V → V ∗
5.5 The unramified Hecke algebra 105
is an isomorphism of admissible representations satisfying ι = ι∗ , we can

associate to ι the G-invariant Hermitian inner product
(ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) := ι(ϕ2 )(ϕ1 ).
t
u
5.5 The unramified Hecke algebra
Let G be a reductive group over F , where F is a nonarchimedean local field.

Recall from §2.4 that G is unramified if G is quasi-split and split over an
unramified extension of F . In this case there is a unique G(F )-conjugacy
class of hyperspecial subgroups K (see §2.4).
Definition 5.6. If G is unramified and K ≤ G(F ) is a hyperspecial sub-

group, then
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K)
is known as the spherical Hecke algebra.
Here Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) is the subalgebra of functions invariant on the left and
right under K.
The following is arguably the most important fact about this algebra:
Theorem 5.5.1 The spherical Hecke algebra Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) is commuta-
tive.
One way to prove this is via the Satake isomorphism (see Theorem 7.2.1).
In special cases this can also be proven using a trick due to Gelfand (see
Exercise 5.14). Let us describe the algebra in more detail in a special case:
Example 5.2. Let G = GLn , viewed as a group over Qp . A hyperspecial sub-

group is GLn (Zp ). The spherical Hecke algebra in this case is
Cc∞ (GLn (Qp ) // GLn (Zp )).
Let
λ = (λ1 , . . . , λn ).
Let T be the maximal torus of diagonal matrices in GLn . Then λ defines a
cocharacter λ : Gm → T given on points by
λ
!
x 1
λ(x) = .. .
.
x λn
Consider
{1GLn (Zp )λ(p)GLn (Zp ) : λ1 ≥ . . . , ≥ λn }

The Smith normal form for matrices over Qp from the theory of elementary
divisors implies that the set above is a C-vector space basis for the spherical
Hecke algebra.
Definition 5.7. Assume that G is unramified with hyperspecial subgroup

K ≤ G(F ). An irreducible admissible representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is un-
ramified, or spherical if V K 6= 0.
The following consequence of Theorem 5.5.1 is often referred to as unique-

ness of the spherical vector, although it is more correct to say that it estab-
lishes the uniqueness of the spherical line:
Corollary 5.5.2 Assume that G is unramified and that (π, V ) is an irre-
ducible admissible unramified representation of G(F ). Then dimC V K = 1.
Proof. Since V is irreducible, V K , if nonzero, must be an irreducible repre-

sentation of the commutative algebra Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) by Proposition 5.3.2.
t
u
5.6 Restricted tensor products of modules
In the representation theory of compact or algebraic groups one very quickly

reduces the representation theory of products of groups to representation the-
ory of the individual factors, thus simplifying problems significantly. We now
explain how one can do this in the context of automorphic representations.
The problem is that G(AF ) is a restricted direct product
0
G(AF ) ∼
Y
= G(Fv ),
v
not a direct product, so we should not expect representations of G(AF ) to

decompose into a direct external product of representations. What one does
instead is define a notion of restricted direct products of representations. We
make this precise in the current section, and then prove in Theorem 5.7.1 that
automorphic representations to indeed factor into restricted direct products
indexed by the places in F .
We start by defining a restricted direct product of vector spaces. Let Ξ be
a countable set, let Ξ0 ⊂ Ξ be a finite subset, let
{Wv : v ∈ Ξ}
be a family of C-vector spaces and for each v ∈ Ξ − Ξ0 let w0v ∈ Wv − 0. For

all sets
5.6 Restricted tensor products of modules 107
Ξ0 ⊆ S ⊆ Ξ
of finite cardinality set WS := v∈S Wv . If S ⊆ S 0 there is a map
Q
WS −→ WS 0 (5.4)
⊗v∈S ϕv 7−→ ⊗v∈S ϕv ⊗ (⊗v∈S 0 −S ϕ0v ) .
Consider the vector space
W := ⊗0 Wv := lim WS
−→
S
where the transition maps are given by (5.4). This is the restricted tensor
product of the Wv with respect to the ϕ0v . Thus W is the set of sequences
(ϕv )v∈Ξ ∈ ⊗v Wv
such that wv = ϕ0v for all but finitely many v ∈ Ξ. We note that if we are
given for each v ∈ Ξ a C-linear map
Bv : Wv −→ Wv
such that Bv (w0v ) = w0v for all but finitely many v ∈ Ξ then this gives a
map
B = ⊗v Bv : W −→ W
⊗ϕv 7−→ ⊗Bv (ϕv ).
We now define a restricted directed product of algebras. Suppose we are

given C-algebras (not necessarily with unit) {Av : v ∈ Ξ} and idempotents
a0v ∈ Av for all v ∈ Ξ − Ξ0 . If S ⊆ S 0 there is a map
AS −→ AS 0 (5.5)
⊗v∈S av 7−→ ⊗v∈S av ⊗ (⊗v∈S 0 −S a0v ) .
Consider the algebra

A := ⊗0v∈Ξ Av := lim AS
−→
S
where the transition maps are given by (5.5). This is the restricted tensor
product of the Av with respect to the a0v . Finally, if Wv is an Av -module
for all v ∈ Ξ such that a0v ϕ0v = ϕ0v for almost all v, then ⊗0v Wv is an
A-module. The isomorphism class of W as an A-module in general depends
on the choice of {ϕ0v }. However, if we replace the ϕ0v by nonzero scalar
multiples we obtain isomorphic A-modules.
An easy example of this construction is the ring of polynomials in infinitely
many variables. It can be given the structure of a restricted tensor product
of algebras
C[X1 , X2 , . . .] = ⊗0i C[Xi ]

where we take a0i to be the identity in C[Xi ].
Let G be a reductive group over the global field F and let ∞ be the set
of infinite places. Let Ξ0 be a finite set of places of F including the infinite
places. Enlarging Ξ0 if necessary we assume that if v 6∈ Ξ0 then GFv is
unramified. If v 6∈ Ξ0 we let Kv ≤ G(Fv ) be a choice of hyperspecial subgroup.
The fundamental example of the constructions above for our purposes is the
isomorphism
Cc∞ (G(A∞ ∼ 0 ∞
F )) = ⊗v-∞ Cc (G(Fv ))
The idempotents are

1
eKv := 1Kv (5.6)
meas(Kv )
where Kv ≤ G(Fv ) is a (choice of) hyperspecial subgroup for all v outside a

finite set of places of F including ∞. Here the measure in question is the Haar
measure used in the definition of the convolution product on Cc∞ (G(Fv )).
We really can take any choice of hyperspecial compact open subgroup here
(see Exercise 5.15), so the isomorphism above is not canonical. Of course,
since all choices lead to isomorphic algebras, the representation theory will
be essentially the same (see Exercise 5.16).
5.7 Flath’s theorem
Flath’s theorem implies that every automorphic representation can be fac-

tored into components indexed by the places of the global field over which
the representation is defined. This fact is fundamental to the study of auto-
morphic representations. In this section we state and prove Flath’s result.
Let G be a reductive group over a global field F . A Cc∞ (G(A∞F ))-module
W is factorizable if we can write
W ∼
= ⊗0v Wv (5.7)
where the restricted direct product is with respect to elements φ0v ∈

WvKv , dim(WvKv ) = 1, and the isomorphism (5.7) intertwines the action of
Cc∞ (G(A∞ 0 ∞
F )) with the action of ⊗v-∞ Cc (G(Fv )), the restricted direct prod-
uct with respect to the idempotents eKv as in (5.6) above.
In view of the assumption that dim(WvKv ) = 1 the module ⊗0v Wv only
depends on the choice of the φ0v up to isomorphism. Note that in this case
W is admissible and irreducible if and only if the Wv are for all v.
5.7 Flath’s theorem 109
Theorem 5.7.1 (Flath) Every admissible irreducible representation W of

Cc∞ (G(A∞
F )) is factorizable.
We start with the following easy case of Theorem 5.7.1:

Theorem 5.7.2 Let G1 , G2 be td groups and let G = G1 × G2 .
(a) If Vi is an admissible irreducible representation of Gi for i = 1, 2 then
V1 ⊗ V2 is an admissible irreducible representation of G.
(b) If V is an admissible irreducible representation of G then there exists
admissible irreducible representations Vi of Gi for i = 1, 2 such that
V ∼= V1 ⊗ V2 . Moreover the isomorphism classes of the Vi are uniquely
determined by V .
Proof. We first prove (a). It is easy to see that V1 ⊗V2 is admissible. We must
check that it is irreducible. By the irreducibility criterion in Proposition 5.3.2
for every compact open subgroup K1 × K2 ≤ G1 × G2 the finite-dimensional
Cc∞ (Gi // Ki )-modules ViKi are irreducible for i ∈ {1, 2}. Since the ViKi are
finite dimensional it it is easy to see that V1K1 ⊗V2K2 is irreducible as a module
under
Cc∞ (G1 // K1 ) ⊗ Cc∞ (G2 // K2 ).
But
Cc∞ (G1 × G2 // K1 × K2 ) = Cc∞ (G1 // K1 ) ⊗ Cc∞ (G2 // K2 )

(V1 ⊗ V2 )K1 ×K2 = V1K1 ⊗ V2K2
so V1 ⊗ V2 is irreducible by Proposition 5.3.2.

Conversely, let V be an admissible representation of G. Choose K = K1 ×
K2 such that V K 6= 0 (this is possible by smoothness). Then since V K is finite
dimensional there exist finite-dimensional irreducible Cc∞ (Gi // Ki )-modules
Vi (Ki ) and an isomorphism of Cc∞ (G // K) modules V K →V˜ 1 (K1 ) ⊗ V2 (K2 ).
Varying K, we obtain a decomposition
V ∼
= V1 ⊗ V2
as Cc∞ (G) ∼
= Cc∞ (G1 × G2 )-modules, where
V1 := lim V1 (K1 ) and V2 := lim V2 (K2 ).

−→ −→
K1 K2
The Vi are evidently admissible, and they are irreducible by Proposition 5.3.2.
t
u
We now prove Flath’s theorem:
Proof of Theorem 5.7.1: For each finite set S of places of F containing the
infinite places and the set of places v where GFv is ramified let
Y
K S := Kv ≤ G(ASF )
v6inS
be a fixed compact open subgroup with Kv hyperspecial for every v.

Choose an isomorphism
Cc∞ (G(A∞ ∼ 0 ∞
F )) = ⊗v-∞ Cc (G(Fv )) (5.8)
where the restricted direct product is constructed using the idempotents eKv
for Kv ≤ G(Fv ) with v 6∈ S. Use (5.8) to identify these two algebras for the
remainder of the proof. We then have a well-defined subalgebra
AS := Cc∞ (G(FS∞ )) ⊗ eK S ≤ Cc∞ (G(A∞

F )),
/ eKv is meas(K S ) 1K S .
1
where eK S = ⊗v∈S
By Corollary 5.5.2 and Theorem 5.7.2, as a representation of AS we have
an isomorphism
S
WK ∼ = ⊗v∈S−∞ Wv ⊗ W S
where W S is a one-dimensional C-vector space on which eK S acts trivially.
Hence, by admissibility,
W KS ∼
[
W = = lim ⊗ W ⊗ WS (5.9)
−→ v∈S−∞ v
S S
with respect to the obvious transition maps (compare §5.6). On the other
hand, (5.8) induces an identification
[
Cc∞ (G(A∞ F )) = AS = lim AS (5.10)
−→
S S
where the direct limit is taken with respect to the obvious transition maps
(again, compare §5.6), and it is clear that (5.9) is equivariant with respect to
(5.10). 2
Exercises
Throughout these exercises G is a group of td type and (π, V ) is a represen-

tation of G.
5.1. Prove that a group of td-type is Hausdorff, locally compact, and totally
disconnected.
5.2. Define [
Vsm := VK
K
5.7 Flath’s theorem 111
where the union is over all compact open subgroups K ≤ G. Prove that Vsm
is preserved by G and is a smooth subrepresentation of G. The subspace
Vsm ≤ V is the space of smooth vectors in V (in the current setting of td
groups).
5.3. Suppose that V is a Hilbert space representation. Assume that G is

second countable. Define Vsm as in the previous exercise. Show that Vsm
admits a countable algebraic (also known as Hamel) basis. Show that if V
is infinite dimensional then V does not admit a countable algebraic basis.
Conclude that if V is infinite-dimensional then Vsm ( V .
5.4. Suppose that V is admissible and preunitary, that is, there is a non-
degenerate inner product on V that is preserved by G. Prove that every
G-invariant subspace V1 ≤ V admits a complement, that is, a G-invariant
subspace V2 ≤ V such that V1 ⊕ V2 = V .
5.5. Assume that G is second countable and V is smooth and irreducible.

Show that any linear map Λ : V → V commuting with the action of G is a
scalar.
5.6. Assume that G is second countable and V is smooth and irreducible. Let
ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn , ϕ01 , . . . , ϕ0n be two sets of elements of V with ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn linearly
independent. Then there is an f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that
π(f )ϕi = ϕ0i
for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
5.7. Assume that G is second countable and V is smooth and irreducible. Let
ZG be the center of G. Show that there is a quasi-character ωπ : ZG → C×
such that π(z) acts via ωπ (z) on V for all z ∈ ZG . The quasi-character ωπ
is called the central quasi-character of π. Show that if χ : G → C× is a
quasi-character, then the central quasi-character of π ⊗ χ is χ|ZG ωπ .
5.8. Let p be a prime number in Z. Prove that there are no constants c1 , c2 ∈

R>0 such that
c1 | · |∞ ≤ | · |p ≤ c2 | · |∞ ,
where | · |∞ denotes the usual archimedean norm on Q and | · |p denotes the
p-adic norm.
5.9. Prove the equality (5.1).
5.12. Show that for any admissible representation V of a td group G

Hom(V K , C) = (V ∨ )K
for all compact open subgroups K ≤ G. Conclude that the contragredient

and Hermitian contragredient of an admissible representation of a td group
is again admissible.
5.13. Prove that if V is an admissible representation of a td group then there

are canonical isomorphisms V → (V ∨ )∨ and V → (V ∗ )∗ .
5.14. . Let F be a nonarchimedean local field. Consider the spherical Hecke

algebra Cc∞ (GLn (F ) // GLn (OF )). For f ∈ Cc∞ (GLn (F )) let f † (g) := f (g t ).
Show that for every f1 , f2 ∈ Cc∞ ((GLn (F ))
(f1 ∗ f2 )† (g) = (f2† ∗ f1† )(g).
Show, on the other hand, that f † = f for f ∈ Cc∞ (GLn (F ) // GLn (OF )).
Conclude that Cc∞ (GLn (F ) // GLn (OF )) is commutative.
5.15. Let F be a global field. For all v outside a finite set of places including
the infinite places choose hyperspecial subgroups Kv ≤ G(Fv ). Show that
0
∼
Y
G(A∞
F )= G(Fv )
v-∞
where the restricted tensor product is taken with respect to the Kv . Note that
we allow for infinitely many of the Kv ’s (perhaps all of them) to be different
from those obtained by choosing a model of G as in Proposition 2.3.1.
5.16. Let F be a global field. For all v outside a finite set of places including
the infinite places choose hyperspecial subgroups K1v , K2v ≤ G(Fv ). For
i = 1, 2, let Ai be ⊗0v-∞ Cc∞ (G(Fv )) where the restricted direct product is
taken with respect to eKiv (see (5.6)). Construct an equivalence of categories
between admissible A1 -modules and admissible A2 -modules.
Chapter 6
Automorphic Forms
Discovery is the privilege of the

child: the child who has no fear
of being once again wrong, of
looking like an idiot, of not being
serious, of not doing things like
everyone else.
Alexander Grothendieck
Abstract In this chapter we give a new definition of automorphic represen-

tations. There are two reasons for introducing the new definition. The first is
that it is easier to relate the new definition to spaces of automorphic forms
on locally symmetric spaces (in the number field case). The second is that
the new definition allows us to move from the category of Hilbert space rep-
resentations to the category of admissible representations. In practice it is
often easier to work in the latter category.
6.1 Smooth functions
Throughout this chapter we let G be a reductive group over a global field

F . Our goal in this chapter is to give a new definition of an automorphic
representation and explain its relation to the old definition. There are two
reasons for introducing a new definition. The first is that it is easier to relate
the new definition to spaces of automorphic forms on locally symmetric spaces
(in the number field case). The second is that the new definition allows us to
move from the category of Hilbert space representations to the category of
admissible representations.
As preparation for this in the current section we comment on the relation
between AG \G(AF ) and G(AF )1 and how one defines smooth functions in
each context. Recall that in §3.3 we defined an automorphic representation
113
114 6 Automorphic Forms
of G(AF )1 to be an irreducible unitary representation π of G(AF )1 isomor-

phic to a subquotient of L2 ([G]). Since we have assumed G is reductive in this
chapter we can identify [G] = G(F )AG \G(AF ) via the canonical isomorphism
G(AF )1 −→A
˜ G \G(AF ). We can then define an automorphic representa-
tion of AG \G(AF ) to be an irreducible unitary representation of AG \G(AF )
isomorphic to a subquotient of L2 ([G]). In the current chapter, we refer to
these concepts as automorphic representations in the L2 sense.
Both conventions have advantages and disadvantages and it is sometimes
useful to switch back and forth between them. For example, there is an ob-
vious isomorphism
AG \G(AF ) ∼
= AG \G(F∞ ) × G(A∞
F )
Analogously test functions on AG \G(AF ) factor in an obvious way.

On the other hand, the groups G(AF )1 seem to be useful when working
with subgroups (which is perhaps why Arthur uses them in his trace formula
[Art78, Art80]), are more natural when working over function fields, and
admit a definition whose natural generalization to the nonreductive setting
is well-behaved.
It is useful to say explicitly what we mean by a smooth function from
either optic. We define
C ∞ (G(AF )) : = C ∞ (G(F∞ )) ⊗ C ∞ (G(A∞

F )), and (6.1)
Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) := Cc∞ (AG \G(F∞ )) ⊗ Cc∞ (G(A∞
F )). (6.2)
Then the compactly supported smooth functions are simply Cc∞ (G(AF )) =
Cc∞ (G(F∞ )) ⊗ Cc∞ (G(A∞F )).
By definition, a smooth function on G(AF )1 is the restriction of a smooth
function on G(AF )
C ∞ (G(AF )1 ) := {f |G(AF )1 : f ∈ C ∞ (G(AF ))}. (6.3)
The canonical isomorphism G(AF )1 →A

˜ G \G(AF ) induces an isomorphism
Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) −→ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 )
via pullback of functions (see Exercise 6.9).
6.2 Classical automorphic forms
For this section F is a number field, K∞ ≤ G(F∞ ) is a maximal compact

subgroup, and K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ) is a compact open subgroup. Recall the home-
omorphism
6.2 Classical automorphic forms 115
a
G(F )\G(AF )/K ∞ −→
˜ Γi (K ∞ )\G(F∞ ) (6.4)
i
of (2.14). By Theorem 2.6.1 there are finitely many indices in this disjoint
union. The important point for the current discussion is not the precise defi-
nition of the Γi (K ∞ ), but just that they are discrete arithmetic subgroups of
G(F∞ ) such that the quotient Γi (K ∞ )\G(F∞ ) has finite volume (see Theo-
rem 2.6.2). Clearly automorphic representations are related to functions on
the left side. In this section and the following we make this relationship pre-
cise. We work only at infinity in the current section and then pass to the
adelic setting in the next.
Let
ι0 : G −→ GLn
be a closed embedding and let ι : G → GL2n be the embedding defined by

0
ι (g)
ι(g) := . (6.5)
ι0−t (g)
We then define the norm

Y
kgk := kgkι = supp1≤i,j≤2n |gij |v .
v|∞
Let g := Lie GF∞ and let K∞ ≤ G(F∞ ) be a maximal compact subgroup.

Let U (g) be the universal enveloping algebra of gC and Z(g) its center (see
§4.6).
Definition 6.1. A function
ϕ : G(F∞ ) −→ C
is of moderate growth or slowly increasing if there are constants c, r ∈

R>0 such that
|ϕ(g)| ≤ ckgkr .
It is of uniform moderate growth if there exists an r ∈ R>0 such that for
all X ∈ U (g) there exists a cX ∈ R>0 such that
|ϕ(g)| ≤ cX kgkr .
It turns out that different choices of ι lead to norms that are equivalent in
a sense made precise by Exercise 6.1. In particular, the notion of moderate
growth and uniform moderate growth is independent of the choice of ι.
For the definition of automorphic forms we will require the notion of K∞ -
finite functions and Z(g)-finite functions. The notion of K∞ -finiteness is given
in Definition 4.3. The definition of Z(g)-finite is similar.
Definition 6.2. Let V be a Z(g)-module. A vector ϕ ∈ V is Z(g)-finite if

Z(g)ϕ is finite-dimensional, or, equivalently, if there is an ideal J ≤ Z(g) of
finite codimension that annihilates ϕ.
We now finally come to the notion of an automorphic form:
Definition 6.3. Let Γ ⊆ G(F ) be an arithmetic subgroup. A smooth func-
tion ϕ : G(F∞ ) → C of moderate growth is an automorphic form on Γ
if it is left Γ -invariant, K∞ -finite, and Z(g)-finite. We denote the space of
automorphic forms on Γ by A(Γ ).
Often it is convenient to isolate the subspace that is annihilated by a
particular ideal J ≤ Z(g). It is denoted A(Γ, J). This space decomposes still
further:
A(Γ, J) := ⊕σ∈K cA(Γ, J, σ)
where A(Γ, J, σ) := A(Γ, J)(σ) in the notation of §4.4. We record the follow-
ing important result of Harish-Chandra [HC68]:
Theorem 6.2.1 (Harish-Chandra) For each ideal J ≤ Z(g) of finite codi-
mension the space A(Γ, J) is an admissible (g, K∞ )-module. In particular,
A(Γ, J, σ) is finite-dimensional for each σ. t
u
One might ask about the relationship between A(Γ ) and L2 (Γ AG \G(F∞ )).
There is no obvious relationship between them except under more stringent
assumptions. For example, Eisenstein series (which will be discussed in Chap-
ter 10) provide examples of elements of A(Γ ) need not even be square inte-
grable. It turns out to be more convenient to explain the relationship between
the so-called cuspidal subspaces of A(G) and L2 (Γ AG \G(F∞ )). We will defer
the discussion of this connection to the following section, in which we discuss
automorphic forms adelically.
6.3 Adelic automorphic forms over number fields
Let ι : G → SL2n be the embedding of (6.5). In this section we assume that

F is a number field. For a place v of F let
kgkv := kgkι,v = supp1≤i,j≤2n |gij |v (6.6)
and for a set of places S of F (finite or infinite) let

Y
kgkS := kgkv .
v∈S
If S is the set of all places of F then we omit it from notation.

As in the archimedean setting we have a definition of a function of mod-
erate growth:
6.3 Adelic automorphic forms over number fields 117
ϕ : G(AF ) −→ C
is of moderate growth or slowly increasing if there are constants c, r ∈

R>0 such that
|ϕ(g)| ≤ ckgkr .
A function ϕ is of uniform moderate growth if there exists an r ∈ R>0
such that for all X ∈ U (g) there exists a cX ∈ R>0 such that
|Xϕ(g)| ≤ cX kgkr .
It is often convenient to phase the notion of moderate growth in terms of

Siegel sets:
Lemma 6.3.1 A function
ϕ : [G] −→ C
is of moderate growth if and only if it is smooth and for all compact subsets
Ω ⊂ [G] and t ∈ R>0 there are constants c, r ∈ R>0 (depending on Ω and t)
such that one has
|ϕ(sy)| ≤ cα(s)r
for all s ∈ AT0 (t) and α ∈ ∆. It is of uniform moderate growth if and only
if it is smooth and there exists an r ∈ R>0 such that for all X ∈ U (g) there
exists a cX ∈ R≥0 such that
|Xϕ(g)| ≤ cX α(s)r
t
u
Here we are using notation from our discussion of Siegel sets and reduction
theory in §2.7. For a proof of this lemma we refer to [Bor07, §5.4].
By definition, a (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞F )-module (π, V ) is a complex vector space
V that is both a (g, K∞ ) and G(A∞ F )-module (we denote the two action
maps by π) such that the two actions commute. It is admissible if for each
K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ) the space of fixed vectors V
K∞
is admissible as a (g, K∞ )-
∞
module. A morphism of (g, K∞ )×G(AF ) is a complex linear map commuting
with the actions of (g, K∞ ) and G(A∞ F ) (no continuity condition is assumed.
We define an irreducible (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞ F )-module to be one that admits no
invariant submodule. There is no topology on V , so we do not assume that
the submodule is closed.
Let Kmax ≤ G(AF ) be a maximal compact subgroup; thus Kmax =
∞ ∞
K∞ × Kmax where K∞ ≤ G(F∞ ) and Kmax ≤ G(A∞ F ) are maximal compact
subgroups. As before, we say that a function ϕ : G(AF ) → C is K-finite if
the span of translates
{x 7→ ϕ(xk) : k ∈ Kmax }
is finite dimensional. An alternate way of phrasing this condition is given

in Exercise 6.3. The reason that we do not include the subscript max at
the infinite component is that it is rare to consider nonmaximal compact
subgroups in this setting, although it is very natural to consider nonmaximal
compact open subgroups at the finite places. The reason stems from the fact
that there are no “small subgroups” in the archimedean setting, compare
Lemma 5.1.2.
Definition 6.5. A smooth function
ϕ : G(AF ) −→ C
of moderate growth is an automorphic form on G if it is left G(F )-invariant,

Kmax -finite, and Z(g)-finite. The C-vector space of automorphic forms is
denoted by A or A(G).
The space A is equipped with an action of (g, K∞ ) and an action of G(A∞
F )
by right translations:
(g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F ) × A −→ A
(X, k, g, ϕ) 7−→ (x 7→ Xϕ(xkg)) . (6.7)
It is important to note that the action of G(A∞ F ) does not extend to an action
of G(AF ). Indeed, let ϕ ∈ A and let g ∈ G(F∞ ). Then x 7→ ϕ(xg) is smooth,
but it is only finite under gK∞ g −1 , not K∞ .
If σ is an irreducible representation of K∞ we denote by A(σ) the subspace
of vectors with K∞ -type σ, and if J ≤ Z(g) is an ideal the subspace of vectors
annihilated by J is denoted by A(J) (resp. A(J, σ)). The action of G(A∞ F )
preserves these spaces, and the action of (g, K∞ ) preserves A(J) (but of
course not A(J, σ) in general).
The following is the adelic analogue of Theorem 6.2.1:
Theorem 6.1. Let J ≤ Z(g) be an ideal of finite codimension. Then A(J)
is an admissible (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F )-module.
∞
Proof. We are to show that A(J, σ)K is finite dimensional for each K∞ -type
σ and each compact open subgroup K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ). We start by recalling the
description of the adelic quotient [G]/K ∞ given by (2.14). Letting t1 , . . . , th
denote a set of representatives for the finite set G(F )\G(A∞ F )/K
∞
one has a
homeomorphism
h
a
Γi (K ∞ )\G(F∞ ) −→ G(F )\G(AF )/K ∞
i=1
given on the ith component by Γi (K ∞ )g∞ 7→ G(F )g∞ ti where Γi (K ∞ ) =

G(F ) ∩ ti K ∞ t−1
i (see (2.14)). By pullback we obtain an isomorphism of C-
vector spaces
6.5 The cuspidal subspace 119
∞
˜ ⊕i=1 A(Γi (K ∞ ), J)
A(J)K −→
φ 7−→ (xi 7→ ϕ(xi ti )) (6.8)
which intertwines the natural action of (g, K∞ ) on both sides. We can now
deduce the theorem by applying Theorem 4.4.1. t
u
In view of the previous theorem the following definition is reasonable:
Definition 6.6. An automorphic representation of G(AF ) is an irre-

ducible admissible (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F ) isomorphic to a subquotient of A.
6.4 Adelic automorphic forms over function fields
The refined definition of an automorphic form in the function field case is

fairly straightforward:
ϕ : G(F )\G(AF ) −→ C
invariant on the right under a compact open subgroup of G(AF ) is an auto-

morphic form on G if the C-vector space spanned by the functions
{x 7→ ϕ(xg) : g ∈ G(AF )}
is an admissible representation of G(AF ).
As in the number field case, we denote by A or A(G) the C-vector space of

automorphic forms. It is naturally equipped with an action of G(AF ).
Definition 6.8. An automorphic representation of G(AF ) is an irre-

ducible admissible representation of G(AF ) that is isomorphic to a subquo-
tient of A.
In analogy with the number field case, two automorphic representations

of G(AF ) are equivalent if they are equivalent in the category of admissible
representations of G(AF ).
6.5 The cuspidal subspace
We now isolate what is arguably the most important subspace of A:
Definition 6.9. An automorphic form ϕ ∈ A is said to be cuspidal if for

every proper parabolic subgroup P < G with unipotent radical N one has
Z
ϕ(ng)dn = 0
[N ]
for all g ∈ G(AF ).
The subspace of cuspidal forms will be denoted Acusp .

Analogously, the cuspidal subspace
L2cusp ([G]) ⊆ L2 ([G]).
is the closure of the space of continuous functions ϕ such that for all proper
parabolic subgroups P < G with unipotent radical N one has
Z
ϕ(ng)dn = 0.
[N ]
It is clear that this is a G(AF )-subrepresentation of L2 ([G]).
Definition 6.10. A cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ) is

an automorphic representation equivalent to a subquotient of Acusp .
Let us say that an irreducible subquotient of L2cusp ([G]) is a cuspidal

automorphic representation in the L2 - sense. We will show in Corollary
9.1.2 below that one has a discrete decomposition
M
L2cusp ([G]) = L2cusp (π)
π
where L2cusp (π) is the π-isotypic subspace of L2cusp ([G]) and the sum is over all
isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic representations π of AG \G(AF ).
In view of this fact every irreducible subquotient of L2cusp ([G]) is in fact a
subrepresentation.
One justification for our claim that Acusp is the most important subspace
of A is that any element of A can be obtained from elements of Acusp ([M ]) as
M runs over the Levi subgroups of parabolic subgroups of G. We will discuss
the L2 -version of this fact in §10.4 below.
Though the relationship between automorphic representations in the sense
of Definition 6.6 and automorphic representations in the L2 -sense is compli-
cated, they are very closely linked in the cuspidal case. To explain the rela-
tionship, first note that if ϕ is in the space of a cuspidal automorphic repre-
sentation π of G(AF ), then by Schur’s lemma (Lemma 4.1) the subgroup AG
acts via a scalar. Let us refine this a little. Let aG := Hom(X ∗ (G)F , R) and
let
HG : G(F ) −→ aG (6.9)
be defined via hHG (g), λi = log |λ(g)| for λ ∈ X ∗ (G)F (compare §4.9). There
is a unique λ ∈ a∗GC such that the representation
π ⊗ ehHG (·),λi
is trivial on AG . In the case where G = GLn , we can be more explicit: there

is a unique s ∈ C such that π ⊗ | det |s is trivial on AG . In any case, there is
not much loss in generality in assuming that an automorphic representation
of G(AF ) is trivial on AG . Let AA
cusp ≤ Acusp be the subspace invariant under
G
AG .
Theorem 6.5.1 The space of cuspidal automorphic forms AA

cusp is a dense
G
subspace of L2cusp ([G]).

We defer the proof of Theorem 6.5.1 to §9.8. We also have the following
theorem:
Theorem 6.5.2 Any automorphic representation in the L2 sense defines,

via passage to K-finite vectors, an automorphic representation. Two auto-
morphic representations in the L2 sense are unitarily equivalent if and only
if the associated automorphic representations are equivalent.
Proof. Suppose we are given an automorphic representation in the L2 -sense.

Passage to K-finite vectors yields an admissible representation of G(AF )
in the function field case or (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F ) in the number field case by
Theorem 4.4.1 and Theorem 5.2. If automorphic representations in the L2 -
sense have equivalent underlying automorphic representations, then they are
unitarily equivalent by Theorem 4.4.4, Lemma 5.3.3 and Proposition 5.3.4.
t
u
In view of Theorem 6.5.2, for many purposes we can work with either
the definition of automorphic representation in terms of admissible repre-
sentations presented in this chapter, or automorphic representations in the
L2 -sense, whichever is convenient for the situation at hand. Both are often
convenient for different reasons. The L2 definition is convenient for abstract
harmonic analysis, but the definition in terms of admissible representations
has the advantage that one can immediately reduce questions to finite di-
mensional settings, either by passing to K∞ -types or vectors fixed under
a compact open subgroup. We will also explain in the next few sections
how spaces of automorphic forms, though not representations of G(AF ), are
(g, K∞ ) × G(A∞ F )-modules and hence give rise to automorphic representa-
tions.
We also warn the reader that later in this book we will often not be specific
about whether we are viewing an automorphic representation in the L2 sense
or in the sense of an admissible representation of G(AF ) (in the function
field case) or (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F ) (in the number field case). Indeed, in practice
one often has to switch back and forth between the two perspectives. The
particular point of view must be deduced from the context.
6.6 From modular forms to automorphic forms
For readers familiar with modular forms we make the connection between
modular forms and automorphic forms precise in this section.
Let Γ ≤ GL2 (Z) be a congruence subgroup. For example, we could set Γ
equal to

Γ0 (N ) := ac db ∈ GL2 (Z) : N |c . (6.10)
We recall the definition of a classical modular form on Γ :
Definition 6.11. Let k ∈ Z>0 and let H be the complex upper half plane.
The space of weight k modular forms for Γ is the space Mk (Γ ) of holo-
morphic functions f : H → C satisfying the following conditions:

az+b

k ab
(a) f cz+d = (cz + d) f (z) for all ∈ Γ ∩ SL2 (Z) and all z ∈ H,
cd
(b) f extends holomorphically to the cusps.
If f additionally vanishes at the cusps we say that f is a cusp form. The
space of weight k cusp forms is denoted Sk (Γ ).
There are many books on modular forms that the reader can consult for more
details. We mention [DS05, GG12, Kob93, Lan95, Miy06, Ser73, Shi94]. A
recent extension of the theory to larger classes of functions that arise naturally
in applications is explained in [BFOR17].
We remark that if k is even then Mk (Γ ) can be identified with a subspace
of the space of holomorphic differential forms H 0 (Γ ∩SL2 (Z)\H, Ω ⊗k/2 ). This
explains the moniker “modular form.” This is explained in great detail in a
slightly more general setting in [GG12, Chapter 6].
We now relate the space Mk (Γ ) to a space of automorphic forms. The idea
is to pull back an automorphic form on H along the quotient map
AGL2 \GL2 (R) −→ AGL2 \GL2 (R)/O2 (R) = H . (6.11)
In this setting
AGL2 := {( r r ) : r > 0} .
We set
j(g, z) = det(g)−1/2 (cz + d)
for
ab
g= ∈ GL2 (R)+ := {g ∈ GL2 (R) : det g > 0}.
cd
This is an example of an automorphy factor (see [GG12, §6.3] for details).
Set
ϕf (g) = j(g, i)−k f (gi) : GL2 (R)+ −→ C
6.6 From modular forms to automorphic forms 123
where g acts on i by fractional linear transformations. This will give us an

automorphic form, but to specify the type we require further notation. Let
σk be the induction of the representation

cos θ − sin θ
7−→ e2πikθ (6.12)
sin θ cos θ
of SO2 to O2 and let

1 2
∆= (H + 2XY + 2Y X)
4
be the Casimir element of glC 1

2 (see §4.7). It and the element Z = ( 1 )
generate Z(gl2 ).
We leave the following proposition as an exercise:
Proposition 6.6.1 For each integer k ≥ 1 the C-linear map f 7→ ϕf induces

an isomorphism

1 2
Sk (Γ ) −→ Acusp Γ, h∆ − (k − 1), Zi, σk
4
f 7−→ ϕf .
t
u
The isomorphism of Proposition 6.6.1 can also be phrased adelically. Let
n o
K0 (N ) := Γ\ a b ∈ GL (Z) b : N |c
0 (N ) = c d 2
where the hat denotes profinite completion. Composing the isomorphism of

Proposition 6.6.1 with (6.8) we obtain an isomorphism
K0 (N )
1
˜ cusp h∆ − (k 2 − 1)i, σk
Sk (Γ0 (N ))−→A
4
One might ask if all cuspidal automorphic forms on GL2 arise from ele-
ments of Sk (Γ ). In fact we have missed many of them. The missing auto-
morphic representations correspond to Maass forms. From the automorphic
perspective it is very simple to define these objects; they are the automorphic
representations of GL2 (AQ ) whose associated (gl2 , O2 (R)) module is in the
principal series in the sense of §4.7. Defining them classically involves at least
as much work as required to formalize the notion of an element of Sk (Γ ).
We refer the reader to [Bum97, §3.2] for more details. The ease with which
we can talk about Maass forms and holomorphic cusp forms on equal footing
illustrates the utility of the language of automorphic representation theory.
6.7 Ramanujan’s ∆-function
We would be remiss not to give an example of a modular form from the

classical perspective, and to an expert it should not be a surprise that we
choose Ramanujan’s ∆-function
∞
Y
∆(z) = e2πiz (1 − e2πinz )24 , z ∈ H.
i=1
This ∆ should not be confused with the Casimir operator from the previous
section.
One has the following basic theorem:
Theorem 6.7.1 One has
S12 (SL2 (Z)) = C∆(z).
The proof of this fact can be found in any of the standard references [DS05,
Lan95, Miy06, Kob93, Ser73, Shi94].
Define τ (n) ∈ C to be the unique integers such that
∞
X
τ (n)e2πinz = ∆(z).
n=1
In other words the τ (n) could be viewed as the Fourier coefficients on ∆(z).
Ramanujan conjectures that
∞
X τ (n) Y 1
t
= −t
(6.13)
n=1
n p
1 − τ (p)p + p11−2t
for a sufficiently large real number t [Ram00b, (101)]. Remarkably this is

exactly his notation. He also conjectures that
|τ (p)| ≤ 2p11/2 (6.14)
[Ram00b, (104)]. For the uninitiated, we pause and explain how fantasti-
cally prescient these two assertions are. In (6.13) Ramanujan has written
down the L-function of the automorphic representation attached to ∆(z)
over 20 years prior to Hecke’s general theory of L-functions for modular
forms [Hec37b, Hec37a] (Ramanujan’s assertion had been proven some time
earlier by Mordell [Mor]). The assertion (6.14) was proven by Deligne as a
consequence of his proof of the Weil conjectures [Del73a], however, the nat-
ural generalization of (6.14) to automorphic representations of GLn remains
open even in the case n = 2; it will be discussed in Conjecture 10.6.4 later.
6.7 Ramanujan’s ∆-function 125
Exercises
6.1. Let ι01 : G → GLn1 , ι02 : G → GLn2 be a pair of faithful representations

of an algebraic group G over a global field F and let S be a set of places of
F (finite or infinite). Let kgkι1 ,S , kgkι2 ,S be the corresponding norms. Prove
that there are constants c1 , c2 ∈ R and r ∈ R>1 such that
1/r
c1 kgkι1 ,S ≤ kgkι2 ,S ≤ c2 kg2 krι1 ,S .
Deduce that the notion of moderate growth and uniform moderate growth is
independent of the choice of faithful representation ι0 : G → GLn .
6.2. Let F be an archimedean local field, G an affine algebraic group over

F and let K ≤ G(F ) be a compact subgroup. For every irreducible finite-
dimensional representation σ of K let χσ be the character of σ and let d(σ)
be its degree. For any K-module (π, V ) let
V −→ V
Z
χ (k)dk
ϕ 7−→ π(k)ϕ σ .
K d(σ)
Show that this linear map is an idempotent that projects V onto the σ-
isotypic subspace V (σ).
6.3. Let F be a global field and let K = K∞ K ∞ ≤ G(AF ) be a maximal

compact subgroup. Show that a continuous function ϕ : [G] → C is K-finite
if and only if for all x∞ ∈ G(A∞ ∞
F ), x∞ 7→ ϕ(x∞ g ) is K∞ -finite and there
0∞ ∞
is a compact open subgroup K ≤ G(AF ) such that ϕ(xk) = ϕ(x) for all
x ∈ G(AF ) and k ∈ K 0∞ .
6.4. Let F be a local field and let G be a connected reductive group over F .
Let K1 , K2 ≤ G(F ) be maximal compact subgroups. If F is nonarchimedean,
show that K1 ∩ K2 is a compact open subgroup of G(F ) and deduce that
a function on G(F ) is K1 -finite if and only if it is K2 -finite. Construct an
example to show that if F is archimedean then a function that is K1 -finite
need not be K2 -finite.
6.5. Let P0 ≤ G be a minimal parabolic subgroup, and call a parabolic

subgroup P standard if it contains P0 . Prove that a function ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]) is
cuspidal if and only if for all standard maximal parabolic subgroups P ≤ G
with unipotent radical N one has
Z
ϕ(ng)dn = 0
[N ]
for almost every g ∈ G(AF ).

6.6. Using the classification of §4.7 identify the underlying g, K)-module of

Acusp (Γ, h∆ − 14 (k 2 − 1), Zi, σk ).
6.7. Prove Proposition 6.7.
6.8. Prove Ramanujan’s assertion that (6.13) is valid assuming Theorem

6.7.1.
6.9. Prove that the canonical isomorphism G(AF )1 →A

˜ G \G(AF ) induces an
isomorphism
Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) −→ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 )
via pullback of functions.
Chapter 7
Unramified Representations
Demazure nous indique que,

derriére cette terminologie
[épinglage], il y a l’image du
papillon (que lui a fournie
Grothendieck): le corps est un
tore maximal T, les ailes sont
deux sous-groupes de Borel
opposées par rapport á T, on
déploie le papillon en étalant les
ailes, puis on fixe des éléments
dans les groupes additifs (des
épingles)...
M. Demazure
Abstract In this chapter we describe the classification of unramified repre-

sentations of connected reductive groups over nonarchimedean local fields.
Along the way we discuss the Satake isomorphism and the Langlands dual
group.
7.1 Unramified representations
By Flath’s theorem, if π is an automorphic representation of G(AF ), then
π∼
= ⊗0v πv
where for almost every v the representation πv is unramified in the sense that
it contains a (unique) vector fixed under a hyperspecial subgroup K ≤ G(Fv ).
In this section we discuss the classification of unramified representations. It
turns out that they can be explicitly parametrized in terms of conjugacy
classes in the dual group of G (see Theorem 7.2.1 and Theorem 7.5.1). This
127
128 7 Unramified Representations
fundamental fact will be used in §7.7 to state a version of the Langlands

functoriality conjecture.
In this section we let G be a reductive group over a non-archimedean local
field F . Our purpose here is to study unramified representations. Recall that
G is unramified if G is quasi-split and split over an unramified extension of
F . In this case there exists a hyperspecial subgroup K ≤ G(F ).
Definition 7.1. An irreducible representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is called un-

ramified if G is unramified and V K 6= 0.
Notice that we do not assume that V is admissible or even smooth. In fact, an

unramified representation is automatically smooth and admissible (see Ex-
ercise 7.2). It is important to realize also that when we speak of unramified
representations we should really speak of K-unramified representations. Hy-
perspecial subgroups of G are not necessarily G(F )-conjugate, they are only
conjugate under Gad (F ) (see [Tit79, §2.5]). Here Gad := G/ZG is the adjoint
quotient of G. We will however follow tradition and suppress the dependence
on K (but see §12.5).
Let K ≤ G(F ) be a hyperspecial subgroup. Then the subalgebra
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) ≤ Cc∞ (G(F ))
is known as the unramified Hecke algebra of G(F ) (with respect to K).

Let f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) and let π be unramified. Then π(f ) acts via a scalar
on V K . It is sensible to denote the scalar by tr π(f ) (see also §8.5). The map
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ C
f 7−→ tr π(f )
is called the Hecke character of π.

Proposition 7.1.1 An unramified representation π is determined up to iso-
morphism by its Hecke character.
Proof. Say that a representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is generated by a subspace

W ≤ V if V = π(G)W .
There is an equivalence of categories
∞
{representations of G(F ) generated by V K }−→{C
˜ c (G(F ) // K)-modules}
V 7−→ V K .
Here we have given the objects of the categories on both sides; morphisms
are simply intertwining maps.
Any irreducible representation is generated by any nonzero subspace, so
an unramified representation is generated by V K . We deduce the proposition.
t
u
7.2 Satake isomorphism 129
7.2 Satake isomorphism
If we did not know anything about Cc∞ (G(F ) // K), then we could hardly
regard Proposition 7.1.1 as useful. However, it turns out that Cc∞ (G(F ) // K)
has a simple description:
Theorem 7.2.1 (Satake) Assume that G is split. There is an isomorphism
of algebras
S : Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ C[Tb]W (G,T )(C)
b b
where Gb is the complex connected reductive algebraic group with root datum
dual to that of G and Tb ≤ G
b is a maximal torus. t
u
To gain intuition for the Satake isomorphism, let us consider the special
case of GLn . The Hecke algebra Cc∞ (GLn (F ) // GLn (OF )), as a C-module,
has a basis given by
1λ := 1 
λ
$1 1

 
GLn (OF ) .. GLn (OF )
 . 
λn
$n
with λ := (λ1 , . . . , λn ) ∈ Zn , λi ≥ λi+1 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 (this follows

from the theory of elementary divisors). As a C-algebra it is generated by 1λ
with λ = (1r ) := (1, . . . , 1, 0, . . . , 0) (r ones and n − r zeros) for 1 ≤ r ≤ n
and λ = ((−1)n ) := (−1, . . . , −1).
On the generating set above the Satake isomorphism is given by
S(1(1r ) ) = q r(n−r)/2 tr (∧r Cn ) (7.1)
where Cn is the standard representation of GLn (C), ∧r Cn is the rth exterior

power of the standard representation, and tr (∧r Cn ) is the trace of a diagonal
matrix in GLn (C) acting on the given representation (see [Gro98, (3.14)]).
It is instructive to indicate various ways of rephrasing this basic result. By
the Chevalley restriction theorem, the inclusion Tb ,→ G b induces an isomor-
phism

Spec(C[Tb]W (G,T ) ) = TbW (G,T ) −→ G/conj = Spec C[G] b Gb (7.2)
b b b b b
where the quotient on the right is the scheme theoretic quotient of G b by

the action of conjugation (for more on scheme-theoretic quotients over fields
[MFK94] is the canonical reference). In particular G/conj(C)
b is just the set of
closed conjugacy classes in G(C) . The closed orbits are precisely the orbits
of semisimple elements; a nice reference for this is [Ste65, Corollary 6.13].
Thus we have a sequence of isomorphisms
(S −1 )∗
Hom(Cc∞ (G(F ) // K), C) −→ Hom(C[Tb]W (G,T ) , C) −→ Gss (C)/conj
b b
(7.3)
where the first map is pullback along the inverse of the Satake isomorphism.
Here homomorphism means homomorphism of C-algebras, and Gss ⊂ G is the
closed subscheme consisting of semisimple elements. In Proposition 7.1.1 we
saw that unramified representations were in bijection with Hecke characters,
which are precisely elements of Hom(Cc∞ (G(F ) // K), C). We have therefore
proven the following corollary of the Satake isomorphism:
Corollary 7.2.2 Assume that G is split. The composite isomorphism (7.3)
induces a bijection between semi-simple conjugacy classes in G(C)
b and iso-
morphism classes of irreducible unramified representations of G(F ). t
u
From the point of view of automorphic representation theory the fact that
the Satake isomorphism is only valid for split groups is problematic. Indeed,
suppose for the moment that G is a reductive group over a global field F .
Then for all but finitely many places v of F the group GFv is unramified by
Proposition 2.4.3 and hence in particular is quasi-split. However, the group
GFv can be nonsplit for infinitely many v (see Exercise 7.3).
Langlands was able to extend the Satake isomorphism to the quasi-split
case. Historically this was important because it gave crucial hints as to the
structure of the Langlands dual group, which he introduced at the same time
[Lan] (see also [Lan70]). We will define the Langlands dual group in the next
section and use it to extend the Satake isomorphism in §7.5.
7.3 The Langlands dual group
For the moment, let G be a connected reductive group over a global or local
field F and let T ≤ G be a maximal torus. To these data we associated in
§1.8 a root datum Ψ (G, T ) = (X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), Φ, Φ∨ ). We remind the reader
that X ∗ (T ) and X∗ (T ) are the character groups, Φ ⊂ X ∗ (T ) is the set of
roots of T in g and and Φ∨ ⊂ X∗ (T ) is the set of coroots. We also remind
the reader that the root datum characterizes GF sep where F sep is a separable
closure of F . To ease on notation, we let
GalF := Gal(F sep /F ).
If G is split, then we set

L
G := G(C)
b × GalF
where Gb is the complex dual group defined as in §1.8; it is the connected

reductive group over C with root datum (X∗ (T ), X ∗ (T ), Φ∨ , Φ).
7.3 The Langlands dual group 131
If G is not split then the L-group has a more complicated definition involv-
ing a Galois action on G b that records the fact that G is a nonsplit group over
F . To define it we must construct an action of GalF on G(C).b It is obvious
that the root datum should be involved in this process. Indeed, given a Galois
action on GF sep we obtain one on Ψ (GF sep , TF sep ) and hence tautologically
we obtain one on Ψ (G, b Tb). This is not enough, as we really need a Galois
action on G(C). It would suffice to produce a splitting of the surjective map
b
Aut(G(C))
b −→ Aut(Ψ (G,
b Tb))
described in Proposition 7.3.2 below. What we actually do is to produce a

refinement Ψ (G,
b B,
b Tb) of Ψ (G,
b Tb) called a based root datum and a surjective
map
Aut(G(C))
b −→ Aut(Ψ (G, b B,
b Tb)).
We then provide an explicit description of splittings of this map via something

known as a pinning, or épilange, of G.b This then suffices to construct our
desired action of Gal(F sep /F ) on G(C).
b
We now begin this process. We assume until otherwise specified that G is
a split, connected reductive group over a separably closed field k. Let ∆ ⊂ Φ
be a base for Φ (see (1.15)). The set ∆∨ ⊂ Φ∨ of coroots dual to ∆ forms a
base of Φ∨ . With this in mind, a tuple
(X, Y, ∆, ∆∨ ) (7.4)
is called a based root datum if there is a root datum (X, Y, Φ, Φ∨ ) such

that ∆ ⊆ Φ is a maximal set of simple roots (with respect to some set of
positive roots) and ∆∨ is the dual set. We note that ∆ spans Φ and ∆∨
spans Φ∨ as Z-modules, so there is no ambiguity in the notation (7.4). There
is an obvious notion of isomorphism of root data; it is simply a pair of linear
isomorphisms on the first two factors preserving the pairing and the sets of
simple roots.
We let Ψ (G, B, T ) := (X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), ∆, ∆∨ ) be a choice of based root
datum, and Ψ (G, T ) the root datum it defines. The reason for the B in this
notation is the following lemma:
Lemma 7.3.1 The choice of a set of simple roots ∆ ⊆ Φ is equivalent to the

choice of a Borel subgroup B ≤ G containing T .
We have already mentioned a more general result in §1.9, but we did not
prove it there. We pause here to sketch the proof. For each α ∈ Φ there is a
unique subgroup Nα ≤ G normalized by T such that Lie Nα = gα . It is called
the root group attached to α. For example if G = GLn and α = eij in the
notation of (1.9) then the corresponding root group is In + Reij .
Proof of Lemma 7.3.1: We just explain the bijection, leaving the details to
the standard references mentioned at the beginning of Chapter 1. Given a
choice of a set of simple roots ∆ the group
B = hT, {Nα }α∈∆ i (7.5)
is a Borel subgroup. Conversely, given a Borel subgroup the set of roots of T

in Lie B form a set of positive roots which provides us with a set of simple
roots. 2
To better describe Ψ (G, B, T ) we recall the notion of a pinning:
Definition 7.2. A pinning of G is a tuple
(B, T, {Xα }α∈∆ )
where T is a maximal torus and B is a Borel subgroup containing it, ∆ is

the set of simple roots attached to B, and Xα ∈ gα − {0} for all α.
We let Aut(B, T, {Xα }α∈∆ ) be the group of automorphisms of G that
preserve B and T and the set {Xα }α∈∆ . The theorem of Chevalley and De-
mazure (Theorem 1.8.3) provides lifts of automorphisms of root data of (G, T )
to automorphisms of the pair (G, T ); using it we obtain an isomorphism
Aut(B, T, {Xα }α∈∆ )−→Aut(Ψ

˜ (G, B, T )) (7.6)
where we use ∆ to define Ψ (G, B, T ).

Proposition 7.3.2 There is a split exact sequence
a b
1 −→ Inn(G(k)) −→ Aut(G) −→ Aut(Ψ (G, B, T )) −→ 1. (7.7)
The splittings are in bijection with pinnings (B 0 , T 0 , {Xα }α∈∆ ) up to conju-

gation by T 0 (k).
Proof. The arrow a is the obvious injection. To describe b, note that for
any automorphism φ ∈ Aut(G(k)) there is a g ∈ G(k) such that φ ◦ Ad(g)
preserves B and T since all Borel subgroups and tori are conjugate under
G(k). Thus φ ◦ Ad(g) restricts to define an automorphism of the root datum
Ψ (G, B, T ). It already preserves B, and by replacing g by tg for some t ∈ T (k)
we can assume that
φ ◦ Ad(g)
preserves the simple roots. Thus we obtain the map b : Aut(G(k))/ Inn(G(k)) →
Aut(Ψ (G, B, T )). It is surjective by Theorem 1.8.3. Moreover, by loc. cit. given
an automorphism φ0 ∈ Aut(Ψ (G, T )) there is an automorphism φ ∈ Aut(G)
such that φ(T ) = T and b(φ) = φ0 . If φ in addition preserves the simple roots
then it follows that the lift is uniquely determined (see [Con14, §1.5] for more
details). This proves that Im(a) = ker(b).
Since Aut((B, T, {Xα }α∈∆ )) is defined to be a subset of G, we see that a
pinning defines a section of Aut(G(k)) −→ Aut(Ψ (G, B, T )).
7.3 The Langlands dual group 133
On the other hand, if g ∈ G(k), then the conjugate of this section may be
thought of as Aut(gBg −1 , gT g −1 , {gXα g −1 }α∈∆ ), which is also a pinning of
Gk . t
u
With this preparation complete we can now define the Langlands dual
group. Assume that G is a connected reductive group over a local or global
field F . Choose a Borel subgroup B ≤ GF sep and a maximal torus T ≤ B ≤
GF sep . We obtain a based root datum
Ψ (G, B, T ) := Ψ (GF sep , B, T ).
Using the exact sequence of Proposition 7.3.2 the homomorphism GalF →

Aut(GF sep ) giving G its F structure yields an action of GalF on the based
root datum. Now
(X∗ (T ), X ∗ (T ), ∆∨ , ∆)
is again a based root datum with associated root datum Ψ (G,
b Tb), so we have
a Borel subgroup B b≤G b such that
(X∗ (T ), X ∗ (T ), ∆∨ , ∆) = Ψ (G,
b B,
b Tb). (7.8)
We therefore obtain an action of GalF on Ψ (G,

b B,
b Tb).
Via a choice of pinning of G we obtain a section of the map
b
b → Aut(Ψ (G,
Aut(G) b B,
b Tb))
and hence a map GalF −→ Aut(G).b We define the Langlands dual group
of G or the L-group of G to be the semidirect product
L
G := G(C)
b o GalF
with respect to this action. Notice that the action is canonical up to conju-
gation by G(C)
b by Proposition 7.3.2.
A morphism of L-groups
L
H −→ L G
is simply a homomorphism commuting with the projections to GalF such that
its restriction to the neutral components is induced by a map of algebraic
groups H b −→ G.b Morphisms are also sometimes called L-maps.
Assume for the moment that F is a global field. For every place v upon
choosing an embedding F sep → Fvsep we obtain an embedding
GalFv −→ GalF ,
unique up to conjugacy. This induces a morphism

L
GFv −→ L GF (7.9)
which allows us to relate local and global L-groups.

Occasionally one works with modifications of the L-group. For example,
we can replace GalF by its quotient Gal(E/F ) where E/F is a finite degree
Galois extension such that GE splits. In some applications one wants to
modify or enlarge GalF (see [Mok15]). In general we can replace GalF by
any topological group Γ admitting a continuous homomorphism Γ → GalF
that surjects onto Gal(E/F ) for any field E such that GE is split; all of the
constructions above have obvious analogues in this level of generality.
It is useful to give some examples of L-groups in this nonsplit situation.
First let G = GLn over a field F and let E/F be a field extension (of finite
degree). One has
sep
L
ResE/F GLn ∼
= GLn (C){σ:E→F } o GalF (7.10)
where GalF acts via permuting the factors. For a slightly more complicated
example let M/F be a quadratic extension and let σ ∈ Gal(M/F ). For an
F -algebra R, consider the quasi-split unitary group
1 1

−t
U (R) := g ∈ GLn (M ⊗F R) : ..
. σ(g) ..
. =g .
1 1
One has
L
U∼
= GLn (C) o GalF (7.11)
where GalF acts via its quotient Gal(M/F ), which acts on GLn (C) via the
isomorphism g 7→ g −t . We mention that there is an L-map
L
U −→ L ResM/F GLn
g o σ 7−→ (g, g −t ) o σ.
7.4 Parabolic subgroups of L-groups
Let G be a connected reductive group over a local or global field F . In Chapter

12 we will require the notion of a parabolic subgroup of an L-group. It is
most natural to discuss this immediately after discussing the L-group, but
the reader should feel free to skip this section and then refer back to it as
needed.
We follow the discussion in [Bor79]. A parabolic subgroup of L G is a
closed subgroup Q such that Q b ∩ G(C)
b is the complex points of a parabolic
subgroup of G b and the restriction of the canonical map L G → GalF to Q is
surjective. Clearly
L
B := B(C)
b o GalF (7.12)
7.4 Parabolic subgroups of L-groups 135
is a parabolic subgroup, where B b is the group of (7.8). A parabolic subgroup

of G is standard if it contains L B. As in the case of algebraic groups,
L
every parabolic subgroup of L G is conjugate under G(C)

b to one and only one
standard parabolic subgroup.
We now isolate a subset of relevant parabolic subgroups of L G. This will
allow us to define a dual parabolic subgroup L P to any proper parabolic
subgroup P ≤ G. We will also explain how this duality behaves with respect
to Levi subgroups.
For every field extension F sep ≥ k ≥ F we let P(k) denote the set of
parabolic subgroups of Gk . Let (P/G)(k) denote the set of G(F sep )-conjugacy
classes of parabolic subgroups in G(F sep ) that are fixed by Gal(F sep /k).
There is a natural map
P(k) −→ (P/G)(k)
which is surjective if G is quasi-split.
Similarly, let L P denote the set of parabolic subgroups of L G and let
L
P/L G denote the set of L G-conjugacy classes of parabolic subgroups of L G.
The bijection ∆ ↔ ∆∨ yields a bijection
(P/G)(k) ←→ L P/L G.
Note that we view (P/G)(k) above as a group scheme opposed to the fact
that L P/L G is a group.
We say that a parabolic subgroup of L G is relevant if its L G-conjugacy
class is in the image of the composite
P(k) −→ (P/G)(k) −→ L P/L G. (7.13)
If P ∈ P(k) we denote by L P the standard parabolic subgroup in the class

that is the image of P under the map (7.13).
Let Q be a parabolic subgroup of L G. The unipotent radical N of Q◦ is
normal in Q and will also be called the unipotent radical of Q. Then Q is the
semidirect product of N by the normalizer in Q of any Levi subgroup M ◦ of
Q◦ . Those normalizers will be called the Levi subgroups of Q.
For given parabolic subgroup P ≤ G, a unique G(F sep )-conjugate gPF sep g −1
of PF sep contains BF sep . Since the parabolic subgroups of GF sep containing
B are in bijection with subsets of ∆ as explained in Theorem 1.9.2 we can
therefore associate a subset J(P ) ⊆ ∆ to P . Given a Levi subgroup M ≤ P ,
there is a g 0 ∈ G(F sep ) such that g 0 M g 0−1 has based root datum
(X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), J(P ), J(P )∨ )
and hence a Levi subgroup of L P ◦ with based root datum
(X∗ (T ), X ∗ (T ), J(P )∨ , J(P )).

The semidirect product of this Levi subgroup of L P ◦ with Gal(F sep /F ) is

then a Levi subgroup of L P denoted by L M . A Levi subgroup of a parabolic
subgroup L P of L G is relevant if L P is.
7.5 The Satake isomorphism for quasi-split groups
Let G be an unramified connected reductive group over a local field F and

let K ≤ G(F ) be a hyperspecial subgroup. We wish to describe Langlands’
extension of the Satake isomorphism to this setting. Since G is unramified
we can take the L-group to be
G(C)
b o FrZ
where Fr ∈ Gal(F sep /F ) is a choice of Frobenius element. In the split case,

the Satake transform could be phrased in terms of the quotient
G(C)/conj.
b
In the nonsplit case, the appropriate quotient is

b o Fr/ ∼
G
where the action is given on C-algebras R by
G(R)
b × G(R)
b o Fr −→ G(R)
b oσ
(g, (h o Fr)) 7−→ ghFr(g)−1 o Fr.
This action can also be described as the action of G

b on itself via Fr-conjugacy,
a notion that plays a key role in the twisted trace formula (see §??? below).
We now describe the analogue of the Chevalley restriction theorem (7.2)
in this setting. Given a maximal torus T ≤ G, its dual Tb is a maximal torus
of G,
b and we can consider its Weyl group W (G, b Tb). Now
W (G, T )(F ) ≤ Aut(Ψ (G, T )) = Aut(Ψ (G,

b B,
b Tb))
so we can consider W (G, T )(F ) as a subgroup of W (G, b Tb) which is a quo-

tient of the normalizer NGb (Tb)(C). Let F N ≤ NGb (Tb)(C) denote the inverse
image of W (G, T )(F ) under the quotient map NGb (Tb)(C) → W (G, b Tb)(C).
The analogue of the Chevalley restriction theorem in this setting is
Tb o Fr/F N −→ G
b o Fr/ ∼ (7.14)
(see [Bor79, Lemma 6.5]). With this isomorphism in mind the following the-
orem is natural:
7.5 The Satake isomorphism for quasi-split groups 137
Theorem 7.5.1 (Langlands and Satake) There is an isomorphism
S : Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ C[Tb o Fr]F N .
t
u
As before, we can rephrase this as an isomorphism
Hom(Cc∞ (G(F ) // K), C) → (Tb o Fr/F N )(C) −→ (G

b o Fr)Fr-ss (C)/ ∼
(7.15)
where (G b × Fr)Fr-ss is the subscheme of elements that are Fr-semisimple; a

concise way to phrase this condition is that the orbit under the action of G
b
is closed. Thus we obtain the following analogue of Corollary 7.2.2:
Corollary 7.5.2 Assume that G is unramified over F . The composite iso-
morphism (7.15) induces a bijection
 
n o  isomorphism classes 
b o Fr)Fr-ss (C)/ ∼ ←→ of irreducible unramified .
(G
representations of G(F )
 
t
u
By way of terminology the Fr-semisimple conjugacy class attached to
an isomorphism class of unramified representations is called its Langlands
class. In the split case, the eigenvalues of a representative of the conjugacy
class are called its Satake parameters.
We will not prove either Theorem 7.2.1 or Theorem 7.5.1, though we will
say more about the definition of the map S in a moment. The standard
references are [Car79, Theorem 4.1], [Bor79, §7], [Sat63], which we follow.
There is a categorified version of the Satake correspondence due to Mirković
and K. Vilonen that is known as the geometric Satake correspondence, see
[MV07]. This result is an important tool in the geometric Langlands program.
Moreover it has now been extended to mixed characteristic by work of Zhu
and Bhatt-Scholze.
Let B ≤ G be a Borel subgroup containing a maximal torus T of G and let
K be a hyperspecial subgroup. We let N denote the unipotent radical of B.
We say that K is in good position with respect to (B, T ) if the Iwasawa
decomposition
G(F ) = KB(F )
holds and
B(F ) ∩ K = (K ∩ T (F ))(K ∩ N (F )).
We also can and do assume that KT := K ∩ T (F ) is a maximal compact

subgroup of T . In fact, we given B and T we can always choose K so that
these assumptions hold (see Theorem 2.7.1).
Using the Iwasawa decomposition G(F ) = KB(F ) = KT (F )N (F ) we
have a decomposition of measures
dg = dkdr b = δB (t)dkdtdn (7.16)
(see Proposition 3.2.1); we always assume that dk(K) = 1. We define a C-

linear map
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )

f 7−→ f B
where
Z
f B (t) := δB (t)1/2 f (tn)dn. (7.17)
N (F )
The function f B is known as the constant term of f along B.

The following lemma is implied by Lemma 8.6.2 and Proposition 8.7.2
below:
Lemma 7.5.3 The map f 7→ f B is an algebra homomorphism and has image
in Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )W (G,T )(F ) . t
u
Let Ts ≤ T be the greatest F -split torus in T . Thus we can write T = Ts Ta
where Ta is anisotropic and Ts ∩ Ta is finite. Let Ks = K ∩ Ts (F ); it is a
maximal compact subgroup of Ts (F ). We note that
W (G, T )(F ) = W (G, Ts )(F ) = W (G, Ts )(F sep ).
Lemma 7.5.4 There is a W (G, T )(F ) ≤ W (G, T )(F sep ) = W (G,

b Tb)(C)-
equivariant isomorphism
Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )W (G,T )(F ) −→C[

˜ Tbs ]W (G,T )(F ) .
Proof. We note that Ta (F ) is compact, so via restriction we obtain an iso-

morphism
Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )W (G,T )(F ) −→C

˜ c∞ (Ts (F )/Ks )W (G,T )(F ) .
We note that there is an isomorphism of C-algebras
Cc∞ (Ts (F )/Ks ) −→ Hom(X ∗ (Ts )F , C) = C[X∗ (Ts )F ]

1tKs 7−→ (χ 7→ ordv (χ(t))).
7.5 The Satake isomorphism for quasi-split groups 139
It is not hard to see that this isomorphism is W (G, T )(F )-equivariant. Since
one has an identification
C[X∗ (Ts )F ] = C[X ∗ (T

cs )C ] = C[T
cs ],
we deduce the lemma. t

u
Lemma 7.5.5 The inclusion Ts → T induces a bijection
(Tb o Fr)(C)/ ∼−→ Tbs (C)/W (G, T )(F )
where on the left the quotient is modulo the conjugation action of F N.
Proof. Let ν : Tb → Tbs be the map induced by the inclusion Ts → T via

duality.
As mentioned after [Bor79, Lemma 6.4] every element of F N is of the form
ws where w ∈ W (G, T )(F ) and u ∈ Tb(C). Moreover
(wu)−1 (t o Fr)wu = u−1 Fr(u)w−1 tw o Fr.
Since Tbs is the fixed points of Fr on Tb, we see that we obtain a map
ν : (Tb o Fr)(C) −→ Tbs (C)

(t o Fr) 7−→ ν(t)
that is equivariant with respect to the action of F N (which acts via its quo-
tient W (G, Ts )(F ) on the right hand side). It is clearly surjective. To prove
injectivity, assume that t, t0 ∈ Tb(C) and
ν(t o Fr) = w−1 ν(t o Fr)w
for some w ∈ W (G, T )(F ). Then ν(t) = ν(w−1 t0 w) since w is fixed by Fr.
Thus t = xw−1 t0 w for some x ∈ ker(ν). By Hilbert’s theorem 90 all x ∈ ker(ν)
are of the form u−1 Fr(u), and we deduce that t o Fr = (wu)−1 (t0 o Fr)wu. t u
Combining lemmas 7.5.3, 7.5.4 and the map of coordinate rings induced
by Lemma 7.5.5 we see that we have constructed the Satake morphism
S : Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )W (G,T )(F ) −→ C[Tb o Fr]F N , (7.18)
though we have not proved that it is injective or surjective. The first map in
this factorization of the Satake isomorphism is a special case of a parabolic
descent map. In general, any construction that relates objects on the group
G to objects on Levi subgroups of its parabolic subgroups (in this case the
Levi subgroup T of the Borel subgroup B) is known as parabolic descent. We
will use this idea in the next section to give a more explicit parametrization
of unramified representations.
7.6 The Principal series
We now explain how to explicitly realize unramified representations. Let G

be an unramified connected reductive group with Borel subgroup B ≤ G
and maximal torus T ≤ B. We assume that B and T are chosen so that the
Iwasawa decomposition
G(F ) = B(F )K
holds and that KT := T (F ) ∩ K is a maximal compact open subgroup of
T (F ); it is always possible to arrange this by Lemma A.5.2. Let N ≤ B be
the unipotent radical of B.
We recall from Proposition 3.5.1 that the modular character
δB := δB(F ) : B(F ) → C (7.19)
is
δB (b) := | det(Ad(b))|.
The last ingredient we need to define unramified principal series representa-
tions is unramified quasi-characters.
Definition 7.3. A quasi-character χ : T (F ) → C× is unramified if it is

trivial on KT .
Let us explicitly describe unramified quasi-characters. As in the previous

section, we let Ts ≤ T be the maximal split torus and choose an anisotropic
torus Ta ≤ T such that Ta Ts = T and Ta ∩ Ts is finite. We remind the
reader that X ∗ (T )F is the abelian group of homomorphisms T → Gm ; this
is in general a proper subgroup of the group X ∗ (T )F sep of homomorphisms
TF sep → GmF sep . In fact
X ∗ (T )F = X ∗ (Ts )F .
In analogy with (4.12) we define a map
HT : T (F ) −→ aT := Hom(X ∗ (T )F , R)
via
ehHT (t),χi = |χ(t)|
for χ ∈ X ∗ (T ). For each
λ ∈ a∗T C := X∗ (T )F ⊗ C
we then obtain a quasi-character
t 7−→ ehHT (t),λi .

7.6 The Principal series 141
It is clearly unramified. Moreover, it depends only on the image of λ under

the map
X ∗ (T )F ⊗ C −→ X ∗ (T )F ⊗ C× = Tbs (C)
induced by the map x 7→ e−x (for the last equality see Exercise 7.5). Thus
for every element of Tbs (C) we obtain an unramified quasi-character of T (F ).
Taking T = G in the following lemma we see that all unramified quasi-
characters arise in this manner:
Lemma 7.6.1 One has natural F N -equivariant bijections
Hom(T (F )/KT , C× ) ←− Tbs (C) −→ (Tb(C) o Fr)F N

(t 7→ ehHT (t),λi ) ←−[ e−λ
provided that we let F N act via its quotient W (G, T )(F ) ≤ W (G, T )(F sep ) =
W (G,
b Tb)(C) on the left two groups.
Proof. For the first isomorphism we start by noting that the inclusion Ts → T
induces a W (G, T )(F )-equivariant isomorphism
Ts (F )/Ks −→T
˜ (F )/KT ,
where Ks := K ∩ Ts (F ) is a maximal compact subgroup of Ts (F ). Thus we

are immediately reduced to the case where T is split.
We henceforth assume Ts = T . The map
Tbs (C) −→ Hom(Ts (F )/Ks , C× )

e−λ 7−→ t 7→ ehHT (t),λi
is W (G, T )(F )-equivariant, so we need only check it is an isomorphism. By

choosing an isomorphism Ta ∼ = Gdm we are reduced to observing that
C× −→ Hom(F × /OF× , C× )
e−λ 7−→ (t 7→ q λ log |t| )
is a bijection (here we represent an element of C× as e−λ for some λ ∈ C). This

completes the proof of the first bijection. The second bijection has already
been proven in Lemma 7.5.5. t
u
For λ ∈ a∗T C we define the representation

hHT (t),λi
I(λ) := IndG
B (t 7→ e )
to be the (smooth) representation of G(F ) on the space of functions

ϕ(tng) = δB (t)1/2 ehHT (t),λi ϕ(g)

ϕ ∈ C ∞ (G(F )) : .
for all (t, n, g) ∈ T (F ) × N (F ) × G(F )
Here G(F ) acts via right translation:
I(λ)(g)ϕ(x) := ϕ(xg). (7.20)
This is an example of an induced representation, see §8.2 for the general

1/2
construction. The factor of δB is present so that if
λ ∈ ia∗T
then I(λ) is pre-unitarizable; this assertion is part of the following special

case of Proposition 8.2.2 later:
Proposition 7.6.2 The representations I(λ) are admissible and satisfy
I(λ)∨ ∼
= I(−λ).
If λ ∈ ia∗T then I(λ) is pre-unitarizable.

We note that the condition λ ∈ ia∗T is equivalent to the statement that the
quasi-character t 7→ ehHT (t),λi is unitary (i.e. is a character).
Definition 7.4. An unramified principal series representation of G(F )
is a representation isomorphic to I(λ) for some λ ∈ a∗T C
This definition is traditional, but it is a little misleading. Indeed, unrami-
fied principal series representations need not be irreducible, but we do have
the following lemma:
Lemma 7.6.3 There is a unique line in I(λ) fixed by K.
Proof. A function in I(λ) is uniquely determined by its restriction to K. t
u
If I(λ) is reducible, the situation is slightly more complicated, but not
insufferably so. To describe what happens, let us start by remarking that
W (G, T )(F ) acts on X∗ (T )F , hence a∗T C by duality. It therefore makes sense
to talk of I(w(λ)) for λ ∈ a∗T C and w ∈ W (G, T )(F ). We say that λ ∈ a∗T C is
regular if w(λ) = λ for w ∈ W (G, T )(F ) implies that w is the identity. This
is equivalent to λ lying in an open Weyl chamber in a∗T C . With this action of
W (G, T )(F ) in mind we are ready to state a result known as the unramified
subquotient theorem:
Theorem 7.6.4 Let λ, λ0 ∈ a∗T C . Then one has the following:
(a) The representations I(λ) and I(λ0 ) are isomorphic if and only if λ = w(λ0 )
for some w ∈ W (G, T )(F ).
(b) Every unramified representation is isomorphic to a subrepresentation of
an I(λ), and every I(λ) admits a unique unramified subquotient.
7.7 Weak global L-packets 143
(c) Assume that λ ∈ iaT . Under this assumption the representation I(λ) is
irreducible if and only if λ is regular.
t
u
For the proof of the theorem one can refer to [Car79, §3-§4]. These results are
due to Casselman, and one can also find proofs of them in his unpublished
notes [Cas]. For λ ∈ a∗T C we let J(λ) be the unique unramified subquotient
of I(λ). The reason for the apparent asymmetry in item (b) is that J(λ)
is not necessarily an irreducible subrepresentation of I(λ), merely a sub-
quotient. It is however an irreducible subrepresentation of I(w(λ)) for some
w ∈ W (G, T )(F ).
By the theorem, every unramified representation is isomorphic to a J(λ)
where λ is unique up to the action of W (G, T )(F ). This is consonant with
Corollary 7.5.2, the parametrization of unramified representations afforded
by the Satake isomorphism, and it is useful to explicitly relate Corollary
7.5.2 and Theorem 7.6.4:
Proposition 7.6.5 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K). For λ ∈ a∗T C one has
tr J(λ)(f ) = S(f )(e−λ ).
Proof. One has

tr I(λ)(f ) = tr ehHT (·),λi (f B )
by Proposition 8.6.1, and by unwinding the definition of the Satake isomor-
phism one obtains
tr ehHT (·),λi (f B ) = S(f )(e−λ ).
Thus to complete the proof it suffices to show that tr I(λ)(f ) = tr J(λ)(f ).
Invoking Theorem 7.6.4 we see that upon replacing λ by wλ for some w ∈
W (G, T )(F ) we can assume that J(λ) is a subrepresentation of I(λ).
There is a unique line Cϕ0 in the space of I(λ) fixed by K by Lemma
7.6.3. It follows that I(λ)(f ) acts via the scalar tr I(λ)(f ) on Cϕ0 . On the
other hand there is an equivariant map
J(λ) −→ I(λ). (7.21)
Since J(λ), being unramified, has a unique spherical line this line its image
must be Cϕ0 under (7.21). t
u
7.7 Weak global L-packets
Let G be a reductive group over a global field F .
Definition 7.5. We say that two irreducible admissible representations π1 ,

π2 of G(AF ) are weakly globally L-indistinguishable if π1S ∼ = π2S for
some finite set of places S of F . An equivalence class of L-indistinguishable

admissible representations is called an weak global L-packet. If an adelic
L-packet contains an automorphic representation, we say that it is a weak
automorphic L-packet.
Here when we say an admissible representation of G(AF ) we mean an ad-
missible (g, K∞ )×G(A∞ F )-module in the archimedean case and an admissible
G(AF )-module in the function field case. Later on we will define a notion of
local L-packets that complements this definition. The definition of local L-
packets will be used to give a refinement of the notion of a global L-packet;
this is why the adjective weak is used above.
For the remainder of this section, we will omit the word global to save ink.
It may seem odd that we include merely admissible, and not automorphic,
representations in a weak automorphic L-packet, but this turns out to be
convenient for technical reasons. In practice one describes the weak L-packet
of an automorphic representation, and then asks which representations in the
weak global L-packet are automorphic.
To describe weak L-packets in more detail we set some notational con-
ventions. If S is a finite set of places of F including the infinite places such
that GFv is unramified for v 6∈ S we say that G is unramified outside of
S. Likewise if π is an admissible representation of G(AF ) then we say π is
unramified outside of S if πv is unramified for v 6∈ S.
The Satake isomorphism provides a convenient way of thinking about weak
L-packets. Assume that G is unramified outside of S. Notice that if π is an
admissible representation of G(AF ) unramified outside of S then it defines a
character
tr π S : Cc∞ (G(ASF ) // K S ) −→ C
where K S ≤ G(ASF ) is a hyperspecial subgroup, i.e. Kv ≤ G(Fv ) is hyper-
special for all v 6∈ S. By the Satake isomorphism, giving this character is
equivalent to giving, for each v 6∈ S, an element cv ∈ L G◦ o Frv / ∼, where
Frv is a choice of Frobenius element at v and the quotient is with respect to
the conjugation action of L G◦ ; the element cv will be Frv -semisimple. Let
Πw (G) : = {weak L-packets of G(AF )}

(7.22)
Πw,aut (G) : = {weak automorphic L-packets of G(AF )}
and
Y
c(G) := {(cv ) ∈ L
G◦ o Frv / ∼: cv is Frv -semisimple for all v 6∈ S}/ ∼
v6∈S
where we say that v6∈S cv ∼ v6∈S c0v if and only if cv = c0v for almost every
Q Q
v 6∈ S (i.e. all v outside of a finite set). There is no need to be specific about
the set of places S in the notation here because we can always enlarge S by a
finite set. Any weak L-packet has a representative that is unramified outside
of S, so we have a map
c : Πw (G) −→ c(G) (7.23)
defined in the obvious manner. We denote by c(Π) the image of an L-packet Π

under this map. We refer to it as the Langlands class or Satake parameter
of Π. If G(Fv ) has a unique G(Fv )-conjugacy class of hyperspecial subgroups
for almost every v then by the Satake isomorphism the map c is bijective.
In general hyperspecial subgroups are only conjugate under Gad (Fv ) [Tit79,
§2.5] so the map can have infinite fibers.
We are now in a position to discuss a naı̈ve form of the Langlands functo-
riality conjecture. Let
r : L H −→ L G
be an L-map. This gives rise to a map
c(H) −→ c(G).
We can now state a weak form of the Langlands functoriality conjecture:

Conjecture 7.7.1 (Langlands) Given a weak global L-packet Π of auto-
morphic representations of H(AF ) there is a global L-packet r(Π) of auto-
morphic representations of G(AF ) such that c(r(Π)) = r(c(Π)).
One can also phrase this as the existence of a top arrow making the following
diagram commute:
∃? /
Πw,aut (H) Πw,aut (G)
c c

c(H)
r / c(G)
The fact that the class c(Π) is only defined up to a finite set of places
is an irritant, but it is not as horrible as it first appears. To explain, we
will require some results described in more Pddetail in §10.6. Let n1 , . . . , nd
be a collection of positive integers with i=1 ni = n. Let P = M N ≤
GLn be the parabolic subgroup of type (n1 , . . . , nd ) with its standard Levi
decomposition (see Example 1.10). For each i let πi be a cuspidal automorphic
representation of AGLni \GLni (AF ) and let λ ∈ a∗M . We can then form the
induced representation
I(π1 , . . . , πnd , λ)
as in §10.3. In general it may have several irreducible subquotients, all of
which turn out to be automorphic. However it always has a canonical sub-
quotient that will be described in more detail in §10.6. Automorphic repre-
sentations equivalent to this canonical subquotient are known as isobaric
representations. In particular, if I(π1 , . . . , πnd , λ) is irreducible then it is
isobaric; this holds in particular if n1 = n which is to say that the represen-
tation is cuspidal.
We now record the following foundational fact from [JS81b, JS81a]:
Theorem 7.7.2 (Jacquet and Shalika) Every weak automorphic L-packet

in Π(GLn ) contains a unique isobaric element. t
u
This tells us that, at least for GLn , admissible representations that are
automorphic are very special; they are determined by their local factors at
any cofinite set of places of F (see Exercise 7.8).
On the other hand, if we fix a finite set of places S of F and choose an ana-
lytically well-behaved irreducible admissible representation πS of AG \G(FS ),
then πS is almost always the local factor at S of an automorphic represen-
tation. To make this precise, recall the notion of a tempered representation
from Definition 4.6 and the Fell topology on the unitary dual from §3.8. For
a proof of the following theorem see [Clo07, §3.3] and the references therein:
Theorem 7.7.3 (Burger, Li and Sarnak) Suppose that πS is a unitary
irreducible tempered representation of the semisimple group G over F . Then
there is an automorphic representation π 0 of G(AF ) such that πS0 in the clo-
sure of the point πS is in the unitary dual of G(FS ). t
u
This theorem can be interpreted as saying that almost every irreducible
tempered representation of AG \G(FS ) is the local factor of an automorphic
representation.
Exercises
7.1. Let S2 act on C[t± ±

1 , t2 ] by letting the nontrivial element act by t1 7→ t2 .
Define a linear map
S 0 : Cc∞ (GL2 (F ) // GL2 (OF )) −→ C[t± ± S2

1 , t2 ]
by setting, for each n ∈ Z, k ∈ Z≥0 ,

 k 
b2c
1(i+n,k−i+n)  = (t1 t2 )n Symk (t1 , t2 ).

X
S0 
i=0
Show that this is an algebra isomorphism and deduce that S = S 0 .

7.2. Let G be a td-group and let K ≤ G be a compact open subgroup. A
representation (π, V ) of G is said to be generated by a subspace W ≤ V if
π(G)W = V . Prove that there is an equivalence of categories
∞
{representations of G generated by V K }−→{C
˜ c (G // K)-modules}
V 7−→ V K .
In particular, deduce that every representation of G generated by V K is

smooth and admissible.
7.3. Let E/F be a quadratic extension of number fields with Galois auto-
morphism σ. For any F -algebra R, let
U (R) := g ∈ GL2 (E ⊗F R) : ( 1 1 ) σ(g)−t ( 1 1 ) = g .

This is a unitary group in two variables over F . Prove that U is quasi-split

over F , UFv is split at every place v of F where E/F is split, and UFv is
nonsplit at every place v of F where E/F is nonsplit.
7.4. Prove the isomorphisms (7.10) and (7.11).
7.5. Let T be a torus over C. Prove that the set valued functors on the
category of C algebras are all naturally equivalent: For C-algebra R,
R 7−→ Tbs (R)

R 7−→ X ∗ (T ) ⊗C R,
R 7−→ Hom(X∗ (T ), R).
7.6. Let F be a local field and let T be a torus over F . If T (F ) is compact,

then T is anisotropic.
7.7. Let G be an affine algebraic group over a local field F and let V be a
topological C-vector space (possibly of infinite dimension). Prove that a map
G(F ) → V
is continuous with respect to the natural topology on G(F ) and the given
topology on V if and only if it is locally constant. Conclude that the map
G(F ) → V is continuous if and only if it is continuous when we give V the
discrete topology.
7.8. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AGLn \GLn (AF ) for

some global field F . Show that if S is a finite set of places of F and πS0 ∼
6 πS
=
is an admissible representation of GLn (FS ) then
πS0 ⊗ π S
is never an isobaric automorphic representation of AGLn \GLn (AF ).

Chapter 8
Nonarchimedean Representation Theory
Let’s assume we know nothing,

which is a reasonable
approximation.
D. Kazhdan
Abstract In this chapter we explain how general admissible representations

are built up out of supercuspidal representations via the process of parabolic
induction.
8.1 Introduction
Let G be a reductive group over a nonarchimedean local field F , let P ≤ G

be a parabolic subgroup, and let P = M N be a Levi decomposition with
M ≤ P a Levi subgroup and N the unipotent radical of P . This notation
will be in force throughout the chapter.
We recall from Proposition 3.5.1 that the modular quasicharacter
δP := δP (F ) : P (F ) −→ R× (8.1)
is
δP (p) := | det(Adp (p) : p(F ) → p(F ))|.
Let (σ, V ) be a smooth irreducible representation of M (F ). Using the mod-
ular character we define the parabolically induced representation (or
simply induced representation) I(σ) := IndG P (σ) to be the (smooth) rep-
resentation of G(F ) on the space of functions
n o
IndGP (V ) := locally constant ϕ : G(F ) −→ V : ϕ(mng) = δP (m)1/2
σ(m)ϕ(g)
149
150 8 Nonarchimedean Representation Theory
for all (m, n, g) ∈ M (F ) × N (F ) × G(F ). Note that a function ϕ : G(F ) → V

is locally constant if and only if it is continuous with respect to the natural
topology on G(F ) and the usual topology (or even the discrete topology) on
V . The group G(F ) acts via right translation:
I(σ)(g)ϕ(x) = ϕ(xg). (8.2)

1/2
The factor of δP is present so that if σ is unitarizable then I(σ) is also
unitarizable (see Proposition 8.2.2). We note that this procedure yields a
functor
IndG
P : Repsm M (F ) −→ Repsm G(F ), (8.3)
from smooth representations of M (F ) to smooth representations of G(F )

(in these categories objects are smooth representations and morphisms are
equivariant maps, see §5.3). This functor is called parabolic induction.
In the previous chapter we gave the classification of unramified representa-
tions of G(F ). In this chapter we delve deeper into the representation theory
of G(F ).
If V is a smooth representation of G(F ) then its contragredient V ∨ is
defined as in §5.4. A function of the form
m(g) := mϕ,ϕ∨ (g) := hπ(g)ϕ, ϕ∨ i (8.4)
for (ϕ, ϕ∨ ) ∈ V ×V ∨ is called a matrix coefficient of π (for the relationship

between this notion and that of §4.8 see Exercise 8.1).
Definition 8.1. A supercuspidal (resp. quasicuspidal) representation of

G(F ) is an admissible (resp. smooth) representation all of whose matrix co-
efficients are compactly supported modulo the center of G(F ).
The main result of this chapter is a theorem of Jacquet which states that
every irreducible admissible representation is obtained as a subquotient of
the parabolic induction of a supercuspidal representation for an appropri-
ately chosen parabolic subgroup (see Corollary 8.3.5 for the precise state-
ment). One can profitably compare this result with the Langlands classifica-
tion from §4.9 and the classification of automorphic representations explained
in Chapter 10. These results can all be viewed as manifestations of what
Harish-Chandra called the “philosophy of cusp forms” [HC70a]. Interpreted
broadly, this is a slogan for the statement that all irreducible representations
of reductive groups can all be obtained via parabolic induction from cuspi-
dal representations of parabolic subgroups. Of course, the correct notion of
cuspidal representation varies based on the context.
We will not give a full proof of Theorem 8.3.5, but we will develop much
of the machinery used in the proof because it is useful in many contexts. We
will also discuss the notion of a trace of an admissible representation, and
8.2 Parabolic induction 151
in addition develop some of the basic properties of supercuspidal representa-

tions, including the fact that they admit coefficients (see Proposition 8.5.3),
a fact that we will later use in our treatment of simple trace formulae.
The canonical reference for the topics covered in this chapter is the unpub-
lished manuscripts of Casselman [Cas] and [Ber]. The paper [Car79] contains
sketches of proofs and refers to [Cas] for the details. We have sometimes fol-
lowed the exposition in [BH06] and [Mur], which fill in many details omitted
in the previous two sources.
8.2 Parabolic induction
Let us now prove some basic facts about parabolic induction. Let (σ, V ) be
a smooth representation of M (F ).
We start with the following observation:
Lemma 8.2.1 If K ≤ G(F ) is a compact open subgroup and ϕ ∈ IndG
P (V )
K
then −1
ϕ(g) ∈ V M (F )∩gKg .
Proof. Under the assumptions in the lemma if k ∈ g −1 M (F )g ∩ K we have
ϕ(g) = ϕ(gk) = ϕ(gkg −1 g) = σ(gkg −1 )ϕ(g).
t
u
Proposition 8.2.2 One has the following:

(a) If σ is admissible then I(σ) is admissible.
(b) If σ is unitary then I(σ) is unitarizable.
Proof. Assume that (σ, V ) is admissible. Let K ≤ G(F ) be a compact open

subgroup. We are to show that IndG P (V )
K
is finite dimensional. An element
ϕ ∈ IndG
P (V ) is determined by its value on any set of representatives X for
the double cosets in
P (F )\G(F )/K.
This set of double cosets is finite by the Iwasawa decomposition, and hence
−1
X is finite. On the other hand, for any x ∈ X one has ϕ(x) ∈ V M (F )∩xKx
by Lemma 8.2.1, and this space is finite dimensional by admissibility. This
proves (a).
For (b), let (·, ·)V be an M (F )-invariant inner product on V . Choose a
maximal compact open subgroup Kmax ≤ G(F ) so that the Iwasawa decom-
position G(F ) = P (F )Kmax holds (see Theorem 2.7.1), and normalize the
Haar measures dg on G(F ), dk on Kmax , and d` p on P (F ) so that dg = d` pdk
(see Exercise 3.5).
For ϕ1 , ϕ2 ∈ IndG P (V ) we define
Z
(ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) := (ϕ1 (k), ϕ2 (k))V dk.
K
Since every element of IndG P (V ) is determined by its restriction to K this is

a positive definite inner product. We must check that it is G(F )-invariant.
Choose a nonnegative f ∈ C ∞ (G(F )) such that
Z
f (px)dr p = 1
P (F )
for all x ∈ G(F ) (see Exercise 8.3). For x ∈ G(F ) one has
Z
(ϕ1 (kx), ϕ2 (kx))V dk
Kmax
Z Z
= (ϕ1 (kx), ϕ2 (kx))V f (pkx)dr pdk
Kmax P (F )
Z
= (ϕ1 (kx), ϕ2 (kx))V f (pkx)δP−1 (p)d` pdk (see Exercise 3.3)
P (F )×Kmax
Z
= (ϕ1 (pkx), ϕ2 (pkx))V f (pkx)d` pdk
P (F )×Kmax
Z
= (ϕ1 (gx), ϕ2 (gx))V f (gx)dg
G(F )
Z
= (ϕ1 (g), ϕ2 (g))V f (g)dg.
G(F )
This expression is independent of x, so we deduce the invariance of our inner

product. t
u
Proposition 8.2.3 If σ is smooth then I(σ ∨ ) ∼

= I(σ)∨ .
Proof. Fix a maximal compact open subgroup Kmax ≤ G(F ) so that the
Iwasawa decomposition G(F ) = P (F )Kmax holds (see Theorem 2.7.1).
Let ϕ ∈ IndG ∨ G ∨
P (V ) and ϕ ∈ IndP (V ). We then have a pairing
Z
∨
(ϕ, ϕ ) := hϕ(k), ϕ∨ (k)idk (8.5)
Kmax
where the pairing on the right is the pairing between V and V ∨ . Arguing as
in the proof of part (b) of Proposition 8.2.2 we deduce that this pairing is
G(F )-invariant.
Since ϕ∨ is smooth the linear form h·, ϕ∨ i on V is smooth and we therefore
obtain a C-linear map
∨ ∨
IndG G
P (V ) −→ IndP (V ) (8.6)
∨ ∨
ϕ 7−→ (·, ϕ ).
8.2 Parabolic induction 153
It is an intertwining map because (8.5) is G(F )-equivariant. We must show

that it is bijective. By smoothness it suffices to show that it induces an
isomorphism
∨ K ∨K
IndG
P (V ) −→ Ind(V )
for all compact open subgroups K ≤ G(F ).

To do this we first describe a basis of Ind(V )K . We let X be a set of
representatives for the double cosets in P (F )\G(F )/K. Since P (F )\G(F ) is
−1
compact X is a finite set. For each x ∈ X let Bx be a basis of V P (F )∩gKg .
−1
By Lemma 8.2.1, ϕ(g) ∈ V M (F )∩xKx . For each w ∈ Bx let ϕx,w be the
function supported on P (F )xK such that
ϕx,w (mnxk) = σ(m)w
for (m, n, k) ∈ M (F ) × N (F ) × K. Then
{ϕx,w : x ∈ X, w ∈ Bx } (8.7)
−1
is a C-basis of I(σ)K . Now for each x let Bx∨ be the basis of V ∨M (F )∩xKx
dual to Bx . We define ϕx,w∨ by replacing V with V ∨ in the construction
above, and we obtain a basis
{ϕx,w∨ : x ∈ X, w∨ ∈ Bx∨ } (8.8)
for IndG ∨ K
P (V ) . It is clear that (8.7) and (8.8) are a basis and dual basis with
respect to the pairing (8.5). t
u
It is often useful to introduce a variant of the parabolic induction functor.

We recall briefly the Harish-Chandra map (4.12) discussed in §4.9. We define
a map
HM : M (F ) −→ aM := Hom(X ∗ (M )F , R) (8.9)
via
hHM (m), λi = log |λ(m)|
for λ ∈ X (M )F . For each λ ∈ a∗M C we then obtain a quasi-character
∗
m 7−→ ehHM (m),λi .
It is clearly unramified. We then define
I(σ, λ) := I(σ ⊗ ehHM (·),λi ). (8.10)
The point of introducing this extra notation is that it makes clear that the
induced representation I(σ, λ) is part of a continuous family, indexed by a∗M C ,
of representations. In practice this can be very useful. We employed this
construction in the special case where P is a Borel subgroup and σ is trivial

in our construction of the unramified principal series in §7.6.
8.3 Jacquet modules
We now define left-adjoints to the functors IndG

P . Let (π, V ) be a smooth
representation of G(F ). Set
V (N ) := hπ(n)ϕ − ϕ : ϕ ∈ V, n ∈ N (F )i and VN := V /V (N ). (8.11)
The space VN is refereed to as the space of coinvariants. We note that since

M (F ) normalizes N (F ) it normalizes V (N ) and hence M (F ) acts on VN . We
can therefore define
N : Repsm (G(F )) −→ Repsm (M (F )) (8.12)

1/2
(π, V ) 7−→ (πN := π|M (F ) ⊗ δP , VN ).
The representation (πN , VN ) is referred to as the Jacquet module of (π, V )

(with respect to N ).
A version of Frobenius reciprocity is valid for this functor:
Proposition 8.3.1 Restriction is left adjoint to induction; in other words
for smooth representations V of G(F ) and W of M (F ) one has a bijection
HomG(F ) (V, IndG

P (W ))−→Hom
˜ M (F ) (VN , W )
that is functorial in V and W .
Proof. There is an M (F )-equivariant map
ev1 : IndG
P (W ) −→ W
ϕ 7−→ ϕ(1)
where 1 ∈ G(F ) is the identity; it is clearly surjective. Thus we have a M (F )-

equivariant map
ev1 ◦ (·) : HomG(F ) (V, IndG

P (W )) −→ HomM (F ) (VN , W )
given by composition with ev1 . Here we are using the fact that N acts triv-
ially on IndG G
P (W ) and thus any G(F )-equivariant map V → IndP (W ) fac-
tors through VN . To construct the inverse, suppose we are given an M (F )-
intertwining map Φ : VN → W . We define
e : V −→ IndG (W )
Φ P
ϕ 7−→ (g 7→ Φ(g.ϕ)).
8.3 Jacquet modules 155
The map Φ 7→ Φ
e is inverse to ev1 ◦ (·). t
u
One would hope that the functor N preserves admissibility, and this is
indeed the case:
Theorem 8.3.2 (Jacquet) The functor N takes admissible representations
to admissible representations. t
u
Jacquet also proved the following elegant characterization of quasicuspidal
representations using these functors:
Theorem 8.3.3 (Jacquet) A smooth irreducible representation (π, V ) of
G(F ) is quasicuspidal if and only if VN = 0 for all parabolic subgroups P ≤ G.
t
u
It is because of these theorems that VN called the Jacquet module. Strictly

speaking Jacquet wrote up his results only for the case of GLn [Jac71], but
the proof carries over to the general case and was worked out in [Cas].
We will not prove theorems 8.3.2 or 8.3.3, referring the reader to [Cas,
§3-4]. In the remainder of this section we use theorems 8.3.2 and 8.3.3 to
prove a subrepresentation theorem for admissible representations over nonar-
chimedean local fields (see Theorem 8.3.5).
Before proving Theorem 8.3.5 we prove a warm-up result. Recall that a
supercuspidal representation is an admissible quasicuspidal representation.
Proposition 8.3.4 A quasicuspidal irreducible representation is supercusp-
idal.
Proof. Let (π, V ) be a quasicuspidal irreducible representation of G(F ). Fix

a nonzero ϕ ∈ V . For all compact open subgroups K ≤ G(F ) one has
V K = π(eK )V = hπ(eK )π(g)ϕ : g ∈ G(F )i,
where
1
eK := 1K
meas(K)
is the idempotent attached to K. We must show V K is finite dimensional.
Since π admits a central quasi-character (see Exercise 5.7) if V K is not finite
dimensional then there exists {gn : n ∈ Z>0 } ⊆ G(F ), all inequivalent modulo
ZG (F ), such that π(eK )π(gn )ϕ are linearly independent. Let W ⊆ V K be a
C-vector subspace space such that
V K = W ⊕ hπ(eK )π(gn )ϕ : gn ∈ G(F ), n ∈ Z>0 i.
As V = V K ⊕ ker π(eK ), we can define ϕ∨ ∈ Hom(V, C) such that
hπ(eK )π(gn )ϕ, ϕ∨ i = n

for all n and ϕ∨ |W ⊕ker π(eK ) = 0. Then ϕ∨ is fixed by K, hence is smooth, and
hence is an element of V ∨ . On the other hand, by construction the support of
the matrix coefficient hπ(g)ϕ, ϕ∨ i is not compact modulo the center ZG (F ).
This implies the proposition. t
u
Combined with Proposition 8.3.4, Theorem 8.3.2 and 8.3.3 allow us to

deduce the following concrete manifestation of the philosophy of cusp forms:
Theorem 8.3.5 If (π, V ) is a smooth irreducible representation of G(F )

then one has the following:
(a) There exists a parabolic subgroup P = M N ≤ G, a supercuspidal repre-
sentation (σ, W ) of M (F ) and a nonzero intertwining map V ,→ IndG
P (W ).
(b) The representation π is admissible.
Proof. The first assertion implies the second, as induction preserves admis-
sibility by Proposition 8.2.2. For the first, we proceed by induction on the
dimension of G (as an F -algebraic group, say). If G has dimension 1 then it
is a torus, and so the result is trivial.
Assume that for all proper parabolic subgroups P there is no nonzero
intertwining map V → IndG P (W ) where (σ, W ) is a smooth irreducible rep-
resentation of M (F ). Applying Frobenius reciprocity (Proposition 8.3.1) we
see that
HomM (F ) (VN , W ) = 0
for all parabolic subgroups P = M N and all smooth representations σ of
M (F ), which implies π is supercuspidal by Theorem 8.3.3.
Now assume that there is a proper parabolic subgroup P < G, a Levi
subgroup M ≤ P , a smooth representation (σ, W ) of M (F ), and a nonzero
(hence injective) intertwining map V → IndG P (W ). By Frobenius reciprocity,
there is a nonzero intertwining map
VN −→ W
of representations of M (F ) so we can apply our inductive hypothesis to de-

duce that there is a parabolic subgroup Q ≤ M with Levi subgroup MQ and
a supercuspidal representation (ρ, U ) of MQ (F ) and a nonzero intertwining
map
VN −→ W −→ IndM Q (U ).
Applying Frobenius reciprocity again we obtain a nonzero intertwining map
V −→ IndG M ∼ G
P ◦ IndQ (U ) = IndQN (U )
(see Exercise 8.4 for the last isomorphism). t

u
8.4 The Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification 157
8.4 The Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification
Theorem 8.3.5 provides the first step towards a classification of all irreducible
admissible representations of G(F ) in terms of supercuspidal representations.
The remaining task is to understand isomorphisms between subquotients of
induced representations.
It is useful to start by stepping backwards and recalling the Langlands clas-
sification in the nonarchimedean setting. This classifies irreducible admissible
representations in terms of tempered representations and is the analogue in
the current setting of Theorem 4.9.2.
Fix a minimal parabolic subgroup P0 ≤ G and call a parabolic subgroup
standard if it contains P0 . Let M (F )1 := ker HM where HM is defined as
in (8.9). Let (σ, V ) be an irreducible admissible representation of M (F )1 .
We extend it trivially to M (F ). Given λ ∈ a∗M we can form the induced
representation I(σ, λ) as in (8.10).
The following is the analogue of Theorem 4.9.1 in this setting:
Theorem 8.4.1 If σ is unitary and tempered and λ is in the positive Weyl
chamber then I(σ, λ) admits a unique irreducible quotient J(σ, λ). t
u
The representation J(σ, λ) is known as the Langlands quotient of I(σ, λ).
Theorem 8.4.2 Every irreducible admissible representation of G(F ) is iso-

morphic to some J(σ, λ). Moreover if we insist that the parabolic sub-
group defining J(σ, λ) is standard, fix a Levi decomposition of each standard
parabolic subgroup, and stipulate that λ is in the positive Weyl chamber then
every irreducible representation of G(F ) is isomorphic to a J(σ, λ) that is
unique up to replacing σ by another representation of M (F )1 equivalent to
σ. t
u
For the proofs of these theorems we refer to [BW00, §XI.2]. See also [Kon03].
In view of these theorems to classify the admissible irreducible representa-
tions of G(F ) it suffices to classify the irreducible tempered representations
of G(F ). This work is largely complete in the case when G was a classical
groups, see [Mg02, MgT02, Jan14] for example. The situation for general lin-
ear groups is arguably the simplest and we will discuss it in this section. The
results are due to Bernstein and Zelevinsky [BZ77, Zel80], and the theory is
known as the Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification.
We start with the classification of representations that are essentially
square integrable. Let n > 1, let a|n, and let σ be an irreducible super-
cuspidal representation of GLn/a (F ). The external tensor product σ a := σ ⊗a
can then be viewed as a (supercuspidal) representation of GLan/a , which we
view as a Levi subgroup of the standard parabolic subgroup of GLn of type
(n/a, . . . , n/a) (see Example 1.10 for our conventions regarding standard
parabolic subgroups).
There is then a unique irreducible subquotient J(σ a , λa ) of I(σ a , λa ) where

a−1 a−3 a−3 a−1
λa := , ,··· ,− ,− ∈ X ∗ (M )F ⊗ C.
2 2 2 2
This subquotient is essentially square-integrable. Conversely, all irreducible

essentially square integrable representations arise in this manner:
Theorem 8.4.3 (Bernstein) Every irreducible (admissible) essentially square-

integrable representation π of GLn (F ) is isomorphic to J(σ a , λa ) for a pair
(σ, a) where a|n and σ is an irreducible supercuspidal representation of
GLn/a (F ). The parameter a is uniquely determined by π, and σ is deter-
mined by π up to isomorphism. t
u
The only reference for the proof appears to be [Ber, Proposition 42]; the
theorem is stated in [Zel80, §9.1]. There is a sketch of the proof in [JS83,
§1.2].
To proceed we need the notion of linked representations. Following [BZ77]
one calls any set of supercuspidal representations of GLr (F ) for some r of
the form
{σ ⊗ ehHGLr (·),1i , σ ⊗ ehHGLr (·),2i , · · · , σ ⊗ ehHGLr (·),di }
for some integer d a segment. Two segments are linked if neither is included
in the other and their union is a segment.
To each J(σ a , λa ) we associate the segment
a−1 a−1
{σ ⊗ ehHM (·), 2 i , . . . , σ⊗hHM (·),− 2 i }.
We say that
0
J(σ a , λa ) and J(σ 0a , λa0 ) (8.13)
are linked if their Pj associated segments are linked.

Now assume i=1 ni = n and ai |ni for all i. If P is the standard parabolic
of type (n1 , . . . , nj ) then for any collection of square-integrable representa-
tions J(σiai , λai ) of GLni (F ) as above we can form the induced representation
a
π = Ind(J(σ1a1 , λa1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ J(σj j , λaj ), 0). (8.14)
a
In the case where J(σiai , λai ) is linked with J(σj j , λaj ) if and only if i = j
we say that none of the J(σiai , λai ) are linked.
The following theorem is [Zel80, Theorem 9.7(a)]:
Theorem 8.4.4 If none of the J(σiai , λai ) are linked then the representation
π in (8.14) is irreducible. t
u
A representation π is irreducible and generic in the sense of §11.2 if and
only if it is isomorphic to a π as in (8.14) above where none of the J(σiai , λai )
are linked [Zel80, Theorem 9.7].
8.5 Traces, characters, coefficients 159
Theorem 8.4.5 An irreducible representation of GLn (F ) is tempered if and

only if it is of the form (8.14) where all of the J(σiai , λai ) are square integrable.
The J(σiai , λai ) are uniquely determined up to reordering indices.
To clarify the assumptions in the theorem, we note that the J(σiai , λai ) are
always essentially square integrable, so the assumption of square integrability
in the theorem amounts to assuming that the central character of J(σiai , λai )
is unitary.
Proof. In [JS83, §1.2] one finds an argument that proves that an irreducible
pre-unitary tempered representation is generic. In fact any tempered rep-
resentation is pre-unitary (see Definition 4.6), so any irreducible tempered
representation is generic. Now since the J(σiai , λai ) are all square integrable
none of them are linked by Exercise 8.15. Thus we can then use [Zel80, The-
orem 9.7(b)] to conclude the assertion of the theorem. t
u
Combining the Langlands classification of Theorem 8.4.2 and the subse-

quent description of tempered representations given by Theorem 8.4.5 we can
give an analogue of the Langlands classification in terms of square-integrable
representations. We defer a discussion of this to §10.5.
8.5 Traces, characters, coefficients
Let π be an admissible representation of G(F ). Then for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ))

one has an operator
π(f ) : V −→ V.
There is a compact open subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K),
and hence π(f ) induces an operator
π(f ) : W −→ W
for any finite dimensional subspace V K ≤ W ≤ V . We define the trace of

π(f ) by
tr π(f ) := tr π(f )|W (8.15)
for any such W . The notion of the trace of a representation will play a crucial
role in the trace formula in later chapters.
In this nonarchimedean setting, a distribution on G(F ) is simply a com-
plex linear functional on Cc∞ (G(F )). Thus the trace map
tr π : Cc∞ (G(F )) −→ C
is a distribution on G(F ), called the character of π. Of course this distribu-

tion depends on a choice of Haar measure. Let Greg ≤ G denote the (open)
subscheme consisting of regular semisimple elements. The notion of a regular

semisimple element will be discussed in more detail in §17.1 below. For the
moment we point out that for fields E/F
Greg (E) := {γ ∈ G(E) : Cγ◦ ≤ GE is a maximal torus}. (8.16)
The following is a fundamental and deep result:

Theorem 8.5.1 (Harish-Chandra) The distribution tr π is represented by
a locally constant function Θπ with support in Greg (F ). t
u
(see [HC99] for the proof and [Kot05] for a detailed exposition).
In other words there is a locally constant function Θπ on Greg (F ) such
that Z
tr π(f ) = Θπ (g)f (g)dg
G(F )
for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )).This result tells us that we can almost regard tr π as
a function.
The following is a version of linear independence of characters adapted to
this setting:
Proposition 8.5.2 (Linear independence of characters) If π1 , . . . , πn is
a finite set of admissible irreducible representations such that πi ∼
= πj implies
i = j, then the distributions tr πi are linearly independent.
Proof. We use admissibility to reduce the assertion to a finite-dimensional

setting. Fix a compact open subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that ViK 6= 0 for all i.
This implies that {ViK } is a finite family of finite dimensional C-vector spaces
with an action of Cc∞ (G(F ) // K). They are all simple, that is irreducible, for
this action. Moreover, they are pairwise nonisomorphic as Cc∞ (G(F ) // K)-
modules by an analogue of the argument in the proof of Proposition 7.1.1.
Let !
Y
∞ K
A := Im Cc (G(F ) // K) −→ EndC (Vi ) .
i
Then A is a finite-dimensional C-algebra and the {ViK } are a finite fam-

ily of finite-dimensional nonisomorphic simple A-modules. Hence the traces
tr πi |Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) are linearly independent. As a reference for this last state-
ment we give [GW09, Lemma 4.1.18]. A simpler argument that depends on
the fact that Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) has a unit is given as Exercise 8.9. t
u
Thus traces can be used to distinguish between a finite set of representa-

tions. In particular, if {π1 , . . . , πn } is a finite set of pairwise nonisomorphic ir-
reducible representations then linear independence of characters implies that
we can find an f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that
tr πi (f ) = 0 if and only if i 6= 1.
8.5 Traces, characters, coefficients 161
For a refinement of this result at the level of operators see Exercise 8.10.
One can ask for more. Let π be an admissible irreducible representation. A
coefficient of π is a smooth function fπ ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that tr π(fπ ) 6= 0
and tr π 0 (fπ ) = 0 for π 0 ∼
6 π. Thus if a coefficient for π exists, we can use it
=
to isolate π among any set of irreducible admissible representations, finite or
not. For general π, it is not necessarily true that such functions f exist. To put
this in perspective, it is useful to recall the Heizenberg uncertainty principle,
namely that the Fourier transform of a compactly supported smooth function
on a real vector space cannot again be compactly supported. Thus if we
replaced G(F ) with the nonreductive group R there would be no way to
construct coefficients. However, we are not in this setting, and in certain
circumstances we can construct coefficients:
Proposition 8.5.3 Assume that ZG (F ) is compact, and let (π, V ) be an
irreducible supercuspidal representation of G(F ). Then for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ))
there exists a unique fπ ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that
π(fπ ) = π(f ) and π 0 (fπ ) = 0 if π 0 6∼

= π.
As an immediate consequence, we see that coefficients exist for supercuspi-

dals. The proof we give depends on our original definition of supercuspidal
representations, that is, they are admissible representations whose matrix
coefficients are compactly supported modulo the center.
To prove Proposition 8.5.3 we collect some observations on the space of
endomorphisms of a representation. For any smooth representation (π, V ) of
G(F ) the C-vector space
End(V ) := HomC (V, V )
is naturally a G(F ) × G(F )-module, where one copy of G acts via precom-
position and the other via postcomposition. The action is given explicitly by
(g1 , g2 ).A = π(g1 ) ◦ A ◦ π(g2−1 ). We let
Endsm (V ) ≤ End(V )
denote the subspace consisting of smooth endomorphisms, that is, en-

domorphisms that are left and right invariant by a compact open subgroup
K ≤ G. This is a smooth representation of G(F ) × G(F ).
The usual isomorphism
V ⊗ HomC (V, C) −→ End(V )
given on pure tensors by
ϕ ⊗ ϕ∨ 7−→ (ϕ0 7−→ hϕ0 , ϕ∨ iϕ)

is G(F ) × G(F )-equivariant and upon restriction induces an isomorphism

V ⊗ V ∨ −→ Endsm (V ) (here all of the tensor products are over C). Thus the
action of G(F ) × G(F ) on Endsm (V ) can be reasonably denoted by π ⊗ π ∨
(for more details on product representations see Theorem 5.7.2 above). This
is a special case of an exterior tensor product; unfortunately, it seems that
the notation ⊗ is used more commonly for this than . If (π, V ) is admissible,
then Endsm (V ) is also admissible (see Exercise 8.13).
One also has an intertwining map
β : (π ⊗ π ∨ , Endsm (V )) −→ (ρ, C ∞ (G(F )))
given by
β(A)(g) = tr(π(g) ◦ A).
Here ρ acts via ρ(g1 , g2 )(f )(h) = f (g1−1 hg2 ). We note that for each A ∈
Endsm (V ) the function β(A) is a sum of matrix coefficients. Indeed, if we
choose a compact open subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that A is fixed on the left
and right under K, choose a basis B of V K and a dual basis B ∨ of V ∨K then
X
β(A)(g) = hπ(g) ◦ Aϕ, ϕ∨ i. (8.17)
ϕ∈B
Proof of Proposition 8.5.3: Since ZG (F ) is compact by assumption and π is

supercuspidal, we have β(Endsm (V )) ≤ Cc∞ (G(F )). Since there are ϕ ∈ V
and ϕ∨ ∈ V ∨ such that
hϕ, ϕ∨ i = hπ(1)ϕ, ϕ∨ i =
6 0,
we have that β is not identically zero. Thus since the exterior tensor product
π ⊗ π ∨ is irreducible β is an embedding.
Consider
β 0 : (ρ, Cc∞ (G(F ))) −→ (π ⊗ π ∨ , Endsm (V )) (8.18)

f 7−→ π(f ).
Then β 0 ◦ β is an endomorphism of the irreducible representation Endsm (V )

of G(F ) × G(F ). Hence β 0 ◦ β is scalar by Schur’s lemma (see Exercise 5.5),
say β 0 ◦ β = λId for some λ ∈ C. We will now show that λ 6= 0 and that we
can take
fπ := λ−1 β ◦ β 0 (f ).
First,
π(β ◦ β 0 (f )) = β 0 ◦ β ◦ β 0 (f ) = λβ 0 (f ) = λπ(f ).
To show that λ 6= 0, note that we can find f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that π(f ) 6=
0 (take, for example, f to be the characteristic function of a sufficiently
8.6 Parabolic descent of representations 163
small compact open subgroup). Thus β 0 (f ) = π(f ) 6= 0, and since β is an

embedding, we deduce that β ◦ β 0 (f ) 6= 0.
Second, let (π 0 , V 0 ) be a smooth irreducible representation of G(F ), and
let ϕ0 ∈ V 0 be a non-zero vector. Let
γ : (ρ|G(F )×1 , Cc∞ (G(F ))) −→ (π 0 , V 0 ) (8.19)

0 0
f 7−→ π (f )ϕ .
As a representation of G(F ) one has that Endsm (V )|G(F )×1 is isomorphic to a

direct sum of copies of π, and thus the same is true of γ(β(Endsm (V )). Thus
γ(β(Endsm (V ))) = 0 unless π 0 ∼
= π (since whenever the former is nonzero we
obtain an intertwining operator between π 0 and π). It follows that π 0 (fπ ) = 0
if π 0 ∼
6 π. This completes the proof of the proposition.
= 2
8.6 Parabolic descent of representations
Parabolic descent is a term for the process by which one passes from objects
(say, representations) on a group to objects on a Levi subgroup of a parabolic
subgroup. In this section we give two examples of this phenomenon. First we
show that the character of a parabolically induced representation is easily
related to the character of the inducing representation (Proposition 8.6.1).
Let P ≤ G be a parabolic subgroup with Levi decomposition P (F ) =
M (F )N (F ) and let K ≤ G(F ) be a maximal compact subgroup.
Definition 8.2. A maximal compact subgroup K ≤ G(F ) is said to be in

good position with respect to (P, M ) if G(F ) = P (F )K and P (F ) ∩ K =
(M (F ) ∩ K)(N (F ) ∩ K).
Given a parabolic subgroup P we can always find a maximal compact

subgroup in good position with respect to P . We can even assume that
KM := M (F ) ∩ K
is a maximal compact open subgroup (see Theorem A.4.2); we will also as-
sume this in what follows.
We assume throughout this section that Haar measures are chosen so that
dg = δP (m)dkdmdn (8.20)
where dk(K) = dn(N (F ) ∩ K) = 1 (see Exercise 8.2).

The constant term of f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) along P is the function
Z
1/2
f P (m) := δP (m) f (mn)dn. (8.21)
N (F )
This is equal to (7.17) in the special case considered in §7.5.

Let T ≤ M be a maximal split torus, and let
Cc∞ (G(F ); K) := {f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) : f (k −1 xk) = f (x) for all k ∈ K}.
We note that Cc∞ (G(F ); K) is precisely the image of the map
Cc∞ (G(F )) −→ Cc∞ (G(F ); K)

f 7−→ fK (8.22)
where fK (x) := K f (k −1 xk)dk. The space Cc∞ (G(F ); K) ≤ Cc∞ (G(F )) is a

R
subalgebra under convolution, and one trivially has
tr π(f ) = tr π(fK ). (8.23)
Proposition 8.6.1 The constant term gives a map
Cc∞ (G(F ); K) −→ Cc∞ (M (F ); KM )

f 7→ f P .
If (σ, V ) is an admissible representation of M (F ), then
tr I(σ)(f ) = tr σ(f P ).
Remark 8.1. The archimedean analogue of this proposition is valid as well.

One reference is [Kna02, (10.23)].
We follow the proof of [Lau96, Lemma 7.5.7] in the following:

Proof. Since K is compact, δP (k) = 1 for all k ∈ M (F ) ∩ K. It follows that
f P ∈ Cc∞ (M (F ); KM ) as claimed.
We now prove the equality of traces. Consider the space IndG P (V )|K of
locally constant functions
ϕ : K −→ V
such that ϕ(mnk) = σ(m)ϕ(k) for (m, n, k) ∈ KM × (N (F ) ∩ K) × K. There
is a representation I(σ|K ) of K on this space given by
I(σ|K )(k)ϕ(g) = ϕ(gk). (8.24)
By the Iwasawa decomposition restriction of functions to K induces an iso-

morphism
IndG G
P (V ) −→ IndP (V )|K (8.25)
G(F )
that intertwines ResK (I(σ)) with I(σ|K ). Since this is an isomorphism,
I(σ)(f ) induces an endomorphism of IndGP (V )|K , and tr I(σ)(f ) is equal to
the trace of this endomorphism on IndG
P (V ). Define
8.6 Parabolic descent of representations 165
Z
1/2
Φk,k0 (m) := δP (m) f (k −1 mnk 0 )dn
N (F )
for k, k 0 ∈ K and m ∈ M (F ). Then if ϕ ∈ IndG P (V ) one has

Z
I(σ)(f )ϕ(k) = f (g)ϕ(kg)dg
G(F )
Z
= f (k −1 g)ϕ(g)dg
G(F )
Z Z Z
= f (k −1 mnk 0 )ϕ(mnk 0 )dk 0 dndm
M (F ) N (F ) K
Z Z Z
= f (k −1 mnk 0 )δP (m)1/2 σ(m)ϕ(k 0 )dk 0 dndm
M (F ) N (F ) K
Z
= σ(Φk,k0 )ϕ(k 0 )dk 0 .
K
It follows that
tr I(σ)(f )
σ(Φk,k0 )ϕ(k 0 )dk 0 ). This en-
R
is the trace of the endomorphism ϕ 7→ (k 7→ K
domorphism has trace Z
tr σ(Φk,k )dk.
K
On the other hand Z
fP = Φk,k dk.
K
The lemma follows. t
u
As an addendum, we prove the following lemma:
Lemma 8.6.2 The constant term provides an algebra homomorphism
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ Cc∞ (M (F ) // KM ).
We used this lemma in the special case where G is unramified and P = B

in §7.5:
Proof. Let f1 , f2 ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K). One has

Z
P 1/2
(f1 ∗ f2 ) (m) = δP (m) (f1 ∗ f2 )(mn)dn
N (F )
Z Z !
1/2 −1
= δP (m) f1 (mng )f2 (g)dg dn.
N (F ) G(F )
Using Exercise 8.2, we rewrite this as

Z Z !
1/2 0 0 0 0 −1 0 0 0 0 0 0
δP (m) δP (g )f1 (gn(k m n ) )f2 (k m n )dk dm dn dn
N (F ) K×M (F )×N (F )
Z Z !
1/2
= δP (mm0 ) f1 (mm 0−1
nn 0−1 0 0
)f2 (m n )dk dm dn 0 0 0
dn
N (F ) K×M (F )×N (F )
Z Z Z !
1/2
= δP (mm0 ) f1 (mm 0−1
n)dn f2 (m n )dn0 0 0
dm0
M (F ) N (F ) N (F )
= f1P ∗ f2P (m).
This proves our assertion that the constant term is an algebra morphism. t
u
8.7 Parabolic descent of orbital integrals
In our discussion of the Satake isomorphism in §7.5 we claimed that the

constant term map has image in Weyl invariant functions on the maximal
torus. We prove this in the current section and use it as an opportunity to
discuss descent of orbital integrals.
We keep the notation of the previous section; thus P = M N is a parabolic
subgroup of G, K ≤ G(F ) is a maximal compact subgroup in good position
with respect to P , and KM := M (F ) ∩ K is maximal in K.
Let γ ∈ G(F ) and let Cγ be the centralizer of γ:
Cγ (R) = {g ∈ G(R) : g −1 γg = γ}. (8.26)
Earlier in Definition 1.12 we only defined semisimple elements for perfect

fields. If F is not perfect then we say that γ ∈ G(F ) is semisimple if the
image of γ in G(F ) is semisimple. If γ ∈ G(F ) is semisimple then the orbit
O(γ) ⊂ G of γ is closed [Ste65, Corollary 6.13, Proposition 6.14]. For a
semisimple element γ the neutral component of the stabilizer Cγ is reductive.
For more details (including proofs and references) we refer to §17.1.
Assume that γ ∈ G(F ) is semisimple. Then Cγ (F ) is unimodular, and
upon choosing a Haar measure dgγ on Cγ◦ (F ) we can form a right G(F )-
dg
invariant Radon measure dg γ
on the quotient Cγ◦ (F )\G(F ) (see Theorem
3.2.2). We then define the orbital integral
Z
dg
O◦γ (f ) := f (g −1 γg) . (8.27)
Cγ◦ (F )\G(F ) dgγ
Note that this is not the same as the local version of the orbital integral
appearing in (18.11), it differs in that in (18.11) we use Cγ instead of Cγ◦ .
This is why we there is a superscript ◦ in the notation. The quotient map
8.7 Parabolic descent of orbital integrals 167
Cγ◦ (F )\G(F ) → Cγ (F )\G(F )
is proper as is the map
Cγ (F )\G(F ) −→ G(F )
Cγ (F )g 7−→ g −1 γg
by the argument in the proof of Theorem 17.4.1. It follows as in the proof of

Theorem 17.4.1 that the integral (8.27) is absolutely convergent.
Let H ≤ G be a connected subgroup. For F -algebras R and h ∈ H(R) it
is convenient to define
DH\G (h) := det I − Ad(h)−1 : h(F )\g(F ) → h(F )\g(F )

(8.28)
where (as usual) h := Lie H and g := Lie G and where I is the identity map.
There is a dual relationship between orbital integrals and characters that
can be made precise in many ways; one of the most profound is the absolute
trace formula (see §18.4). The following proposition is consonant with this
duality:
Proposition 8.7.1 Assume that γ ∈ G(F ) is closed, γ ∈ M (F ), and Cγ◦ ≤
M . If DM \G (γ) 6= 0 then one has
O◦γ (f ) = |DM \G (γ)|−1/2 O◦γ (f P ).
Here we normalize the Haar measure dg on G(F ) as in (8.20) and we take

the Haar measures on Cγ (F ) to be equal on either side of the equation.
If we replace the assumption that Cγ◦ ≤ M with the stronger assumption
that Cγ ≤ M and define O◦γ (f ) with Cγ◦ (F ) replaced by Cγ (F ) then the
proposition remains valid, with an identical proof.
The following proof is taken from [Lau96, Proposition 4.3.11]:
Proof. Upon taking a change of variables n 7→ mnm−1 we see that the nor-
malization of the Haar measure in (8.20) is equivalent to
d(mnk) = dmdndk.
Thus one has

Z Z Z
dm
O◦γ (f ) = f (k −1 n−1 m−1 γmnk)dkdn .
Cγ◦ (F )\M (F ) N (F ) K dmγ
For each m ∈ M (F ) there is a morphism of affine F -schemes N → N given

on points in an F -algebra R by
N (R) −→ N (R)
(8.29)
n 7−→ (m−1 γm)−1 n−1 (m−1 γm)n.
We claim that this morphism is an isomorphism. The image is the orbit of the
identity under an action of the unipotent group N , and is therefore closed in
N by [Mil17, Theorem 17.64]. On the other hand the morphism is injective
at the level of points. Indeed if γn−1 γn = γn0−1 γn0 for n, n0 ∈ N (R) then
n0 n−1 ∈ Cγ (R) which implies n0 n−1 = I by our assumption that Cγ◦ ≤ M
(see [Hum95, §2.2, Theorem]). The same is true if we replace γ by m−1 γm
and injectivity follows. In particular the stabilizer of the identity element is
trivial. We concluded using Proposition 17.1.2 that (8.29) is an isomorphism
onto its image, a closed subscheme of N . By considering dimensions we deduce
that (8.29) is an isomorphism.
The Jacobian depends only on γ and is equal to
J(γ) = |det (I − Ad(γ) : n(F ) → n(F ))| .
We note that
|DM \G (γ)| = δP (γ)J(γ)2 .
Therefore we can change variables and deduce that the integral above is
Z Z Z
dn dm
f (k −1 m−1 γmnk)dk
Mγ◦ (F )\M (F ) N (F ) K J(γ) dmγ
and deduce the proposition. t

u
This is the first time we have used the usual change of variables formula
in the nonarchimedean setting. A general discussion of integration on mani-
folds over nonarchimedean fields, including the change of variables formula,
is in [Igu00, Chapter 7]. We refer especially to [Igu00, Proposition 7.4.1] and
[Igu00, §7.6].
We now prove the following proposition, used in §7.5:
Proposition 8.7.2 Assume that G is quasi-split with Borel subgroup B, that
M ≤ B is a maximal torus and that T ≤ M is its maximal split subtorus.
The constant term induces a homomorphism
Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) −→ Cc∞ (T (F )/KT )W (T,G)(F ) .
In the case at level M , Proposition 8.7.2 is a refinement of Lemma 8.6.2.

To prove the proposition we require the following proposition:
Proposition 8.7.3 With assumptions as in Proposition 8.7.2 for any γ ∈
M (F )
|DM \G (γ)| =
6 0
if and only if Cγ◦ = M . The set
{γ ∈ M (F ) : Cγ◦ = M } (8.30)
is dense in M (F ) in the natural topology.

Proof. Clearly M ≤ Cγ◦ because M is connected and commutative. Since

I − Ad(γ) acts by zero on the subspace
m\gγ ≤ m\g
we deduce that |DM \G (γ)| =6 0 if and only if m = gγ , which is to say that

Cγ◦ = M . Here m = Lie M and gγ = Lie Cγ .
To deduce that the set of elements of M (F ) where Cγ◦ = M is dense
in M (F ) in the natural topology we remark that the set of points where a
nonzero polynomial on a (nonarchimedean) analytic manifold does not vanish
is necessarily dense. t
u
Remark 8.2. There are surprisingly few textbook treatments of analytic man-
ifolds in the nonarchimedean setting; one is [Ser06] and some additional topics
are in [Igu00]. Perhaps the reason is that more sophisticated treatments in-
volving rigid analytic spaces, Berkovich spaces, etc. are often needed and
have drawn more attention.
We now prove Proposition 8.7.2:
Proof of Proposition 8.7.2: Every element of W (T, G)(F ) has a representative

w ∈ NG (T )(F ), the normalizer of T in G(F ) (see above [Spr09, 16.1.3]). Thus
it suffices to show that for f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) one has
f B (w−1 tw) = f B (t)
for t ∈ T (F ). We will in fact show the stronger statement that
f B (w−1 γw) = f B (γ) (8.31)
for all γ ∈ M (F ).
The set of γ ∈ M (F ) such that Cγ◦ = M is dense by Proposition 8.7.3, and
for such a γ one has |DM \G (γ)| =
6 0. Let dm be the Haar measure on M (F )
used in (8.20). We then have
O◦γ (f ) = |DM \G (γ)|−1/2 O◦γ (f B )

= |DM \G (γ)|−1/2 f B (γ)
by Proposition 8.7.1. Here the last equality follows since M (F ) is commuta-

tive. It is clear that O◦w−1 γw (f ) = O◦γ (f ), so at least for γ ∈ M (F ) such that
Cγ◦ = M we deduce (8.31). This set is dense in M (F ) by Proposition 8.7.3.
It is clear that f B is continuous, so we deduce (8.31) for all γ ∈ M (F ). 2
Exercises
In all of these exercises G is a connected reductive group over a local field F

and P ≤ G is a parabolic subgroup with a fixed Levi subgroup M ≤ P and
unipotent radical N .
8.1. Let (π, V ) be a unitary representation of G(F ) on a Hilbert space V .

Let Vsm ≤ V be the subspace of smooth vectors (see Exercise 5.2). Construct
an isomorphism Vsm ∼ = (Vsm )∨ . Using this isomorphism, show that a matrix
coefficient in the sense of (8.4) is a matrix coefficient in the sense of §4.8.
8.2. Assume that K ≤ G(F ) is a maximal compact subgroup in good position

with respect to (P, M ). Show that we can normalize the Haar measures dg,
dk, dm, dn on G(F ), K, M (F ), and N (F ), respectively, so that
dg(kmn) = δP (m)dkdmdn
where dk(K) = dn(N (F ) ∩ K) = 1.
8.3. Show that we can choose a function f ∈ C ∞ (G(F )) such that

Z
f (px)dr p = 1
P (F )
for all x ∈ G(F ).
8.4. Let Q ≤ M be a parabolic subgroup. There is a natural transformation

of functors
M ∼
IndG G
P ◦ IndQ = IndQN
The analogous statement for Jacquet modules is true as well.
8.5. The functor IndG P is exact (that is, it preserves exact sequences) and
additive (that is, takes direct sums to direct sums).
8.6. The functor π 7→ πN is exact (sends exact sequences to exact sequences)

and additive (sends direct products to direct products).
8.7. Let (π, V ) be a smoothR representation of G(F ). An element ϕ ∈ V

is in V (N ) if and only if KN π(n)ϕdn = 0 for some compact subgroup
KN ≤ N (F ).
8.8. Prove that Greg , defined as in (8.16), is an open subscheme of G.
8.9. Assume that A is a finite-dimensional (not necessarily commutatives)

C-algebra with unit and that V1 , . . . , Vn are finite-dimensional pairwise non-
isomorphic simple nonzero A-modules. Prove that the functions
A −→ C
a 7−→ tr(a : Vi → Vi )
are linearly independent over C.
8.10. Let (π1 , V1 ), . . . , (πn , Vn ) be a finite set of irreducible admissible rep-

resentations of G(F ) such that πi ∼ = πj if and only if i = j. Let K ≤ G(F )
be a compact open subgroup such that V1K 6= 0. Show that there exists an
f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F ) // K) such that π1 (f )|V1K is the identity and πi (f ) = 0 if
1 < i ≤ n.
8.11. Without using the Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification, prove that an

unramified irreducible admissible representation of GLn (F ) is tempered if
and only if its Satake parameters have complex norm 1.
8.12. Suppose that π is a supercuspidal representation of G(F ). Show that

there exists a function fπ ∈ Cc∞ (G(F )) such that tr π(fπ ) = 1 and if
tr π 0 (fπ ) 6= 0 for some irreducible admissible representation π 0 of G(F ) then
π∼ = π 0 ⊗ χ for some character χ : ZG (F ) → C× .
8.13. Let (π, V ) be an admissible representation of a td group G. Prove that

the space of smooth endomorphisms Endsm (V ) is an admissible representa-
tion of G × G.
8.14. Prove (8.23).

0
8.15. In the notation of §8.4, whow that if J(σ a , λa ) and J(σ 0a , λa0 ) are both
square integrable (not just essentially square integrable) then they are not
linked.
Chapter 9
The Cuspidal Spectrum
God exists since mathematics is

consistent, and the Devil exists
since we cannot prove it.
Andre Weil
Abstract The cuspidal spectrum of L2 ([G]) decomposes discretely into a

Hilbert space direct sum with finite multiplicities. We give a complete proof
of this fact in this chapter.
9.1 Introduction
Let G be a reductive group over a global field F . For x ∈ G(AF )1 , one has
the operator
R(x) : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G]) (9.1)

ϕ 7→ (g 7→ ϕ(gx)) .
This defines the regular representation of G(AF )1 ) on L2 ([G]). For a smooth

version, one considers the integral operator
R(f ) : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G]) (9.2)

Z !
ϕ 7→ g 7→ f (x)ϕ(gx)dx ,
G(AF )1
where f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ). Later in this book we will be interested in various

notions of the trace for operators of this type. There is a problem, however,
in that in general R(f ) does not have a well-defined trace. Instead, one re-
stricts the operator to the cuspidal subspace of Definition 6.9 and proves
173
174 9 The Cuspidal Spectrum
that this restriction is of trace class. One is then left with understanding the
complement of the cuspidal subspace; this is possible thanks to the theory of
Eisenstein series which will be discussed in Chapter 10.
Before stating the main theorems of this chapter we pause and explain
what one means by a trace in this infinite-dimensional setting.
Definition 9.1. Let V be a Hilbert space. A linear operator A : V → V is

Hilbert-Schmidt if there is an orthonormal basis (ϕi )∞
i=1 of V such that
∞
X
kAϕi k22 < ∞.
i=1
The operator A : V → V is of trace class if there is an orthonormal basis

(ϕi )∞
i=1 of V such that
X∞
kAϕi k2 < ∞.
i=0
If A is Hilbert-Schmidt we let
∞
X ∞
X
kAkHS = kAϕi k22 and kAktr = kAϕi k2 . (9.3)
i=1 i=1
This is known as the Hilbert-Schmidt norm (resp. trace norm) of A. If

A is of trace class we define its trace to be
∞
X
tr A := (Aϕi , ϕi ).
i=1
The Hilbert-Schmidt norm, trace norm, and trace, are independent of the
choice of basis ϕ (Exercise 9.1).
For the reader’s convenience we recall Definition 6.9:
Definition 9.2. A function ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]) is cuspidal if for every parabolic

subgroup P ≤ G with unipotent radical NP one has
Z
ϕ(ug)du = 0
[NP ]
for almost every g ∈ G(AF )1 .
Our aim in this chapter is to prove the following fundamental theorem:
Theorem 9.1.1 (Gelfand and Piatetski-Shapiro) The subspace
L2cusp ([G]) ≤ L2 ([G])
is closed and Rcusp (f ) is of trace class for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ).

Here Rcusp (f ) is the restriction of R(f ) to the cuspidal subspace. As a fairly

straightforward consequence we will prove the following corollary in §9.3:
Corollary 9.1.2 The subspace L2cusp ([G]) decomposes into a Hilbert space
direct sum of irreducible representations of G(AF )1 , each occurring with finite
multiplicity.
In other words we can write
L2cusp ([G]) = ⊕
b π L2cusp (π), (9.4)
where the sum is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic repre-

sentations of AG \G(AF ) and the multiplicity of π in L2cusp (π) is finite. It
does not matter if we take this to mean automorphic representations in the
L2 -sense or with the refined definition of Chapter 6; see §9.8 below.
Let
L2disc ([G]) ≤ L2 ([G]) (9.5)
denote the discrete spectrum. It is defined as in (3.14). It is the Hilbert space

direct sum of all irreducible subrepresentations of L2 ([G]). An automorphic
representation of G(AF )1 is discrete if it can be realized as subrepresentation
of L2disc ([G]). This is equivalent to it being a subrepresentation of L2 ([G])
and not merely a subquotient. Thus cuspidal representations are discrete by
Corollary 9.1.2, but the converse is false. A far more difficult theorem than
Corollary 9.1.2 is the following:
Theorem 9.1.3 Assume F is a number field. The restriction of R(f ) to the
full discrete spectrum of L2 ([G]) is of trace class. t
u
Müller [Mül89] first proved the theorem in the special case where f is finite
under a maximal compact subgroup K∞ ≤ G(F∞ ). Ji [Ji98] and Müller
[Mül98] then independently removed this assumption.
For the proof of theorem 9.1.1 we will follow [God66] and fill in some
details in his presentation using results from [Bor97]. These two references
proceed classically whereas we will proceed adelically. This leads to some
simplifications (mostly notational) because one can work with rational points
of groups instead of integral points of groups. We remark that the reader
should feel free to skip the remainder of this chapter and refer back to it as
necessary; for the most part one can get by just knowing the statement of
Theorem 9.1.1 and Corollary 9.1.2.
9.2 The cuspidal subspace
We begin with the easiest part of Theorem 9.1.1:

Lemma 9.2.1 The space L2cusp ([G]) is closed in L2 ([G]).

A direct proof of the lemma is possible; see [Bor97, Proposition 8.2]. In-
stead we will prove a stronger result which will give us an opportunity to
discuss Poincaré series. To keep straight the techniques used in the proof we
do not assume that G is reductive or even connected; any affine algebraic
group over a global field will do. Thus we recall the adelic quotient
[G] = G(F )\G(AF )1
as in (2.12). Let H ≤ G be a subgroup and let
e F ) := H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 .
H(A
Assume that H(F )\H(Ae F ) is compact and let χ : H(A e F ) → C× be a char-

acter trivial on H(F ). The fact that H(F )\H(A
e F ) is compact implies that
H(AF ) is unimodular (see Exercise 9.6); we let dh be a choice of Haar measure
e
on it.
For continuous functions ϕ : [G] → C we let
Z
Pχ (ϕ) := ϕ(h)χ(h)dh. (9.6)
H(F )\H(A
f F)
This is an example of a period integral. It is absolutely convergent since

H(F )\H(A
e F ) is compact.
We consider the subspace
V := ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]) : Pχ (R(g)ϕ) = 0 for almost every g ∈ G(AF )1 ,

where R is defined as (9.1). We will show that V is closed:

Proposition 9.2.2 The subspace V ≤ L2 ([G]) is closed.
The proof of Proposition 9.2.2 will be given at the end of this section. As a
corollary of proposition 9.2.2 it is easy to obtain Lemma 9.2.1:
Proof of Lemma 9.2.1: For parabolic subgroups P ≤ G with unipotent radical

NP let VP be the space V of Proposition 9.2.2 in the special case where
H = NP and χ is the trivial character. Then
\
L2cusp ([G]) = VP .
P
Thus L2cusp ([G]), being the intersection of closed subspaces, is closed. 2

For f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 )we consider the kernel function
X
Kf (x, y) = f (x−1 γy). (9.7)
γ∈G(F )
These functions will be revisited in §16.1 below; there we will prove that they
are absolutely convergent and define smooth functions on G(AF )1 . We define
the Poincaré series
Z
Péf (g) := Péf,H,χ (g) := Kf (h, g)χ(h)dh. (9.8)
H(F )\H(A
f F)
Since H(F )\H(A

e F ) is compact the integral converges absolutely. If G is con-
nected and reductive, H = N is the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup
and χ is a generic character of N (AF ) in the sense of §11.2 below, then this
coincides with the Poincaré series studied in many places, including [Fri87]
and [Ste87].
Lemma 9.2.3 One has Péf ∈ L2 ([G]).
Proof. One has that

 
Z X
Péf (g)Péf (g) =  f (h1 γ1 g)χ(h1 )dh1  (9.9)
H(F )\H(A
f F)
γ1 ∈G(F )
 
Z X
× f (h2 γ2 g)χ(h2 )dh2  .
H(F )\H(A
f F)
γ2 ∈G(F )
Choose a fundamental domain F for H(F )\H(A

e F ). Then
Z
fe(g) := f (hg)χ(h)dh ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ). (9.10)
F
Thus from (9.9) and (9.10), we obtain that

 
Z Z X X
Péf (g)Péf (g)dg =  fe(γ1 g) fe(γ2 g) dg.
[G] [G] γ1 ∈G(F ) γ2 ∈G(F )
P
Since γ∈G(F ) fe(γg) is a compactly supported continuous function on [G],
this integral converges. t
u
In the proof of the next lemma we will encounter for the first time the
trivial, but useful, technique known as unfolding. We formalize this in the
following lemma, the proof of which is an application Theorem 3.2.2:
Lemma 9.2.4 Suppose that G is a Hausdorff, locally compact, second count-
able topological group with right Haar measure dg. If f ∈ L1 (G) and Γ ≤ G
is a discrete subgroup such that the modular character of G is trivial on Γ
then
Z X Z
f (γg)dg = f (g)dg.
Γ \G γ∈Γ G
t
u
Here in the lemma we have denoted also by dg the right G-invariant measure
on Γ \G induced by dg. Use this technique, we prove the following lemma.
Lemma 9.2.5 One has
Z
Péf (g)ϕ(g)dg = Pχ (R(f )ϕ).
[G]
Proof. Let ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]). Then by Lemma 9.2.3 the integral

Z
Péf (g)ϕ(g)dg
[G]
is absolutely convergent. It is equal to

Z Z
Kf (h, g)χ(h)dhϕ(g)dg.
[G] H(F )\H(A
f F)
Manipulating formally, we have

Z Z
Kf (h, g)χ(h)dhϕ(g)dg
[G] H(F )\H(A
f F)
Z Z !
= Kf (h, g)ϕ(g)dg χ(h)dh
H(F )\H(A
f F) [G]
Z Z !
= f (g)ϕ(hg)dg χ(h)dh.
H(F )\H(A
f F) G(AF )1
Here in the last equality we have unfolded as in Lemma 9.2.4 to deduce that
Z Z
Kf (h, g)ϕ(g)dg = f (g)ϕ(hg)dg. (9.11)
[G] G(AF )1
The integral on the right converges absolutely and defines a continuous func-
tion of h. Combining this with the compactness of H(F )\H(A e F ) and domi-
nated convergence we deduce that our formal manipulations above are justi-
fied. t
u
Given our preparation, the proof of Proposition 9.2.2 is now straightfor-

ward:
Proof of Proposition 9.2.2: Each f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) gives rise to a linear form
(·, Péf ) on L2 ([G]). It is continuous by Lemma 9.2.3. In view of Lemma 9.2.5
9.3 Deduction of the discreteness of the spectrum 179
the space V is the intersection over all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) of the kernels of
these linear forms. 2
9.3 Deduction of the discreteness of the spectrum
We now explain how to deduce the discreteness of the spectrum in Corollary

9.1.2 from the assertion that certain operators are of trace class in Theorem
9.1.1. As in the previous section, we do not yet assume that G is reductive.
A Dirac sequence on G(AF )1 is a sequence of nonnegative (real valued)
functions fn ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) indexed by n ∈ Z>0 such that
(a) For any open neighborhood U 3 1 in G(AF )1 with compact closure the
support of fn is contained in U for n large enough.
(b) One has fn (x−1 ) = fn (x).
(c) One has Z
fn (x)dx = 1
G(AF )1
for all n.
It is not difficult to see that a Dirac sequence on G(AF )1 exists (Exercise
9.7). They are known as Dirac sequences because for representations (R, V )
of G(AF )1 and ϕ ∈ V one has R(fn )ϕ → ϕ as n → ∞ (Exercise 9.8). We also
note that if fn is a Dirac sequence and (R, V ) is a unitary representation of
G(AF )1 then R(fn ) is self-adjoint for every n by condition (b).
We recall that an operator T on an infinite dimensional Hilbert space V
is compact if and only if it can be written as
∞
X
T = λn hϕn , ·iϕ0n (9.12)
n=1
operator where {ϕn }n>0 , {ϕ0n }n>0 are orthonormal sequences of vectors in
V and {λn }n>0 ⊂ C is a sequence of numbers such that limn→∞ λn = 0. If
T is self-adjoint, then we can take ϕn = ϕ0n , and in particular in this case T
has an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors. A nice reference is [Zhu93, §1.3].
Lemma 9.3.1 Let (R, V ) be a unitary representation of G(AF )1 . Assume
that there is a Dirac sequence {fn } on G(AF )1 such that R(fn ) is compact
for all n. Then (R, V ) decomposes into a Hilbert space direct sum of irre-
ducible closed G(AF )1 -invariant representations of G(AF )1 , each with finite
multiplicities.
Proof. The following is an adaptation of the proof of [Bor97, Lemma 16.1]:

We first show that a closed G(AF )1 -invariant nonzero subspace W ≤ V
contains a closed G(AF )1 -invariant subspace that is minimal among nonzero
closed G(AF )1 -invariant subspaces. Let W be a closed G(AF )1 -invariant sub-

space. Clearly there exists a j such that R(fj )|W 6= 0. Let λ be a nonzero
eigenvalue of R(fj ) in W and let Eλ 6= 0 be the corresponding finite dimen-
sional eigenspace in W . Let M be a minimal element among the nonzero
intersections of Eλ with the closed G-invariant subspaces of W ; such an el-
ement exists because Eλ is finite-dimensional. Let ϕ ∈ M \ {0} and let P
be the smallest closed G(AF )1 -invariant subspace containing ϕ. By construc-
tion, P ∩ Eλ = M . We claim that P is a minimal closed G(AF )1 -invariant
subspace of W . Let Q be a closed G(AF )1 -invariant subspace of P and Q⊥
be its orthogonal complement in P . Then P = Q ⊕ Q⊥ . The spaces P , Q, Q⊥
and Eλ are invariant under R(fj ), hence M = P ∩Eλ = (Q∩Eλ )⊕(Q⊥ ∩Eλ ).
Therefore, either M = Q ∩ Eλ with P = Q and Q⊥ = 0 or M = Q⊥ ∩ Eλ
with P = Q⊥ and Q = 0.
Next, we prove that (R, V ) has a discrete decomposition into closed ir-
reducible G(AF )1 -invariant subspaces. Let S be the set consisting of the
nonzero closed G(AF )1 -invariant subspaces admitting a discrete decomposi-
tion. Then S is not empty by the prior claim. This set is partially ordered
by the relation X ≤ Y if the space of X is contained in that of Y . Let W
be the space given by a maximal element. If W 6= V , then we could add to
W a minimal closed nonzero G(AF )1 -invariant subspace in the orthogonal
complement of W , which exists by the previous claim. This contradiction
implies that W = V .
Finally, we will show that the multiplicities are finite. Let π be an irre-
ducible unitary representation occurring in V and let mπ be its multiplicity.
Let j be such that π(fj ) is not zero on the speace of π, let λ be a nonzero
eigenvalue of π(fj ) and mλ be its multiplicity. Then the dimension of the
eigenspace of R(fj ) in V with eigenvalue λ is finite and is at least mλ mπ .
Therefore mπ is finite. t
u
In view of Lemma 9.2.1 and Lemma 9.3.1, to prove Theorem 9.1.1 it suffices
to show that Rcusp (f ) is compact for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ). The following
lemma gives us a criteria for compacity:
Lemma 9.3.2 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ). Let V ≤ L2 ([G]) be a closed G(AF )1 -
invariant subspace. Assume one has an estimate
kR(f )ϕk∞ f kϕk2
for all ϕ ∈ V . Then the operator R(f )|V is of trace class, hence Hilbert-
Schmidt, hence compact.
The assertions that trace class implies Hilbert-Schmidt implies compact are
left as Exercise 9.3. In the lemma and below k·k∞ denotes the uniform norm.
Proof. This follows from the argument of the proof of [Bor97, Theorem 9.5]
which we will recall here: For given x ∈ G(AF )1 , the assumption implies that
9.3 Deduction of the discreteness of the spectrum 181
the map ϕ 7→ R(f )ϕ(x) is a continuous linear form on V . Hence by the Riesz
representation theorem there exists an element KR(f ),x ∈ V such that
Z
R(f )ϕ(x) = KR(f ),x (y)ϕ(y)dy
[G]
for all ϕ ∈ V . Taking ϕ = KR(f ),x we obtain
kKR(f ),x k22 ≤ kR(f )KR(f ),x k∞ f kKR(f ),x k2
so it follows that kKR(f ),x k2 ≤ C for some constant C > 0. Write
KR(f ) (x, y) := KR(f ),x (y)
for x, y ∈ [G]. Then

Z Z Z Z !
2
|KR(f ) (x, y)| dxdy = KR(f ),x (y)KR(f ),x (y)dy dx
[G] [G] [G] [G]
Z
2
≤C dx
[G]
is finite and Z
R(f )ϕ(x) = KR(f ) (x, y)ϕ(y)dy
[G]
for ϕ ∈ V . Therefore the operator R(f ) on V is represented by an L2 -kernel.

This implies that it is Hilbert-Schmidt (see Exercise 9.4).
It follows from the Dixmier Malliavin lemma (Theorem 4.2.5) that f is a
finite linear combination of convolutions f1 ∗ f2 with f1 , f2 ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 )
(Exercise 9.9). Therefore R(f ) is a finite linear combination of convolutions
of two Hilbert-Schmidt operators and hence is of trace class (see Exercise
9.2). t
u
In view of lemmas 9.3.1 and 9.3.2, to prove Theorem 9.1.1 it suffices to

prove that for f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) one has an estimate
kR(f )ϕk∞ f kϕk2 (9.13)
for ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]). This estimate is really the heart of the proof. In the func-
tion field case we will be able to deduce something much stronger, and in the
number field case we derive it using the argument of [God66]. It is only in
this part of the proof where we use the assumption that G is reductive. We
have been careful in isolating when this assumption is used for two reasons.
First, it is helpful to see at what point the argument passes from abstract
representation theory to something that uses the specific structure of the
adelic quotient in the reductive case. Second, there ought to be a notion of
a cuspidal representation on more general groups than those that are reduc-
tive, but we do not know the natural level of generality. We feel that this
is an interesting research problem. One example that has been worked out
reasonably thoroughly is the case where G is the Jacobi group, a semi-direct
product of SL2 and the three-dimensional Heisenberg group [BS98, §4.2]. The
work in [Sli84] is probably relevant here as well.
9.4 The function field case
Assume for this section that F is a function field and that G is reductive.
The asymptotic behavior of cuspidal functions is much simpler in this case
than their behavior in the number field case.
Theorem 9.4.1 (Harder) Let ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]) be a function that is invari-
ant under the compact open subgroup K 0 ≤ G(AF )1 . Then ϕ(x) = 0 for x
outside a compact subset of [G] that depends only on K 0 .
Before proving this theorem let us indicate how it can be used to prove
Theorem 9.1.1 in the function field case.
Proof of Theorem 9.1.1 (for function field): Let f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ). As ex-
plained in more detail in §16.1 the operator
R(f ) : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G])
is represented by the kernel

X
Kf (x, y) := f (x−1 γy).
γ∈G(F )
It is not hard to see that this function is continuous as a function of (x, y) ∈

[G] × [G] (for more details see §16.1). Thus for any compact subset Ω ⊆ [G]
the restriction of Kf (x, y) to Ω × Ω is in L2 (Ω × Ω), and hence is a Hilbert-
Schmidt operator.
Now there is a compact open subgroup K ≤ G(AF )1 such that f ∈
∞
Cc (G(AF )1 // K). Thus for any ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([Q]) such that R(f )ϕ 6= 0 one
has ϕ ∈ L2 ([G])K . Using Theorem 9.4.1 choose a compact subset Ω ⊂ [G]
such that any element of L2cusp ([G])K is supported in Ω. In other words,
R(f )|L2cusp ([G]) = R(f )|L2 (Ω)∩L2cusp ([G]) .
Now R(f )|L2 (Ω) is Hilbert-Schmidt, so its restriction to the closed subspace
L2 (Ω) ∩ L2cusp ([G]) of L2 (Ω) is also Hilbert-Schmidt (see Exercise 9.5).
Thus we have proven that R(f ) : L2cusp ([G]) → L2cusp ([G]) is Hilbert-
Schmidt. On the other hand, every f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) is a finite linear com-
Pk
bination of convolutions: f = i=1 hi1 ∗ hi2 where hij ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) (see
9.4 The function field case 183
Exercise 9.9). We deduce that

k
X
R(f ) = R(hi1 ) ∗ R(hi2 ).
i=1
This says that R(f ) is a finite sum of convolutions of two Hilbert-Schmidt

operators, and hence is of trace class (Exercise 9.2). 2
We now begin the proof of Theorem 9.4.1. We follow Harder’s original
proof [Har74]. Let P = M N be a minimal parabolic subgroup of G and let
H be a maximal torus torus of Gder contained in M . Thus T := ZG T0 is
a maximal torus of G. Fix Ω ⊆ M (AF )N (AF ), t ∈ R>0 and a maximal
compact subgroup K ≥ K 0 and let S(t) be the corresponding Siegel set as
in (2.16). We assume that Ω and K are chosen so that for t sufficiently small
one has
AG G(F )S(t) = G(AF );
this is possible by Theorem 2.7.2.
Let Φ+ be the set of positive roots of the split maximal torus T ≤ M
acting on N . For each simple root α ∈ ∆, let
Φ+
α ⊂Φ
+
mα0 α0 with mα > 0.

P
be the set of roots of T in G of the form λ = α0
Moreover let
n(Φ+
α ) := ⊕λ∈Φ+ n .
α λ
(9.14)
It is clear that this is an ideal in n. Let N (Φ+ α ) / N be the closed connected

subgroup of N with Lie algebra n(Φ+ α ). It is the unipotent radical of a maximal
parabolic subgroup of G containing P .
Lemma 9.4.2 If t > 0 is chosen sufficiently large, then for any h ∈ S(t)
one has
0 −1
N (Φ+ +
α )(F )(N (Φα )(AF ) ∩ hK h ) = N (Φ+α )(AF ).
Proof. Temporarily denote by p the residual characteristic of F . Observe that

for any open subset ω ⊂ AF there is a constant cω such that if a ∈ A×
F satisfies
|a| ≥ pcω then F + aω = AF . Write
Y
N (Φ+α) = Nλ
λ∈Φ+
α
where τλ : Ga −→N˜ λ is a one-parameter subgroup with Lie Nλ = nλ . Then

Nλ (AF )∩hK 0 h−1 ⊂ Nλ (AF ) is a compact open subgroup for any h ∈ G(AF ).
Thus by our observation one has Nλ (F )(Nλ (AF ) ∩ hK 0 h−1 ) = Nλ (AF ) for
h ∈ S(t) if t is sufficiently large.
We now wish to complete the proof using an inductive argument. For

this purpose choose an ordering of the set of positive roots Φ+ that gives a
total ordering on Φ+
α with respect to which the simple roots are positive. For
λ0 ∈ Φ+α , let Y
N (α, λ0 ) := Nλ .
λ∈Φ+
α :λ≥λ
0
We have that N (Φ+ N (α, λ), i.e. N (Φ+

S
α ) := λ∈Φ+
α α ) is an increasing chain of
products of the Nλ . We can now apply induction to deduce the lemma. t u
0
Proof of Theorem 9.4.1: Let ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G])K . Choose t0 > 0 and a Siegel
set S(t0 ) := ΩAT0 (t0 )K so that AG G(F )S(t0 ) = G(AF ).
Choose t > t0 so that the conclusion of Lemma 9.4.2 holds. Then for
h ∈ S(t) the function
N (Φ+
α )(AF ) −→ C
n 7−→ ϕ(nh)
is left invariant under N (Φ+ +

α )(F ) and right invariant under N (Φα )(AF ) ∩
0 −1
hK h . Thus by Lemma 9.4.2 it is constant. On the other hand N (Φ+ α ) is
the unipotent radical of a proper parabolic subgroup of G and we obtain
Z
0= ϕ(nh)dn = measdn ([N (Φ+ α )])ϕ(h)
[N (Φ+
α )]
so ϕ(h) = 0. Thus ϕ vanishes on S(t) for sufficiently large t. The theorem

follows. 2
9.5 Estimates for the Fourier transform of the kernel
We now assume that G is reductive. Our aim is prove (9.13). To motivate

the approach, let’s consider the case G = GL2 over Q. To make things as
concrete as possible, we assume that
ϕ : [G] → C
is a smooth cuspidal function invariant under O2 (R)GL2 (Z);

b in this case we
can identify ϕ with a function
ϕ : SL2 (Z)\H −→ C
(compare (2.14), (6.11)). We can choose a fundamental domain for SL2 (Z)
contained in the Siegel set
9.5 Estimates for the Fourier transform of the kernel 185

1
z ∈ H : Im(z) > , 0 ≤ Re(z) ≤ 1 (9.15)
2
by Exercise 2.15. Thus it suffices to bound ϕ in this region. Let B ≤ GL2 be

the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices and NB ≤ B the unipotent
radical of B. Then ϕ is invariant under NB (Z) on the left, which is to say
that it is invariant under z 7→ z + 1. Thus it can be expanded in a Fourier
series
X∞
ϕ(z) = an e2πinz .
n=1
The key point here is that cuspidality implies that only positive n contribute.
Since ϕ is continuous the an are bounded and this allows one to deduce (9.13)
in this case. In the discussion above we have used Fourier analysis on
Z\R ∼
= NB (Z)\NB (R)
to establish (9.13). The general case follows this basic outline, using Fourier
analysis on the unipotent radical of a minimal parabolic subgroup.
We now begin our discussion of the general case, so we let G be a reductive
connected group over a number field F . By applying Weil restriction of scalars
we can and do assume F = Q. Let P be a fixed minimal parabolic subgroup
of G with Levi decomposition P = M N (N being the unipotent radical). Let
T ≤ M be a maximal split torus and let T0 ≤ Gder a split torus such that
T0 ZG = T . The exponential map induces an isomorphism of affine schemes
over Q:
exp : n −→ N.
Here as usual n denotes the Lie algebra of N and we are viewing n as an
affine space over F , isomorphic to Gdima
Fn
. Note that we are not claiming
that the exponential map is an isomorphism with respect to any sort of
group structure.
Any element ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]) is left-invariant under G(Q). Thus for f ∈
∞
Cc (G(AQ )1 ) we can write
Z
R(f )ϕ(x) = f (x−1 y)ϕ(y)dy (9.16)
G(AQ )1
Z X
= f (x−1 γy)dyϕ(m)dm
N (Q)\G(AQ )1 γ∈N (Q)
Z
= Kf,P (x, y)ϕ(y)dy
N (Q)\G(AQ )1
where for x, y ∈ G(AQ ) we set

X X
Kf,P (x, y) = f (x−1 γy) = f (x−1 exp(η)y). (9.17)
γ∈N (Q) η∈nP (Q)
We view nP as an affine abelian algebraic group over Q with addition as the

law of composition. In particular,
[nP ] := nP (Q)\nP (AQ )
is an abelian group. We note that for fixed x, y ∈ G(AQ ) the function
η 7→ f (x−1 exp(η)y)
is smooth on nP (AQ ). Let ψ : Q\AQ → C× be a nontrivial character and let
h , i : nP × nP −→ Ga
be a perfect pairing (over Q). Then by Poisson summation one has

X Z
Kf,P (x, y) = f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn (9.18)
η∈nP (Q) nP (AQ )
for an appropriate choice of (additive) Haar measure nP (AQ ). For a primer

on Poisson summation over global fields see Appendix B.
Using the Iwasawa decomposition (2.15) we write a general element of
G(AQ )1 as
y = uy my sy ky
with (uy , my , sy , ky ) ∈ N (AQ ) × M (AQ )1 × AT0 (t) × K for some t > 0. We
shall denote
S(t) = ΩN .ΩM .AT0 (t).K
a fixed Siegel domain in G(AQ ). Here ΩN and ΩM are fixed compact subsets
of N (AQ ) and M (AQ )1 , respectively.
Lemma 9.5.1 Assume x ∈ S(t). Then s−1
x x lies in a compact subset of
G(AQ ) depending only on S(t).
Proof. If x ∈ S(t) we have
x ∈ ΩN ΩM sx K = ΩN sx ΩM K.
for some compact subsets ΩN ⊂ N (AQ ), ΩM ⊂ M (AQ )1 . Here we are using

the fact that sx commutes with M (AQ ).
As x varies over S(t) one has that s−1
x ΩN sx lies in a compact subset of
N (AQ ) (see Exercise 9.10). Thus x ∈ sx ΩG for some compact subset ΩG of
G(AQ )1 . t
u
Lemma 9.5.2 Fix a compact subset ΩN ⊂ N (AQ ). Assume that x ∈ S(t)

and y ∈ ΩN M (AQ )1 K. If
f (x−1 γy) 6= 0
9.5 Estimates for the Fourier transform of the kernel 187
for some γ ∈ N (F ) then x−1 sx and s−1x y lie in compact subsets of G(AQ )
1
depending only on the support of f and on ΩN . Moreover my lies in a compact

subset of M (AQ )1 that depends only on the support of f and on ΩN .
Proof. Since x ∈ S(t) one has by Lemma 9.5.1 that x ∈ sx ΩG for some
compact subset ΩG of G(AQ )1 depending only on the Siegel set S(t). We can
take ΩG to be invariant under g 7→ g −1 and then it follows that x−1 ∈ ΩG s−1
x .
Now if f (x−1 γy) 6= 0 then x−1 γy lies in a compact subset ΩG of G(AQ )1
depending only on f . By our earlier considerations we see that upon enlarging
ΩG if necessary
s−1 −1 −1
x γy = sx γuy sx sx my sy ky ∈ ΩG (9.19)
and hence (again enlarging ΩG if necessary) s−1 −1

x γuy sx my sx sy ∈ ΩG .
We deduce that my lies in a compact subset ΩM ≤ M (AQ )1 and s−1x sy lies
in a compact subset of AT0 (t) depending only on f and ΩN . Using Lemma
9.5.1 we deduce that s−1 1
x y lies in a compact subset of G(AQ ) depending only
on f, ΩN . t
u
Let Φ be the set of roots of T in G. The choice of simple roots ∆ yields a

set of positive roots Φ+ . Choose a norm
k·kn
on the the real vector space n(R).

Proposition 9.5.3 Assume that y ∈ ΩN M (AQ )KM for some fixed compact
subset ΩN ⊂ N (AQ ). Let B > 0. There is a compact subset Ωn∞ ⊂ n(A∞
Q )
such that for any λ ∈ Φ+ and x ∈ S(t) one has
Z
f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ (hη, ni) dn
n(AQ )
n 1 Ωn
B,ΩN kηk−B −B
∞ (η)δP (sx )supλ(sx ) ,
where the supremum is taken over among λ such that
hη, ·i|n(λ) 6= 0.
Proof. One has

Z
f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
Z
= f (x−1 sx exp(Ad(s−1 −1
x )n)sx y)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
Z
= δP (sx ) f (x−1 sx exp(n)s−1
x y)ψ(hη, Ad(sx )ni)dn.
n(AQ )
Using Lemma 9.5.2 and integration by parts at the infinite place we conclude
that for all B > 0
Z
x )ηkn 1Ωn
f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn δP (sx )kAd∨ (s−1 −B
∞ (η).
n(AQ )
The proposition follows. t

u
For each simple root α ∈ ∆, let
Φ+
α ⊂Φ
+
mα0 α0 with mα > 0.

P
be the set of roots of T in G of the form λ = α0
Moreover let
n(Φ+
α ) := ⊕λ∈Φ+ n .
α λ
(9.20)
It is clear that this is an ideal in n. Let N (Φ+ α ) / N be the closed connected

subgroup of N with Lie algebra n(Φ+ α ). It is the unipotent radical of a maximal
parabolic subgroup of G containing P .
Lemma 9.5.4 Let α ∈ ∆, and assume that hη, ·i is trivial on n(Φα ). Then
Z
y 7−→ f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
is left invariant under multiplication by N (Φ+

α ).
Proof. Let n ∈ n(AQ ) and u ∈ N (Φ+

α ). One has
exp(n)u = exp(n + w(n, u))
for some w(n, u) ∈ n(AQ ) by the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula. As men-

tioned above, n(Φ+ α ) is an ideal in n. Thus since w(n, u) is given in terms of
commutators of n and u one has w(n, u) ∈ n(Φ+ α ). Thus
Z
f (x−1 exp(n)uy)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
Z
= f (x−1 exp(n + w(n, u))y)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
Z
= f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, n − w(n, u)i)d(n − w(n, u))
n(AQ )
Z
= f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn.
n(AQ )
t
u
9.6 The basic estimate 189
9.6 The basic estimate
The main result of this section is the following proposition:

Proposition 9.6.1 Let ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]). Then for any f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AQ )1 ) and
any B ∈ R>0 one has
|Rcusp (f )ϕ(x)| f,B maxα∈∆ (α(sx ))−B kϕk2
for x ∈ S(t).
Combined with Lemma 9.3.1 and Lemma 9.3.2 this completes the proof
of Theorem 9.1.1.
Proof. Using (9.16) and (9.18) we obtain

Z
R(f )ϕ(x) = Kf,P (x, y)ϕ(y)dy (9.21)
N (Q)\G(A)1
 
Z X Z
=  f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn ϕ(y)dy.
N (Q)\G(AQ )1 η∈n(Q) n(AQ )
To prove the proposition it suffices to provide a bound

 
Z X Z
 f (ux−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn ϕ(y)dy
N (Q)\G(AQ )1 η∈n(Q) n(AQ )
f,B δP (sx )α(sx )−B kϕk2
for each α ∈ ∆.
Now if η ∈ n(Q) has the property that hη, ·i is identically zero on n(Φ+
α)
then Z
y 7−→ f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn
n(AQ )
is left-invariant under N (Φ+

α ) by Lemma 9.5.4. Thus for such an η
Z Z !
−1
measdu ([N (Φ+
α )]) f (x exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn ϕ(y)dy
N (Q)\G(AQ )1 n(AQ )
Z Z Z !
−1
= f (x exp(n)uy)ψ(hη, ni)dn ϕ(y)dȳdu
[N (Φ+
α )] N (Q)\G(AQ )1 n(AQ )
Z Z Z !
= f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn ϕ(u−1 y)du dȳ
N (Q)\G(AQ )1 n(AQ ) [N (Φ+
α )]
=0
by cuspidality of ϕ. Here we are using the fact that [N (Φ+ α )] is compact

to justifying manipulating the integrals. Thus in (9.21) one can omit the
summands indexed by those η for which hη, ·i is identically zero on n(Φ+ α ).
Recall that we have assumed x ∈ S(t). Thus for an η such that hη, ·i is not
identically zero on n(Φ+α ) we can apply Proposition 9.5.3 to see that there is
a compact subset Ωn∞ ⊂ n(A∞ Q ) such that for any B > 0 one has
Z
f (x−1 exp(n)y)ψ(hη, ni)dn kηk−Bn 1 Ωn
−B
∞ (η)δP (sx )α(sx ) .
n(AQ )
Here we have replaced the supremum of Proposition 9.5.3 by α because the

other possiblePweights can only make the bound smaller.
Note that η∈n(Q) kηk−B n 1 Ωn∞ (η) is bounded for B sufficiently large. Thus
for B sufficiently large one can sum over η and apply Lemma 9.5.2 to obtain
a bound Z
−B
R(f )ϕ(x) δP (sx )α(sx ) ϕ(y)dy
sx ΩG
1
where ΩG ⊂ G(AQ ) is a dy measurable compact set. By the Cauchy-
Schwartz inequality this is bounded by
Z 1/2
−B 1/2 2
δP (sx )α(sx ) measdy (ΩN sx ΩG ) |ϕ(y)| dy . (9.22)
ΩN sx ΩG
One has
Z 1/2
2
|ϕ(y)| dy kϕk2 (9.23)
ΩN sx ΩG
and
measdy (ΩN sx ΩG ) = measdy s−1 −1

x ΩN sx ΩG δ(sx ) .
Thus (9.22) is bounded by a constant times
1/2
δP (sx )α−B (sx )kϕk2
as required. t
u
9.7 Rapidly decreasing functions
The estimate of Proposition 9.6.1 for cuspidal functions motivates the follow-
ing definition:
ϕ : [G] −→ C
9.8 Cuspidal automorphic forms 191
is rapidly decreasing if it is smooth and for all compact subsets Ω ⊂ [G],

and t, B ∈ R>0 there is a constant C ∈ R>0 (depending on t, Ω and B) such
that one has
|ϕ(sy)| ≤ Cα(s)−B
for all s ∈ AT0 (t), y ∈ Ω, and α ∈ ∆.
Here we are using notation from our discussion of Siegel sets and reduction
theory in §2.7.
Using this terminology we see that Theorem 9.4.1 and Proposition 9.6.1
imply the following theorem:
Theorem 9.7.1 If f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) and ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]) then R(f )ϕ is
rapidly decreasing. t
u
Corollary 9.7.2 Any smooth ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]) is rapidly decreasing.

Here when we say that ϕ is smooth we mean that there is a compact open
subgroup K ≤ G(A∞ 2 K
F ) such that ϕ ∈ Lcusp ([G]) , and ϕ lies in the set of
2 K
vectors in Lcusp ([G]) that are smooth with respect to the action of G(F∞ )
in the sense of §4.2.
Proof. It suffices to show that such a ϕ can be written as a finite sum

X
ϕ= R(fi )ϕi
i
for some fi ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) and ϕi ∈ L2cusp ([G]). This follows from Theorem
4.2.4. t
u
9.8 Cuspidal automorphic forms
We now wish to prove Theorem 6.5.1, which is the statement that AA

cusp is a
G
dense subspace of L2cusp ([G]).

To prove this we first state the following result:
Theorem 9.8.1 An element of AA cusp is compactly supported in the function
G
field case and rapidly decreasing in the number field case. t

u
We refer to [MW95, §1.2.12] for the proof. It is similar to the proofs of
Theorem 9.4.1 and Proposition 9.6.1.
Let K = K∞ K ∞ ≤ G(AF ) be a maximal compact subgroup. We also
require the following lemma:
Lemma 9.8.2 Let (π, V ) be an irreducible unitary representation of AG \G(AF )
on a Hilbert space V . The subspace Vfin of K-finite vectors is dense. For every
ϕ ∈ Vfin there is an f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) such that π(f )ϕ = ϕ.
Proof. If F is a function field, then the density of Vfin in V follows from

Lemma 5.3.3. In this case every vector ϕ ∈ Vfin is fixed by a compact open
subgroup K 0 ≤ K, so π(1K 0 )ϕ = ϕ.
If F is a number field then we can write Vfin = V∞ ⊗ V ∞ where V∞ is an
irreducible admissible (g, K∞ )-module and V ∞ is an admissible irreducible
representation of G(A∞ F ). The density assertion is implied by Proposition
4.4.2 and Lemma 5.3.3. The fact that every element in Vfin is of the form
π(f )ϕ for some ϕ ∈ V is implied by the corresponding statements for V∞
and V ∞ . For V ∞ one proceeds as in the function field case. For V∞ it is a
general fact (mentioned already in §4.2) that every element of V∞ is of the
form π∞ (f )ϕ for some f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(F∞ ) and ϕ ∈ V∞ [DM78]. t
u
Proof of Theorem 6.5.1: By Theorem 9.8.1 an element of AA cusp is bounded.

G
AG 2
Since [G] has finite measure we deduce that Acusp ≤ Lcusp ([G]).
We now prove density. For a cuspidal automorphic representation π of
AG \G(AF ) let L2cusp (π) be the π-isotypic subspace of L2cusp ([G]). In view of
Corollary 9.1.2 it suffices to show that AA 2
cusp ∩ L (π) is dense in π.
G
∞
Let K = K∞ K be a maximal compact subgroup of G(AF ). We claim
that for each cuspidal automorphic representation π of AG \G(AF ) (in the L2
sense) the space of K-finite vectors in L2cusp (π) is exactly
AA 2
cusp ∩ Lcusp (π).
G
The space of K-finite vectors Vfin in L2cusp (π) is an admissible G(AF )-

representation in the function field case and an admissible (g, K∞ ) × G(A∞
F )-
module in the number field case. Moreover, in the number field case this
(g, K∞ )×G(A∞ F )-module admits an infinitesimal character by Schur’s lemma
(Lemma 4.1). Invoking Lemma 9.8.2, Theorem 9.4.1 and Proposition 9.6.1
we deduce the theorem. 2
Exercises
9.1. Prove that the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of a Hilbert-Schmidt operator is

independent of the choice of basis and the trace norm and trace of a trace-
class operator is independent of the choice of basis.
9.2. Prove that if A and B are Hilbert-Schmidt operators then A ◦ B is a

trace class operator.
9.3. Prove that a trace class operator is Hilbert-Schmidt and a Hilbert-

Schmidt operator is compact.
9.8 Cuspidal automorphic forms 193
9.4. Let (Y, µ) be a σ-finite measure space. Then L2 (Y, dµ) is a separable
Hilbert space. Let K(x, y) ∈ L2 (Y × Y, dµ × dµ). Prove that the operator
L2 (Y, dµ) −→ L2 (Y, dµ)

Z
ϕ 7−→ x 7→ K(x, y)ϕ(y)dµ(y)
Y
is Hilbert-Schmidt.
9.5. Let V be a Hilbert space and let A : V → V be a Hilbert-Schmidt

operator. Prove that the restriction of A to a closed subspace W ≤ V is also
a Hilbert-Schmidt operator.
9.6. Let G be a connected reductive group over a global field F and let
H ≤ G be a subgroup such that H(F )\H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 is compact. Prove
that H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 is unimodular.
9.7. Prove that a Dirac sequence on G(AF )1 exists.
9.8. If fn ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) is a Dirac sequence and (R, V ) is a representation

of G(AF )1 and ϕ ∈ V then
R(fn )ϕ −→ ϕ
as n → ∞.
9.9. Using Theorem 4.2.5 prove that every f ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ) can be written
as
r
X
f= f1r ∗ f2r (9.24)
i=1
for some integer r and some fij ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF )1 ).
9.10. With notation as in Lemma 9.5.1 prove that when x varies over S(t)
one has that s−1
x ΩN sx lies in a compact subset of N (AF ).
9.11. For n ≥ 1,let J := −I0 n I0n . For Q-algebras R let

Sp2n (R) = {g ∈ GL2n (R) : Jg −t J −1 = g}.
Let Hn be the set of n × n symmetric complex matrices Z = X + iY whose

imaginary part Y is positive definite (this is called Siegel’s upper-half space
of degree n). The group Sp2n (R) acts on Hn via
A B ) · Z = (AZ + B)(CZ + D)−1 .
(C D
Here A, B, C, D are n × n matrices.

(a) Show that Sp2n (R) acts transitively on Hn .

(b) Let B ⊂ Sp2n be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices. Com-
pute the image of the associated Siegel domain S(t) under
Sp2n (AQ ) −→ Sp2n (R) −→ Hn
for n = 1 and n = 2.
Chapter 10
Eisenstein Series
Langlands’ calculation of the

constant terms of Eisenstein
series was one of the most
influential computations of the
20th century.
E. Lapid
Abstract In this chapter we survey the theory of Eisenstein series. Our main
goal is to state Langlands’ decomposition of L2 ([G]).
10.1 Induced representations
In §8.1 we first mentioned the philosophy of cusp forms, a slogan coined

by Harish-Chandra [HC70a] that states that the irreducible representations
of a connected reductive group ought to all be obtained as subquotients of
cuspidal representations induced from Levi subgroups of parabolic subgroups.
This philosophy is in part based on the foundational results of Langlands
[Lan76] which we survey in this chapter. We largely follow [Art05, §7] in our
exposition. It is beyond the scope of this book to provide proofs. Indeed, whole
books have been devoted to solely to the theorems we state here [MW95].
We begin by setting notation for the induction of automorphic represen-
tations from Levi subgroups of G to G itself. Intertwining operators relating
such representations on different (but isomorphic) Levi subgroups are dis-
cussed in §10.2. Eisenstein series, defined in §10.3 allow one to prove that
these induced representations are again automorphic, and in §10.4 we use
Eisenstein series to give Langlands’ decomposition of L2 ([G]). In the case of
GLn all of this theory simplifies significantly. In particular, one can use it to
define an analogue of direct sums in the category of automorphic represen-
tations of general linear groups. This is discussed in §10.5 and 10.6. We end
195
196 10 Eisenstein Series
the chapter with a statement, in §10.7 of Moeglin and Waldspurger’s foun-

dational result which precisely describes the discrete spectrum of L2 ([GLn ])
in terms of cuspidal representations of smaller general linear groups.
Let G be a connected reductive group over a global field F with minimal
parabolic subgroup P0 ≤ G. As usual, parabolic subgroups containing P0 to
be standard. We fix Levi decompositions P0 = M0 N0 . There is then a unique
Levi decomposition
P = MN
for each standard parabolic subgroup P such that M contains M0 ; we always
use this Levi decomposition. In this global setting we pick a maximal compact
subgroup K ≤ G(AF ) in good position with respect to P0 (and hence all P )
and normalize the Haar measures dg on G(AF ), dk on K and d` p on P (AF )
so that
dg = d` pdk
(see Exercise 3.5). Let aM := Hom(X ∗ (M )F , R). We have a map
HM : M (AF ) −→ aM (10.1)
defined by
hHM (m), λi = log |λ(m)|
∗
for λ ∈ X (M )F . Using the Iwasawa decomposition G(AF ) = N (AF )M (AF )K
we define a morphism
HP : G(AF ) −→ aM
nmk 7−→ HM (m)
for (n, m, k) ∈ N (AF ) × M (AF ) × K.

Let (σ, V ) be an AM \M (AF )-subrepresentation of the discrete series
L2disc ([M ]) ≤ L2 ([M ]). The precise definition of the discrete series is given
in (3.14); it is the largest subspace of L2 ([M ]) that decomposes as a Hilbert
space direct sum of irreducible representations. We denote by Rdisc the re-
striction of the regular representation R of L2 ([M ]) to this subspace.
For λ ∈ a∗M C we then form a global induced representation
(I(σ, λ), IndG

P (V )).
Here IndG
P (V ) is the space of measurable functions
ϕ : N (AF )M (F )AM \G(AF ) −→ C
such that for all x ∈ G(AF ) the function
m 7→ ϕ(mx)
lies in V ≤ L2disc ([M ]) and such that

10.2 Intertwining operators 197
Z Z
kϕk2 = |ϕ(mk)|2 dmdk < ∞.
K AM M (F )\M (AF )
Thus IndG
P (V ) is a Hilbert space. The action is given by
I(σ, λ)(g)ϕ(x) = ϕ(xg)ehHP (xg),λ+ρP i e−hHP (x),λ+ρP i
where ρP ∈ a∗M is half the sum of the positive roots of a maximal split torus
of G contained in P ; of course we use P to denote the notion of positivity
defined by P (see §1.9).
Suppose now that σ is irreducible, so it is an automorphic representation
of AM \M (AF ). Since
Y
ehHM (m),λi = ehHM (mv ),λi
v
for m ∈ M (AF ), we have a factorization
I(σ, λ) ∼
Y
= I(σv , λ)
v
where the local factors I(σv , λ) are defined as in §4.9 in the archimedean
setting and §8.2 in the nonarchimedean setting. There is a slight difference
between our conventions in the global setting and in the local setting in terms
of the spaces on which I(σ, λ) acts. In the global setting we are normalizing
things so that the space on which I(σ, λ) acts is independent of λ. In the local
setting we incorporated λ into the definition of the functions themselves. The
two definitions only differ by the character e−hHP (xv ),λ+ρP i at a place v.
10.2 Intertwining operators
Let T0 ≤ M0 be a maximal split torus and let
W0 := W (T0 , G)(F ) = W (T0 , G)(F )
be the Weyl group of T0 in G. For a pair of standard parabolic subgroups

P, P 0 we let
W (aP , aP 0 )
be the set of linear isomorphisms from aP onto aP 0 obtained by restricting
elements in the Weyl group W0 . If W (aP , aP 0 ) is nonempty then P and P 0
are said to be associate. Let
P = MN and P 0 = M 0 N 0
be the unique Levi decompositions such that M and M 0 contain M0 .

Lemma 10.2.1 If P and P 0 are associate then M = M 0 . Moreover, w pre-
serves M = M 0 , where w ∈ W (aP , aP 0 ).
In view of the lemma, it is therefore natural to expect a relationship be-

tween representations of G induced from P and those induced from P 0 .
This relationship is obtained by introducing intertwining operators
M (w, λ) : IndG G
P (V ) −→ IndP 0 (V )
defined by
Z
−1
M (w, λ)ϕ(x) := e−1 nx)ehHP (we
ϕ(w nx),λ+ρP i hHP 0 (x),−wλ+ρP 0 i
e dn, (10.2)
where the integral is over N 0 (AF ) ∩ wN e−1 \N 0 (AF ). Here w

e (AF )w e ∈ G(F ) is
any representative for w. At the moment this is just a formal definition. To
make it rigorous let K ≤ G(AF ) be a maximal compact subgroup. We first
restrict to the dense subspace
IndG 0 G
P (V ) ≤ IndP (V )
that consists of K-finite functions in the function field case and automorphic
forms in the sense of Definition 6.5 in the number field case.
When restricted to IndG 0
P (V ) the integral M (w, λ) converges for λ suffi-
ciently large in a sense we now make precise. Let Φ denote the set of roots
of ZM in G and let ∆P be a base for the set of positive roots defined by P
(see §1.9). Set
(a∗P C )+ := {λ ∈ a∗M C : λ(α) > 0 for all α ∈ ∆P } .
The following proposition is stated in [Art05, Lemma 7.1]; a discussion is

contained in [MW95, §II.1.6].
Proposition 10.2.2 (Langlands) If Re(λ) ∈ ρP + (a∗P C )+ then M (w, λ)
converges absolutely. t
u
It turns out that the operators M (w, λ) admit meromorphic continuations
[MW95, §IV.1.8, §IV.1.10] [Art05, Theorem 7.2].
Theorem 10.2.3 The operators M (w, λ) admit meromorphic continuations

to a∗P C that are holomorphic and unitary on iaP . If P, P 0 , P 00 are standard
parabolic subgroups then the operators satisfy the functional equation
M (w1 w2 , λ) = M (w1 , w2 λ) ◦ M (w2 , λ)
for w1 ∈ W (aP 0 , aP 00 ) and w2 ∈ W (aP , aP 0 ) . t

u
10.3 Eisenstein series 199
The subspace iaP ⊆ a∗P C plays a distinguished role, because the represen-
tations I(σ, λ) are unitary for λ ∈ iaP (see Exercise 10.5).
10.3 Eisenstein series
Now I(σ, λ) is a representation of G(AF ) on a space of functions on G(AF ),

but the functions in IndG P (V ) are not left invariant under G(F ). The functions
in its space are left invariant under P (F ), however. We therefore do the most
naı̈ve thing possible to make them invariant under G(F ), namely average.
Given
ϕ ∈ IndG 2
P (Ldisc ([M ]))
we let
X
E(x, ϕ, λ) := ϕ(δx)ehHP (δx),λ+ρP i . (10.3)
δ∈P (F )\G(F )
This is an Eisenstein series. It provides an intertwining map from I(σ, λ)

to the regular action of G(AF ) on functions on G(AF ):
E(xg, ϕ, λ) = E(x, I(σ, λ)(g)ϕ, λ) (10.4)
(see Exercise 10.4) provided that the series E(x, ϕ, λ) converges absolutely.
The problem is that E(x, ϕ, λ) only converges for λ “sufficiently large”
[Art05, Lemma 7.1]:
Proposition 10.3.1 (Langlands) If Re(λ) ∈ ρP + (a∗P C )+ then E(x, ϕ, λ)
converges absolutely. t
u
On the other hand the representations I(σ, λ) are unitary when λ ∈ iaP ,
which is never in the plane of absolute convergence of the Eisenstein series.
Instead, one has to analytically continue the Eisenstein series as a complex an-
alytic function of λ to the line λ ∈ iaM in order to construct pieces of L2 ([G]).
In the case G = GL2 this was accomplished by Selberg [Sel56, Sel63]. Though
important, it offered only limited insight into the difficulties presented by the
general case.
Langlands was the first to appreciate the difficulties presented by the gen-
eral case, and was able to overcome them [Lan76]. It is hard to overestimate
the impact of Langlands’ work on Eisenstein series to automorphic represen-
tation theory (and indeed much of mathematics, especially number theory).
This work, for example, led to the discovery of Langlands reciprocity as enun-
ciated in Langlands letter to Weil [Lan, Lan70], led to Langlands-Shahidi
theory of automorphic L-functions [Lan71, Sha10], and also is required input
into any general treatment of a trace formula, either in the Arthur-Selberg
sense [Art78, Art80], or in Jacquet’s sense [Jac05a, JLR99].
If P and P 0 are associate standard parabolics, then the intertwining op-

erators of the previous section give a relationship between representations
induced from P to representations induced from P 0 . This suggests a rela-
tionship between the associated Eisenstein series. The precise relationship is
contained in the following theorem of Langlands (see [Art05, Theorem 7.2]
and [MW95, §IV.1.10])
Theorem 10.3.2 (Langlands) The Eisenstein series E(g, ϕ, λ) admits a
meromorphic continuation to a∗P C . It satisfies the functional equation
E(g, M (w, λ)ϕ, wλ) = E(g, ϕ, λ)
for w ∈ W (aP , aP 0 ). t
u
Sometimes in applications one needs more precise information about the
size of Eisenstein series and the intertwining operators. For an example we
refer to [GL06] for an important example where this is crutial. This paper
refers to the equally important paper [M0̈0], which proves that Eisenstein
series the Eisenstein series E(x, ϕ, λ) is a quotient of functions of finite order
under suitable assumptions on ϕ.
10.4 Decomposition of the spectrum
Assume for this section that F is a number field. It turns out that there is a
finite direct sum decomposition
L2 ([G]) = ⊕P L2P ([G]) (10.5)
where the direct sum is over all association classes P of parabolic subgroups.
Consider the Hilbert space of families F of measurable functions
FP : iaP −→ IndG 2
P (Ldisc ([M ]))
indexed by P ∈ P and satisfying the Weyl invariance condition
FP 0 (wλ) = M (w, λ)FP (λ)
for w ∈ W (aP , aP 0 ). The relevant inner product is

X Z
(F1 , F2 ) = n−1
P (F1P (λ), F2P (λ))dλ,
P ∈P iaP
where F1P ∈ F1 and F2P ∈ F2 for P ∈ P. Here

X
nP := |W (aP , aP 0 )|. (10.6)
P 0 ∈P
10.5 Local preparation for isobaric representations 201
Given such a family of functions we can define

X Z
−1
nP E(x, FP (λ), λ)dλ ∈ L2 ([G])
P ∈P iaP
at least when FP is compactly supported as a function of λ with image in

a finite dimensional subspace of IndG 2
P (Ldisc ([M ])) consisting of automorphic
forms in the sense of Definition 6.5 in the number field case and K-finite in
the function field case. Here, as usual, K ≤ G(AF ) is a maximal compact
subgroup. The closure of the subspace of L2 ([G]) spanned by functions of
this type is denoted
L2P ([G]).
Theorem 10.4.1 (Langlands) One has
L2 ([G]) = ⊕P L2P ([G])
where the sum is over association classes P of parabolic subgroups of G. t

u
This is [Art05, Theorem 7.2].
10.5 Local preparation for isobaric representations
In this section we collect some local preliminaries for our discussion of isobaric
representations in §10.6. Thus for this section we assume that F is a local
field.
We have already discussed in §4.9 and §8.4 how to classify admissible rep-
resentations of G(F ) for reductive F -groups G in terms of tempered repre-
sentations. When G = GLn and F is nonarchimedian, we have also discussed
how this can be refined to a classification of the tempered representations
in terms of the square-integrable representations. We now explain a useful
refinement of these results. Pk
Assume G = GLn . Let n = i=1 ni be a partition of n and for each i let
πi be an irreducible essentially square-integrable representation of GLni (F ).
Let
GLni (F )1 := ker(HGLni : GLni (F ) −→ aGLni ) (10.7)
where HGLni is defined as in (8.9). Thus
GLni (F ) := GLni (F )1 × AGLni ,
where
(
R>0 Ini if F is archimedean and
AGLni =
$Z Ini if F is nonarchimedean.
Here in the nonarchimedean case $ is a uniformizer for F .

For λi ∈ C, let πi1 be the unique irreducible representation of GLni (F )
and such that
πi (ag) = |a|λi πi1 (g) (10.8)
for a ∈ AGLni .
After changing the order of the partition we can assume that
Re(λ1 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λk ).
Let P be the standard parabolic attached to the partition n1 , . . . , nk with

standard Levi subgroup M . Let λ = (λ1 , . . . , λk ). Then we can form the
induced representation !
Yk
I πi1 , λ .
i=1
Q
k
Theorem 10.5.1 The induced representation I i=1 πi1 , λ has a unique
Q
k 1
irreducible quotient J i=1 πi , λ . If
!  0

k k
Y
∼
Y 0
J πi1 , λ =J π 1 i , λ0 
i=1 i=1
with Re(λ1 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λk ) and Re(λ01 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λ0k0 ) then k = k 0 and

there is a permutation τ of {1, . . . , k} such that πi0 ∼
= πτ (i) (which implies
λ0i = λτ (i) ).
Proof. For the nonarchimedean case, this is consequence of the Bernstein-

Zelevinsky classification discussed in §8.4. For the archimedean case a dis-
cussion with references is given after [Kna94, Theorem 1 and 4]. t
u
Let π1 · · ·πk be the irreducible quotient of the theorem. In this notation

we do not assume that the πi are arranged so that Re(λ1 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λk ),
so by definition
ki=1 πi ∼
= ki=1 πτ (i)
for any permutation τ of {1, . . . , k}. Because of the theorem, this notation is
unambiguous.
Theorem 10.5.2 Any irreducible admissible representation of GLn (F ) is
isomorphic to ki=1 πi for some set of essentially square-integrable πi .
10.6 Isobaric representations 203
Proof. Again, this is consequence of the Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification

in §8.4 in the nonarchimedean case and the discussion following [Kna94, The-
orem 1 and 4] in the archimedean case. t
u
Given Theorem 10.5.1 and Theorem 10.5.2, we can define an irreducible

admissible representation ki=1 πi of GLn (F ) for any tuple π1 , . . . , πk of ir-
Pk
reducible admissible representations of GLni (F ) with i=1 ni = n. In par-
ticular, we can remove the assumption that the πi are essentially square-
integrable. For each πi we write πi = kj=1
i 0
πij and then set

0
ki=1 πi = ki=1 kj=1
i
πij . (10.9)
The symbol behaves something like a formal direct sum on the category
of admissible representations, but we emphasize that ki=1 πi is always irre-
ducible.
It is useful to explicitly point out the relationship between the classification
of unramified representations in terms of the Satake correspondence and the
isobaric sum. For this let Tn ≤ GLn be the maximal torus of diagonal matrices
and let Bn ≤ GLn be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices.
Theorem 10.5.3 Let χ1 , . . . χn : F × → C× be n unramified quasicharacters
and let
χ : Tn (F ) −→ C×
n
Y
(tij ) 7−→ χi (tii ).
i=1
Then the isobaric sum ni=1 χi is the unique unramified subquotient of the
GLn
induced representation IndB n
(χ).
Proof. We know that there is a unique unramified subquotient of IndGLn

Bn (χ)
n
by Theorem 7.6.4. On the other hand the isobaric sum i=1 χi is unramified
by [Mat13, Corollary 1.2]. t
u
10.6 Isobaric representations
Assume now that F is a number field. So far we have explained how the entire
spectrum of L2 ([G]) can be described in terms of automorphic representations
of Levi subgroups of parabolic subgroups of G. We again restrict to the case
G = GLn and discuss refinements of this result.
As a first step in this section we discuss an operation on automorphic
representations of GLn that plays the role in automorphic representation
theory of the direct sum in ordinary representation theory. In fact, under the
conjectural Langlands correspondence (to be discussed in Chapter 12) this

operation should be induced by taking direct sums of L-parameters.
Let
k
X
n= ni (10.10)
i=1
and for each i let σi is a cuspidal automorphic representation of AGLni \GLni (AF ).
Let P be a standard parabolic subgroup of GLn (i.e. a parabolic subgroup
containing the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices) with Levi sub-
Qk Qk
group isomorphic to i=1 GLni . Let σ = i=1 σi . We form the induced
representation
I(σ, λ) (10.11)
as in (10.1). For the proof of the following theorem see the appendix to [BJ79]
(see also [Lan79a]):
Theorem 10.6.1 (Langlands) Any irreducible subquotient of I(σ, λ) is an
automorphic representation, and every automorphic representation is of this
form. t
u
This theorem leaves open the question of whether the automorphic rep-
resentation π of GLn (AF ) can arise in two different manners. In fact, it can
arise in essentially only one manner. More precisely, assume that
0
k
X k
X
ni = n0j = n
i=1 j=1
and σi (resp. σj0 ) are cuspidal automorphic representations of AGLni \GLni (AF )
(resp. AGLn0 \GLn0j (AF )) for 1 ≤ i ≤ k and 1 ≤ j ≤ k 0 . We let
j
0
k
Y k
Y
0
σ= σi and σ = σj0 .
i=1 j=1
We view these as representations of standard parabolics P and P 0 attached

to
0
k
X k
X
ni and n0j ,
i=1 j=1
respectively. The following theorem is [JS81a, Theorem 4.4]:

Theorem 10.6.2 (Jacquet and Shalika) Let S be a finite set of places of
F including the infinite places such that I(σ, λ) and I(σ 0 , λ0 ) are unramified
10.6 Isobaric representations 205
outside of S. If the irreducible spherical subquotients of I(σ, λ)v and I(σ 0 , λ0 )v

are isomorphic for v 6∈ S then there is a permutation τ of the set of k elements
such that
σi ∼
= στ0 (i) and λi = λ0τ (i) .
t
u
This immediately implies the following corollary:

Corollary 10.6.3 If π is an irreducible subquotient of I(σ, λ) and I(σ 0 , λ0 )
then the conclusion of Theorem 10.6.2 holds t
u
Given the Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification described in §8.4, it would be
aesthetically pleasing if σv were tempered for each v. Indeed, if this where the
case, then upon rearranging the σi we could assume that λ is in the positive
Weyl chamber. There would then be a canonical irreducible subquotient of
I(σ, λ), namely Y
J(σv , λ)
v
with the local factors J(σv , λ) defined as in Theorem 4.9.1 and Theorem 8.4.1.
An important open conjecture is that cuspidal representations always have
tempered local factors:
Conjecture 10.6.4 (The Ramanujan conjecture) If π is a cuspidal au-
tomorphic representation of AGLn \GLn (AF ) then πv is tempered for all v.
A discussion of this conjecture and what is known towards it is contained in
[Sar05].
Since the Ramanujan conjecture remains unproven to find a canonical
irreducible subquotient of I(σ, λ) we must proceed differently. The first step
is the following refinement of Theorem 10.6.1:
Theorem 10.6.5 Assume
Re(λ1 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λk ).
The induced representation I(σ, λ) has a unique irreducible quotient J (σ, λ).
If
J (σ, λ) ∼
= J (σ 0 , λ0 )
with Re(λ1 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λk ) and Re(λ01 ) ≥ · · · ≥ Re(λ0k0 ) then k = k 0
and there is a permutation τ of {1, . . . , k} such that σi0 ∼
= στ (i) and hence
λ0i = λτ (i) .
Proof. The uniqueness of the irreducible quotient follows from the corre-
sponding local uniqueness assertion in Theorem 10.5.1 provided that these
quotients can be taken to be spherical outside of finitely many places. This is
implied by Theorem 10.5.3 The second assertion of the theorem then follows
from Theorem 10.6.2. t
u
This is the global analogue of the local result Theorem 10.5.1. To make
the analogy clearer, it is convenient to adjust our notation slightly. Let πi be
cuspidal automorphic representations of GLni (AF ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ k. Then there
is a unique λ ∈ a∗M such that
⊗ki=1 πi ∼
= σ ⊗ ehHM (·),λi
where σ is a cuspidal automorphic representation of AM \M (AF ). We denote

by
π1 · · · πk (10.12)
the representation J (σ, λ) of the theorem. Here by definition (10.12) is inde-

pendent of the ordering of the factors. This convention is justified by Theorem
10.6.5.
Definition 10.1. An automorphic representation of GLn (AF ) is isobaric if
it is of the form ki=1 πi for some k-tuple of cusp forms π1 , . . . , πk .
Not all automorphic representations are isobaric. In the notation of Theorem
10.6.5, if I(σ, λ) is reducible, then any subquotient that is not J(σ, λ) provides
an example. A concrete example is given in Exercise 10.9 below.
In view of Theorem 10.6.5 we can extend the definition of to arbitrary
tuples of isobaric automorphic representations in a well-defined manner just
as in (10.9). The operation on the set of isomorphism classes of isobaric
representations behaves something like a direct product, but just as in the
local case isobaric sums are always irreducible representations. We close this
section with the following local-global compatibility result:
Lemma 10.6.6 For a k-tuple π1 , . . . , πk where πi is a cuspidal automorphic
representation of GLni (AF ) one has
ki=1 πi ∼
Y
= ki=1 πiv
v
where ki=1 πiv is defined as in (10.9).

Proof. Since ki=1 πi is defined to be the unique irreducible quotient of an
appropriate representation, and the right hand side of the isomorphism pro-
vides such a quotient by the local definition of an isobaric representation the
lemma follows. t
u
10.7 A theorem of Moeglin and Waldspurger
For this section we assume that F is a number field. Let G be a reductive

group over F . The discrete spectrum L2disc ([G]) of L2 ([G]) is the largest
10.7 A theorem of Moeglin and Waldspurger 207
closed subspace that decomposes as a direct sum of irreducible representa-

tions (see §3.7 for more information). The spectral decomposition of L2 ([G])
proven by Langlands leaves open the important question of how to describe
the discrete spectrum of L2 ([M ]) for Levi subgroups M of G. Some informa-
tion on this question is obtained in the course of Langlands’ proof of Theorem
10.4.1, but nothing definitive.
In [Jac71] Jacquet gave a precise conjectural description of L2disc ([GLn ])
which was later proven by Moeglin and Waldspurger in [MgW89]. We state
this result in this section. Since the Levi subgroups of GLn are products of
general linear groups, by induction this gives a complete spectral decompo-
sition of L2 ([GLn ]).
Fix an integer n. Call a parabolic subgroup P ≤ GLn standard if it con-
tains the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices. For each factorization
n = md there is a unique standard parabolic subgroup P with Levi sub-
group M isomorphic to GL×m d . Suppose we are given a cuspidal automorphic
representation π of AGLd \GLd (AF ). We can then form the tensor product
representation π ⊗m of AM \M (AF ). Let
L2 (π ⊗m ) ≤ L2 ([M ])
be the π ⊗m -isotypic subspace. We can then consider a form

2 ⊗m
ϕ ∈ IndG
P (L (π ))
and the corresponding Eisenstein series
E(x, ϕ, λ).
Jacquet constructed an irreducible subrepresentation (σ, m) of L2 ([GLn ]) by

taking an iterated residue of E(x, ϕ, λ). If we pick an appropriate isomorphism
a∗M ∼= Rm then the iterated residue is at certain point. The representation
(σ, m) is called a Speh representation, since Speh constructed the local
analogues of these representations (see [Spe83]). To get a feel for these repre-
sentations, it is useful to note that if v is a nonarchimedean place of F where
σ is unramified then
m
Y
L(s, (σ, m)v ) = L(s − i + (m + 1)/2, σv ).
i=1
Here L(s, (σ, m)v ) is the L-function of (σ, m)v (see §11.8). Jacquet then con-
jectured the following theorem, which was proven in [MgW89]:
Theorem 10.7.1 (Moeglin and Waldspurger) Any irreducible subrepre-
sentation of L2 ([GLn ]) is isomorphic to a Speh representation (σ, m) for a
unique factorization md = n and a unique cuspidal automorphic representa-
tion σ of AGLd \GLd (AF ). t
u
Thus the theorem gives a complete description of L2disc ([GLn ]). This the-
orem forms the basis of much of what we know about the discrete spectrum
for other groups. For example, it together with the Jacquet-Langlands cor-
respondence is used to describe the discrete spectrum of inner forms of GLn
in [Bad08]. As a consequence of the theory of twisted endoscopy, Arthur
[Art13] and Mok [Mok15] have given a description of the discrete spectrum
of quasi-split classical groups in terms of the parametrization of Moeglin and
Waldspurger. This is explained in §13.8 below.
Exercises
10.1. Let G = GL2 and let P be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular
matrices with Levi subgroup M , the diagonal matrices. Let
χ : [M ] −→ C×
( a1 a2 ) 7−→ χ1 (a1 )χ2 (a2 )
be a character. Let Φ ∈ S(A2F ) (the usual Schwartz space). Let

Z
ϕΦ,χ,λ (g) := χ1 (det g)| det g|λ Φ((0, x)g)χ1 χ−1 2λ ×
2 (x)|x| dx .
A×
F
Show that ϕΦ,χ,0 (g) ∈ IndG

P (χ) (with our conventions on the induced action
from §10.1) and that
X
E(g, ϕΦ,χ,0 , λ) = ϕΦ,λ+1/2 (γg).
γ∈P (F )\G(F )
In particular show that this series converges absolutely for Re(λ) large
enough.
10.2. Using Poisson summation, prove that E(g, ϕ, λ) admits a meromorphic

continuation to the plane and satisfies the functional equation
E(g, ϕΦ,χ,0 , λ) = E(g −t , ϕΦ,χ

b −1 ,0 , −λ).
10.3. Prove that E(g, ϕΦ,χ,0 , λ) is holomorphic unless χ1 = χ2 , in which

case it has at worst simple poles at s = ± 12 . Prove that the residue of
E(g, ϕΦ,χ,0 , λ) is independent of g, and hence can be thought of as a vec-
tor in the trivial representation of SL2 (AF ).
10.4. Prove the intertwining relation (10.4).
10.5. Prove that I(σ, λ) is unitary for λ ∈ iaM .

10.7 A theorem of Moeglin and Waldspurger 209
10.6. Prove theorems 10.5.1 and 10.5.2 using the results on the Bernstein-
Zelevinsky classification stated in §8.4.
For the remaining problems, let triv denote the trivial representation of
GL1 (AF ). Let
π := I(triv, ( 12 , − 12 ));
it is a representation of GL2 (AF ).
10.7. Prove that every irreducible subquotient of I(triv, ( 12 , − 12 )) is automor-

phic and that the (unique) isobaric subquotient is the trivial representation
of GL2 (AF ).
10.8. Prove that πv has a composition series of length 2 (the unique irre-
ducible subrepresentation σv is known as the Steinberg representation).
10.9. Prove that the irreducible subquotients of π are in bijection with finite
Q of places
sets of F : the set S of places corresponds to the representation
S
v|S σv ⊗ π
Chapter 11
Rankin-Selberg L-functions
Artin and Hecke were together at

Göttingen, but neither realized
the intimate connection between
the two different types of
L-functions they were
constructing. The moral of the
story is to talk with your
colleagues.
L. Saper
Abstract In this chapter we sketch the theory of generic representations and

Rankin-Selberg L-functions.
11.1 Paths to the construction of automorphic

L-functions
Let F be a global field and let π and π 0 be a pair of cuspidal automorphic

representations of AGLn \GLn (AF ) and AGLm \GLm (AF ), respectively. An
important analytic invariant of this pair is the Rankin-Selberg L-function
L(s, π × π 0 ).
This is a meromorphic function on the complex plane satisfying a functional

equation whose poles can be explicitly described in terms of π and π 0 . These
L-functions play a crucial role in automorphic representation theory. On the
one hand they are used in the statement of the local Langlands correspon-
dence for GLn (and hence, implicitly, for the global Langlands correspon-
dence). This will be discussed in §12.5.
In this chapter we describe one method by which they can be defined,
namely the Rankin-Selberg method. This requires the introduction of the no-
211
212 11 Rankin-Selberg L-functions
tion of a generic representation. It turns out that all cuspidal representations

of GLn (AF ) are generic, but cuspidal representations of other groups need not
be generic. A much more detailed treatment of the Rankin-Selberg method
is contained in [Cog07], which was our primary reference in the preparation
of this chapter.
There are other approaches to defining these L-functions. One is via the
so-called Langlands-Shahidi method. This method also uses the notion of
a generic representation. The idea is that Rankin-Selberg L-functions (and
some more general L-functions) occur in the constant term of certain Eisen-
stein series. This approach was historically important because it suggested
both the general definition of a Langlands L-function, discussed in §12.7,
and the general formulation of Langlands functoriality. We do not discuss
this construction. It is discussed at length in the book [Sha10].
In the special case where π 0 is the trivial representation there is an alter-
nate approach to defining these L-functions due to Godement and Jacquet
[GJ72]. It is a direct generalization of Tate’s construction of the L-functions
of Hecke characters in his famous thesis [Tat67], which in turn is an adelic
formulation of the classical work of Hecke.
11.2 Generic characters
Let G be a quasi-split group over a global or local field F , let B ≤ G be a

Borel subgroup, let T ≤ B a maximal torus and let N ≤ B the unipotent
radical of B. We choose a pinning
(B, T, {Xα }α∈∆ )
as in Definition 7.2. Let E/F be a Galois extension over which B and T

split. Then since T (E) is preserved by Gal(E/F ) the root spaces Xα are
permuted by Gal(E/F ) and we can choose a set of representatives {β} for
the Gal(E/F ) orbits; let O(β) denote the orbit of β. For E-algebras R the
exponential map yields a group homomorphism
Y
exp : Ga (R) −→ GE (R)
α∈O(β)
Y
(xα ) 7−→ exp(xα Xα ).
α∈O(β)
Its image is a unipotent subgroup whose Lie algebra is spanned by {Xα }α∈O(β) .
This unipotent subgroup is in fact stable under Gal(E/F ), and hence is the
E points of a unipotent subgroup N (β) ≤ N that is isomorphic to ResE/F Ga .
Varying β, we see that we have a subgroup
11.3 Generic representations 213
Y
N (β) ≤ N,
β
where the product is over all Gal(E/F )-orbits of simple roots α. We note
that inclusion induces an isomorphism
Y
der
N (β)−→N/N
˜ .
β
Definition 11.1. If F is a local field, a character ψ : N (F ) → C× is called

generic if ψ|N (β)(F ) is nontrivial for each Gal(E/F )-orbit β. If F is global a
character ψ : N (AF ) → C× trivial on N (F ) is called generic if ψv is generic
for all places v.
Example 11.1. Take G = GLn and let Bn ≤ GLn be the Borel subgroup of
upper triangular matrices. Moreover let Nn ≤ Bn be the unipotent radical.
If F is local any character of Nn (F ) is of the form
Nn (F ) −→ C×
 
1 x12 ∗ ∗ ∗
 1 x23 ∗ ∗ 

.. ..
 (11.1)
7−→ ψ(m1 x12 + · · · + mn−1 x(n−1)n )
 

 . . ∗  
 1 x(n−1)n 
1
for some m1 , . . . , mn−1 ∈ F , where ψ : F → C× is a nontrivial character. The

character is generic if and only if all of the mi are nonzero. If F is global any
character of Nn (AF ) trivial on Nn (F ) is of the same form, but now the mi
must be in QF and ψ must be trivial on F . Again, the character is generic if
n−1
and only if i=1 mi 6= 0. If all mi = 1 we call this the standard character
attached to ψ.
11.3 Generic representations
Let G be a quasi-split reductive group over a local field F and let ψ : N (F ) →

C× be a character. Let (π, V ) be an admissible representation of G(F ).
Definition 11.2. Assume F is nonarchimedean. A ψ-Whittaker func-
tional on V is a continuous linear functional λ : V −→ C such that
λ(π(n)ϕ) = ψ(n)λ(ϕ)
for ϕ ∈ V and n ∈ N (F ).
In this nonarchimedean setting, continuous means locally constant.
If F is archimedean, we assume that V is a Hilbert space and even that π

is unitary. Then for every X ∈ U (g) we can define a seminorm k · kX on Vsm
via
kϕkX := kπ(X)ϕk2 .
We can give Vsm a locally convex topology via these seminorms, and it then
makes sense to speak of continuous linear functionals. It is this notion of
continuity we use in the following definition:
Definition 11.3. Assume F is archimedean. A ψ-Whittaker functional

on V is a continuous linear functional λ : V −→ C such that
λ(π(n)ϕ) = ψ(n)λ(ϕ)
for ϕ ∈ Vsm and n ∈ N (F ).
Assume, as above, that in the archimedean setting (π, V ) is unitary. As-

sume in addition that ψ is generic.
Definition 11.4. An irreducible admissible representation (π, V ) of G(F ) is

ψ-generic if it has a nonzero ψ-Whittaker functional on V .
An irreducible admissible representation (π, V ) is simply said to be generic if

there exists a Borel subgroup B ≤ G with unipotent radical N and a generic
character ψ : N (F ) → C× such that (π, V ) is ψ-generic.
The following theorem of Shalika [Sha74] has turned out to be extremely
important:
Theorem 11.3.1 (Shalika) The space of ψ-Whittaker functionals on an ir-
reducible admissible representation of G(F ) is at most 1-dimensional. t
u
We now define the related notion of a Whittaker function. The space of
Whittaker functions on G(F ) is the space of smooth functions
W(ψ) := {smooth W : G(F ) → C satisfying W (ng) = ψ(n)W (g)}. (11.2)
This space admits an action of G(F ):
G(F ) × W(ψ) −→ W(ψ)

(g, W ) 7−→ (x 7→ W (xg)).
Let (π, V ) be an irreducible admissible representation π of G(F ). A Whit-

taker model of π is a nontrivial G(F )-intertwining map
Vsm −→ W(ψ)
(in the nonarchimedean case, V = Vsm by assumption). As a corollary of

Theorem 11.3.1 we have the following (see Exercise 11.2):
11.3 Generic representations 215
Corollary 11.3.2 A Whittaker model of π exists if and only if π is generic.

If π is generic, then it admits a unique Whittaker model. t
u
Motivated by Corollary 11.3.2 if (π, V ) is generic we let
W(π, ψ) (11.3)
be the image of any intertwining map Vsm → W(ψ). We write the map
explicitly as
Vsm −→ W(π, ψ)
ϕ 7−→ Wψϕ .
By Schur’s lemma this map is well-defined up to multiplication by a nonzero

complex number.
Now assume that F is global, let π be a cuspidal automorphic represen-
tation of G(AF ) realized in a subspace V ≤ L2cusp ([G]), and let ϕ ∈ Vsm . We
then define the global ψ-Whittaker function
Z
ϕ
Wψ (g) := ϕ(ng)ψ(n)dn. (11.4)
[N ]
We say that (π, V ) is globally ψ-generic if
Wψϕ (g) 6= 0
for some ϕ ∈ V and g ∈ G(AF )1 . We remark that a priori this notion depends
on the realization of π in L2cusp ([G]) if it does not occur with multiplicity 1.
It is not hard to check that if π is globally ψ-generic and π ∼
= ⊗0v πv then each
πv is ψv -generic (Exercise 11.3).
The notion of a generic representation is only useful if we have an interest-
ing supply of generic representations. The following theorem implies that all
cuspidal automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) are generic, and moreover
they admit an expansion in terms of Whittaker functionals:
Theorem 11.3.3 Let ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([GLn ]) be a smooth vector in the space of a
cuspidal automorphic representation π of AGLn \GLn (AF ). If ψ : Nn (AF ) →
C× is a generic character then one has
X
ϕ(g) = Wψϕ (( γ 1 ) g) . (11.5)
γ∈Nn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (F )
t
u
The expression for ϕ in (11.5) is called its Whittaker expansion. It is a
generalization (but not the only generalization) of the well-known Fourier
expansion of a modular form.
We now prove this theorem in the special case n = 2. Consider the function
x 7→ ϕ (( 1 x1 ) g) . (11.6)
This is a continuous function on the compact abelian group F \AF , and hence
admits a Fourier expansion. If we fix a nontrivial character ψ : F \AF → C× ,
then all other characters are of the form ψα (x) := ψ(αx) for α ∈ F (see
Lemma B.1.2). Thus the Fourier expansion of the function (11.6) is
XZ
ϕ (( 1 x1 ) g) ψ(αyx)dy. (11.7)
α∈F F \AF
Since ϕ is cuspidal, the α = 0 term vanishes identically. Taking a change of

variables x 7→ α−1 x for each α ∈ F × and using the left GL2 (F )-invariance of
ϕ we see that (11.6) is equal to
X
Wψϕ (( α 1 ) ( 1 x1 ) g) . (11.8)
α∈F ×
Setting x = 0 we obtain Theorem 11.3.3 when n = 2. We will not prove

Theorem 11.3.3 because we cannot improve on the exposition in [Cog07,
§1.1]. The basic idea is to proceed as in the n = 2 case, using abelian Fourier
analysis on certain abelian subgroup of Nn (AF ). However, since Nn (AF ) is
no longer abelian for n > 3 one has to combine this with a clever inductive
argument using the fact that ϕ is cuspidal.
Using Theorem 11.3.3, we obtain the following related theorem of Shalika
[Sha74, Theorem 5.5]:
Theorem 11.3.4 (Multiplicity one) An irreducible admissible represen-
tation of GLn (AF ) occurs with multiplicity at most one in L2cusp ([GLn ]).
We note that Theorem 11.3.4 is false for essentially every reductive group
that is not a general linear group.
Proof. Let (π1 , V1 ), (π2 , V2 ) be two realizations of a given cuspidal automor-
phic representation (π, V ). Choose equivariant maps Li : V → Vi . We then
obtain Whittaker functionals
λi : Vsm −→ C
L (ϕ)
ϕ 7−→ Wψ i (In ),
where In is the identity element. They are nonzero by Theorem 11.3.3. By

Theorem 11.3.1 one therefore has λ1 = cλ2 for some c ∈ C× . Thus
L (ϕ)
X
L1 (ϕ)(g) = Wψ 1 (( γ 1 ) g)
γ∈Nn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (F )
L (ϕ)
X
=c Wψ 2 (( γ 1 ) g)
γ∈Nn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (F )
11.4 Formulae for Whittaker functions 217
= L2 (ϕ)(g).
This implies in particular that V1 and V2 have nonzero intersection, and hence
are equal. t
u
11.4 Formulae for Whittaker functions
Let (π, V ) be a globally generic cuspidal representation of the quasi-split

group G, realized on a closed subspace V ≤ L2 ([G]).
Using Flath’s theorem we can choose an isomorphism
˜ ⊗0v Vv −→ ⊗v W(πv , ψv ).
Vsm −→ (11.9)
Let ϕ ∈ Vsm be a pure tensor, i.e. a vector that maps to a vector of the form
⊗0v ϕv under the first isomorphism. Then, by local uniqueness of Whittaker
models upon normalizing the composite isomorphism Vsm by multiplying by
a suitable nonzero complex number we have
Y ϕ
Wψϕ (g) = Wψvv (g). (11.10)
v
Thus to compute the global Whittaker function Wψϕ (g) it suffices to com-
pute the local Whittaker functions Wψϕvv . When πv and ψv are unramified
this can be accomplished using famous Casselman-Shalika formula [CS80].
For the remainder of this section let F be a nonarchimedean local field and
let ψ : F → C× be a nontrivial unramified character. The Casselman-Shalika
formula is valid for any unramified reductive group over F , but to simplify
our discussion we will assume that G is a split group. Let B ≤ G be the
Borel subgroup with split maximal torus T ≤ B. We let K ≤ G(F ) be a
hyperspecial subgroup in good position with respect to (B, T ). We note that
by the Iwasawa decomposition one has
a
G(F ) = N (F )µ($)K (11.11)
µ∈X∗ (T )
where N ≤ B is the unipotent radical of B.

Using the notation of §7.6, for λ ∈ a∗T C we can then form the induced
representation I(λ), where the induction is with respect to the Borel subgroup
B. Its unique unramified subquotient is denoted by J(λ). Any unramified
representation is equivalent to such a J(λ). The choice of T and B, by duality,
give rise to a maximal torus and Borel subgroup Tb ≤ B b ≤G b as explained
in §7.3. This gives rise to a notion of dominant weight of Tb in B, b say µ ∈
X ∗ (Tb) = X∗ (T ). By Cartan-Weyl theory, there is a unique isomorphism class
V (µ) of irreducible representation of G
b attached to µ. Let χµ be its character.
Theorem 11.4.1 (Casselman and Shalika) Any function W in the one-

dimensional space W(J(λ), ψ)K satisfies W (I) ∈ C× , I is the identity ele-
ment. If µ is a dominant weight then
W (µ($)) 1/2
= δB (µ($))χµ (e−λ ).
W (I)
If µ is not a dominant weight then W (µ($)) = 0. t

u
Here one recalls that eλ is discussed in Lemma 7.6.1. This is proven in [CS80];
to translate the formula in loc. cit. to the formula above one uses the Weyl
character formula.
It is instructive to write this formula down more explicitly when G = GLn .
In this case it is due to Shintani [Shi76]. We assume that B = Bn is the Borel
subgroup of upper triangular matrices and T = Tn ≤ Bn is the maximal
torus of diagonal matrices. In this case weights can be identified with tuples
(k1 , . . . , kn ) ∈ Zn as in (1.9). The cocharacter µ attached to such a tuple is
recorded in (1.9). The dominant weights are those with
k1 ≥ · · · ≥ kn .
The associated irreducible representation of GLn is Sk1 ,...,kn (Vst ), where Vst
is the standard representation Pn and Sk1 ,...,kn is the Schur functor attached to
the partition k1 , . . . , kn of i=1 kn . Let χk1 ,...,kn be its character.
Corollary 11.4.2 (Shintani) If G = GLn and W ∈ W(J(λ), ψ)GLn (OF ) is
the unique vector satisfying W (In ) = 1 then
! (
$ k1 1/2
.
δBn (µ($))χk1 ,...,kn (e−λ ) if k1 ≥ · · · ≥ kn
W .. =
$ kn
0 otherwise.
t
u
11.5 Local Rankin-Selberg L-functions
Let F be a local field and let ψ : F → C× be a nontrivial character. Our goal

in this section is to define local Rankin-Selberg L-functions for generic repre-
sentations, at least when F is nonarchimedean. The fundamental idea here is
that these L-functions are the smallest rational functions in q −s that cancel
the poles of a family of zeta functions. The definition of this family was orig-
inally given in [JPSS83], and the archimedean case was treated definitively
in [Jac09]. We refer to these papers for proofs of the unproved statements we
make below.
Let π, π 0 be irreducible admissible generic representations of GLn (F ) and
GLm (F ), respectively. Let ψ : F → C× be an additive character. Use it to
11.5 Local Rankin-Selberg L-functions 219
define a standard generic character of Nn (F ) and Nm (F ) as in Example 11.1.

We denote these characters again by ψ. Let
W ∈ W(π, ψ), W 0 ∈ W(π 0 , ψ).
If m < n let
Z
Ψ (s; W, W 0 ) := h
W 0 (h)| det(h)|s−(n−m)/2 dh,

W In−m
Z Z h (11.12)
Ψe(s; W, W 0 ) := W x In−m−1 0
dxW (h)| det h| s−(n−m)/2
dh,
1
where the top integral is over Nm (F )\GLm (F ), the outer integral on the
bottom is over Nm (F )\GLm (F ), and the inner integral on the bottom is over
(n − m − 1) × m matrices with entries in F .
If m = n, then for each Φ ∈ S(F n ) (the Schwartz space) let
Z
Ψ (s; W, W 0 , Φ) := W (g)W 0 (g)Φ(en g)| det g|s dg. (11.13)
Nn (F )\GLn (F )
Here en ∈ F n is the elementary vector with 0’s in the first n − 1 entries and
1 in the last entry.
Proposition 11.5.1 Assume that F is nonarchimedean.
(a) The integrals (11.12) and (11.13) converge for Re(s) sufficiently large.
For π and π 0 unitary they converge absolutely for Re(s) ≥ 1. For π and π 0
tempered, they converge absolutely for Re(s) > 0.
(b) Each integral is a rational function of q −s .
(c) The C-linear span of the integrals in C[q s , q −s ] as W, W 0 (and when m = n
the Schwartz function Φ) is a principal ideal I(π, π 0 ). t
u
In this nonarchimedean case, one proves that there is a unique polynomial
Pπ,π0 ∈ C[x] satisfying Pπ,π0 (0) = 1 such that Pπ,π0 (q −s )−1 is a generator of
I(π, π 0 ). One sets
L(s, π × π 0 ) := Pπ,π0 (q −s )−1 . (11.14)
In the archimedean case one actually defines L(s, π × π 0 ) using the local
Langlands correspondence, which was established very early on in the theory
by Langlands himself. We will explain this in more detail in §12.3 below.
Right now we note the following important bound:
Theorem 11.5.2 If π and π 0 are unitary then L(s, π × π 0 ) is holomorphic
and nonzero for Re(s) ≥ 1. t
u
See [BR94a, §2] for a proof. Technically speaking they only state that the
L-function is holomorphic at this point, but the argument actually proves
that it is nonzero as well.
To discuss the archimedean case we say that a holomorphic function f (s)

of s ∈ C is bounded in vertical strips if it is bounded in
Vσ1 ,σ2 := {s : σ1 ≤ Re(s) ≤ σ2 }
for all σ1 < σ2 ∈ R. A meromorphic function f (s) is bounded in vertical

strips if for each σ1 < σ2 there is a polynomial Pσ1 ,σ2 ∈ C[x] such that
Pσ1 ,σ2 (s)f (s) is holomorphic and bounded in vertical strips in the original
sense.
Theorem 11.5.3 Assume F is archimedean. The local Rankin-Selberg inte-

grals (11.12) and (11.13) converge absolutely for Re(s) sufficiently large and
admit meromorphic continuations to functions of s that are bounded in ver-
tical strips. t
u
Let
1

Im
wm,n := , wn := . .. ∈ GLn (Z)
wn−m 1
and for functions f on GLn (F ) or GLn (AF ) let ρ(wm,n )f (x) := f (xwm,n )
and fe(g) := f (wn g −t ).
Theorem 11.5.4 There is a meromorphic function γ(s, π × π 0 , ψ) ∈ C(q −s )
in the nonarchimedean case such that if m < n we have
Ψe(1 − s, ρ(wn,m )W f 0 ) = ω 0 (−1)n−1 γ(s, π × π 0 , ψ)Ψ (s, W, W 0 )

f, W
and if m = n we have
Ψ (1 − s, W f 0 , Φ)
f, W b = ω 0 (−1)n−1 γ(s, π × π 0 , ψ)Ψ (s; W, W 0 , Φ)
for all W ∈ W(π, ψ), W 0 ∈ W(π 0 , ψ). Here ω 0 is the central quasi-character
of π 0 .
We warn the reader that the functional equations in [Jac09] are different. The
root of this is that the definition of the contragredient W
f of W in loc. cit. is
different.
We need one other factor, the local ε-factor:
γ(s, π × π 0 , ψ)L(s, π × π 0 )
ε(s, π × π 0 , ψ) := . (11.15)
L(1 − s, π ∨ × π 0∨ )
Proposition 11.5.5 In the nonarchimedean case ε(s, π × π 0 ) is a function

of the form cq −f s for some real number f and c ∈ C× .
The ε-factor is a useful arithmetic invariant of the pair (π, π 0 ). Assume
that π 0 is trivial. In this case the ideal $f is called the conductor of π. One
11.6 The unramified Rankin-Selberg L-functions 221
writes f := f (π), and calls it the exponent of the conductor, or sometimes

just the conductor. Let.
   

 ∗ 


 
∗ ..  

K1 ($ f (π)
) := g ∈ GLn (OF ) : g ≡ 
 .  (mod $
 f (π)
) .



 ∗ 


0 ... 0 1
 
Then one has the following (see [Mat13]):

Theorem 11.5.6 The number f (π) is the smallest nonnegative integer such
that the space V of π satisfies
f (π)
V K1 ($ )
6= 0.
f (π)
Moreover, dimC V K1 ($ )
= 1. t
u
11.6 The unramified Rankin-Selberg L-functions
In this section we assume that F is nonarchimedean and that π and π 0 are

irreducible unramified representations of GLn (F ) and GLm (F ), respectively.
Assume that ψ : F → C× is unramified and let W ∈ W(π, ψ) and W 0 ∈
W(π 0 , ψ) be the unique spherical vectors satisfying W (In ) = W 0 (Im ) = 1.
We assume that π ∼ = J(λ) and π 0 ∼= J(λ0 ), where λ ∈ a∗Tn C and λ0 ∈ a∗Tm C .
Our aim in this section is to prove the following identity:
Theorem 11.6.1 For Re(s) sufficiently large if n > m one has
0 −1

Ψ (s, W, W 0 , ψ) = det Imn − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ .
If m = n one has
0 −1

Ψ (s, W, W 0 , 1OFn ) = det In2 − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ .
Implicit in the definition of the local Rankin-Selberg integrals is a choice of

measure on GLm (F ) and Nm (F ) so that we can form a quotient measure on
Nm (F )\GLm (F ). In order for the equalities above to be valid we must choose
the unique Haar measures that assign volume 1 to GLm (OF ) and Nm (OF ),
respectively.
Proof. For each m ∈ Z≥1 let T + (m) be the set of the tuples µ = (k1 , · · · , km ) ∈
Zm with k1 ≥ · · · ≥ km ≥ 0. This can be identified with a subset of the dom-
inant weights of Tbm or a cocharacter of Tm . If n > m let
T + (m) ,→ T + (n)
be the injection given by extending the tuple k1 , . . . , km by zeros.

Assume for the moment that n > m. Then by Corollary 11.4.2 we have
Ψ (s; W, W 0 )

X µ($) −1
= W W 0 (µ($))| det(µ($))|s−(n−m)/2 δB (µ($))
In−m m
µ∈T + (m)
X 0
= χk1 ,...,km (e−λ )χk1 ,...,km ,0,...,0 (e−λ )q −|µ|s
µ∈T + (m)
0
= det(Imn − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ )−1 ,
where we let |µ| = k1 +· · ·+km and, as before, χk1 ,...,km ,0,...,0 denotes the char-
acter associated to Sk1 ,...,km ,0,...,0 . This last identity is known as the Cauchy
identity [Bum13, Chapter 38]. Similarly, when n = m we have
Ψ (s; W, W 0 , 1OFn )
W µ($) W 0 (µ($)) 1OFn (en µ($)) | det(µ($))|s δB
X
−1

= n
(µ($))
µ∈T + (n)
X 0
= χk1 ,...,kn (e−λ )χk1 ,...,kn (e−λ )q −|µ|s
µ∈T + (n)
0
= det(In2 − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ )−1 .
t
u
0
The calculation above implies that det(Imn − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ ) divides L(s, π ×
π 0 )−1 (as a polynomial in q −s )). More is true (see [JPSS83]):
0
Theorem 11.6.2 One has L(s, π × π 0 ) = det(Imn − q −s e−λ ⊗ e−λ )−1 . t
u
11.7 Global Rankin-Selberg L-functions
Let π and π 0 be cuspidal automorphic representations of AGLn \GLn (AF ) and

AGLm \GLm (AF ), respectively.
We have previously defined the local Rankin-Selberg L-functions L(s, πv ×
πv0 ). The global Rankin-Selberg L-function is the product
Y
L(s, π × π 0 ) := L(s, πv × πv0 ). (11.16)
v
If ψ : F \AF → C× is a nontrivial character we also define

11.7 Global Rankin-Selberg L-functions 223
Y
ε(s, π × π 0 ) := ε(s, πv × πv0 , ψv ).
v
The reason that ψ is not encoded in to the left hand side of this equation is
that the right hand side is in fact independent of the choice of ψ.
The following theorem collects the basic facts about Rankin-Selberg L-
functions:
Theorem 11.7.1 The Rankin-Selberg L-function admits a meromorphic con-
tinuation to the plane, holomorphic except for possible simple poles at s = 0, 1.
There are poles at s = 0, 1 if and only if m = n and π ∼ = π 0∨ . One has a
functional equation
L(s, π × π 0 ) = ε(s, π, π 0 )L(1 − s, π ∨ × π 0∨ ). (11.17)
One extremely important consequence of this theorem is the strong mul-

tiplicity one theorem:
Theorem 11.7.2 (Strong multiplicity one) Let π and π 0 be cuspidal au-
tomorphic representations of GLn (AF ) and let S be a finite set of places of
F . If π S ∼
= π 0S then π ∼
= π0 .
We leave the proof as Exercise 11.6. It is a consequence of Proposition 11.5.1,
Theorem 11.5.2 and Theorem 11.7.1. Despite its name Theorem 11.7.2 does
not imply the Theorem 11.3.4 above. For a beautiful generalization of the
strong multiplicity one theorem we refer the reader to the work of Dinakar
Ramakrishnan on automorphic analogues of the Chebatarev density theorem.
More generally, one has the following (see Exercise 11.7).
Corollary 11.7.3 Let π and π 0 be isobaric automorphic representations of
GLn (AF ) and let S be a finite set of places of F . If π S ∼
= π 0S then π ∼
= π0 .
Let ϕ be in the space of π and ϕ0 in the space in π 0 . We outline the basic
idea behind this theorem in the case m = n − 1. We will not justify any of
the convergence statements made in our outline. For full details we refer the
reader to [JPSS83].
In this case we take
Z
I(s; ϕ, ϕ0 ) := ϕ ( h 1 ) ϕ0 (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh. (11.18)
GLn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (AF )
Let ϕ(g)
e := ϕ(g −t ) and ϕe0 (g) := ϕ(g −t ). Taking a change of variables h 7→
−t
h we see that
I(s; ϕ, ϕ0 ) = I(1 − s, ϕ,
e ϕe0 ). (11.19)
This simple change of variables is what ultimately powers the proof of theo-
rem 11.7.1.
Define
Z
0 0
Ψ (s; Wψϕ , Wψϕ ) = Wψϕ ( h 1 ) Wψϕ (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh.

Nn−1 (AF )\GLn−1 (AF )
This is a global Rankin-Selberg integral.

0
Theorem 11.7.4 For Re(s) sufficiently large I(s; ϕ, ϕ0 ) = Ψ (s, Wψϕ , Wψϕ ).
In particular, the functional equation (11.19) immediately implies an anal-

0
ogous one for the global Rankin-Selberg integral Ψ (s, Wψϕ , Wψϕ ).
Proof. Replacing ϕ by its Whittaker expansion we have

Z
0
I(s; ϕ, ϕ ) = ϕ ( h 1 ) ϕ0 (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh
GLn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (AF )
Z X ϕ γ
Wψ ( 1 ) ( h 1 ) ϕ0 (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh,

=
GLn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (AF ) γ
where the inner sum is over γ ∈ Nn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (F ). Since ϕ0 (h) is automor-
phic on GLn−1 (AF ) and | det(γ)| = 1 for γ ∈ GLn−1 (F ), we may interchange
the order of summation and integration and obtain
Z
0
Wψϕ ( h 1 ) ϕ0 (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh.

I(s; ϕ, ϕ ) =
Nn−1 (F )\GLn−1 (AF )
This integral is absolutely convergent for Re(s) 0 which justifies the inter-
change.
Let us first integrate over [Nn−1 ]. View Nn−1 ,→ Nn as matrices of the
form ( u 1 ). Then for u ∈ Nn−1 (AF ) one has Wψϕ (ug) = ψ(u)Wψϕ (g).
I(s; ϕ, ϕ0 )
Z Z
Wψϕ ( u 1 ) ( h 1 ) ϕ0 (uh)du| det h|s−1/2 dh

=
N (A )\GLn−1 (AF ) [Nn−1 ]
Z n−1 F Z
Wψϕ h 1 ψ(u))ϕ0 (uh)du| det h|s−1/2 dh

=
Nn−1 (AF )\GLn−1 (AF ) [Nn−1 ]
Z
0
Wψϕ h 1 Wψϕ (h)| det h|s−1/2 dh

=
Nn−1 (AF )\GLn−1 (AF )
0
= Ψ (s; Wψϕ , Wψϕ ).
t
u
In the case m = n − 1 above Theorem 11.7.1 can be deduced from theorems

11.5.4 and 11.7.4; we leave this as Exercise 11.8.
11.9 Converse theory 225
11.8 The nongeneric case
In the theory above crucial use was made of the fact that cuspidal auto-
morphic representations are globally generic. Indeed, our definition of local
L-functions was given in terms of the Whittaker model.
We now explain how to handle the general case. Assume first that F is
a local field. From §10.6 we know that every pair of admissible irreducible
representation π of GLn (F ) and π 0 of GLm (F ) can be written as an isobaric
sum 0
π∼= ki=1 πi and π 0 ∼
= kj=1 πi0
where the πi and πi0 are essentially square integrable and hence generic [JS83,
§1.2].
We then define, for nontrivial characters ψ : F → C× , that
0
k Y
Y k
0
L(s, π × π ) = L(s, πi × πj0 ),
i=1 j=1
0
k Y
Y k
0
γ(s, π × π , ψ) = γ(s, πi × πj0 , ψ),
i=1 j=1
0
k Y
Y k
0
ε(s, π × π , ψ) = ε(s, πi × πj0 , ψ).
i=1 j=1
Of course, one has to check that this is consistent with our earlier definitions.
In other words, we must know that if π and π 0 are generic, then this procedure
gives the same result as if we used our original definition of the local factors.
This can be done.
We then adopt the analogous convention in the global case and obtain
Rankin-Selberg integrals for isobaric automorphic representations. The ana-
lytic properties of these L-functions can be read off from the corresponding
ones for cuspidal representations (see Theorem 11.7.1).
11.9 Converse theory
Let π be an admissible irreducible representation of GLn (AF ). If π is a cusp-

idal automorphic representation then for all cuspidal automorphic represen-
tations π 0 of GLm (AF ) we have seen in Theorem 11.7.1 that the L-function
L(s, π × π 0 ) admits a functional equation and a meromorphic continuation to
the plane that is bounded in vertical strips. Converse theory asks if automor-
phic representations can be characterized by the analytic properties of their
L-functions. It has been used to establish cases of Langlands functoriality
[CKPSS04]. In addition, it is philosophically important because it says that
an L-function that satisfies reasonable assumptions has to come from an au-

tomorphic representation, solidifying the tight connection between these two
objects.
Theorem 11.9.1 Let π be an irreducible admissible representation of GLn (AF ).

Assume that for all cuspidal automorphic representations π 0 of GLm with
1 ≤ m ≤ max(n − 2, 1) the L-functions L(s, π × π 0 ) and L(s, π ∨ × π 0∨ ) have
analytic continuations to the plane that are holomorphic and bounded in ver-
tical strips of finite width. Assume moreover that for all π 0 as above
L(s, π × π 0 ) = ε(s, π × π 0 )L(1 − s, π ∨ × π 0∨ ).
Then π is a cuspidal automorphic representation. t

u
Here to define ε(s, π × π 0 ) we fix a nontrivial character ψ : F \AF → C× and
formally define
Y
ε(s, π × π 0 ) := ε(s, πv × πv0 , ψv ). (11.20)
v
We refer to [CPS99] for a proof of Theorem 11.9.1 and for variants.
Exercises
11.1. Let B1 , B2 ≤ GLn be Borel subgroups defined over a nonarchimedean

local field F . For 1 ≤ i ≤ 2 let Ni be the unipotent radical of Bi and let
ψi be a generic character of Ni (F ). Prove that an irreducible admissible
representation π of GLn (F ) is ψ1 -generic if and only if it is ψ2 -generic.
11.2. Prove Corollary 11.3.2.
11.3. Let G be a split reductive group over a global field F and assume that
π is a cuspidal globally ψ-generic representation of V . If π ∼
= ⊗0v πv prove that
each πv is ψv -generic.
11.4. Prove Theorem 11.4.2 when n = 2.
11.5. Assume that J(λ) is irreducible unitary unramified generic represen-

tation of GLn (F ) where λ ∈ a∗Tn C . Let ψ : F → C× be unramified, let
W ∈ W(π, ψ) and W 0 ∈ W(π ∨ , ψ) be the unique spherical Whittaker func-
tionals satisfying W (In ) = W 0 (In ) = 1. Using the identity
det(I2 − q −s eλ ⊗ e−λ )Ψ (s, W, W 0 , 1OFn ) = 1
and Proposition 11.5.1 prove that every eigenvalue of eλ lies in (q −1/2 , q 1/2 ).
11.9 Converse theory 227
11.6. If π and π 0 are cuspidal automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) such

that π S ∼
= π 0S for some finite set of places S of F then π ∼
= π0 .
11.7. If π and π 0 are isobaric automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) such

that π S ∼
= π 0S for some finite set of places S of F then π ∼
= π0 .
11.8. Prove Theorem 11.7.1 in the case m = n − 1 using Theorem 11.7.4 and
the local functional equations of Theorem 11.5.4.
Chapter 12
Langlands Functoriality
The local Langlands conjecture is

one of those hydra-like
conjectures which seems to grow
as it gets proved.
M. Harris and R. Taylor
Abstract Langlands functoriality has been a driving force in modern number

theory, representation theory, and beyond since it was first posed in a famous
letter of Langlands to Weil. We survey progress toward the local Langlands
conjecture and state a rough form of the global Langlands functoriality con-
jecture in this chapter.
12.1 The Weil group
In this chapter we state the Langlands reciprocity and functoriality conjec-

tures. Though the conjectures are mostly open, extremely important progress
has been made.
We begin with reciprocity. Let G be a reductive group which is unramified
over a nonarchimedean local field F (recall that by our conventions reductive
groups are connected). By Corollary 7.5.2 one has a bijection
 
n o  isomorphism classes 
b o Fr)Fr-ss (C)/ ∼ ←→ of irreducible unramified .
(G
representations of G(F )
 
This is the archetypical example of a Langlands reciprocity law or Langlands

correspondence . Roughly speaking, Langlands reciprocity relates represen-
tations of generalized Galois groups with image in L G and representations of
the points of G in locally compact rings. One refers informally to the Galois
229
230 12 Langlands Functoriality
side of the correspondence and the automorphic side of the correspondence.

This terminology is standard, but a bit loose, because the Galois side really
consists of representations of generalized Galois groups and the representa-
tions on the other side of the correspondence are only automorphic in the
global setting. It is not difficult to see how the bijection above fits into this
framework but we will postpone a discussion to §12.5.
We now describe more precisely the objects involved on the Galois side
of the correspondence. We start by indicating why working with traditional
Galois groups is not sufficient. Let F be a global or local field, let F sep be a
separable closure of F and let
GalF := Gal(F sep /F )
be the absolute Galois group of F . It is endowed with the profinite topology.

A continuous homomorphism GalF → GLn (C) necessarily has finite im-
age. On the other hand, there are many continuous homomorphisms GalF →
GLn (Q` ) with infinite image.
Example 12.1. If E is an elliptic curve over Q without CM, then the Tate
module of E gives a representation with image isomorphic to GL2 (Z` ) for
almost all primes ` [Ser72].
Example 12.2. A more elementary example is given by the cyclotomic char-

acter, which is the character
χ` : GalQ −→ Z×
`
defined as follows. If σ ∈ GalQ and ζn is a primitive `n th root of unity then

a
σ(ζn ) = ζnσ,n for some aσ,n ∈ (Z/`n )× . We then define
χ` (σ) = lim aσ,n .

←−
n
One can check that if p 6= ` then χ` (Frp ) = p.
It would be nice to view these examples as complex-valued representations

of a single group. At least in the special case where we are only considering
representations into GL1 (C) Weil was able to accomplish this by constructing
a modification of the Galois group. We now discuss this modification following
the exposition of [Tat79].
Definition 12.1. Let F be a local or global field. Then a Weil group for F
is a tuple (WF , φ, {ArtE }) where WF is a topological group,
φ : WF −→ GalF
is a continuous homomorphism with dense image, and, for each finite exten-
sion E/F ,
12.1 The Weil group 231
WE := φ−1 (GalE ),
and
ArtE : CE −→ WEab (12.1)
is an isomorphism, where
(
E × if F is local,
CE :=
E × \A×E if F is global.
Here the superscript ab denotes its maximal abelian Hausdorff quotient, that
is, the quotient by the closure of the commutator subgroup. Moreover, these
data are required to satisfy the following assumptions:
(a) For each finite extension E/F the composite
Art induced by φ
E
CE −−−−→ WEab −−−−−−−−→ Galab
E
is the reciprocity map of class field theory.

(b) Let w ∈ WF and σ = φ(w) ∈ GalF . For each E the following diagram
CE
ArtE
/ W ab
E
σ

CE σ / W abσ
ArtE σ E
commutes. Here the right arrow is induced by conjugation by w.

(c) For E 0 ⊆ E the following diagram
ArtE 0
CE 0 / W ab0
E
inclusion transfer

CE / W ab
ArtE E
commutes.
(d) Finally, the map
WF → lim WE/F
←−
is an isomorphism, where WE/F := WF /WE , the bar denoting closure.
For the proof of the following theorem we refer to [AT09]:
Theorem 12.1.1 A Weil group exists and it is unique up to isomorphism.

t
u
In many cases the Weil group can be described explicitly:
Example 12.3. Let F be a local field with residue field k and

S for all finite
extensions E/F let kE be the residue field of E. Put k = E kE . Let q be
the cardinality of k. The group WF is the dense subgroup of GalF generated
n
by the σ ∈ GalF such that on k, σ acts as x 7→ xq for some n ∈ Z. The
|a|
automorphism ArtE (a) acts as x 7→ x on k.
Example 12.4. In the global function field case, the Weil group is defined as
in the previous example, but one replaces the residue field above with the
constant field.
Example 12.5. If F = C then WF is just C× , φ is the trivial map and ArtF

is the identity map.
Example 12.6. If F = R then WF is C× ∪ jC× where j 2 = −1 and jcj −1 = c

for c ∈ C× . In this case φ takes C× to 1 and jC× to the nontrivial element
of Gal(C/R).
For number fields one doesn’t have a nice intrinsic description like in the
above examples.
Almost by definition of the Weil group, one obtains the following corre-
spondence:
Theorem 12.1.2 (The Langlands correspondence for GL1 ) There is a
bijection between isomorphism classes of irreducible automorphic representa-
tions of GL1 (AF ) and continuous representations χ : WF → GL1 (C).
Proof. An irreducible automorphic representation of GL1 (AF ) can be iden-

tified with a character of F × \A× ab
F , which is isomorphic to WF by definition
of the Weil group. t
u
12.2 The Weil-Deligne group and L-parameters
For better or worse the Weil group is still not big enough. The correct en-
largement of WF when F is a number field should be the as yet hypothetical
Langlands group. On the other hand, the correct enlargement of WF when F
is a local field is known, so in this section we restrict to this case. We follow
the treatment in [GR10].
The Weil-Deligne group of a local field F is
(
WF if F is archimedean,
WF0 := (12.2)
WF × SL2 (C) if F is nonarchimedean.
We also denote by φ the map

12.2 The Weil-Deligne group and L-parameters 233
φ : WF0 → GalF (12.3)
that is just φ in the archimedean case and it the composite of the natural
quotient map WF0 → WF with φ in the nonarchimedean case.
Let G be a group scheme over C whose neutral component is a reductive
group. If F is archimedean, then a representation of WF0 into G(C) is simply
a homomorphism ρ : WF → G(C).
Assume until stated otherwise that F is nonarchimedean. We now prepare
to define a representation of WF0 . Let k be the residue field of F , k a choice
of algebraic closure, and Galk := Gal(k/k). The action of GalF preserves the
ring of integers and the (unique) prime ideal of the ring of integers of any
finite extension field E/F contained in F . There is thus an exact sequence
1 −→ IF −→ GalF −→ Galk −→ 1
where IF is the inertia subgroup, which can be defined as the kernel of the
map GalF → Galk .
The Weil group WF is a subgroup of GalF and contains IF . We thus have
an exact sequence
1 −→ IF −→ WF −→ Galk .
The last map is not surjective. Its image is isomorphic to Z, whereas Galk is
isomorphic to Z,
b the profinite completion of Z. We deduce that
WF ∼
= IF o hFri
where Fr is a Frobenius element.
Definition 12.2. Let G be a group scheme over C whose neutral component

is a reductive group. If F is nonarchimedean a representation of WF0 into
G(C) is a homomorphism
ρ : WF0 −→ G(C)
such that ρ is trivial on an open subgroup of IF , ρ(Fr) is semisimple, and

ρ|SL2 (C) is induced by a morphism of algebraic groups SL2 → G.
By a representation of WF0 we mean a representation of WF0 into GLn (C)

for some integer n. There are various equivalent alternate definitions of a
representation of the Weil-Deligne group in the literature, see [GR10]. We
also note that in the nonarchimedean case what we call a representation more
properly ought to be called a Frobenius semisimple representation.
Recall that the L-group L G of a reductive group G over F admits a canon-
ical map L G → GalF given by taking the quotient by the neutral component.
This map occurs in the following definition:
Definition 12.3. An L-parameter is a representation ρ of WF0 into L G such

that the composite
ρ
WF0 −→ L G −→ GalF
is the map φ of (12.3). Two L-parameters are equivalent if they are conju-
gate by an element of G(C).
b
We note that given an L-parameter ρ : WF0 → L H and an L-map

L
H −→ L G
the composite homomorphism WF0 → L G is an L-parameter.

When G is split, the L-group is a direct product:
L
G := G(C)
b × GalF .
In particular in this case an L-parameter ρ : WF0 → L G induces a represen-

tation into G(C)
b
ρ : WF0 −→ L G −→ G(C)
b
and every representation of WF0 into G(C) b arises in this manner. Thus L-
parameters may be identified with representations into G(C) b in this setting,
and the notion of equivalence of L-parameters corresponds to G(C)-conjugacy
b
of the associated representations.
We now define L-functions, ε-factors, and γ-factors. We start by giving
ourselves a representation ρ : WF0 −→ GL(V ). Recall that the isomorphism
classes of irreducible representations of SL2 are given by the symmetric power
representations Symn of the standard representation. We can therefore de-
compose V as a representation of WF0 = WF × SL2 (C):
∞
M
V = Vn ⊗ Symn .
n=0
Here Vn is a representation of WF (that is zero for all but finitely many n).
We then define
∞
Y −1
L(s, ρ) := det 1 − ρ(Fr)q −(s+n/2) |VnIF . (12.4)
n=0
Assume that E/F is a field extension of either archimedean or nonar-

chimedean fields. If ρ : WE0 → GL(V ) is a representation then it is not hard
to see that if we define the induction
W0 0 ⊕[WF :WE ] 0 0
IndF
E (ρ) := IndW 0 (ρ) : WF −→ GL(V
F
) (12.5)
E
0 0
in the usual manner then it is a representation of WF0 into GL V ⊕[WF :WE ]
in the sense of Definition 12.2. One checks that when F is nonarchimedean

L(s, ρ) = L s, IndF
E (ρ) . (12.6)
12.2 The Weil-Deligne group and L-parameters 235
One says that L-functions are invariant under induction. Moreover, if ρi :

WF0 → GL(Vi ), i ∈ {1, 2}, are a pair of representations then the direct sum,
defined in the usual manner, is a representation into GL(V1 ⊕ V2 ) in the sense
of Definition 12.2. Again when F is nonarchimedean one checks that
L(s, ρ1 ⊕ ρ2 ) = L(s, ρ1 )L(s, ρ2 ). (12.7)
One says that L-functions are additive.

We now assume until otherwise stated that F is archimedean. Part of
the data of the Weil group is an isomorphism ArtF : F × →W˜ Fab . Thus we
can identify quasi-characters of WF and quasi-characters of F × . Define the
quasi-character
χs,m : F × −→ C×
zm (12.8)
z 7−→ |z|s .
(z z̄)m/2
Here if F is complex the bar denotes complex conjugation. If F is real the

bar is the identity map and we assume m ∈ {0, 1}. In particular χ0,1 is the
sign character. We leave the proof of the following lemma as Exercise 12.7:
Lemma 12.2.1 Every quasi-character of F × is of the form χs,m for a unique
s ∈ C and m ∈ Z where we assume m ∈ {0, 1} if F is real. t
u
Unless otherwise specified, when we discuss the character χs,m we will always
assume that s ∈ C, that m ∈ Z and if F is real that m ∈ {0, 1}.
Let
( s
π − 2 Γ 2s

if F = R
ΓF (s) := (12.9)
2(2π)−s Γ (s) if F = C.
Here Γ (s) is the usual Γ -function. We then define

L(s, χs0 ,m ) = ΓF s + s0 + [F|m|
:R] . (12.10)
Now WC is just C× by (12.5) and WR contains WC as a normal subgroup

of index 2. Using this fact the following proposition is not hard to prove (see
Exercise 12.8):
Proposition 12.2.2 Any representation of WF for archimedean F is com-
pletely reducible. If F = C then irreducible representations are 1-dimensional,
and if F = R then irreducible representations are 1 or 2 dimensional. The
irreducible two-dimensional representations of WR are the induced represen-
tations
IndR
C (χs,m )
where m 6= 0. For m 6= 0 one has

IndR ∼ R
C (χs,m ) = IndC (χs0 ,m0 ) (12.11)
if and only if s = s0 and m = ±m0 . t

u
Motivated by (12.6) we define

L s, IndR C (χs0 ,m ) := L(s, χs0 ,m ).
By Proposition 12.2.2 a general representation ρ : WF −→ GL(V ) is a di-

rect sum of its irreducible subrepresentations. All these subrepresentations
are either 1 or 2 dimensional and for such representations we already have
a definition of an L-function. Motivated by (12.7) we then define the L-
function of such a representation to be the product of the L-functions of its
irreducible subrepresentations. This completes the definition of L(s, ρ) in the
archimedean case.
Now we allow F to be either archimedean or nonarchimedean and discuss ε
factors. If ψ : F → C× is an additive character, d× x is a Haar measure on F × ,
dx is a Haar measure on F and χ is a quasi-character, i.e., a homomorphism
χ : WF −→ GL1 (C),
then we define ε(s, χ, ψ) := ε(s, χ, ψ, dx) to be the nonzero complex number

such that
fb(x)χ−1 (x)|x|1−s d× x f (x)χ(x)|x|s d× x

R R
F× F×
= ε(s, χ, ψ) , (12.12)
L(1 − s, χ−1 ) L(s, χ)
R
where fb(y) := F f (x)ψ(xy)dx is the Fourier transform of f . In certain cases
ε(s, χ, ψ) can be explicitly computed. When F is nonarchimedean and ab-
solutely unramified, χ and ψ are unramified, and dx is normalized so that
dx(OF ) = 1 then ε(s, χ, ψ) = 1.
Langlands and Deligne defined in general an ε-factor ε(s, ρ, ψ) [Del73b,
Del75]. The ε-factor encodes important arithmetic information about the
representation ρ, including its Artin conductor [Tat79]. Finally we set
ε(s, ρ, ψ)L(1 − s, ρ∨ )
γ(s, ρ, ψ) := . (12.13)
L(s, ρ)
Now given an L-parameter ρ : WF0 → L G and a representation
r : L G −→ GL(V )
we obtain a representation r ◦ ρ : WF0 → GL(V ). We then define

12.3 The archimedean Langlands correspondence 237
L(s, ρ, r) : = L(s, r ◦ ρ),

ε(s, ρ, r, ψ) : = ε(s, r ◦ ρ, ψ), (12.14)
γ(s, ρ, r, ψ) : = γ(s, r ◦ ρ, ψ).
In the case where G = GLn and the map r : L GLn → GLn (C) is just the
projection to the neutral component r is omitted from notation, i.e.
L(s, ρ) := L(s, ρ, r).
12.3 The archimedean Langlands correspondence
For this section F is an archimedean local field. Over archimedean local fields
the Langlands correspondence between L-packets of representations of G(F )
and L-parameters into L G was proven by Langlands [Lan89]. We should note
that there is a substantial literature refining his result in various important
ways, but we will not describe it.
Instead we will focus on the G = GLn case and describe the Langlands
correspondence explicitly. Let
K := Kn := {g ∈ GLn (F ) : gg ∗ = In }
where g ∗ = g t if F is real and g ∗ = g t if F is complex. This is the standard

maximal compact subgroup of GLn (F ). Let
g := gn := ResF/R gln .
We recall from §10.5 that any irreducible admissible (g, K)-module π can
be written as an isobaric sum
π∼
= ki=1 πi
where the πi are irreducible and essentially square integrable. It turns out
that the possibilities for essentially square integrable π are very limited. If
G is a semisimple group over R we say that G is equal rank if there is a
maximal torus T ≤ G that is anisotropic. In other words, T ≤ G is maximal
and T (R) is compact.
Harish-Chandra’s fundamental theorem on the existence of discrete series
representations follows:
Theorem 12.3.1 (Harish-Chandra) Let G be a reductive group over R.
There are essentially square-integrable irreducible representations of G(R) if
and only if Gder is equal rank. t
u
We refer to [Wal88, §7.7.1] for the proof.
By the theorem, if F is complex then GLn (F ) admits irreducible essen-

tially square-integrable representations if and only if n = 1 (in fact one-
dimensional representations are always essentially square-integrable). If F is
real then GLn (F ) admits irreducible essentially square-integrable represen-
tations if and only if 1 ≤ n ≤ 2 (see Exercise 12.11).
We now explicitly define the Langlands correspondence. The admissible
representation corresponding to a 1 dimensional representation WF → C× is
the quasi-character defined by the composite
Art
F × −→F WFab −→ C× .
If WF → GLn (C) is irreducible and n > 1 then n = 2 by Proposition 12.2.2.

In this case the representation is of the form IndW
WC (χs,m ) by the same propo-
R
sition. The associated irreducible (g, K)-module, by definition, is | · |s πm ,

where πm is the discrete series representation (or limit of discrete series rep-
resentation) of §4.7.
In general, if ρ : WF → GLn (C) is a representation, it is isomorphic
to ⊕i=1 ρi where the ρi are all irreducible of dimension 1 or 2, and we let
the corresponding irreducible (g, K)-module be π(ρ) := ki=1 π(ρi ), where
π(ρi ) is the irreducible admissible (g, K)-module corresponding to ρi . Using
Proposition 12.2.2 and the discussion of isobaric representations given in §10.5
we deduce the following very special case of the archimedean local Langlands
correspondence:
Theorem 12.3.2 The map ρ 7→ π(ρ) described above is a bijection between
isomorphism classes of irreducible admissible representations of GLn (F ) and
equivalence classes of representations WF → GLn (C). t
u
Now suppose m, n ∈ Z≥1 and we are given an irreducible admissible
(gn , Kn )-module π and an irreducible admissible (gm , Km )-module π 0 with
associated representations ρ(π) : WF → GLn (C) and ρ(π 0 ) : WF → GLm (C).
For any nontrivial character ψ : F → C× we let
L(s, π × π 0 ) : = L(s, ρ(π) ⊗ ρ(π 0 )),

ε(s, π × π 0 , ψ) : = ε(s, ρ(π) ⊗ ρ(π 0 ), ψ),
γ(s, π × π 0 , ψ) : = γ(s, ρ(π) ⊗ ρ(π 0 ), ψ).
This is the definition of the archimedean Rankin-Selberg L-factors. Given

this indirect definition, it is remarkable that Jacquet, Piatetski-Shapiro and
Shalika were able to prove that it satisfies the same analytic properties (e.g.
functional equation) that the nonarchimedean local L-function does (see The-
orem 11.5.4). The fact that they were able to prove this indicates that the
archimedean Langlands correspondence given above has meaning. Without
proving that some other property is preserved by the correspondence it is
rather ad-hoc. Another indication of the utility of the correspondence is that
it can be used to compute characters of representations. We refer to the
12.4 Local Langlands for GLn 239
foundational work of Shelstad and Langlands [Lan89, She82] for more on

this matter.
12.4 Local Langlands for GLn
Let F be a local field. Let Π(GLn ) be the set of isomorphism classes of

irreducible admissible representations of GLn (F ) and let Φ(GLn ) be the set
of GLn (C)-conjugacy classes of L-parameters ρ : WF0 → L GLn .
By a local Langlands correspondence for GLn over F one means a collec-
tion, for every n ≥ 1, of bijections
rec := recF : Π(GLn )−→Φ(GL

˜ n) (12.15)
such that
(a) If π ∈ Π(GL1 ) then rec(π) = π ◦ Art−1
F .
(b) If π1 ∈ Π(GLn1 ) and π2 ∈ Π(GLn2 ) then
L(s, π1 × π2 ) = L(s, rec(π1 ) ⊗ rec(π2 ))
and
ε(s, π1 × π2 , ψ) = ε(s, rec(π1 ) ⊗ rec(π2 ), ψ).
(c) If π ∈ Π(GLn (F )) and χ ∈ Π(GL1 (F )) then
rec(π ⊗ (χ ◦ det)) = rec(π) ⊗ rec(χ).
(d) If π ∈ Π(GLn ) and π has central quasi-character χ then
det rec(π) = rec(χ).
(e) If π ∈ Π(GLn ) then rec(π ∨ ) = rec(π)∨ (where ∨ denotes the contragre-

dient).
Theorem 12.4.1 (Local Langlands correspondence) There is a local
Langlands correspondence for GLn for every local field F . t
u
When n = 1 this is essentially local class field theory. When F has positive
characteristic (and hence is the completion of a global function field) the
theorem is due to Laumon, Rapoport and Stuhler [LRS93]. In the mixed
characteristic case the proved by Harris-Taylor first [HT01], then a simplified
proof was found by Henniart [Hen00].
There are many additional desiderata that one might ask of the local Lang-
lands correspondence. We mention a few. First, the correspondence sends
isobaric sums to direct sums. In other words,
rec(π1 π2 ) = rec(π1 ) ⊕ rec(π2 ). (12.16)

Second, supercuspidal representations of GLn (F ) correspond bijectively to

irreducible representations of WF0 that are trivial on the SL2 (C)-factor. Fi-
nally, a representation π is essentially square integrable if and only if rec(π)
is irreducible. Indeed, in the archimedean case this is clear from our explicit
description of the correspondence in §12.3. In the nonarchimedean case the
theorem of Bernstein, Theorem 8.4.3, asserts that a representation is essen-
tially square integrable if and only if it is of the form J(σ a , λa ) with notation
as in Theorem 8.4.3 (here σ is supercuspidal). Such representations corre-
spond to representations of WF0 = WF × SL2 (C) of the form rec(σ) ⊗ Syma .
All of these requirements are more or less built into the classification. In the
nonarchimedean setting, the first paper to discuss how the whole correspon-
dence could be reduced to the supercuspidal case was [Zel80].
12.5 The local Langlands conjecture
The (conjectural) Langlands correspondence for arbitrary reductive groups

G over local fields F is far more complicated. The general shape involves a
relationship between

isomorphism classes of irreducible
Π(G) := (12.17)
admissible representations of G(F )
and
Ψ (G) := {G(C)-conjugacy
b classes of L-parameters into L G} (12.18)
We will state the conjecture for quasi-split groups G in this section. Our
exposition follows that of [Kal16].
The conjectural correspondence is simplest to state in the tempered case
and we will restrict to this setting. We have already defined the notion of a
tempered representation in Definition 4.6. An L-parameter
ρ : WF0 −→ L G
is tempered if its image under the projection to G(C) b is bounded. Note

L
that the projection G → G(C) is just a set-theoretic projection; it is only a
b
homomorphism if G is split. It is clear the notion of being tempered depends
only on the equivalence class. We denote by Φ(G) the set of all equivalence
classes of L-parameters and by
Φt (G) (12.19)
the set of equivalence classes of tempered L-parameters. We denote by

12.5 The local Langlands conjecture 241
Πt (G)
the set of isomorphism classes of tempered irreducible admissible representa-

tions of G(F ). The basic form of the local Langlands conjecture for quasi-split
groups is the following:
Conjecture 12.5.1 (Local Langlands correspondence) Assume G is quasi-
split.
(a) There is a surjective map
LL : Πt (G) −→ Φt (G)
with finite fibers Π(ρ) := LL−1 (ρ).

(b) If one element of Π(ρ) is essentially square-integrable then they all are,
and this is the case if and only if the image of ρ is not contained in a
proper parabolic subgroup of L G.
(c) If ρ ∈ Φt (G) is the image of ρM ∈ Φt (M ) for a proper Levi subgroup M ≤
G, then Π(ρ) consists of the irreducible constituents of the representations
that are parabolically induced from elements of Π(ρM ).
For the notion of a parabolic subgroup of L G, we refer to §7.4. In the last
assertion we are implicitly using the fact that there is a natural map L M →
L
G for every Levi subgroup M ≤ G. We will discuss the compatibility of
the formulation above with the known case of G = GLn at the end of this
section.
Let us describe the structure of an L-packet in an important special case.
Definition 12.4. An L-parameter is unramified if F is nonarchimedean, G

is unramified and the parameter is trivial on IF × SL2 (C).
Let ρ : WF0 → L G be an unramified parameter. Given a hyperspecial

subgroup K ≤ G(F ), the coset
b o Fr)Fr−ss (C)
ρ(Fr) ∈ (G
gives rise to an unramified representation via the Satake correspondence as

in Corollary 7.5.2. Specifically, the coset ρ(Fr) gives rise to λ ∈ X ∗ (T )F ⊗ C
via Lemma 7.6.1. The corresponding K-spherical representation is the unique
K-spherical subquotient J(λ). Now if G is semisimple then there is a unique
Gad (F )-conjugacy class of hyperspecial subgroups of G(F ) [Tit79, §2.5 and
3.8]. However (even for semisimple G) there is in general more than one
G(F )-conjugacy class of hyperspecial subgroups of G(F ). Thus the definition
of J(λ) depends on the choice of K; to indicate this we temporarily write it
as J(λ, K). By definition
a
Π(ρ) := J(λ, K)
where the disjoint union is over the G(F )-conjugacy classes of hyperspecial
subgroups of G(F ) with K a representative of the class. This is an unrami-
fied L-packet.
Given a tempered L-parameter ρ, the isomorphism classes of representa-
tions in Π(ρ) are by definition a local L-packet. The conjecture, as stated,
leaves open the question of the structure of the packet Π(ρ). To describe a
little of what is expected, let
Sρ := CG(C)
b (ρ(WF0 )) (12.20)
be the centralizer of ρ(WF0 ) in G

b and let
GalF
S ρ := Sρ /ZG(C)
b . (12.21)
Here we are using the fact that Gb comes equipped with an action of GalF ,
the same action used to define L G.
Lemma 12.5.2 For G = GLn the group S ρ is connected.
Proof. It suffices to show that Sρ is connected. For irreducible ρ Schur’s

lemma implies that Sρ = Gm In (the scalar matrices in GLn ). In general, the
fact that ρ is Frobenius semisimple implies that it is completely reducible
(see Exercise 12.4) so Sρ is isomorphic to a product of Gm ’s, one for each
irreducible subrepresentation of ρ. t
u
Conjecture 12.5.3 For a tempered L-packet ρ there is an injection
ι : Π(ρ) −→ Irr(π0 (S ρ ))
that is bijective if F is nonarchimedean.

Here Irr(π0 (S ρ )) is the set of isomorphism classes of irreducible representa-
tions of the finite group π0 (S ρ ), the group of components of S ρ .
The theory of generic representations gives a means of isolating a basepoint
in Π(ρ). Consider the set of pairs (B, ψ) where B ≤ G is a Borel subgroup
and ψ is a generic character of the F -points of its unipotent radical. There is a
natural action of G(F ) on this set by conjugation, and a Whittaker datum
is a G(F )-orbit. Let w be a Whittaker datum and say that an admissible
irreducible representation π is w-generic if it is ψ-generic for some (hence
all) pairs (B, ψ) ∈ w.
The following is a version of a conjecture of Shahidi [Sha90, §9]:
Conjecture 12.5.4 (Shahidi) Every tempered L-packet Π(ρ) contains a

unique w-generic member.
Assume for this paragraph that conjectures 12.5.1, 12.5.3 and 12.5.4 are
valid. Given a Whittaker datum w we assume that the injection ι : Π(ρ) →
12.5 The local Langlands conjecture 243
Irr(π0 (S ρ )) can be normalized so that the generic element of the packet (which
is unique by Conjecture 12.5.4) is sent to the trivial representation. We call
this normalized injection ιw . Thus we have a pairing

h , i : Π(ρ) × π0 S ρ −→ C
(π, s) 7−→ tr(ιw (π)(s)).
It will play a crucial role in Conjecture 12.6.3 below.

Important progress towards the conjectures 12.5.1, 12.5.3, and 12.5.4 has
been made. We very briefly indicate some results and refer to [Kal16] for a
more detailed discussion. The following is Arthur’s main theorem on the local
Langlands correspondence [Art13, Theorem 1.5.1].
Theorem 12.5.5 Assume the stabilization of the twisted trace formula and
that F is of characteristic zero. Parts (a) and (b) of Conjecture 12.5.1 and
Conjecture 12.5.3 are valid for the split groups Sp2n and SO2n+1 . A slightly
weaker version of these conjectures is valid for the quasi-split (or split) special
orthogonal groups of even-dimensional quadratic spaces. t
u
Let G = SO∗2n , which we take to be either the split form of SO2n or a
quasi-split inner form, and let O∗2n be the corresponding orthogonal group.
In the theorem the slighly weaker version of the correspondence is the corre-
spondence obtained by replacing equivalence classes in Φt (G) and Πt (G) by
equivalence classes up to conjugation by O b ∗ (C) and O∗ (F ), respectively.
2n 2n
We point out that technically speaking we have only defined L-groups for
reductive groups, not disconnected algebraic groups with reductive neutral
component like O∗2n . The definition must be extended to make sense of the
expression Ob ∗ (C).
2n
We will not say precisely what is meant by the stabilization of the trace
formula. Moeglin and Waldspurger [MW16a, MW16b] have proven this sta-
bilization under the assumption of the twisted weighted fundamental lemma.
There does not seem to be any theoretical obstacle to obtaining this last
result, but it has not been completed. Thus the work of Arthur is still con-
ditional at this point.
There is an analogous statement for quasi-split unitary groups over local
fields [Mok15, Theorem 2.5.1]:
Theorem 12.5.6 Assume the stabilization of the twisted trace formula and
that F is of characteristic zero. Let E/F be a quadratic extension and let G be
the corresponding quasi-split unitary group. Parts (a) and (b) of Conjecture
12.5.1 and Conjecture 12.5.3 are valid for G. t
u
In this section we have limited our focus to the tempered case. In prac-
tice one needs to refine this in two qualitatively different manners. First, one
often has to enlarge the set of equivalence classes of tempered L-parameters
to a set of almost tempered L-parameters Φat (G) and define a set of al-
most tempered representations Πat (G) such that there is a local Langlands
correspondence relating the two sets. This enlargement is necessary because

we do not know that the local components of automorphic representations
that are expected to be tempered are in fact tempered (see §12.6 below for
further discussion). For general representations stating a version of the local
Langlands correspondence requires the introduction of Arthur’s A-packets
(see [Art89, Art90]).
We close this section by discussing the compatibility of conjectures 12.5.1,
12.5.3, and 12.5.4 and our discussion of the unramified correspondence
with the local Langlands correspondence of Theorem 12.4.1. For GLn or
ResE/F GLn where E/F is a field extension take Φ(G) to be the set of all
equivalence classes of L-parameters. Then for each ρ we can let Π(ρ) be
the unique irreducible admissible representation of G(F ) corresponding to
ρ under the local Langlands correspondence. To check that under the local
Langlands correspondence of Theorem 12.4.1 irreducible tempered represen-
tations are sent to tempered parameters is Exercise 12.9. The fact that the
Langlands correspondence in this case is compatible with the unramified cor-
respondence discussed above is a consequence of the fact that all hyperspecial
subgroups of GLn (F ) are GLn (F )-conjugate to GLn (OF ) (see [Ser06, II.IV
Appendix 1]). Condition (b) in Conjecture 12.5.1 is valid by the discussion at
the end of §12.4. To check consistency with condition (c) of Conjecture 12.5.1
let M be the Levi subgroup of GLn , so M ∼
Qk
= i=1 GLni is a product of gen-
Qk
eral linear groups. We note that if ρM ∈ Φt (M ) = i=1 Φt (GLni ) then the
Qk
parabolic induction of the unique representation π = i=1 πni ∈ Π(ρM ) to
GLn (F ) is irreducible by Exercise 12.10 and equal to ki=1 πni . Given that the
local Langlands correspondence sends isobaric sums to direct sums we deduce
compatibility of the local Langlands correspondence with requirement (c). To
check compatibility with Conjecture 12.5.3 we use Lemma 12.5.2. Finally, to
check compatibility with Conjecture 12.5.4 we recall that every irreducible
tempered representation of GLn (F ) is generic [JS83, §1.2].
12.6 Global Langlands functoriality
Let F be a global field and let G be a connected reductive group over F . As

before, let GalF := Gal(F sep /F ) and for all places v of F let
GalFv := Gal(Fvsep /Fv ).
Then for each place v of F there is a GalF -conjugacy class of injective ho-
momorphisms GalFv −→ GalF . Choosing such a homomorphism one obtains
an injection
L
GFv := G(C)
b o GalFv −→ G(C)
b o GalF =: L G.
12.6 Global Langlands functoriality 245
Motivated by this define

( )
Y
Φ(GAF ) : = (ρv ) ∈ Φ(GFv ) : ρv is unramified for a.e. v . (12.22)
v
Let Φt (GAF ) ⊂ Φ(GAF ) be the subset of ρ = (ρv ) such that ρv ∈ Φt (GFv )

for all v. We call Φ(GAF ) the set of adelic L-parameters into L G and call
Φt (GAF ) the set of tempered adelic L-parameters into L G. We will often
drop the adjective “adelic.”
Assume momentarily that G is quasi-split and that we know the local
Langlands conjecture for GFv for all places v. Thus, for example, we could
take G to be GLn . Then given a tempered L-parameter ρ ∈ Φt (GAF ) we can
form the global L-packet
Π(ρ) := {π = ⊗0v πv : πv ∈ Π(ρv ) for all v} . (12.23)
This is a set of admissible representations of G(AF ). The set of all L-packets

of G(AF ) up to equivalence is denoted Π(G). Here two L-packets Π(ρ) and
Π(ρ0 ) are said to be equivalent if there is a bijection
j : Π(ρ) −→ Π(ρ0 )
such that j(π) is isomorphic to π as a representation of G(AF ). In general

L-packets are infinite. We say a global L-packet is automorphic if one of its
elements is an automorphic representation. The set of automorphic L-packets
is denoted Πaut (G). There is a natural commutative diagram
Πaut (G) −−−−→ Πw,aut (G)

 
 
y y
Π(G) −−−−→ Πw (G)
where the subscript w denotes the weak L-packets of (7.22). The vertical
arrows above are injective, but the horizontal arrows are not in general.
We now return to the general situation; we do not assume anything about
G other than it is reductive over a global field F . Let H be another reductive
group over F and let
r : L H −→ L G
be an L-map. We then obtain a commutative diagram
L r L
HFv −−−−→ GFv
 
  .
y y
L r L
H −−−−→ G
Given any ρ ∈ Φ(HAF ) we can define
r ◦ ρ = (r ◦ ρv ) ∈ Φ(GAF ). (12.24)
Thus given an L-map L H → L G we obtain maps
Φt (HAF ) −−−−→ Φt (GAF )

 
 
y y
Φ(HAF ) −−−−→ Φ(GAF ).
Assume for the remainder of this section that G and H are quasi-split
and that conjectures 12.5.1, 12.5.3 and 12.5.4 are known for GFv and HFv
for all places v. This is a reasonable working assumption, as the local Lang-
lands correspondence is known in many cases. The remainder of this section
is devoted to using the local Langlands correspondence to state the global
Langlands functoriality conjecture. We begin with the simplest case. Assume
that G = ResE/F GLn for some field extension E/F of finite degree. In this
case local L-packets are singletons (see §12.5). Thus global L-packets are
singletons in this setting and the following conjecture is natural:
Conjecture 12.6.1 Suppose that G = ResE/F GLn . Let π be an everywhere
tempered cuspidal automorphic representation of H(AF ) with L-parameter
ρ ∈ Φt (HAF ). The unique admissible representation in Π(r ◦ ρ) is automor-
phic.
We invite the reader to compare this with the weaker Conjecture 7.7.1. At
least in the cases where the local Langlands conjecture is known for H Con-
jecture 12.6.1 does not rely on a chain of conjectures for its statement.
For general (even non-quasi-split) H and G the statement of the weaker
Conjecture 7.7.1 doesn’t even require any unknown conjecture in its state-
ment. However, Conjecture 7.7.1 leaves much to be desired. There could be
many L-packets in a weak L-packet, and it does not explain which elements
of an L-packet are automorphic.
Giving a more specific conjecture seems to require the introduction of the
conjectural Langlands group LF . This first appeared in [Lan79a] and is
also discussed in [Art02], where a conjectural construction of the group is
given. The theory of Tannakian categories also indicates that such a group
ought to exist if we assume Langlands functoriality. For a discussion of this
point of view and the obstacles one runs into if one pursues it we refer to
[Ram94].
The Langlands group LF of a global field F is supposed to be an extension
of the Weil group WF by a locally compact group. For reductive F -groups
G one should be able to define global L-parameters LF → L G as in the
local case; they ought to be continuous homomorphisms commuting with
the projection to GalF along the maps LF → WF → GalF . Two global L-
parameters are equivalent if they are G(C)-conjugate.
b For every place v one
12.6 Global Langlands functoriality 247
should have homomorphisms
WF0 v −→ LF ,
unique up to conjugacy. We let
Φt (G)
be the set of isomorphism classes of L-parameters LF → L G such that the

image of the parameter under the set-theoretic projection map L G → G(C)
b
is bounded. Similarly we let Πt,aut (G) be the set of isomorphism classes of
automorphic representations of G(AF ) that are tempered at every place.
One is supposed to have a global analogue of the local parametrization of
Conjecture 12.5.1:
Conjecture 12.6.2 (Global Langlands reciprocity) There is a surjec-
tive map
Πt,aut (G) −→ Φt (G) (12.25)
such that the diagram
Πt,aut (G) −−−−→ Φt (G)

 
 
y y
⊗v Πt (GFv ) −−−−→ Φt (GAF )
commutes.
In practice one hypothesizes the existence of LF , derives consequences from it,
rephrases those consequences in terms that do not depend on the existence of
LF , and then proves those consequences. For example, given an L-parameter
ρ : LF → L G one should obtain an adelic L-parameter Π(ρ). As in the local
setting, one defines
Sρ := CGb (ρ(LF ))
the centralizer of ρ(LF ) in G

b and sets
GalF
S ρ := Sρ /ZG
b .
Then global L-packets ought to be controlled by the component group of S ρ )

as in the local setting. Remarkably, in [Art13] Arthur was able to use this
yoga to give an unconditional definition of a group π0 (S ρ ) which, if LF exists,
ought to be the component group of S ρ . It then played a crucial role in the
statement of his results.
Assume that π is a given tempered automorphic representation of H(AF )
(which is to say that πv is tempered for all v). Then there is a ρ ∈ Φt (HAF )
such that π ∈ Π(ρ). It is natural to ask if there is an automorphic represen-
tation in Π(r ◦ ρ), where r ◦ ρ is defined as in (12.24). Langlands functoriality

poses a conjectural answer to this question.
Let B ≤ G be a Borel subgroup with unipotent radical N and let ψ :
N (AF ) → C× be a character trivial on N (F ) such that ψv is generic for all
v. This provides us with a Whittaker datum wv for all v and hence pairings
h , iv : Π(r ◦ ρv ) × π0 (S ρv ) −→ C.
Let π 0 be the unique element of Π(r ◦ ρ) such that πv0 is generic for all v.
Assume that π 0 occurs in L2disc ([G]), the largest closed subspace on which the
representation of G(AF ) decomposes discretely. We assume moreover that for
every v there is a homomorphism π0 (S r◦ρ ) −→ π0 (S r◦ρv ). Finally a global
L-parameter
ρ : LF −→ L G
is said to be discrete generic if it is semisimple, its projection to G(C)
b is
bounded and its image is not contained in a proper parabolic subgroup of
L
G.
Conjecture 12.6.3 Under the assumptions above, the multiplicity of a π ∈

Π(r ◦ ρ) in L2disc ([G]) is
X 1 X Y
hπv , si,
ρ
|π0 (S r◦ρ )|
s∈π0 (S r◦ρ ) v
where ρ runs over the equivalence classes of discrete generic global parameters
satisfying πv ∈ Π(r ◦ ρv ) for all places v.
A few comments are in order. Theoretically, one should be able to re-
duce whatever one wants to know about automorphic representations to the
tempered case. The A-packets of Arthur and his conjectures regarding them
were introduced to make this precise [Art89, Art90] (see also [Clo07] and
[Sha11] where the relationship between A-packets and Conjecture 10.6.4, the
Ramanujan Conjecture, is discussed). However, even when we expect rep-
resentations to be tempered, in most cases we can only prove bounds that
establish that they are close to being tempered. Moreover, the only means
currently known to prove that they are indeed tempered seems to be using
Langlands functoriality (compare [Lan70, Sar05]). To overcome this prob-
lem, as in the local case, instead of just dealing with tempered L-parameters
and representations one enlarges the set of parameters involved in the local
Langlands correspondence to a set of almost tempered parameters and rep-
resentations. This is supposed to be a set that is restrictive enough that the
local Langlands correspondence is still correct, but general enough to include
all representations that can occur as local components of the most tempered
part of the discrete series of L2 ([G]). For examples of such an enlargement
we refer to [Art13].
12.7 Langlands L-functions 249
12.7 Langlands L-functions
Assume that we are given a quasi-split reductive G over a local field F such
that the local Langlands correspondence is known for G(F ). Given a repre-
sentation
r : L G −→ GL(V )
an irreducible tempered representation π of G(F ), and a nontrivial character
ψ : F → C× one can then use (12.14) to define the local Langlands L-
function, ε-factor, and γ-factor as follows:
L(s, π, r) : = L(s, LL(π), r)

ε(s, π, r, ψ) : = ε(s, LL(π), r, ψ) (12.26)
γ(s, π, r, ψ) : = γ(s, LL(π), r, ψ).
By definition admissible representations in the same L-packet necessarily

have the same L-functions, ε-factors, and γ-factors. This is the reason for
the terminology “L-packet.” Sometimes one says that elements in the same
L-packet are L-indistinguishable. When G = GLn × GLm and
L
G −→ GLnm (C)
is the tensor product Rankin-Selberg theory as discussed in Chapter 11 al-

ready furnishes us with a definition of these factors. Part of the content of
the local Langlands correspondence for GLn of Theorem 12.4.1 is that the
two definitions coincide.
Now assume that F is a global field, ψ : F \AF → C× is a nontrivial char-
acter, and G is a quasi-split reductive F -group such that the local Langlands
correspondence for G(Fv ) is known for every place v. Assume moreover that
we are given a representation
r : L G −→ GL(V ).
The global Langlands L-function and global ε-factor are then

Y
L(s, π, r) : = L(s, πv , r),
v
Y
ε(s, π, r) : = ε(s, πv , r, ψv ).
v
As the notation indicates, the global ε-factor is (conjecturally) independent

of the choice of ψv . The basic conjectures regarding these L-functions are as
follows:
Conjecture 12.7.1 The L-function L(s, π, r) is meromorphic as a func-
tion of s, is bounded in vertical strips, and satisfies the functional equation
L(s, π, r) = ε(s, π, r)L(1 − s, π ∨ , r∨ ).
This is in fact a consequence of Conjecture 12.6.1 and Theorem 11.7.1.

In addition to the Rankin-Selberg theory discussed in the previous chapter,
many important cases of this conjecture have been proven using Langlands-
Shahidi theory [Sha10, CKM04]. However in most cases the conjecture is
open. The most that is known in general is that L(s, π, r) converges for Re(s)
sufficiently large (see [Lan71] and [Sha10, §2.5]).
12.8 Algebraic representations
Let F be a number field. The hypothetical Langlands group LF is expected

to admit a morphism
LF −→ GalF .
In particular, suitable morphisms
GalF −→ L G
commuting with the projection to GalF should give rise to L-packets of au-
tomorphic representations of G(F ). It is natural to try and describe classes
of L-packets that are of this form.
In [Clo90b] isolated a class of automorphic representations on G = GLn
that he called “algebraic” and then conjectured that they are associated to
particular types of Galois representations (not just representations of LF ).
Buzzard and Gee [BG14] later extended Clozel’s conjectures to the case of ar-
bitrary reductive G. We recall Buzzard and Gee’s conjectures in this section,
following the exposition in [BG14] closely.
Until otherwise specified we work locally at an archimedean place v of F
which we omit from notation, writing F := Fv . Let T ≤ G be a maximal
torus, and let BC > TC be a Borel subgroup of GC . The local Langlands
correspondence is known in the archimedean case [Lan89]. It provides us
with a set-theoretic map
LL : Π(G) −→ Φ(G)
π 7−→ LL(π)
with notation as in (12.17) and (12.18).

Fix a maximal torus Tb in Gb with an identification X∗ (Tb) = X ∗ (T ). We
can and do assume that LL(π)(C× ) ⊆ Tb(C). Let
HomR (C, C) = {σ, τ }.

×
Then one has that ρπ (z) = σ(z)λσ τ (z)λτ for z ∈ F and for λσ , λτ ∈ X ∗ (T )⊗
C such that λσ − λτ ∈ X ∗ (T ). This follows from the fact that all quasi-
characters of C× are of the form (12.8) (see Lemma 12.2.1).
12.8 Algebraic representations 251
The group
(X ∗ (T ) ⊗ C)HomR (C,C) (12.27)
has a diagonal action of the Weyl group W (G, T )(C). The action of GalF on
X ∗ (T ) ⊗ C is W (G, T )(C)-semilinear, i.e. for
(ξ, w, x) ∈ GalF × W (G, T )(C) × X ∗ (T ) ⊗ C
one has ξ(wx) = ξ(w)ξ(x). The group (12.27) also has an action of GalF de-
fined using both the action of GalF on X ∗ (T ) and the action on HomR (F , C).
Explicitly, if we think of an element of (12.27) as a morphism
φ : HomR (C, C) −→ X ∗ (T ) ⊗ C
then ξ.φ := (t 7→ ξφ(tξ)). These considerations impliy that (λσ , λτ ) give us a

well-defined element of
GalF
(X ∗ (T ) ⊗ C)HomR (F ,C) /W (G, T )(C)
The W (G, T )(C)-orbit of (λσ , λτ ) in (X ∗ (T ) ⊗Z C)HomR (C,C) is an invariant

attached to ρπ .
Definition 12.5. An L-parameter ρ : WF → L G is L-algebraic if λσ ∈
X ∗ (T ). An irreducible admissible representation π of G(F ) is L-algebraic if
LL(π) is L-algebraic.
Recall that we have fixed T ≤ B ≤ GC and hence we have the notion of
the positive roots. As usual, denote by ρB the half sum of positive roots.
Definition 12.6. An L-parameter ρ : WF → L G is C-algebraic if λσ −ρB ∈
X ∗ (T ). An irreducible admissible representation π of G(F ) is C-algebraic if
LL(π) is C-algebraic.
The assertion λσ ∈ X ∗ (T ) is independent of the choice of B and of the iso-
morphism F ∼ = C. Likewise the assertion λσ −ρB ∈ X ∗ (T ) is also independent
of such choices. If ρB ∈ X ∗ (T ), then two notions coincide.
The expectation (which will be made precise below) is that L-algebraic au-
tomorphic representations should correspond to representations of GalF with
image in G(Q
b p ) (what we mean by this last symbol will be explained below).
By Corollary 15.5.2 cohomological automorphic representations in the sense
of Definition 15.6 are C-algebraic (hence the terminology C-algebraic). The
known techniques for proving that L-algebraic representations correspond to
representations of GalF invariably involve cohomlogical representations, so
L-algebraic and C-algebraic representations ought to be studied in tandem.
The two definitions differ by half the sum of the positive roots. For G = GLn ,
the notion of C-algebraic coincides in the isobaric case with Clozel’s notation
of algebraic used in [Clo90b, Clo16].
It is clear that the notion of L-algebraicity (resp C-algebraicity) for an

×
L-parameter ρ depends only on the restriction of ρ to F . Moreover the
notion of L-algebraicity (resp. C-algebraicity) of an irreducible admissible
representation π of G(F ) depends only on the infinitesimal character of this
representation. More precisely:
Lemma 12.8.1 An irreducible admissible representation π of G(R) is L-
algebraic (resp. C-algebraic) if and only if the infinitisimal character χλ of π
satisfies λ ∈ X ∗ (T ) ⊂ (tC )∨ (resp. λ − δB ∈ X ∗ (T )).
Proof. In the notation of §4.6, the infinitisimal character of π is χλ with
λ ∈ (tC )∨ , uniquely defined up to the action of W . Now
(tC )∨ = X∗ (T )C = X ∗ (Tb)C
where the identifications are W -equivariant, so we may regard λ as an element

of X ∗ (Tb). The W -orbit of λ contains λσ . For a sketch of the proof of this last
assertion see [Vog93, Proposition 7.4]. t
u
For the global definitions of algebraic representations, we let G be a con-
nected reductive groups defined over a number field F . Fix an algebraic clo-
sure F of F and form the L group L G = G b o GalF . For each place of v of F ,
fix an algebraic closure F v of Fv and an embedding F ,→ F v . Let π = ⊗0v πv
be an automorphic representations of G(AF ).
Definition 12.7. We say that π is L-algebraic (resp. C-algebraic) if πv is
L-algebraic (resp. C-algebraic) for all infinite places of F .
In the remainder of this section we state an important conjecture on ex-
istence of Galois representations attached to L-algebraic automorphic repre-
sentations and a related result (see Theorem 12.8.3 below).
To state the conjecture, we let p be a fixed prime and fix an injection
Q → C. We fix once and for all a choice of algebraic closure Qp of Qp and
isomorphism ι : C −→ Qp . Therefore the inclusion Q → C together with ι
induces an embedding Q −→ Qp .
We note that in the construction of G b and the action of GalF on it we
could replace the base field C by any algebraically closed field. Thus we could
consider Gb as a group over Q = F , for example, and ι induces an isomorphism
ι : G(C)
b −→ G(Q
b p)
We can also form
G(Q
b p ) o GalF (12.28)
and we have an isomorphism
ι : L G −→ G(Q
b p ) o GalF .
12.8 Algebraic representations 253
This construction is used in the following conjecture due to Buzzard and Gee.
It is a generalization of a conjecture of Clozel in the case G = GLn .
Conjecture 12.8.2 If π is L-algebraic, then there is a finite set S of places
of F containing all infinite places, all places dividing p, and all ramified
places, and a continuous Galois representation
ρπ = ρπ,ι : GalF −→ G(Q

b p ) o GalF
such that the composite of ρπ and the projection to GalF is the identity and
if v 6∈ S then the Frobenius semisimplification of ρπ |WFv is G(Q
b p )-conjugate
to ι(LL(πv )).
There is additional important information about π at the infinite places and
the places dividing p predicted in the full version of Conjecture 12.8.2 given
in [BG14] but we omit a discussion.
Though in general Conjecture 12.8.2 is open there are important special
cases that are known.
Theorem 12.8.3 Suppose that F is CM or totally real and that π has the
same infinitisimal character as an irreducible representation of ResF/Q GLn
and in particular is L-algebraic. Then Conjecture 12.8.2 is true. t
u
There are in fact two different proofs of Theorem 12.8.3 available, one due to
Harris, Lan, Taylor and Thorn [HLTT16] and another due to Schölze [Sch15].
Exercises
12.1. With notation as in Example 12.2, prove that if p 6= ` then χ` (Frp ) = p.
12.2. Given a map G → H of reductive groups with normal image, prove

b → G.
that there is an induced map H b
b →G
12.3. For reductive groups H and G, give an example of a morphism H b
that is not induced by a map H → G as in the previous problem.
12.4. Prove that a representation ρ : WF0 −→ GLn (C) (or more properly a
Frobenius semisimple representation) is completely reducible.
12.5. Prove (12.6).
12.6. Prove (12.7).
12.8. Prove Proposition 12.2.2.

12.9. Prove that tempered representations are sent to tempered parameters

under the local Langlands correspondence for GLn .
12.10. For 1 ≤ i ≤ k let πi be an irreducible tempered representation of

GLni (F ). Let π = Ind(π1 ⊗ · · · πk , 0). Prove that π is irreducible.
12.11. Let G be a semisimple group over C. Show that ResC/R G is equal

rank if and only if G is trivial. Show that SLn (as a group over R) is equal
rank if and only if n ≤ 2 (here we interpret SL1 as the trivial group.
12.12. Let G be a reductive group over C. State and prove an analogue of

Lemma 12.8.1 for an irreducible admissible representation π of G(C).
Chapter 13
Known Cases of Global Langlands
Functoriality
...I had not recognized in 1966,

when I discovered after many
months of unsuccessful search a
promising definition of
automorphic L-function, what a
fortunate, although, and this
needs to be stressed, unforeseen
by me, or for that matter anyone
else, blessing it was that it lay in
the theory of Eisenstein series.
R. P. Langlands
Abstract In the number field case the global Langlands functoriality con-
jecture is wide open. Despite this several important cases have established.
We survey some of the hard-earned progress in this chapter.
13.1 Introduction
What is now known as the Langlands functoriality conjecture was posed in

a seventeen page handwritten letter [Lan] that Langlands wrote in 1967 to
André Weil (see [Lan70]). In Chapter 12 we recalled the conjecture with some
degree of precision. There has been decisive progress on the conjecture in the
local setting in both equal and mixed characteristics (see §12.4 and §12.5)
and in the global setting when the base field F is a function field (see §13.9).
However for number fields the conjecture remains mostly open.
Despite this there has been hard-earned progress. We will survey some of
this progress in the current chapter. Throughout F is a global field with ring
of adeles AF . The symbol G will denote a reductive group over F .
255
256 13 Known Cases of Global Langlands Functoriality
13.2 Parabolic induction
Let P be a parabolic subgroup of G. A choice of Levi subgroup M ≤ P yields

a Levi decomposition P = M N where N is the unipotent radical of P . Let
T ≤ MF sep be a maximal torus and let
(X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), ∆, ∆∨ )
be a based root datum for G (see §7.3). It follows from the theory of parabolic
subgroups reviewed in §1.9 that there are subsets of ∆1 ⊆ ∆ and ∆∨ 1 ⊆ ∆
∨
such that
(X ∗ (T ), X∗ (T ), ∆1 , ∆∨
1)
is a based root datum for M . Using this fact one can define an L-map
L
M −→ L G. (13.1)
In the special case where G = GLn the conjugacy classes of Levi Pdsubgroups
of parabolics are indexed by tuples n1 , . . . , nd ∈ Z>0 such that i=1 ni = n
as explained in (1.10). The map (13.1) is given by the identity on the Galois
factor and the natural block diagonal embedding
d
Y
GLni (C) −→ GLn (C)
i=1
 
x1
(x1 , . . . , xd ) 7−→ 
 .. 
. 
xd
on the neutral components.

Langlands functoriality for the L-map (13.1) was essentially fully estab-
lished by Langlands himself before Langlands even posed his functoriality
conjecture. It is merely one manner of interpreting the theory of Eisenstein
series and its relationship to the spectral decomposition of L2 ([G]) recalled
in §10.4.
13.3 L-maps into general linear groups
Let G be a quasi-split reductive group over F and let E/F be a finite sepa-
rable extension. Suppose we are given an L-map
r : L G −→ L ResE/F GLn
13.4 The strong Artin conjecture 257
for some n. Assume moreover that we know the local Langlands correspon-
dence for G. Then for every cuspidal automorphic representation π of G(AF )
and every place v of F we can associate an L-parameter
ρ(πv ) : WF0 v −→ L G.
We therefore obtain, for each v, an L-parameter
r ◦ ρ(πv ) : WF0 v −→ L ResE/F GLn .
By the local Langlands correspondence for ResE/F GLn (Fv ) (which is known,
see §12.3 and §12.4) associated to r ◦ ρ(πv ) there is a unique irreducible
admissible representation r(πv ) with this L-parameter. We denote by
r(π) := ⊗v r(πv ).
This is an irreducible admissible representation of GLn (AE ). By the version

of Langlands functoriality explicated in Conjecture 12.6.1, at least if π is
tempered r(π) ought to be automorphic. In practice one does not want to
assume that π is tempered, but merely that it is “almost tempered” in the
sense that the matrix coefficients of πv are suitably close to being essentially
square integrable. We refer to [Art13] for an example of how to make this
precise.
The following definition is extremely useful:
Definition 13.1. An automorphic representation π 0 of ResE/F GLn (AF ) is a
weak transfer of π with respect to r if
r(πv ) ∼
= πv0
for all v not in some finite set of places S of F .

Weak transfers are also often called weak lifts. If one wishes to be more
specific, one can say that the functorial transfer of π with respect to r is
compatible with the local Langlands correspondence outside of S. If a weak
transfer exists then it is unique by strong multiplicity one for GLn (Theo-
rem 11.7.2). In practice one constructs weak transfers first and then checks
compatibility of the transfer with the local Langlands correspondence at the
finite set of places S.
13.4 The strong Artin conjecture
Let E/F be a (nontrivial) finite degree Galois extension of number fields.

Any homomorphism
r : Gal(E/F ) −→ GLn (C)
defines a representation
r : L GL1 −→ GLn (C) (13.2)
by tensoring with the trivial representation of L GL◦1 = GL1 (C). Temporar-

ily denote by 1 the trivial representation of GL1 (AF ), which is obviously
automorphic. The Langlands functoriality conjecture predicts that r(1) is
automorphic. One has
L(s, r(1)) = L(s, 1, r) = L(s, r)
where the L-function at the right is the usual Artin L-function. Artin and
Brauer proved that the L-function on the right admits a meromorphic contin-
uation to the plane, satisfies a functional equation, and has a finite number of
poles [MM97]. Artin conjectured the following refinement of this statement:
Conjecture 13.4.1 (Artin) If r is nontrivial and irreducible then L(s, r)
is holomorphic.
The only irreducible representation that not covered by this conjecture is the
trivial representation. If r is the trivial representation then L(s, r) = ΛF (s),
the completed Dedekind zeta function of F . It is certainly not holomorphic;
in fact it has simple poles at s ∈ {0, 1}. Artin’s conjecture implies that this is
the only irreducible Galois representation whose Artin L-function has a pole.
Thus Langlands functoriality implies the following conjecture, which is
often called the strong Artin conjecture:
Conjecture 13.4.2 (Strong Artin) If r is irreducible, then there exist a
cuspidal representation π of GLn (AF ) such that
πv = r(1)v
for all places v.

This is in fact a much deeper conjecture than the Artin conjecture, and one
can make precise the difference between Conjecture 13.4.1 and Conjecture
13.4.2 using Theorem 11.9.1.
The strong Artin conjecture for nilpotent groups is known to be true
[AC89, Theorem 7.1]:
Theorem 13.4.3 (Arthur-Clozel) Assume that E/F is a Galois exten-
sion of number field with nilpotent Galois group Gal(E/F ). Then if r is any
irreducible complex representation of Gal(E/F ), the strong Artin conjecture
is true for r. t
u
Even when Gal(E/F ) is solvable the strong Artin conjecture is still not known
in general.
In a different direction, one could ask for results for representations r :
Gal(E/F ) → GLn (C) for a fixed n. The case n = 1 is of course true by class
13.4 The strong Artin conjecture 259
field theory. Even the case n = 2 is not known in general. It is convenient to

recall the following theorem of Klein:
Theorem 13.4.4 (Klein) A finite subgroup of PGL2 (C) is isomorphic to
one of the following:
a cyclic group,
a dihedral group,
the tetrahedral group A4 ,
the octahedral group S4 ,
the icosahedral group A5 .
t
u
A subgroup of GL2 (C) mapping to a cyclic group in PGL2 (C) acts re-
ducibly on C2 , so we can ignore these groups. We say a representation
r : Gal(E/F ) −→ GL2 (C)
is dihedral if the image of the composite map
r : Gal(E/F ) −→ GL2 (C) −→ PGL2 (C)
is a dihedral group. We use the analogous convention when dihedral is re-

placed by tetrahedral, octahedral or icosahedral. In all but the icosahe-
dral case the strong Artin conjecture is known to be true:
Theorem 13.4.5 (Langlands-Tunnell) The strong Artin conjecture is true
for dihedral, tetrahedral, or octahedral representations r. t
u
In [Lan80] Langlands derived the dihedral and tetrahedral cases from the
theory of base change which will be reviewed in the following section. Tunnell
completed the octahedral case in [Tun81]. Interestingly this theorem was used
in Wiles’ proof of Fermat’s last theorem.
The key difference with the icosahedral case is that it is the only case
where the Gal(E/F ) is nonsolvable. If one had the theory of base change
for nonsolvable extensions one could make decisive progress on this last case
[Get12].
Though the theory of base change for nonsolvable extensions is unavailable
at the time of this writing, one can still make progress under special assump-
tions. Namely, assume that the base field F is totally real. For every infinite
place v of F complex conjugation defines a conjugacy class cv of elements
σv ∈ Gal(F /F ). The representation r extends to Gal(F /F ), and we say it is
odd if det(r(cv )) = −1 for all infinite places v.
Theorem 13.4.6 If F is a totally real field and r is odd then the strong
Artin conjecture is true for r. t
u
This theorem was proven by Pilloni and Stroh [PS16] after the case F = Q
was settled by Khare and Wintenberger [KW09a, KW09b] as a consequence of
their proof of Serre’s conjecture (Kisin made a decisive contribution [Kis09]).

There was a body of work prior to this spearheaded by Taylor; see [PS16]
for references. The oddness assumption allows one to apply the powerful
machinery of Galois deformation theory that played so pivotal a role in Wiles’
proof of Fermat’s last theorem.
13.5 Base change
Let E/F be a finite degree Galois extension of number fields. Then

L
ResE/F GLn := GL[E:F
n
]
(C) o GalF
where GalF acts via its quotient Gal(E/F ), which in turn acts by permuting
the factors. There is an L-map
rE/F : L GLn −→ L ResE/F GLn (13.3)
defined by stipulating that it is the diagonal embedding on the neutral com-

ponent and the identity on the Galois factor. Suppose that ρ ∈ Φ(GLnFv ) for
some place v of F (see §12.6 for the definition of Φ(GLnFv )). Then
Y
L(s, rE/F ◦ ρ) = L(s, ρ|WE0 w ) (13.4)
w|v
where the product is over all places w of E dividing v. Here WE0 w is the
Weil-Deligne group as (12.2). In other words, rE/F corresponds to restric-
tion of Galois representations. The L-map rE/F and the functorial trans-
fers it induces (conjectural or not) are known as base change. It con-
jecturally allows us to relate automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) and
ResE/F GLn (AF ) := GLn (AE ). It is customary to write
πE := rE/F (π).
Consider the representation
ρreg : GalF → Gal(E/F ) → GL[E:F ] (C)
where the first map is the quotient and the second is the regular representa-
tion. We define an L-map
AIE/F : L ResE/F GLn −→ L GLn[E:F ] (13.5)
by stipulating that its composite with the quotient map L GLn[E:F ] −→

GLn[E:F ] (C) is the tensor product of the standard representation of GLn (C)
with ρreg . This L-map and the funtorial transfers (conjectural or not) it in-
13.5 Base change 261
duces are called automorphic induction. It allows us to relate automorphic

representations of GLn (AE ) = ResE/F GLn (AF ) and GLn[E:F ] (AF ). We note
that
L(s, π, AIE/F ) = L(s, π). (13.6)
Using the fact that the regular representation of Gal(E/F ) decomposes as

M
ρ⊕d(ρ)
ρ
where the sum is over the isomorphism classes of irreducible representations

ρ of Gal(E/F ) and d(ρ) is the dimension of the space of ρ, one has
Y
L(s, π, rE/F ) = L(s, π, AIE/F ◦ rE/F ) = L(s, π, rst ⊗ ρ)m(ρ) . (13.7)
ρ
Here rst is the standard representation rst : L GLn −→ GLn (C) and we asso-
ciate to ρ the representation L GL1 −→ GLd(ρ) (C) as in (13.2).
If E/F is a prime degree cyclic extension, then base change and auto-
morphic induction are known. The case n = 2 is due to Langlands [Lan80],
following a crucial special case discovered by Saito [Sai75] and rephrased
representation-theoretically by Shintani [Shi79]. Besides placing the theory
in the correct level of generality, Langlands was able to use it and converse
theory to establish the strong Artin conjecture for 2-dimensional Galois rep-
resentations in many solvable cases (see Theorem 13.4.5).
For GLn the result was established by Arthur and Clozel [AC89]. To state
it, let E/F be a prime degree Galois extension. Let θ be a generator of
Gal(E/F ). It acts on the set of automorphic representations π 0 of GLn (AE )
via
π 0θ (g) := π 0 (θ(g)).
Finally, let NE/F : A× ×
E → AF be the norm map.
Theorem 13.5.1 (Base change) For every cuspidal automorphic repre-

sentation π of GLn (AF ) the base change πE exists; it is an automorphic
representation πE of GLn (AE ) that is cuspidal if and only if π 6∼
= π ⊗ η for
any Hecke character η ∈ (F × \A× F /N E/F (A × ∧
E )) . Conversely, if a cuspidal
0 ∼ 0θ
automorphic representation π of GLn (AE ) satisfies π = π then π 0 = πE
0
for some cuspidal automorphic representation π of GLn (AF ). t

u
Theorem 13.5.2 (Automorphic induction) If π is a cuspidal automor-
phic representation of GLn (AF ), then the automorphic induction AI(π) is an
isobaric automorphic representation of GLn[E:F ] (AF ). It is cuspidal if and
only if π ∼
6 π θ . A cuspidal automorphic representation of GLn[E:F ] (AF ) is the
=
automorphic induction of a cuspidal automorphic representation of GLn (AF )
if and only if π ∼= π ⊗ η for some η ∈ (F × \A× × ∧
F /NE/F (AE )) . t
u
Implicitly in this theorem we are using the local Langlands correspondence

for the general linear group to define base change and automorphic induc-
tion. This was not available when Arthur and Clozel proved their result.
Arthur and Clozel instead used the representation-theoretic analogue defined
by Shintani [AC89, Definition 6.1]. The compatibility of the two notions is
checked in [HT01, Lemma VII.2.6].
By breaking an arbitrary solvable extension E/F into a sequence of prime-
degree cyclic extensions one deduces the existence of base changes of isobaric
automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) along E/F . Characterizing the im-
age of the base change in this case is more subtle, however, see [LR98, Raj02].
The case of an arbitrary extension E/F is open. The first author has
described a possible approach to this case in [Get12] and explained how it
implies the remaining open cases of the Artin conjecture for two-dimensional
complex representations of GalF , at least up to an abelian twist. The work
in [Get12] can be seen as an refinement and explication of Langlands’ beyond
endoscopy idea [Lan04] in a special case.
13.6 The Langlands-Shahidi method
As explained in §10.4, Langlands proved that L2 ([G]) could be completely

described in terms of cuspidal representations of Levi subgroups of G by
means of Eisenstein series. Some time after completing this he realized that
the constant terms of Eisenstein series (which naturally depend on certain
complex parameters) admitted functional equations [Lan71]. This led him to
the definition of what are now called Langlands L-functions and to posing his
functoriality conjecture. Langlands only obtained coarse functional equations
for these L-functions. His results were subsequently completed and refined
by Shahidi [Sha88]. This method of proving the analytic continuation of L-
functions is known as the Langlands-Shahidi method. Combining these
results with converse theory in the sense of Theorem 11.9.1 one can obtain
cases of Langlands functoriality that, at present, can not be obtained by
any other method. The book [Sha10] and the surveys [CKM04] are useful
references for this theory.
We record some important results obtained via the Langlands-Shahidi
method. We assume throughout this section that F is a number field. The
first case concerns the symmetric powers of cuspidal automorphic represen-
tations of GL2 . More precisely, let π = ⊗v πv be a cuspidal automorphic
representation of GL2 (AF ) and let
Symk : L GL2 −→ L GLk+1 (13.8)
be the representation that is the identity on the Galois factor and the sym-
metric kth power representation on the neutral components. By the local
13.6 The Langlands-Shahidi method 263
Langlands correspondence explained in §12.5, Symk (πv ) is a well-defined ir-

reducible admissible representation of GLk+1 (Fv ) for all places v of F . Hence
Symk (π) = ⊗v Symk (πv )
is an irreducible admissible representation of GLk+1 (AF ).

Theorem 13.6.1 If π is a cuspidal automorphic representation of GL2 (AF ),
then the admissible representation Symk (π) of GLk+1 (AF ) is automorphic for
k ≤ 4. t
u
The proof of Theorem 13.6.1 was given by Gelbart-Jacquet [GJ78] for k = 2,

by Kim-Shahidi [KS02] for k = 3, and by Kim [Kim03] for k = 4. As of this
writing the corresponding statement for k ≥ 5 remains unproven. Gelbart
and Jacquet’s work occurred before the local Langlands correspondence was
proven. In [Kim03] Kim gives an alternate proof that includes compatibility
with the local Langlands correspondence.
The second case we would like to mention here is the Langlands functori-
ality for Rankin-Selberg products of cuspidal automorphic representations of
GLn . For any m, n ∈ Z≥0 , let
r⊗ : L (GLm × GLn ) −→ L GLmn (13.9)
be the representation that is the tensor product on the neutral components

and the identity map on the Galois factor. This family of L-maps is extremely
important; taking tensor products is arguably the most basic procedure for
constructing new representations out of old representations.
For every place v of F and every admissible representation π1v ⊗ π2v of
GLm (Fv ) × GLn (Fv ) we have
L(s, π1v ⊗ π2v , r⊗ ) = L(s, π1v × π2v )
where the L-function on the right is the Rankin-Selberg L-function appearing

in §11.5. This identity is built into the local Langlands correspondence. It is
customary to write
π1v π2v := r⊗ (π1v ⊗ π2v ).
Thus for automorphic representations π1 , π2 of GLm (AF ) and GLn (AF ), re-
spectively, we have an admissible representation
Y
π1 π2 := π1v π2v
v
of GLmn (AF ). Now we know that the standard L-function of this represen-
tation behaves as predicted under the Langlands functoriality conjecture by
Rankin-Selberg theory (see Chapter 11). In general this is very far from the
assertion that π1 π2 is automorphic. Converse theory in the sense of The-
orem 11.9.1 makes the difference precise. For small m and n the difference is
not as significant and thus using converse theory and the Langlands-Shahidi
method one can prove the following theorem:
Theorem 13.6.2 For 1 ≤ k ≤ 3, let π1 , π2 be cuspidal automorphic repre-
sentations of GL2 (AF ) and GLk (AF ), respectively. Then π1 π2 is automor-
phic. t
u
For the GL2 × GL2 case this was proven in [Ram00a]. For the GL2 × GL3
case this is [KS02, Theorem 5.1]. The paper [Ram00a] was written before the
proof of the local Langlands correspondence. Compatibility of the transfer
with the local Langlands correpondence was checked in [Kim03].
13.7 Functoriality for the classical groups
We continue to assume that F is a number field. Let

 
1
Jn :=  . . .  ∈ GLn (Z)
 
be the antidiagonal matrix and let

0 Jn
J2n :=
−Jn
 
Jn
0
J2n+1 := 1 .
−Jn
We take our “standard” orthogonal and symplectic groups to be the groups

over F whose points in an F -algebra R are given by
On (R) : = {g ∈ GLn (R) : gJn g t = Jn }

0 0
(13.10)
Sp2n (R) : = {g ∈ GL2n (R) : gJ2n g t = J2n }.
We also define some quasi-split groups as follows. Let E/F be a quadratic

extension. We then define
Un (R) := {g ∈ GLn (E ⊗F R) : gJn0 ḡ t = Jn0 }
where the bar denotes the action of the nontrivial element of Gal(E/F ).
This is the quasi-split unitary group attached to the extension E/F . The
extension E/F also defines a quasi-split orthogonal group as follows: View E
as a vector space over F equipped with the quadratic form NE/F . Choosing
a basis we obtain a symmetric matrix γE ∈ GL2 (F ) corresponding to the
quadratic form in the usual manner. Then
13.7 Functoriality for the classical groups 265
    
 Jn−1 Jn−1 
O∗2n (R) := g ∈ GLn (R) : g  γE  gt =  γE  .
Jn−1 Jn−1
 
We define SOn < On and SO∗n < O∗n to be the subgroups of determinant 1
as usual. We refer to the groups above as the quasi-split classical groups
of rank n defined over R and denote by Gn .
Following [CPSS11] we have the following table of groups and embeddings
of L-groups:
Gn r : L Gn → L HN HN
SO2n+1 Sp2n (C) × GalF → GL2n (C) × GalF GL2n
SO2n SO2n (C) × GalF → GL2n (C) × GalF GL2n
SO∗2n SO2n (C) o GalF → GL2n (C) × GalF GL2n
Sp2n SO2n+1 (C) × GalF → GL2n+1 (C) × GalF GL2n+1
Un GLn (C) o GalF → GLn (C)2 o GalF ResE/F GLn
We call the representation
r : L Gn −→ L HN (13.11)
listed above the standard representation of L Gn . The L-maps in the first,

second, and fourth row are given by the natural inclusions. For the third, let
 
In−1
 01 
wb :=  .
 10 
In−1
Then GalF acts on SO2n (C) via its quotient Gal(E/F ), with the nontrivial
element σ of Gal(E/F ) acting by conjugation by w.
b The map
SO2n (C) o GalF → GL2n (C) × GalF
is given by the natural embedding on the neutral component and sends 1 o

σ to w b o σ. Finally when Gn = Un and HN = ResE/F GLn the absolute
Galois group of F again acts on GLn (C) via its quotient Gal(E/F ), with the
nontrivial element σ acting via
L
Un◦ = GLn (C) −→ GLn (C)
g 7−→ Jn0 g −t Jn0−1
L ◦
(13.12)
HN = GLn (C)2 −→ GLn (C)2
(h1 , h2 ) 7−→ (h2 , h1 )
and the embedding r is given by
r(g o σ) = (g, Jn0 g −t Jn0−1 ) o σ. (13.13)
There is a great deal known about Langlands functoriality for this collection
of L-maps. Definitive results were obtained for generic representations in
[CKPSS04, CPSS11]. We focus on this case in the current section. Later
Arthur [Art13] established the same result for arbitrary representations (in
the orthogonal and symplectic cases) under the assumption that the twisted
weighted trace formula can be stabilized (see §13.8 for details). The unitary
case was completed by Mok [Mok15] under this same assumption.
The following theorem is [CKPSS04, Theorem 1.1]. It uses the notation of
the table above. It represents the culmination of an impressive body of work
by Cogdell, Kim, Piatetski-Shapiro and Shahidi.
Theorem 13.7.1 Let π be an irreducible globally generic cuspidal automor-

phic representation of Gn (AF ). Then there exists a functorial transfer of π
to HN (AF ) with respect to the L-map r. t
u
The main tools used in the proof of this theorem are the Langlands-Shahidi
method and the converse theorem (Theorem 11.9.1). Let π be as in the state-
ment of the theorem. For every integer m ≥ 1 and every cuspidal auto-
morphic representation τ of GLm (AF ) Langlands-Shahidi theory provides an
L-function L(s, π × τ ) that admits a functional equation and meromorphic
continuation to the plane. One constructs an admissible representation r(π)
of HN (AF ) such that one has
L(s, πv × τv ) = L(s, r(π)v × τv ) (13.14)
for all archimedean places v and nonarchimedean places where π, τ and F are
unramified. It is harder to obtain information at the ramified places. For this
purpose one uses stability of γ-factors, which says roughly that certain γ
factors related to those defined in Theorem 11.5.4 depend only on the central
character of πv after taking a suitably ramified by a character of Fv× . At
the end one then applies converse theorems analogous to Theorem 11.9.1 to
deduce the automorphy of r(π).
Assuming Theorem 13.7.1, Ginzburg, Rallis and Soudry [GRS01] had pre-
viously used their descent technique to characterize the image of the functo-
rial transfer attached to r. The characterization is given in terms of poles of
Langlands L-functions. To state it, we define a family of representations r0
and characters χGn : [Gm ]× → C× . The representations r0 listed below are
13.7 Functoriality for the classical groups 267
representations of HN , where HN is the group attached to Gn in the table

above.
Gn r0 χGn
SO2n+1 ∧2 1
SO2n , n ≥ 2 Sym2 1
SO∗2n Sym2 ηE/F
Sp2n Sym2 1
U2n AsE/F ⊗ ηE/F 1
U2n+1 AsE/F 1
Here 1 denotes the trivial character, and ηE/F is the character attached to
E/F by class field theory. The only representation that is not self-explanatory
is the Asai representation
AsE/F : L ResE/F GLn = GL2n (C) o GalF −→ GLn2 (C)
that is defined by stipulating that for ξ ∈ HomF (E, F ),
AsE/F (((gξ ) o 1))(⊗ξ vξ ) = ⊗ξ gξ vξ and AsE/F ((1)ξ o σ)(⊗ξ vξ ) = ⊗ξ vσ◦ξ .
This plays an important role in §14.5.

Conjecture 12.7.1 on the analytic properties of Langlands L-functions is
more or less known in the cases above. In more detail, let ψ : F \AF → C× be
a nontrivial character. Langlands-Shahidi theory produces L- and ε-factors
LLS (s, πv , r0 )
(13.15)
εLS (s, πv , r0 , ψv )
for every place v of F that are equal to the L- and ε-factors
L(s, πv , r0 )
(13.16)
ε(s, πv , r0 , ψv )
when v is archimedean or v lies outside of some finite set of nonarchimedean

places S. One sets
Y
LLS (s, π, r0 ) := LLS (s, πv , r0 )
v
Y (13.17)
0
εLS (s, π, r ) := εLS (s, πv , r0 , ψv )
v
The global ε-factor is independent of ψ. These factors are originally defined

for Re(s) large. One has the following theorem, due to Shahidi following work
of Langlands [Sha90, Theorem 7.7]:
Theorem 13.7.2 The L-function LLS (s, π, r0 ) admits a meromorphic con-
tinuation to the plane to a function that is bounded in vertical strips. It sat-
isfies the functional equation
LLS (s, π, r0 ) = ε0LS (s, π, r0 )LLS (s, π ∨ , r0 )
The boundedness of the L-function in vertical strips is in fact a joint theorem

of Gelbart and Shahidi [GL06]. Shahidi’s book [Sha10] and Kim’s article in
[CKM04] are also very useful references.
Generalizations of the Rankin-Selberg theory discussed in §11.7 provide
yet another definition of the L-functions and ε-factors and one can prove a
theorem analogous to Theorem 13.7.2 using these L-functions in most cases
(see [Bum05] for a survey). The definition of the L-functions in terms of
Rankin-Selberg integrals is important because in practice it provides infor-
mation about the poles of L-functions that is complementary to that obtained
via the Langlands-Shahidi method.
Of course, one wants to know that all of these L and ε factors agree. This
has been proven in important cases. For the agreement of Langlands-Shahidi
and Rankin-Selberg L-factors in many cases we refer to [Kap15]. We also
have the following result [CST17]:
Theorem 13.7.3 When r0 is ∧2 or Sym2 then
LLS (s, πv , r0 ) = L(s, πv , r0 )

εLS (s, πv , r0 ) = ε(s, πv , r0 ).
After this digression on L-functions we turn back to our characterization of

the image of the functorial transfer. The group ResE/F GLn admits an outer
automorphism σ induced by the action of the nontrivial element of GalE/F .
For irreducible admissible representations π 0 of ResE/F GLn (AF ) let
π 0σ (g) := π 0 (g σ )
and let
π 0∗ := (π 0σ )∨ .
This is sometimes known as the conjugate dual. We say that π is conjugate
self-dual if π ∼= π∗ .
For the purposes of stating the following theorem it is convenient to let
π 0∗ := π 0∨ when HN = GLN and let π 0∗ be defined as above otherwise. Let
ωπ0 be the central quasi-character of π 0 (see [GRS01, Sou05] for more details):
Theorem 13.7.4 Let π be a globally generic cuspidal automorphic represen-

tation of Gn (AF ). The functorial lift r(π) satisfies ωr(π) |A× = χGn and is of
F
13.8 Endoscopic classification of representations 269
the form
π 0 = Ind(π10 ⊗ · · · ⊗ πd0 ) = π10 · · · πd0 ,
where each πi is a unitary cuspidal automorphic representation of HNi (AF )
satisfying
(a) πi0∗ ∼
= πi0
0 ∼ 0
(b) πi = πj if and only if i = j,
(c) LS (s, πi0 , r0 ) has a pole at s = 1 for a sufficiently large finite set of places
S of F including all infinite places.
Moreover, any π 0 as above satisfying ωπ0 |A× = χGn and (a)-(c) is of the
F
form r(π) for some globally generic cuspidal automorphic representation π of
Gn (AF ). t
u
Analogues of 13.7.1 and 13.7.4 are known for spin similitude groups by work
of Asgari and Shahidi [AS06, AS14].
In this section we have concentrated on generic representations. This is be-
cause originally the converse theory approach explained above relied crucially
on this assumption. Recently the genericity assumption has been removed in
work of Cai, Friedberg, Ginzburg, Kaplan. We refer to [CFK18] (which is
based on [CFGK17]) for a precise statement. This provides a new, uncondi-
tional, and independent proof of a portion of the endoscopic classification of
representations on classical groups that we discuss in the next section.
13.8 Endoscopic classification of representations
In this section we continue to use the notational conventions of the previous

section. In particular F is a number field. The great accomplishment of Arthur
in [Art13] is to prove the existence of functorial transfer with respect to the
the L-maps r of the previous section (at least when Gn 6= Un ). In particular
there is no genericity assumption in his work. Moreover, he gave a precise
enough description of the fibers of the functorial transfer that he could classify
the discrete spectrum of L2 ([Gn ]) in terms of automorphic representations on
HN . We explain these results in the current section. The main tool used to
establish Arthur’s result is the theory of twisted endoscopy (see §19.5), so
one refers to Arthur’s work and subsequent refinements as the endoscopic
classification of representations.
In his book [Art13] Arthur gives a careful account of how to replace objects
attached to the conjectural global Langlands group by well-defined, uncon-
jectural objects. For the sake of clarity and brevity we will not reproduce this
discussion. Instead, we will try to state Arthur’s main results as directly as
possible.
There are two points the reader should bear in mind. First, we have not
stated all of Arthur results, and we have not included Mok’s results in the
Gn = Un case since this would require more notation. We refer to [Mok15].

Second, all of the work in this section (and in Mok’s work) is conditional on
the stabilization of the twisted weighted trace formula. Moeglin and Wald-
spurger have proven this under the assumption of the twisted weighted funda-
mental lemma [MW16a, MW16b]. The original fundamental lemma of Shel-
stad and Langlands was proved in the breakthrough work of Ngô in [Ngô10b]
for which he received the Fields medal. Ngô’s work is based on the work of
many over decades and his survey [Ngô10c] is a good place to obtain some
historical perspective. Other versions of the fundemental lemma have been
proven by Laumon and Chaudouard using nontrivial generalizations of Ngô’s
techniques [CL10, CL12]. In principle there should be no new obstacle in
proving the twisted weighted fundamental but as of this writing it is not
complete.
For the remainder of this section we assume Gn 6= Un . The first main
theorem is the following:
Theorem 13.8.1 Every irreducible subrepresentation of L2 ([Gn ]) admits a
functorial transfer to HN with respect to r. t
u
This result is implicit in the main theorems stated in [Art13]. Since irreducible
subrepresentations of L2 ([Gn ]) need not be tempered, to make precise what
one means by a functorial transfer one needs more than the theory outlined
in §12.5. We will not make this precise and instead refer the reader to [Art13].
There is a wrinkle which will continue to play a role below. When Gn is
SO2n or SO∗2n let θ : Gn → Gn be an automorphism of order 2 preserving
the “standard splitting” of SO2n [Art13, p. 41]. It is unique if n > 3. Then
the functorial transfer given in Theorem 13.8.1 is insensitive to replacing a
representation π by π θ , where π θ (g) := π(θ(g)). With this in mind let
ec∞ (Gn (AF ))

C (13.18)
be Cc∞ (Gn (AF )) except in the special case where Gn is SO2n or SO∗2n , in
which case it is the subalgebra of Cc∞ (Gn (AF )) invariant under the outer
automorphism θ.
Let
L2disc ([Gn ]) < L2 ([Gn ])
be the largest closed subspace that decomposes discretely under Cc∞ (Gn (AF ))
(see §3.8 for details). Alternately L2disc ([Gn ]) is the Hilbert space direct sum
of all irreducible subrepresentations of L2 ([Gn ]). In view of Theorem 13.8.1
it is natural to partition L2disc ([Gn ]) into packets consisting of fibers of the
functorial transfer to HN (AF ) and then try to describe the fibers, preferably
in terms of local data. This is precisely what Arthur accomplishes.
We state the main classification result first. The remainder of the section
is devoted to defining the notation that appears.
ec∞ (Gn (AF ))-module isomorphism
Theorem 13.8.2 (Arthur) There is an C
13.8 Endoscopic classification of representations 271
L2disc ([Gn ]) ∼
M M
= π ⊕mψ ,
ψ∈Ψ
e2 (Gn ) π∈Π
fψ (εψ )
where mψ = 1 or 2. t
u
This is [Art13, Theorem 1.5.2]. For a cuspidal automorphic representation
τ of HN (AF ) and m ∈ Z≥1 let (τ, m) be the Speh representation of §10.7.
One says that τ is of orthogonal type if LS (s, τ, Sym2 ) has a pole at s = 1
and of symplectic type if LS (s, τ, ∧2 ) has a pole at s = 1, where S is a finite
set of places containing all infinite places and all places where τ is ramified.
Since
LS (s, τ, Sym2 )LS (s, τ, ∧2 ) = LS (s, τ × τ )
it follows from Theorem 11.7.1 that τ cannot be both orthogonal and sym-
plectic, and it is orthogonal or symplectic if and only if τ ∼
= τ ∨ . We define
the type of the representation (τ, m) is determined as in the table below:
τ m (τ, m)
orthogonal even symplectic
symplectic even orthogonal
orthogonal odd orthogonal
symplectic odd symplectic
The set Ψe2 (Gn ) is the set of automorphic representations of HN (AF ) of the
form
di=1 (τi , mi )
where
(1) τi is a cuspidal automorphic representation of HNi (AF )
P d
(2) i=1 Ni mi = N
∨ ∼
(3) τi = τi
(4) τi ∼
= τj if and only if i = j.
(5) If L G◦n is orthogonal (resp. symplectic) then (τi , mi ) is orthogonal (resp. sym-
plectic).
We note that condition (5) actually implies condition (3). The set Ψe2 (Gn ) is
known as the set of discrete global A-packets of Gn (see [Art13, page
33-34 in §1.4]). The multiplicity mψ in Theorem 13.8.2 is defined to be 1
unless N is even, L G◦n = SON (C), and Ni mi is even for all i, in which case it
is 2. The discrete global A-packet is said to be generic if mi = 1 for all i. In
this case we also refer to the packet as a discrete global generic L-packet.
For every ψ ∈ Ψe2 (Gn ) Arthur defines a finite 2-group Sψ and a character
εψ : Sψ −→ {±1}.
We omit the definition. For every place v of F and every ψ ∈ Ψe2 (Gn ) we
define a representation
ψv : WF0 v × SL2 (C) −→ L HN
by
ψv := ⊕di=1 rec(τiv ) ⊗ Symm
where rec is the local Langlands reciprocity map of (12.15) in §12.4. We note
that ψv is not an L-parameter, but one can obtain an L-parameter from it
as follows: 1/2
ρ(ψv )(g) := ψv g, |g| −1/2 .
|g|
The extra SL2 factor occurring in ψv is colloquially known as the Arthur

SL2 and plays a role similar to the representation of SL2 that appears in
Hodge theory. One proves that ψv factors through the L-map r and hence
defines a homomorphism
ψv : WF0 v × SL2 (C) −→ L Gn .
These are examples of A-parameters, although we will not formally define

this concept. One shows in addition the existence of maps
Sψ −→ π0 (S ψv )
where
GalF
S ψv := CGb n (C) (Im(ψv ))/ZG
b (C)n
(the component group π0 (S ψv ) is denoted by Sψv in [Art13]). Compare with

(12.20) and (12.21) in §12.5.
Arthur then define sets Π(ψ
e v ) of admissible irreducible representations of
Gn (Fv ) attached to each such parameter satisfying certain desiderata. This is
already a substantial theorem as it amounts to a proof of the local Langlands
classification for Gn . The sets Π(ψ
e v ) are the local A-packets attached to
ψv . The use of Π(ψe v ) instead of the notation Π(ρv ) of §12.5 is intentional.
First, the tilde is a reminder that one is only classifying representations up to
the action of the outer automorphism θ when Gn is SO2n or SO∗2n . Second,
the packets Π(ψe v ) are not L-packets, but an enlargement of them required
due to the fact that the representations in question are often nontempered.
In the special case where ψv is trivial on the Arthur SL2 the packet Π(ψ e v)
is an (almost tempered) L-packet in the sense of §12.5. In particular ψv is
trivial on the Arthur SL2 for all v for any discrete global generic L-packet
Π(ψ).
e As in §12.5, any πv ∈ Π(ψ
e v ) comes equipped with a character
h·, πv i : π0 (S ψv ) −→ C× .
13.9 The function field case 273
and thus a we obtain a character

Y
h·, πi := h·, πv i.
v
This allows us to form the global adelic A-packet

n o
Π(ψ)
e := ⊗v πv : πv ∈ Π(ψ
e v ) and h·, πv i = 1 for almost all v . (13.19)
It consists of admissible representations of Gn (AF ). Not all of them are au-

tomorphic, let alone occur in L2disc ([Gn ]). The last piece of the classification
theorem is a device for selecting which occur in L2 ([Gn ]). This is provided
by εψ . One defines
e ψ (εψ ) := {π ∈ Π(ψ)
Π e : h·, πi = εψ }. (13.20)
This completes our discussion of the objects in Theorem 13.8.2.
13.9 The function field case
In the function field case much more is known. Let F be a function field of
characteristic p. For GL2 , the Langlands correspondence for a function field
was proved by Drinfeld [Dd80, Dd87b, Dd87a, Dd88] and for higher rank
GLn , this was proved by L. Lafforgue following Drinfelds’ argument.
In fact, L. Lafforgue, in Fields’ medal winning work [Laf02], proved the
existence of a correspondence between the set of equivalence classes of cus-
pidal automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) and the isomorphism classes
of continuous irreducible `-adic representations
GalF −→ GLn (Q` )
that are unramified almost everywhere. One can view this as establishing
the automorphic to Galois direction of the global Langlands correspondence.
However, for GLn , this implies the both directions and hence establishes the
global Langlands correspondence. More precisely, the other direction can be
deduced from the converse theory of GLn of Weil [Wei67], Piatetski-Shapiro
and Cogdell [CPS94, CPS99] as well as Grothendieck’s functional equation
and the product formula for ε-factors of Laumon [Lau87].
More recently, V. Lafforgue (L. Lafforgue’s brother) gave a decomposition
of the space of cusp forms on an arbitrary reductive group in terms of Lang-
lands parameters that is compatible with the local Langlands correspondence
at almost all places [Laf18].
All of the work above involves an object known as a shtuka (Russian for
“thing”). The very definition of a shtuka involves the scheme
Spec(OF ⊗Fp OF ). (13.21)
This sort of self product also comes up in Deligne’s proof of the Riemann
hypothesis in the function field case. The analogue of this scheme does not
exist in the number field case, since the various residue fields of the number
field all have different characteristics.
There has been a great deal of thought about what can be used to replace
(13.21) in the number field case. The idea is that instead of Fp one should use
the field with one element. This remains a very interesting but mostly specu-
lative prospect. The motivation comes not only from the link with Langlands
functoriality but also from the link to the Riemann hypothesis.
Exercises
13.1. Construct the morphism (13.1).
13.2. Let r : L G → L ResE/F GLn be an L-map and let π be a cuspidal

automorphic representation of G(AF ). Assume that a weak transfer π 0 of π
to ResE/F GLn (AF ) = GLn (AE ) with respect to r exists and π 0 is isobaric.
Prove that π 0 is the unique isobaric automorphic representation of GLn (AE )
that is a weak transfer of π with respect to r.
13.3. Prove (13.4).
13.4. Prove (13.6).
13.5. Prove that a continuous homomorphism
GalF −→ GLn (C)
has finite image.
13.6. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AGL2 \GL2 (AF ). Let
rk := L GL2 → GL2(k+1)
be the representation given by Symk ⊗ (Symk )∨ . Assume that L(s, π, rk ) con-

verges absolutely for Re(s) > 1. Prove the unramified Ramanujan conjecture
for π. In other words, for all places v of F such that πv is unramified, say
πv ∼= J(λ), the Langlands class (or Satake parameter) eλ ∈ GL2 (C) has
eigenvalues of complex norm equal to 1.
Chapter 14
Distinction and Period Integrals
Je serais reconnaissant a toute

personne ayant compris cette
demonstration de me l’expliquer.
Pierre Deligne
Abstract In this chapter we define the notion of a distinguished represen-

tation in local and global contexts. The global notion is defined in terms
of period integrals. The relative trace formula was developed precisely to
understand distinguished representations.
14.1 Introduction
The notion of distinction of automorphic representations with respect to sub-

groups of the ambient group was introduced in a global setting by Harder,
Langlands and Rapoport in their work on the Tate conjecture for Hilbert
modular surfaces [HLR86]. Jacquet later developed a tool for studying dis-
tinction, namely the relative trace formula, which includes the usual trace
formula as a special case. This will be treated in Chapter 18. In retrospect,
the notion of distinction has been an integral part of representation theory
for some time, as it often isolates models of representations of considerable
interest. For example, the whole theory of generic representations can be
thought of as a special case of the study of distinguished representations.
In this chapter we discuss the notion of distinction, starting from the
local setting and moving to the global. The special case of spherical sub-
groups is discussed in §14.4 and important conjectures of Sakellaridis and
Venkatesh are described in vague terms. We give a fairly thorough treatment
of symmetric subgroups of the general linear group in §14.5 and then dis-
cuss the exciting prospect of generalizing this to classical groups in §14.6. A
brief introduction to the Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture will follow after that.
275
276 14 Distinction and Period Integrals
This can be viewed as a precursor to the Sakellaridis-Venkatesh conjectures.

Much is known but there are still important cases to be completed. Finally
we complete the chapter with some negative results in §14.8.
14.2 Distinction in the local setting
Let G be a reductive group over a local field F and let H ≤ G be a subgroup.

Assume we are given a quasi-character χ : H(F ) → C× . Let Vχ be the space
of χ (i.e. the one-dimensional complex vector space on which H(F ) acts via
χ).
Definition 14.1. An irreducible admissible representation (π, Vπ ) of G(F )
is (H, χ)-distinguished if
HomH(F ) (Vπ , Vχ ) 6= 0.
If χ is trivial, then we say that the representation is H-distinguished, or

simply distinguished if H is understood. An element of
HomH(F ) (Vπ , Vχ )
is a relative character or an (H, χ)-character if we wish to be specific.

The definition above has the advantage that it is simple, but sometimes a
slightly more sophisticated perspective is advantageous. Let
F(H(F )\G(F ), χ) : = {f : G(F ) → C : f (hg) = χ(h)f (g) for h ∈ H(F )},

C ∞ (H(F )\G(F ), χ) : = {f ∈ C ∞ (G(F )) : f (hg) = χ(h)f (g) for h ∈ H(F )}.
Thus the first space is just a space of functions, and the second is a space of
smooth functions. The first space can be regarded as the space of sections on
the line bundle over H(F )\G(F ) defined by χ and the second can be regarded
as the space of smooth sections.
Lemma 14.2.1 There is a C-linear isomorphism
HomH(F ) (Vπ , Vχ )−→Hom

˜ G(F ) (Vπ , F(H(F )\G(F ), χ)). (14.1)
Proof. To a relative character λ and ϕ ∈ Vπ we associate the function
Iλ (ϕ)(g) := λ(π(g)ϕ).
To an intertwining map I : Vπ → F(H(F )\G(F ), χ) we associate the relative

character
λI (ϕ) := I(ϕ)(1)
where 1 is the identity of G(F ). t
u
14.3 Global distinction and period integrals 277
Corollary 14.2.2 An irreducible admissible representation (π, Vπ ) of G(F )

is (H(F ), χ)-distinguished if and only if there is a nonzero intertwining map
Vπ −→ F(H(F )\G(F ), χ).
t
u
The lemma allows us to describe natural subspaces of the space of relative
characters HomH(F ) (Vπ , Vχ ). For example, let
HomH(F ),sm (Vπ , Vχ ), (14.2)
the inverse image of C ∞ (H(F )\G(F ), χ) under the bijection of Lemma 14.2.1.
We say that the elements of (14.2) are smooth relative characters. We say
that π is smoothly (H, χ)-distinguished if (14.2) is nonzero. More sophisti-
cated notions of smoothness must sometimes be employed in the archimedean
case (see, for example, §11.3).
It is instructive to observe that one can view the theory of generic repre-
sentations discussed in §11.3 as a special case of the more general concept
of a distinguished representation. Assume for simplicity that F is nonar-
chimedean. If G is quasi-split, N ≤ G is the unipotent radical of a Borel
subgroup, and ψ : N (F ) → C× is a generic character then an irreducible
admissible representation π of G(F ) is ψ-generic if and only if it is smoothly
(N, ψ)-distinguished. The space HomN (F ),sm (Vπ , Vψ ) is the space of Whit-
taker functions, and HomG(F ) (Vπ , C ∞ (N (F )\G(F ), ψ)) is the space of Whit-
taker models. Both are at most one-dimensional. For many interesting cases,
the phenomenon that (14.2) is at most one dimensional (or at least finite
dimensional) persists. We discuss this in more detail in §14.4 below.
14.3 Global distinction and period integrals
The global version of distinction involves period integrals of cusp forms. Let
G be a reductive group over a global field F and let H be a subgroup of G.
Let
χ : H(AF ) −→ C×
be a quasi-character trivial on (AG ∩AH )H(F ). If ϕ : [G] → C is a continuous
function then we define the period integral
Z
Pχ (ϕ) := ϕ(h)χ(h)dh (14.3)
(AG ∩AH )H(F )\H(AF )
whenever this integral is absolutely convergent.

For a cuspidal automorphic representation π of AG \G(AF ) let L2cusp (π)

be the π-isotypic subspace of L2cusp ([G]). We assume that Pχ (ϕ) is absolutely
convergent for all smooth ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]).
Definition 14.2. A cuspidal automorphic representation π of AG \G(AF ) is

(H, χ)-distinguished if Pχ (ϕ) is nonzero for some smooth ϕ in L2cusp (π).
If H and/or χ are understood then we often speak of H-distinguished, χ-

distinguished or simply distinguished representations. If χ is trivial, then we
often write P for Pχ .
Assume F is a number field. Let K∞ ≤ G(F∞ ) be a maximal compact
subgroup. It is often useful to work with K∞ -finite functions in L2cusp (π)
instead of merely smooth ones. With this in mind we prove the following
lemma:
Lemma 14.3.1 Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AG \G(AF )
such that Pχ (ϕ) is absolutely convergent for all smooth ϕ ∈ L2cusp (π). The
representation π is (H, χ)-distinguished if and only if there is a K∞ -finite
smooth function ϕ ∈ L2cusp (π) such that Pχ (ϕ) 6= 0.
Proof. The “if” direction is obvious. We prove the “only if.”

Let U be a neighborhood of 1 in AG \G(F∞ ) and let ε > 0. By the
proof of Proposition 4.4.2 we can choose a nonnegative K∞ -finite f∞ ∈
Cc∞ (AG \G(F∞ )) with support in K∞ U such that
Z Z
f (g)dg = 1 and f (g)dg < ε.
AG \G(F∞ ) AG \G(F∞ )−U
Choose a smooth function ϕ in L2cusp (π) such that Pχ (ϕ) 6= 0. It is fixed by

some compact open subgroup K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ). Let
f := measdg∞ (K ∞ )−1 f∞ 1K ∞ .
Then π(f )ϕ is K∞ -finite, and

Z

|Pχ (π(f )ϕ) − Pχ (ϕ)| = f (g) (Pχ (π(g)ϕ) − Pχ (ϕ)) dg .

AG \G(AF )
Here we have used the absolute convergence of the period integral to justify
switching the order of integration. The above is bounded by
Z
f (g) |Pχ (π(g)ϕ) − Pχ (ϕ)| dg
AG \G(AF )
which can be made as small as we want by adjusting U and ε. t

u
To continue our example from the previous section, if G is quasi-split,

H = N is the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup, and ψ : N (AF ) → C×
14.3 Global distinction and period integrals 279
is a generic character then a cuspidal representation is ψ-generic if and only

if it is (H, ψ)-distinguished.
We now develop criteria for Pχ (ϕ) to be convergent. We assume for the
remainder of this section that
• The neutral component of H ≤ G is the direct product of a unipotent and
a reductive group.
We begin with the following lemma:
Lemma 14.3.2 If H is reductive then the quotient (AG ∩ AH )H(F )\H(AF )
is closed in [G].
Proof. By definition of the quotient topology, we are to show that
AG ∩ AH \G(F )H(AF ) = AG \G(F )AG H(AF ) ⊂ AG \G(AF )
is closed. For this it suffices to show that AG \G(F )AG H(AF )/H(AF ) is
closed in AG \G(AF )/H(AF ). We in fact show that the image of G(F ) in
the quotient AG \G(AF )/H(AF ) is discrete in Lemma 17.6.4. t
u
A version of the following proposition is proven in [AGR93]:
Proposition 14.3.3 If f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) and ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]) is smooth
then the integral defining Pχ (ϕ) is absolutely convergent.
Proof. We first reduce the proposition to the case where H is connected. Let
K ∞ ≤ H(A∞ F ) be a compact open subgroup such that ϕ and χ are left K -
∞
◦
invariant. We recall that H(AF )/H (AF ) is compact by a theorem of Borel
[Con12a, Proposition 3.2.1], and hence
H(F )H ◦ (AF )\H(AF )/K ∞
is finite. For appropriate choices of Haar measures dh on H(AF ) and dh◦ on

H ◦ (AF ) one has
Z
ϕ(h)χ(h)dh
(AG ∩AH )H(F )\H(AF )
Z
= ϕ(h)χ(h)dh
(AG ∩AH )H(F )\H(AF )/K ∞
X Z
= ϕ(h◦ h)χ(h◦ h)dh◦ .
h∈H(F )H ◦ (AF )\H(AF )/K ∞ (AG ∩AH )H ◦ (F )\H ◦ (AF )
Thus we are reduced to the case where H is connected.

We now assume H is connected. Write H = Hr ×Hu where Hr is reductive
and Hu is unipotent. We then have
Z Z
Pχ (ϕ) := ϕ((hr , hu ))χ(hr , hu )dhr dhu
(AG ∩AHr )Hr (F )\Hr (AF ) [Hu ]
(see Exercise 2.16). The set [Hu ] is compact by Theorem 2.6.2. Thus applying
the Fubini-Tonelli theorem, we see that it suffices to establish the proposition
in the special case where H is reductive.
Assume first that we are in the function field case. In this setting Theorem
9.4.1 asserts that any smooth function in L2cusp ([G]) is compactly supported.
Thus the proposition follows from Lemma 14.3.2.
Now assume that we are in the number field case. Let TH0 ≤ H der and
T0 ≤ Gder be maximal F -split tori in H der and Gder , respectively. We can
and do assume T0 ∩ H der = TH0 . Let PH be a minimal parabolic subgroup of
H containing TH0 . It admits a Levi decomposition MH NH = PH , where MH
is the centralizer of TH0 in H (it is a Levi subgroup of P [Bor91, Proposition
20.4] or [BT65, Theorem 4.15(b)] ) and NH < PH is the unipotent radical of
PH . By Theorem 2.7.2 there is an 0 < r < 1 such that
H(AF ) = AH H(F )ATH0 (r)ΩKH
where Ω is relatively compact subset of NH (AF )MH (AF )1 , KH ≤ H(AF ) is

a maximal compact subgroup, and ATH0 (r) is defined with respect to the set
of simple roots ∆H of TH in H attached to the parabolic subgroup PH . We
refer to §2.7 for notation.
The Haar measure on H(AF ) decomposes as
d(anmk) = dadndmdk
for (a, n, m, k) ∈ AH ATH0 (r)×NH (AF )×MH (AF )1 ×KH by the Iwasawa de-
composition (Theorem 2.7.1) and Proposition 3.2.1. Thus the integral Pχ (ϕ)
converges absolutely provided that
Z
|ϕ(anmk)|dadndmdk (14.4)
(AG ∩AH )\AH ATH0 (r)×Ω×KH
converges.
Let ∆ be a set of simple roots for T0 in G. We can then form the corre-
sponding set
AT0 (r0 )
for r0 ∈ R>0 . There is a Weyl chamber C ⊂ Lie(AT0 ) such that the closure
of the image of C under the exponential map is AT0 (1). Weyl chambers in
Lie(AT0 ) are permuted simply transitively by W (G, T )(F ) [Bor91, Theorems
14.7, 21.2, and 21.6]. It follows that
[
AT 0 = wAT0 (1)w−1
w∈W (G,T )(F )
and the intersection of any two W (G, T )(F )-conjugates of AT0 (1) is a set of
measure zero with respect to any Haar measure on AT0 . Hence (14.4) is equal
to
14.4 Spherical subgroups 281
X Z
|ϕ(anmk)|dadndmdk.
w∈W (G,T )(F ) (AG ∩AH )\AH ATH0 (r)∩wAT0 (1)w−1 ×Ω×KH
Changing variables a 7→ w−1 aw and using the left invariance of ϕ under w

we see that this is the sum over w ∈ W (G, T )(F ) of
Z
|ϕ(awnmk)|dadndmdk.
(AG ∩w−1 AH w)\w−1 AH ATH0 (r)w∩AT0 (1)×Ω×KH
The function ϕ is rapidly decreasing as a function on G(AF ) by Corollary

9.7.2. It follows immediately from this that the integral above is finite. t
u
One can also give a reasonable definition of distinction for representations
that are not necessarily cuspidal, see [JLR99, LR03, Off06, Zyd19].
14.4 Spherical subgroups
We continue to let G be a reductive group over a global field or a local

field F and let H ≤ G be a subgroup. We assume for this section that the
characteristic of F is zero because the majority of references restrict to this
case.
For general H, one does not even have a conjectural answer to the ques-
tion of which representations are H-distinguished. However, there is an im-
portant class of subgroups for which one can conjecturally characterize H-
distinguished representations:
Definition 14.3. A connected subgroup H ≤ G is said to be spherical if
HomH (V, Vtriv ) is at most one dimensional for all irreducible representations
ρ : G → GL(V ), where Vtriv denotes the trivial representation.
Note that here ρ is a representation in the category of algebraic groups.
Now assume that G and H are split reductive groups. The group H acts
on O[G], the ring of regular functions (see §17.1 for details on this), and one
defines
X := G/H := Spec(O[G]H ). (14.5)
Gaitsgory and Nadler [GN10] defined a dual group G

b X equipped with an
embedding
b X × SL2 −→ G
G b (14.6)
of reductive algebraic groups over C. There are antecedents of this definition

in the special case where H is symmetric subgroup in the sense of §14.5 be-
low, see [Ric82, JLR93]. These antecedents did not include the SL2 factor.
This factor is crucial for understanding nontempered distinguished represen-

tations.
Assume that G and H are both split and that the local Langlands corre-
spondence is known for tempered representations of G(F ). In this case the
basic local principle (due to Sakellaridis and Venkatesh) is the following:
Principle 14.4.1 A tempered L-parameter ρ : WF0 → L
G factors through
the natural map
b X (C) × GalF → L G
G
if and only if some π ∈ Π(ρ) is H-distinguished.
Here we have ignored the SL2 factor in (14.6). This is to avoid discussing
Arthur packets, which are necessary to understand the SL2 (C) factor. We
have stated this as a principle instead of a conjecture because it might be
false as stated. For example, it might be necessary to enlarge the L-packet to a
so-called Vogan L-packet that includes representations of pure inner forms
of G. There are other more serious problems that can occur, for example
in the case where H is an orthogonal group On and G is the general linear
group GLn (see §14.5 below). However we do not wish to delve into the details
for which we refer to [SV12, §16]. There are antecedents of this conjecture
in the special case of symmetric varieties in the work of Jacquet and his
collaborators [JLR93, Jac05a].
One knows the most about Principle 14.4.1 in the case where the L-
parameters is unramified. The most general statements currently known are
contained in work of Sakellaridis [Sak08, Sak13]. We point out that even in
the unramified case there is not a robust understanding of distinguished rep-
resentations for groups that are quasi-split and not split. Developing such a
theory is an important (and probably accessible) open problem.
Now assume that F is a global field and G is a reductive group over F .
Let H ≤ G be a spherical subgroup. By Exercise 14.5 if π = ⊗0v πv is a
cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ) that is H-distinguished then
πv is H-distinguished for all places v. In general, the converse statement is
false. There is usually a global condition that is also necessary that can of-
ten be phrased in terms of L-functions. We will illustrate this with examples
next few sections. Under suitable assumptions, in [SV12] Sakellaridis and
Venkatesh have a conjecture characterizing cuspidal automorphic representa-
tions π distinguished by spherical subgroups in these terms, that is, in terms
of local distinction of the components of π together with a criterion in terms
of L-functions. There is even a conjectural formula for the period integral
in terms of L-functions that is known as the Ichino-Ikeda conjecture. It
was first posed in a special case in [II10]. The power and beauty of the con-
jectures of Sakellaridis and Venkatesh lies in the fact that they provide a
uniform perspective on many proved and unproved conjectures in local rep-
resentation theory and period integrals and at the same time suggest many
new avenues of research. They are currently the most precise enunciation of
what has become known as the relative Langlands program.
14.5 Symmetric subgroups 283
Before moving to examples of spherical subgroups in the next few sections

we mention that Knop and Schalke [KS17] have defined a dual group G bX
attached to any G-scheme X equipped with a morphism G b X → G.
b It would
be interesting to investigate whether or not this generalized dual group can
be used to generalize Principle 14.4.1.
14.5 Symmetric subgroups
Assume for the moment that F is a characteristic zero field. Let σ : G → G

be an automorphism over F of order 2. For F -algebra R, let
Gσ (R) := {g ∈ G(R) : g σ = g} (14.7)
be the subgroup fixed by σ and denote by H = (Gσ )◦ its connected compo-

nent.
In this case we refer to X := G/H as a symmetric variety and H as a
symmetric subgroup. We have the following theorem of Vust [Vus74, §1.3]:
Theorem 14.5.1 A symmetric subgroup is a spherical subgroup. t

u
To classify symmetric subgroups it suffices to classify involutions of G.
This question has been studied by several authors; we mention in particular
the work of Helminck [Hel00]. The classification is somewhat complicated. To
get a feel for what is going on it is illuminating to consider the involutions
of the classical groups over an algebraically closed field. When the field is C,
there is a nice discussion in [GW09, §11.3.4].
We now describe some results on distinction by symmetric subgroups of
GLn or ResE/F GLn when E/F is a quadratic extension of number fields. The
upshot of the discussion is that there is a great deal known in this setting.
One of the motivations for Jacquet’s development of the relative trace
formula was to prove the following theorem [Jac10]:
Theorem 14.5.2 Let E/F be a quadratic extension, let G = ResE/F GLn
and let H be a quasi-split unitary group attached to the extension E/F . Then
a cuspidal automorphic representation π of G(AF ) is H-distinguished if and
only if π ∼
= π σ , where hσi = Gal(E/F ). t
u
See also [FLO12] for more refined versions of this theorem. This is sometimes
known as the Jacquet-Ye case since its proof was more or less reduced to a
local statement known as the Jacquet-Ye fundamental lemma in [JY96] and
later proved in two different manners by Ngô [Ngô99b, Ngô99a] and Jacquet
[Jac04, Jac05b] (see §19.6 for more details). The condition that π ∼ = π σ is
equivalent to π being a base change lift from GLn (AF ), by work of Arthur
and Clozel [AC89] (see Theorem 13.5.1). Thus this theorem is consonant with
the expectation of the principles laid out in §14.4, although the dual group
of the relevant spherical variety is not defined here as G is not quasi-split.
Similarly, using a variant of the Rankin-Selberg theory we discussed in
§11.7 Flicker and Zinoviev proved the following theorem [Fli88, FZ95]:
Theorem 14.5.3 For G as in Theorem 14.5.2 an automorphic respresenta-
tion π of AG \G(AF ) is distinguished by GLn if and only if the Asai L-function
L(s, π, AsE/F ) has a pole at s = 1. t
u
Here the Asai L-function is the Langlands L-function attached to the Asai
representation. To define it, let E/F be an arbitrary (not just quadratic)
extension with d := [E : F ]. Then the Asai representation
AsE/F : L ResE/F GLn = GLdn (C) o GalF −→ GLnd (C)
is defined by stipulating that for τ ∈ HomF (E, F ),
AsE/F (((gτ ) o 1))(⊗τ vτ ) = ⊗τ gτ vτ , AsE/F ((1)τ o σ)(⊗τ vτ ) = ⊗τ vσ◦τ .
A representation
ρ : GalE −→ GLn (C)
extends uniquely to a homomorphism
ρ : GalF −→ L ResE/F GLn
commuting with the projections to GalF on the L-group side. Thus to each
such ρ we can associate the representation
AsE/F (ρ) := AsE/F ◦ ρ : GalF −→ GLnd (C).
Note that for all field extensions L ≥ E one has
AsE/F (ρ)Gal ∼= ⊗τ ∈HomF (E,F ) ρτ GalL .

L
Thus the Asai representation AsE/F (ρ) is a canonical extension of
⊗τ ∈HomF (E,F ) ρτ
to GalF . Suppose now that E/F is quadratic and that τ is the gen-
erator of Gal(E/F ). Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of
AResE/F GLn \ResE/F GLn (AF ). In this case the analytic properties of the Asai
L-function are understood by Theorem 13.7.2. The discussion above (with
global Galois groups replaced by local Weil-Deligne groups) implies that
L(s, π × π τ ) = L(s, π, AsE/F )L(s, π ⊗ AsE/F ⊗ ηE/F ) (14.8)
where ηE/F is the character attached to Gal(E/F ) by class field theory.

i
In particular, by Theorem 11.7.1 a pole of L(s, π, AsE/F ⊗ ηE/F ) for some
14.5 Symmetric subgroups 285
i ∈ {0, 1} implies that π ∼

= π ∨τ . Moreover, if L(s, π, AsE/F ⊗ηE/F
i
) has a pole
at s = 1 then π is a functorial transfer from a quasi-split unitary group with
respect to an L-map depending on the parity of n and i [Mok15, Theorem
2.5.4(a), Remark 2.5.5]. This is again consonant with the expectations in
§14.4.
If n = 2, F = Q and E is a real quadratic extension then Theorem 14.5.3
was proven in [HLR86]. It was then used to prove many cases of the Tate con-
jecture for Hilbert modular surfaces. As mentioned in the introduction, this
paper is significant because it was where the notion of a distinguished repre-
sentation was first defined. Extensions of Harder, Langlands and Rapoports’
results are contained in [Ram04, GH14].
We now move on to symmetric subgroups of GLn (not ResE/F GLn ). Let
σm,n : GLm+n −→ GLm+n

Im

be conjugation by −In . Then let
H := GLσm+n = GLm × GLn .
The first result is the following [FJ93, Proposition 2.1]:

Proposition 14.5.4 If m > n then no cuspidal automorphic representation
of GLm+n (AF ) is distinguished by (GLm , χ ◦ det) for any quasi-character
χ : F × \A× ×
F →C . t
u
Here we view GLm as the subgroup GLm × 1 of GLm × GLn = H. In par-
ticular, no cuspidal automorphic representation of GLm+n (AF ) is (H, χ)-
distinguished for any χ.
Thus from the point of view of cuspidal representations the only interesting
case is when m = n. In this case consider the quasi-character
µs : H(AF ) −→ C×
det a s−1/2

a det a
7−→
χ η(det b),
b det b det b
where χ and η are characters [Gm ] (in particular they are trivial on AGm ). In
this setting Jacquet and Friedberg [FJ93, Theorem 4.1] prove the following:
Theorem 14.5.5 Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of GL2n (AF )
with central character ωπ . Assume that η n ωπ = 1. The cuspidal representa-
tion π on GL2n (AF ) is (H, µs0 )-distinguished if and only if L(s, π, ∧2 ⊗ η)
has a pole at s = 1 and L(s0 , π ⊗ χ) 6= 0. t
u
In fact Friedberg and Jacquet prove that for ϕ in the space of π the pe-
riod integral Pµs0 (ϕ) is a holomorphic multiple of L(s0 , π ⊗ χ) (under the
assumption that L(s, π, ∧2 ⊗ η) has a pole at s = 1). Ash and Ginzburg use
Theorem 14.5.5 to construct p-adic L-functions under a technical hypothesis,
see [AG94].
If η = 1 and π has trivial central character, the condition that L(s, π, ∧2 )

has a pole at s = 1 is equivalent to the statement that π is a lift of an
automorphic representation of SO2n+1 (AF ) by Theorem 13.7.4. We note that
SO
c 2n+1 = Sp2n , and in this case the Lie algebra of G b X is sp2n (see [KS17,
Table 3]). This again agrees with the expectations of §14.4.
If we take G = GLn and take σ(g) = J −1 g −t J for a symmetric matrix
J ∈ GLn (F ) then Gσ is an orthogonal group On . In the case n = 2 one has a
complete characterization of representations of GL2 distinguished by O2 via
work of Waldspurger reinterpreted and reproved in [Jac86]. In general the rep-
resentations of GLn (AF ) distinguished by On should be functorial lifts from
the topological double cover of GLn (AF ), which is not the adelic points of a
reductive group. This expectation is stated as a precise conjecture in [Mao98].
In the same paper it is more or less reduced to a local conjecture known as
the Jacquet-Mao fundamental lemma. The Jacquet-Mao fundamental lemma
is now known [Do15] so it seems likely that the expected characterization of
distinguished representations mentioned above will be proven in the near fu-
ture. It would be interesting to see how the Sakellaridis-Venkatesh conjectures
mentioned §14.5 could be generalized to handle this setting.
If we take G = GL2n and take σ(g) := J −1 g −t J for a skew-symmetric ma-
trix J ∈ GL2n (F ) then Gσ is a symplectic group Sp2n . It is not hard to check
that all of these subgroups are conjugate under GLn (F ), so the choice of J
is irrelevant (see Exercise 14.1). It is known that there are no cuspidal au-
tomorphic representations of GL2n that are distinguished by Sp2n by [JR92,
Proposition 1]. However there are discrete automorphic representations of
GL2n that are distinguished by Sp2n ; these are classified in [Off06].
We close by noting that in the discussion above we have treated every
symmetric subgroup H of GLn up to conjugation by GLnF , see [GW09,
§11.3.4]. Of course, this is not the same as conjugation up to GLnF , but we
omit a discussion for brevity.
14.6 Relationship with the endoscopic classification
We continue to let F be a number field and E/F be a quadratic extension in

this section. In the previous section we explained many results on distinction
of cuspidal automorphic representations of GLn (AF ) and ResE/F GLn (AF )
with respect to symmetric subgroups. These results are very interesting, but
they all suffer a serious drawback. Since the locally symmetric space attached
to GLn (AF ) is never hermitian for n > 2, there is no obvious connection be-
tween algebraic and arithmetic geometry and distinction implied by the re-
sults of the previous section in higher rank. In order to obtain such results, the
theory of Shimura varieties exposed in §15.8 below indicates that we should
really obtain analogous results for automorphic representations of classical
14.6 Relationship with the endoscopic classification 287
groups (see also §15.6). Of coures this is also of interest independently of

applications to algebraic or arithmetic geometry.
The first author and Wambach [GW14] provide one means of relating dis-
tinction of automorphic representations of GLn to distinction of automorphic
representations on unitary groups (including those defining hermitian locally
symmetric spaces). It is suggestive of broader phenomena that merit study.
To state the result, let E/F be a quadratic extension of totally real number
fields, let hσi = Gal(E/F ), and let M/F be a CM extension. Let H be a
quasi-split unitary group in n variables attached to the extension M/F and
let G := ResE/F H. It is the restriction of scalars down to F of a quasi-split
unitary group attached to the extension M E/E. The following is the main
theorem of [GW14] under some simplifying assumptions:
Theorem 14.6.1 Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ).
Suppose that π satisfies the following assumptions:
(a) There is a finite-dimensional representation V of GF∞ such that π is
V -cohomological.
(b) There are finite places v1 6= v2 of F totally split in M E/F such that πv1
and πv2 are supercuspidal.
(d) For all places v of F such that M E/F is ramified one of the extensions
M/F or E/F is split.
The representation π admits a base change π 0 to ResM/E G(AE ) := GLn (AM E )
with respect to the L-map of §13.7:
r : L G −→ ResM/E GLn .
If the partial Asai L-function LS (s, π 0 , AsM E/F ) has a pole at s = 1 then
some cuspidal automorphic representation π 00 of G(AF ) in the L-packet of π 0
is H-distinguished. Moreover, we can take π 00 to be V -cohomological. t
u
Here S is a sufficiently large finite set of places of M including all infinite
places. The notion of V -cohomological is explained in §15.5 below.
The heart of the proof is based on a particular case of a general principle
which we now explain. Let G be a reductive group, let hτ i = Gal(M/F ), and
let
G
e := ResM/F G.
Let σ be an automorphism of G of order 2 and let H := Gσ ≤ G and G eσ ≤ Ge

be the subgroups fixed by σ. Let θ = σ ◦ τ , viewed as an automorphism of G, e
and let Geθ ≤ Ge be the subgroup fixed by θ. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic
representation of G(AF ). Assume that π admits a weak transfer π 0 to G(A
e F ).
In favorable circumstances the machinery developed in [GW14] together with
suitable fundamental lemmas should imply the general principle:
The representation π 0 is Ge σ -distinguished and Ge θ -distinguished if and
only if a cuspidal automorphic representation in the L-packet of π is H-
distinguished.
We have not asserted this principle as a conjecture because it may be false as

stated. In particular one might need to work with, e.g. (H, χ)-distinguished
representations for characters χ or incorporate pure inner forms of the groups
involved (see §14.7 for the definition of pure inner forms). In Theorem 14.6.1
the group G is a unitary group and G e is the restriction of scalars of a general
linear group. Even restricting G to this setting there are more interesting
cases to consider. More generally, the hope is that generalizing the principle
and explicating it will allow one to classify the distinguished representations
of classical groups in terms of their transfer to general linear groups much as
we have a classification of the whole discrete spectrum of classical groups in
terms of the general linear group due to the theory of twisted endoscopy (see
§13.8 and [Art13, Mok15]). We remark that in many case one direction of the
principle can be obtained as a consequence of known results on Langlands
functoriality and the so-called residue method. For a family of examples
we refer to [PWZ19].
14.7 Gan-Gross-Prasad type period integrals
The Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture is an characterizing representations of a

pair of groups distinguished by a subgroup embedded diagonally [GGP12a,
GGP12b]. It can be viewed as a special case of the Sakellaridis-Venkatesh
conjectures mentioned in §14.5, though the original version of the conjecture,
due to Gross and Prasad, is older [GP92].
For simplicity, we will only state the conjectures of Gan, Gross and Prasad
in a restricted setting, referring to [GGP12a, GGP12b] for the more general
setup. Let F be a local or global field and let E be an étale F -algebra of
degree 1 or 2. In other words E = F , E = F ⊕ F , or E/F is a quadratic field
extension. We let
σ : E −→ E
be the generator of Gal(E/F ). Let V be a finite rank free E-module. We
let V0 be the fixed points of σ acting on V ; it is an F -vector space. An
E-Hermitian form h , i on V is a pairing
h , i : V × V −→ E
that is E-linear in the first variable and satisfies
hv, ui = σ(hu, vi). (14.9)
We assume that h , i is nondegenerate. We let G

e V be the group whose points
in an F -algebra R are given by
e V (R) := {g ∈ GLV (E ⊗F R) : hgv, gwi = hv, wi for all v, w ∈ V ⊗F R}.
G 0
14.7 Gan-Gross-Prasad type period integrals 289
Let GV be the neutral component of G e V . Then GV is a classical group. We

list the possibilities in the following table:
E GV
E=F OV
E =F ⊕F GLV0
E/F quadratic UV
Here OV and UV are the orthogonal and unitary group of V , respectively.

In order to proceed it is useful to use the definition of a pure inner form
of an algebraic group G. We will give two equivalent definitions, one using
Galois cohomology, and an ad-hoc definition using the specific features of
our given situation. The reader unfamiliar with Galois cohomology should
feel free to skip to the ad-hoc definition below.
A canonical reference for Galois cohomology is [Ser02]. Two algebraic
groups G and G0 over F are said to be forms of eachother if GF sep ∼ = G0F sep .
For an algebraic group H over a field k we let
H 1 (k, H) := H 1 (Galk , H(k sep )) (14.10)
denote the usual Galois cohomology set. The forms of G are in bijection with
H 1 (F, Aut(G)). The so called inner forms are those forms corresponding
to the subgroup of inner automorphisms. This means that the corresponding
cocycles are in the image of the map
H 1 (F, G/Gder ) −→ H 1 (F, Aut(G)).
The pure inner forms are those corresponding to cocycles in the image of
the map
H 1 (F, G) −→ H 1 (F, G/Gder ) −→ H 1 (F, Aut(G)).
Two pure inner forms are said to be equivalent if the corresponding cocycles
in H 1 (F, G) are equivalent. It turns out that the pure inner forms of GV are
all of the form GV 0 for free E-modules V 0 with E-rank equal to V . More
specifically, if E and V are fixed the side conditions on V 0 that are equivalent
to GV 0 being a pure inner form of GV are given in the following table (see
[GGP12b, §2]):
E conditions
E=F rankE V 0 = rankE V and disc(V ) = disc(V 0 )
E =F ⊕F rankE V 0 = rankE V
E/F quadratic V0 ∼
= V as hermitian spaces
We recall the following:

Proposition 14.7.1 If G and G0 are reductive groups over a global field F
and are inner forms of eachother then there exists a finite set of places S of
F such that for v 6∈ S one has an isomorphism GFv →G˜ 0Fv .
Proof. There is a finite set of places S of F such that GFv and G0Fv are
quasisplit for v 6∈ S [Spr79, Lemma 4.9]. On the other hand two inner forms
of the same quasi-split reductive group are necessarily isomorphic [Mil17,
Corollary 23.53]. t
u
Thus for S as in the proposition we can unambiguously identify isomorphism

classes of representations of G(ASF ) and G0 (ASF ). We say that automorphic
representations π of G(AF ) and π 0 of G0 (AF ) are nearly equivalent if π S ∼
=
π 0S for any finite set of places S as above. By design, the notion of near
equivalence is unchanged if we enlarge S.
Let W < V be a subspace nondegenerate with respect to h , i such that
rankE V /W = 1. Then the restriction of h , i to W is naturally an E-Hermitian
form and we can form the group GW as above. Moreover one has a natural
embedding ι : GW ,→ GV and hence an embedding of GW into
G := GV × GW
given on points in an F -algebra R by
GW (R) −→ GV (R) × GW (R)

(14.11)
g 7−→ (ι(g), g).
We let H be the image of GW . If G0 is a pure inner form of G, so G0 =

GV 0 × GW 0 with V 0 and W 0 as in the table above we let H 0 be the image of
GW 0 under the analogous map GW 0 → GV 0 × GW 0 .
Assume that GW and GV are quasi-split. We then have standard repre-
sentations rV of L GV and rW of L GW given in the table (13.11) and we can
form the tensor product representation rV ⊗ rW . In the special case where
GV and GW are general linear groups we take the standard representation
to be the identity map.
Assume for the remainder of the section that F is a global field. Let π
is a cuspidal automorphic representation of AG \G(AF ) that lies in a global
discrete generic L-packet in the sense of §13.8. In the special case where GV
14.7 Gan-Gross-Prasad type period integrals 291
and GW are general linear groups this simply means that π is a cuspidal
automorphic representation.
Conjecture 14.7.2 (Gan-Gross-Prasad) One has
L( 12 , π, rV ⊗ rW ) 6= 0
if and only if there is a pure inner form G0 of G and a cuspidal automorphic

representation π 0 of G0 (AF ) nearly equivalent to π that is H 0 -distinguished.
There is a local version of the conjecture which we omit. The import of
the local version for the global conjecture 14.7.2 is that it allows one to
detect fairly explicitly which π 0 in the near equivalence class of π is distin-
guished. Stating this in a reasonable form seems to require one to collect
representations on the adelic points of all the pure inner forms of G into a
so-called Vogan L-packet. We prefer to not make this precise and instead
refer the reader to the lucid explanation in [GGP12b]. Assuming certain ex-
pected properties of Vogan L-packets the local Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture
has been proven (for tempered representations) in the orthogonal case by
Mœglin and Waldspurger [MW12] and by Beuzart-Plessis in the unitary case
[BP16].
We state now what is known about the global conjecture. When E = F ⊕F
the groups GV and GW are general linear groups. In this case the conjecture
is true (see Exercise 14.9). In fact the general linear group admits only one
isomorphism class of pure inner form. Thus in the statement of the conjecture
we may take G = G0 and H = H 0 in this case.
Under suitable assumptions on G (in particular that it is orthogonal)
Ginzburg, Jiang and Rallis proved one implication, namely if some repre-
sentation in the near equivalence class of π is distinguished then the central
L-value is nonzero [GJR05, Theorem A] (see also [GJR04]). The proof is ele-
gant in its simplicity. It is a clever application of the theory of automorphic
descent which explicitly constructs the inverse of the functorial lift from clas-
sical groups to the general linear group. It is this theory that underlies one
proof of Theorem 13.7.4.
Currently the most definitive result on the global Gan-Gross-Prasad con-
jecture is in the unitary case:
Theorem 14.7.3 Assume that E/F is a quadratic extension of number fields
(so that G is a product of unitary groups). Assume that there is a nonar-
chimedean place v of F such that the transfer (rV ⊗ rW )(πv ) is supercuspidal.
Then Conjecture 14.7.2 is true. t
u
The method of proof is quite beautiful and was suggested by Jacquet
and Rallis [JR11]. One reduces the unitary case of the Gan-Gross-Prasad
conjecture to the general linear case, which, as mentioned above, is known,
using a comparison of relative trace formulas that in turn relies on a local
conjecture called the Jacquet-Rallis fundamental lemma that was proven by
Z. Yun [Yun11]. The approach is an antecedent of the principle enunciated

in §14.6. It is interesting to note that, unlike in the settings considered in
§14.5 and in Theorem 14.6.1, allowing pure inner forms of G is necessary for
the theorem to be true. It is expected that including pure inner forms will be
necessary in proving cases of the principle in §14.6.
Theorem 14.7.3 is the culmination of the work of quite a few mathemati-
cians. After Z. Yun proved the Jacquet-Rallis fundamental lemma, W. Zhang
established another important local result (the smooth transfer) in the nonar-
chimedean case, and then proved a slightly weaker version of Theorem 14.7.3
[Zha14]. The archimedean case was proven by H. Xue [Xue17]. Other nec-
essary local results were completed by Bleuzart-Plessis [Beu16]. Finally, as
with most trace formula comparisons, to obtain a complete result requires
delicate arguments deal with the fact that the geometric and spectral sides
of trace formulae are rarely convergent. In the current setting this work was
undertaken by Chaudouard and Zydor. The theorem in the form stated above
is [CZ16, Théorème 1.1.6.2].
The work above does not generalize in an obvious way to the orthogonal
case of Conjecture 14.7.2. However, an approach to this case has recently
been proposed and completed in a low rank setting [Kri19].
We close this section by mentioning an exciting analogue of Conjecture
14.7.2 that (in certain cases) gives a formula for L0 ( 12 , π, rV ⊗ rW ) where
L( 12 , π, rV ⊗ rW ) = 0. The derivative can in some cases be related to heights
of algebraic cycles, and the relationship represents an important link be-
tween representation theory and arithmetic geometry. A formula of this type
was conjectured in [GGP12b] and is known as the arithmetic Gan-Gross-
Prasad conjecture. It generalizes the famous Gross-Zagier formula [GZ86],
which is a key input into the best known results on the Birch and Swinnerton-
Dyer conjecture in the number field case. In the unitary setting, the arithmetic
Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture was essentially reduced to a local conjecture
known as the arithmetic fundamental lemma by W. Zhang [Zha12b]. Z. Yun
and W. Zhang together used related ideas to prove the best known results
towards the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture in the function field case
[YZ17, YZ19].
14.8 Necessary conditions for distinction
Assume for the moment that F is a global field. One should be aware that for
general reductive groups G and connected subgroups H ≤ G there do not ex-
ist cuspidal automorphic representations of G(AF ) that are H-distinguished.
A somewhat trivial example is given by taking H to be the unipotent radi-
cal of a parabolic subgroup. In this case there are no cuspidal automorphic
representations of G(AF ) that are H-distinguished by the very definition of
a cuspidal representation.
14.8 Necessary conditions for distinction 293
A more substantial result was obtained by Ash, Ginzburg, and Rallis in

[AGR93]:
Theorem 14.8.1 If (G, H) is one of the following pairs of reductive groups
over a number field F then there are no cuspidal automorphic representations
of G(AF ) that are H-distinguished:
(GLn+k , SLn × SLk ) for n 6= k,
(GL2n , Sp2n ),
(GL2n+1 , Sp2n ),
(SO(n, n), SLn ) for n odd,
(Sp2(n+k) , Sp2n × Sp2k ),
(Sp2n , Sp2(n−l) ) with 4l < n.
t
u
There is an additional case in [AGR93] which we omit since it involves cusp
forms on (disconnected) orthogonal groups and we have not defined cusp
forms on such groups. We also point out that the theorem is stated in the
case F = Q in [AGR93] but this is not used in the proofs. We refer to [AGR93]
for the definition of the embeddings of H into G.
Let F be a nonarchimedean local field of characteristic not equal to 2 and
let G be a quasi-split reductive group over F equipped with an automorphism
σ : G −→ G
of order 2. Let
H := ((Gσ )◦ )der .
In this setting Prasad [Pra19, Theorem 1] gave a beautifully simple criterion
for there to exist generic representations of G(F ) distinguished by H(F ):
Theorem 14.8.2 If there is an irreducible admissible generic representation
of G(F ) distinguished by H(F ) then there is a Borel subgroup B < GF such
that B ∩ σ(B) is a maximal torus of GF . t
u
One also has the following partial converse [Pra19, Proposition 11]:
Proposition 14.8.3 If there is a Borel subgroup B < G such that B ∩ σ(B)
is a maximal torus of G then there exists an irreducible generic representation
of G(F ) distinguished by Gσ (F ). t
u
In this proposition we are assuming B is a subgroup of G, not GF .
Exercises
14.1. Let G be a reductive group over a local or global field F and let
H, H 0 ≤ G be subgroups that are G(F )-conjugate. If F is local prove that an
irreducible admissible representation of G(F ) is H-distinguished if and only

if it is H 0 -distinguished. If H is the direct product of a reductive and a unipo-
tent group prove that a cuspidal automorphic representation π of G(AF ) is
H-distinguished if and only if it is H 0 -distinguished.
14.2. Let H be a reductive group over the nonarchimedean local field F ,

viewed as a subgroup of G := H × H via the diagonal embedding. Show that
an irreducible admissible representation π1 × π2 of G(F ) is H-distinguished
if and only if π1 ∼
= π2∨ .
14.3. Assume that G is a reductive group over a global field F and that
H ≤ G is a subgroup. Prove that
AG ∩ H(AF ) = AG ∩ AH .
14.4. Let H be a reductive group over the global field F viewed as a subgroup
of G := H × H via the diagonal embedding. Let π1 and π2 be cuspidal
automorphic representations of AH \H(AF ) and let π = π1 ⊗ π2 be their
exterior tensor product, viewed as a cuspidal automorphic representation of
AG \G(AF ). Show that π1 ⊗ π2 is H-distinguished if and only if π1 ∼ = π2∨ .
14.5. Let G be a reductive group over a global field F , let H ≤ G be a

subgroup, and let χ : H(AF ) → C× be a quasi-character trivial on H(F ).
Let π = ⊗0v πv be a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ) that is
(H, χ)-distinguished. Prove that for all nonarchimedean v the representation
πv is smoothly (H, χv )-distinguished.
14.6. Give an example of a subgroup H ≤ GL2 × GL2 (over a global field F )

a quasi-character χ : H(AF ) → C× , and a smooth function ϕ in a cuspidal
automorphic representation of (AGL2 \GL2 (AF ))2 such that the integral
Z
|ϕ(h)χ(h)|dh
[H]
diverges.
14.7. Assume the notation in the proof of Proposition 14.3.3. Give an ex-
ample of a pair of reductive subgroups H ≤ G such that the closure of
AH − (AH ∩ AT0 (r0 )) is noncompact for any choice of r0 > 0 and any choice
of simple roots ∆ of T0 in G.
14.8. Prove (14.8).
14.9. Prove the Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture when E = F ⊕ F (and hence

GV and GW are general linear groups) using Rankin-Selberg theory.
Chapter 15
The Cohomology of Locally Symmetric
Spaces
We are in a forest whose trees

will not fall with a few timid
hatchet blows. We have to take
up the double-bitted axe and the
cross-cut saw, and hope that our
muscles are equal to them.
R. P. Langlands
Abstract In this chapter we discuss how automorphic representation theory

controls the cohomology of arithmetic locally symmetric spaces.
15.1 Introduction
A fruitful application of the theory of automorphic representations is to give

the decomposition of the cohomology of locally symmetric spaces as a mod-
ule under certain algebras of correspondences. We survey this connection in
this chapter. The primary technical tool one uses to make the connection is
(g, K∞ )-cohomology. The definition is given in §15.4.
One case that is particularly important is when the locally symmetric space
is the C-points of a quasi-projective scheme over a number field. Shimura was
the first to study this case systematically, and in his honor such varieties are
called Shimura varieties. We recall Deligne’s reformulation of the notion of
a Shimura variety at the end of this chapter. Part of the reason that this case
is so important is it is one of the few cases where there is a direct relationship
between automorphic representations and Galois representations. We point
the reader to some of the vast body of work that has been done elucidating
this relationship in §15.8.
Our real motivation for this chapter, however, is to explicitly discuss the
relationship between distinguished representations and cycles on locally sym-
295
296 15 The Cohomology of Locally Symmetric Spaces
metric spaces. This was in fact the original motivation for Harder, Langlands,
and Rapoport’s introduction of the notion of a distinguished automorphic
representation [HLR86]. In this paper they related period integrals of au-
tomorphic representations to algebraic cycles on Hilbert modular varieties.
Using this relation they proved cases of the Tate conjecture for these varieties.
There has been work generalizing their results, but even very basic questions
remain. We point out one such question explicitly in §15.6. We hope that in
the near future the knowledge one now has about the étale cohomology of
Shimura varieties can be combined with the relative trace formula to system-
atically study the Tate and Beilinson-Bloch conjectures for these varieties.
It is beyond the scope of this book to make this completely precise, but we
mention some promising results that have been obtained in §15.8.
Understanding the material in this chapter requires some knowledge of
sheaves and cohomology. In §15.8 we even briefly discuss étale cohomology of
Shimura varieties. The results will not be used in the remainder of the book,
so the reader should feel free to skip this chapter on a first reading. However,
we encourage the reader to at some point investigate the fascinating interplay
between arithmetic geometry and automorphic forms that is the subject of
Langlands’ quote in the epigraph.
15.2 Locally symmetric spaces
Unless otherwise specified throughout this chapter G is a connected reductive

group over Q. We let A := AQ be the adeles of Q, let K∞ ≤ G(R) be a
compact subgroup containing the maximal connected compact subgroup (in
the real topology) and, as before, let
AG ≤ G(R)
be the identity component in the real topology of the maximal Q-split torus in
the center of G. To ease notation, we write K for K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ ), a compact-
open subgroup. Finally we set
X := AG \G(R)/K∞ .
Any connected component of X is a symmetric space. One can essentially

take this to be the definition of a symmetric space, although it is not the
most natural definition. We let
ShK := Sh(G, X)K := G(Q)\X × G(A∞ )/K (15.1)
and refer to it as a Shimura manifold. As explained in (2.14) this is a finite

union of locally symmetric spaces. Indeed, if we take a set of representatives
(gi )i∈I for the finite set G(Q)\G(A∞ )/K then
15.2 Locally symmetric spaces 297
a
K
Γi \X −→Sh
˜ (15.2)
i∈I
Γi x 7−→ G(Q)(x, gi )K
where Γi = gi Kgi−1 ∩ G(Q).

To relate this setting within the traditional framework of locally symmetric
spaces it is useful to have in mind the notion of arithmetic and congruence
subgroups. These were already defined in §2.6, but we recall the definition
for the convenience of the reader:
Definition 15.1. A subgroup Γ ≤ G(Q) is arithmetic if there is some
faithful representation ρ : G → GLn such that ρ(Γ ) is commensurable with
ρ(G(Q)) ∩ GLn (Z). It is congruence if it is of the form G(Q) ∩ K for some
compact open subgroup K ≤ G(A∞ ).
Congruence subgroups are arithmetic (see Exercise 15.3). The famous con-
gruence subgroup problem asks whether every arithmetic subgroup is con-
gruence. The answer is in general no, but the failure of arithmetic subgroups
to be congruence can be controlled via techniques that originated in the in-
fluential paper [BMS67] (see also [Men65]). In particular, every arithmetic
subgroup of SLnQ , n ≥ 3, and Sp2nQ , n ≥ 2, is congruence (see loc. cit.). The
survey by Prasad and Rapinchuk in [Mil10] is a source for more up to date
information.
A useful assumption on a subgroup Γ ≤ G(Q) is that it is torsion-free.
This implies, for example, that
Γ \X (15.3)
is a manifold, as opposed to an orbifold (see Exercise 15.2). Unfortunately, the

property of being torsion free is not preserved under certain constructions,
such as intersecting with a parabolic subgroup and mapping to the Levi
quotient. A more robust condition is that of being neat:
×
Definition 15.2. An element g ∈ GLn (Q) is neat if the subgroup of Q
generated by its eigenvalues is torsion-free. An arithmetic subgroup Γ ≤
G(Q) is neat if given any (equivalently, one faithful) representation ρ : G →
GLn , ρ(g) is neat for all g ∈ Γ .
Clearly, if Γ is neat, then all its subgroups and homomorphic images are
neat.
Lemma 15.2.1 Any congruence subgroup Γ ≤ G(Q) contains a congruence
subgroup of finite index that is neat.
Proof. When G = GLn , we can take the neat subgroup to be of the form
{g ∈ GLn (Z) : g ≡ I mod N }
for a sufficiently divisible integer N . The general case follows from this. t
u
Definition 15.3. A compact open subgroup K ≤ G(A∞ ) is neat if
G(Q) ∩ g −1 Kg
is neat for all g ∈ G(A∞ ).
In fact, one only has to check this condition for all g ∈ G(Q)\G(A∞ )/K,
which is a finite set. An elaboration of the proof of Lemma 15.2.1 implies the
following (see Exercise 15.4):
Lemma 15.2.2 If K ≤ G(A∞ ), then K contains a neat subgroup of finite
index. t
u
Our motivation for introducing this notion is the following:
Lemma 15.2.3 If K is neat then ShK is a smooth manifold.
Proof. Since K is neat gKg −1 ∩ G(Q) is torsion-free for all g ∈ G(A∞ ). It

follows that the Γi occurring in the decomposition (15.2) are all torsion free.
As mentioned above, this implies that the Γi \X are all manifolds. t
u
In §5.2 we discussed the Hecke algebra Cc∞ (G(A∞ )). We recall that this is
the space of C-linear combinations of characteristic functions of double cosets
KgK for g ∈ G(A∞ ). We now explain how these operators can be realized
geometrically as correspondences. Let K and K 0 be compact open subgroups
of G(A∞ ), and g ∈ G(A∞ ) be such that K 0 ⊂ gKg −1 . Then we have a map
0
Tg : ShK −→ ShK (15.4)
0
G(Q)(x, hK ) 7−→ G(Q)(x, hgK).
These are finite étale maps if K and K 0 are neat.

The geometric realization of the characteristic function of KgK is the
correspondence
−1
ShK∩gKg (15.5)
y TI Tg %
ShK ShK .
It acts on functions via pullback TI∗ along TI followed by pushforward Tg∗

along Tg . In other words if we set K 0 := K ∩ gKg −1 then for functions ϕ on
0
ShK and ϕ0 on ShK
TI∗ (ϕ)(x, hK 0 ) : = ϕ(x, hK)

X
Tg∗ (ϕ0 )(x, hK) : = ϕ0 (x, hk 0 gK 0 ).
k0 ∈K/gK 0 g −1
15.3 Local systems 299
Set
T (g) := Tg∗ ◦ TI∗ (15.6)
Then for any function ϕ : ShK → C,
T (g)ϕ = R(1KgK )ϕ, (15.7)
where Z
R(1KgK )ϕ(x) := 1KgK (g)ϕ(xg)dg
G(A∞ )
with the Haar measure dg normalized so that dg(K) = 1.
15.3 Local systems
A well-known classical fact is that if Γ is a congruence subgroup of GL2Q

contained in the subgroup of matrices with positive determinant and H is the
upper half-plane then the cohomology group
H 1 (Γ \H, C)
can be decomposed as a direct sum of three summands, one isomorphic to the

space of weight 2 cusp forms on Γ namely S2 (Γ ) (see §6.6 for the definition),
one isomorphic to the space
{f (z) : f ∈ S2 (Γ )}
of antiholomorphic forms, and one isomorphic to a certain space of Eisenstein

series. In order to give a geometric interpretation of modular forms of weight
bigger than 2, it is necessary to introduce local systems. We now recall their
construction in the case at hand. Our treatment is largely modeled on that
of the thesis of S. Morel [Mor08].
Until further notice Γ ≤ G(Q) is a neat arithmetic subgroup. Let V be a
representation of G equipped with the discrete topology and form the quotient
V Γ := Γ \(V × X) (15.8)
by the diagonal action of Γ on the product. We say that the diagram given
by the natural projection
V Γ −→ Γ \X (15.9)
is a local system. For example, if V is a representation of Γ over C, then

this is the total space of a locally constant sheaf of C-vector spaces. For each
open set U ⊆ Γ \X we let
V Γ |U := {s : U −→ V Γ } (15.10)
be the abelian group of sections of the map (15.9). Then the functor
{U ⊆ Γ \X} −→ Ab (15.11)
Γ
U 7−→ V |U
from the category of open sets of Γ \X with morphisms given by inclusions

to the category of abelian groups Ab is a sheaf. It is called the sheaf of
sections of V Γ . Its sheaf cohomology is denoted
H • (Γ \X, V Γ ). (15.12)
We now turn to the adelic setting. As above, let V be a representation of

G. For K ≤ G(A∞ ) a compact open neat subgroup, define
V K := G(Q)\V × X × G(A∞ )/K, (15.13)
where for γ ∈ G(Q),
γ(v, x, gK) = (γ.v, γ.x, γgK).
We thus have a natural map V K → ShK . This is again a local system, and
we define the associated sheaf of sections as above.
The relationship between the two constructions given above can be de-
scribed as follows. Fix g ∈ G(A∞ ) and let Γ = gKg −1 ∩ G(Q). We then have
an embedding
ι : Γ \X −→ ShK (15.14)
Γ x 7−→ G(Q)(x, g)K.
If V is a representation of G(Q) then ι−1 V K ∼

= VΓ .
We now describe how to associate to each g ∈ G(A∞ ) a homomorphism
T (g) : H • (ShK , V K ) −→ H • (ShK , V K ). (15.15)
We first note that for any neat compact open subgroups K, K 0 ≤ G(A∞ )
with K 0 ≤ gKg −1 one has an isomorphism of sheaves
0 0
˜ g−1 V K = V K ×ShK ShK
θ : V K −→T (15.16)
0 0
(v, (x, hK )) 7−→ ((v, (x, hgK)), (x, hK )).
Here Tg−1 V K is the inverse image sheaf and the object on the right is the fiber
product over the canonical projection V K → ShK and the morphism Tg :
15.3 Local systems 301
0
ShK → ShK . The isomorphism θ is called a lift of the correspondence.
This isomorphism canonically induces a morphism (15.15). Concretely the
procedure is to take a cocycle on ShK with values in V K , pull it back to
0 0
ShK , use the isomorphism θ to produce a cocycle on ShK with values in
Tg−1 V K , and then push it down along Tg while summing over the fibers of
Tg−1 V K → V K to obtain a cocycle on ShK .
Alternately, one can work at the level of sheaves as follows. By generalities
on sheaf cohomology [Har11, (4.33)] one has a homomorphism
0 0 0
H • (ShK , V K ) −→ H • (ShK , TI−1 V K ) = H • (ShK , V K ). (15.17)
0
Here the equality results from the identification TI−1 V K = V K . The isomor-
phism θ induces an isomorphism
0 0 0
θ : H • (ShK , V K )−→H
˜ • (ShK , Tg−1 V K ). (15.18)
To finish we construct a “trace” homomorphism

0
H • (ShK , Tg−1 V K ) −→ H • (ShK , V K ). (15.19)
Composing (15.17), (15.18), and (15.19) then gives
T (g) : H • (ShK , V K ) −→ H • (ShK , V K ). (15.20)
To construct (15.19) we follow [Ive86, §VII.4], to which we refer for more

details. We note that the assertions below all heavily depend on the fact that
Tg is a covering map. For any sheaf F on ShK and any y ∈ ShK one has
Tg∗ Tg−1 Fy = ⊕x∈Tg−1 (y) Fy .
One can check that there is a unique morphism of sheaves
tr : Tg∗ Tg−1 F −→ F
given on the fiber over y by taking the sum. Now let
V K −→ I •
be an injective resolution of V K . We then obtain a morphism
tr : Tg∗ Tg−1 I • −→ I • . (15.21)
We apply the “cohomology of global sections” functor to obtain a map
H • Γ (ShK , Tg∗ Tg−1 I • ) −→ H • (ShK , V K ).
But Tg−1 transforms injectives into injectives, and Tg∗ is exact, so

0
H • Γ (ShK , Tg∗ Tg−1 I • ) = H • (ShK , Tg−1 V K ).
15.4 (g, K∞ )-cohomology
As above let V be a finite-dimensional representation of G. A fundamental

tool for describing H • (ShK , V K ) as a Hecke module is (g, K∞ )-cohomology.
We explain its definition in this section. The basic reference is [BW00].
Let g ≥ k be the Lie algebras of GR and K∞ respectively. Let A be a
g-module (not necessarily of finite dimension). For q ∈ Z≥0 , let
C q (g, k; A) = Homk (∧q (g/k), A). (15.22)
Here the action of k on ∧q (g/k) is the adjoint action. Explicitly Homk (∧q (g/k), A)
is the subspace of HomC (∧q (g/k), A) consisting of functions f satisfying
q
X
f (x1 , . . . , [x, xi ], . . . , xq ) = x.f (x1 , . . . , xq ),
i=1
for x ∈ k, where [ , ] is the Lie bracket of g. We define a differential
d : C q (g, k; A) → C q+1 (g, k; A)
on the complex by
q
X
(df )(x0 , . . . , xq ) = (−1)i x · f (x0 , . . . , xbi , . . . , xq )
i=1
X
+ (−1)i+j f ([xi , xj ], x0 , . . . , xbi , . . . , xbj , . . . , xq ).
1≤i<j≤q
Here a hat denotes an omitted argument. One checks that this is well-defined
(i.e. independent of the choice of representative of the coset x + k) and that
d ◦ d = 0. We then let H • (g, k; A) denote the cohomology of this complex:
ker d : C q (g, k; A) → C q+1 (g, k; A)

H q (g, k; A) := H q (C • (g, k; A), d) := .
im d : C q−1 (g, k; A) → C q (g, k; A)
This is called the (g, k)-cohomology of A. This cohomology is insensitive to

the connected components of K∞ . It is therefore desirable to refine it.
Assume now that A is a (g, K∞ )-module. The group K∞ acts in a natural
manner on C • (g, k; A) via the action of K∞ on A and the adjoint action on
g. For this action define
C • (g, K∞ ; A) = C • (g, k; A)K∞ .

15.5 The cohomology of Shimura manifolds 303
Denote by H • (g, K∞ ; A) the cohomology of this complex.
Definition 15.4. The (g, K∞ )-cohomology of the (g, K∞ )-module A is

H • (g, K∞ ; A).
15.5 The cohomology of Shimura manifolds
Let V be a finite dimensional representation of G. We now relate (g, K∞ )-

cohomology and the cohomology of ShK with coefficients in V K . We refer to
[BW00, §VII.2] for proofs.
Let m := dimR (X) for X = AG \G(R)/K∞ . Fix a basis ω i , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, of
left invariant 1-forms on X. For
I = {i1 , . . . , iq } ⊂ {1, . . . , m}
with ij < in for j < n set
ω I := ω i1 ∧ · · · ∧ ω iq .
Let
A := C ∞ (G(Q)\G(A)/K ∞ ).
Denote by
Aq (ShK , V K )
the space of differential q-forms on ShK with coefficients in V K . Any element
of Aq (ShK , V) can be written as
X
η= fI ω I
I
with fI ∈ (A ⊗ V )AG . Let
aG := Lie(AG ). (15.23)
The discussion above yields an identification
A• (ShK , V K ) = C • (aG \g, K∞ ; (A ⊗ V )AG ) (15.24)
commuting with the differentials, which in turn yields an isomorphism
H • (ShK , V K ) ∼
= H • (aG \g, K∞ ; (A ⊗ V )AG ). (15.25)
This gives an explicit link between cohomology and automorphic representa-

tions. This isomorphism is Hecke equivariant in the sense that for g ∈ G(A∞ )
the action of the correspondence T (g) is intertwined with the action of 1KgK .
We leave the proof of this Hecke equivariance assertion to the reader (see Ex-
ercise 15.7).
This whole construction motivates the following definition:
Definition 15.5. A vector ϕ ∈ A is cohomological if there exists a repre-
sentation V of G, v ∈ V and ω I on G(R) such that
ϕω I ⊗ v ∈ C • (aG \g, K∞ ; (A ⊗ V )AG )
defines a non-zero class in H • (aG \g, K∞ ; (A ⊗ V )AG ).

If we wish to specify the representation V we could speak of a V -
cohomological vector instead.
Now A is naturally a (g, K∞ )×G(A∞ )-module. Let us decompose it under
the action of G(A∞ ). There is a quasi-character
ξ : AG → R>0
such that the restriction of V to AG is ξ −1 . Let
A(ξ) := {ϕ ∈ A : ϕ(ag) = ξ(a)ϕ(g)}.
Then
(A ⊗ V K )AG = A(ξ) ⊗ V K .
As usual [G] := AG G(Q)\G(A). There is a G(A)1 -intertwining map
A(ξ) −→ C ∞ ([G])K
(15.26)
ϕ 7−→ (g 7→ ξ 0 (g)ϕ(g))
for an appropriate quasi-character ξ 0 : G(A) → R>0 . We let
A(ξ)cusp
be the inverse image of L2cusp ([G])K ∩ C ∞ ([G])K under the map (15.26).
By Corollary 9.1.2
M
A(ξ)cusp = π ⊕m(π)
π
where the sum is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic represen-

tations π of G(A) and m(π) is the multiplicity of π in A(ξ)cusp . Hence
H • (ShK , V K ) ⊃ Hcusp
•
(ShK , V K ) = H • (aG \g, K∞ ; A(ξ)cusp ⊗ V ) (15.27)
M ⊕m(π)
= H • aG \g, K∞ ; (π ⊗ V )K .
π
•
The group Hcusp (ShK , V K ) is known as the cuspidal cohomology. Its com-
plement is described in terms of so called Eisenstein cohomology; for some
15.6 The relation to distinction 305
information about the decomposition of the whole of the cohomology see

[BLS96]. It follows that, as a module under Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K), one has
•
M m(π)
Hcusp (ShK , V K ) = H • (aG \g, K∞ ; (π∞ ⊗ V ) ⊗ (π ∞ )K . (15.28)
π
This decomposition is sometimes called Matsushima’s formula. For a cus-

pidal automorphic representation π of AG \G(A) we refer to
•
M m(π0 )
Hcusp (ShK , V K )(π ∞ ) := H • (aG \g, K∞ ; (π∞
0
⊗ V ) ⊗ (π ∞ )K
π 0 :π 0∞ ∼
=π ∞
as the π ∞ -isotypic component of the cohomology.

Definition 15.6. A cuspidal automorphic representation π of AG \G(A) is
cohomological if there is a representation V of G such that
H • (aG \g, K∞ ; π∞ ⊗ V ) 6= 0.
A vector ϕ in the space of π is cohomological if there exists an embedding

from the space of π into L2cusp ([G]) such that the image of ϕ is cohomological.
Thus if there is a vector in the space of π that is cohomological, then π
itself is cohomological. If we wish to be more specific, we could speak of
V -cohomological representations or V -cohomological vectors.
The condition that π is cohomological is very restrictive. An easy way to
quantify this is given by the following theorem [BW00, Corollary I.4.2]:
Theorem 15.5.1 If H • (aG \g, K∞ ; π∞ ⊗ V ) 6= 0 then the infinitisimal char-
∨
acter of π∞ is equal to the infinitisimal character of V . t
u
A more or less equivalent way of phrasing this assertion is the following
corollary:
Corollary 15.5.2 A cohomological cuspidal representation π of G(A) is C-
algebraic in the sense of Definition 12.6.
Proof. This follows from Theorem 15.5.1 and Lemma 12.8.1. t
u
15.6 The relation to distinction
Usually in the literature one finds references to cohomological representations

but no references to cohomological vectors. Despite this, the notion of a
cohomological vector is of great importance.
Suppose that H ≤ G are connected reductive Q-groups and that their
corresponding symmetric spaces are chosen so that XH ,→ X. Then there is
an embedding
∞
Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A )
−→ Sh(G, X)K =: ShK .
For the remainder of this section we assume for simplicity that ShK is com-
pact , which is to say that Gder has no nontrivial Q-split subtorus by Theorem
2.6.2. We also assume ShK is orientable.
Let V be a representation of G and let V ∨ be the dual representation.
∞
We denote by VH the local system on Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A ) attached to V |H .
K
Let n be the real dimension of Sh and let q be the real codimension of
∞
Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A ) in ShK . There is a cycle class map
∞
H 0 (Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A )
, VH ) −→ H q (ShK , V K ) (15.29)
∞
defined as follows. For a class [Z] ∈ H 0 (Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A )
, VH ) we have a
linear functional
H n−q (ShK , (V K )∨ ) −→ C
(15.30)
Z
η 7−→ η.
Z
Poincaré duality [Har11, Corollary 4.8.10] furnishes a perfect pairing
H n−q (ShK , (V K )∨ ) × H q (ShK , V K ) −→ C (15.31)
so [Z] defines an element of H q (ShK , V K ), yielding the cycle class map

(15.29).
Describing the Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K ∞ )-span of the image of (15.29) is an im-
portant (and mostly open) problem. This is especially true in the situation
∞
where ShK and Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A ) are Shimura varieties, not just manifolds,
due to the connection with the Tate conjecture (see §15.8).
We now explain the precise connection between the image of (15.29) and
distinguished representations and point out an important technical problem
that deserves more study. By Matsushima’s formula (15.28) to describe the
Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K ∞ )-span of the image of (15.29) it suffices to describe its
projection to
H • (ShK , V K )(π ∞ )
for all automorphic representations π of G(A). Here we have used that ShK is
compact, and hence every automorphic representation of G(AF ) is cuspidal,
to simplify the notation: H • = Hcusp
•
.
Unwinding the considerations of §15.5 and the definition of the cycle class
map we see that the projection of (15.29) to H • (ShK , V K )(π ∞ ) is nonzero if
and only if there is
• a cuspidal automorphic representation π 0 of G(A) with π ∞ ∼ = π 0∨ ,
∨ ∨ 0 K∩H(A∞ )
• (v , v) ∈ V × H (Sh(H, XH ) , VH ),
• a V ∨ -cohomological vector ϕ in the space of π 0 , and a ω I on G(R) such
that
15.7 More on (g, K∞ )-cohomology 307
Z
ϕω I v ∨ (v) 6= 0. (15.32)
[Sh(H,XH ))K∩H(A∞ ) ]
This motivates the following question:

Question 15.6.1 If π is H-distinguished and V ∨ -cohomological, then is
there ∞
(v ∨ , v) ∈ V ∨ × H 0 (Sh(H, XH )K∩H(A ) , VH ),
an ω I on G(R), a V ∨ -cohomological vector ϕ in the space of π such that
(15.32) holds?
Recall that π is H-distinguished if and only if
Z
ϕ(h)dh 6= 0
AG ∩H(A)H(Q)\H(A)
for some smooth ϕ ∈ L2 (π), the π-isotypic subspace of L2 ([G]). The point
of the question is that, a priori, it could happen that no such ϕ satisfies the
additional stipulations of the question. For example, it could be that no such
ϕ is V ∨ -cohomological.
We do not know, even conjecturally, the answer to Question 15.6.1 in any
degree of generality. In special cases the question above can be answered in
the affirmative (see [KS15, Sun17] for example).
In this section we have assumed that ShK is compact. The considerations
above are of course still of interest in the noncompact case, but even defining
the cycle class map (15.29) in any level of generality is complicated. Extending
the cycle class map to the noncompact case is another open problem that
has not received the scrutiny it deserves. We refer to [GG12] for an example
where the difficulties caused by noncompactness of ShK are overcome in a
very special case.
15.7 More on (g, K∞ )-cohomology
We have seen that the question of whether or not a given automorphic rep-
resentation contributes to the cohomology of a Shimura manifold with coeffi-
cients in a local system is completely determined by the (g, K∞ )-cohomology
of its factor at infinity. One thing that makes this so useful is the fact that
(g, K∞ )-cohomology is a very pleasant object with which to work. In this
section we list some properties of these groups; the canonical reference is
[BW00].
Let G1 , G2 be reductive groups over R and let Ki∞ ≤ Gi (R) be maximal
compact subgroups. Moreover let Ai be admissible (gi , Ki∞ )-modules. Then
one has a Künneth forumla:
Theorem 15.7.1 (Künneth formula) For any n ∈ Z≥0 one has natural
isomorphisms
M
H n (g1 ⊕g2 , K1∞ ×K2∞ ; A1 ⊗A2 ) = H p (g1 , K1∞ ; A1 )⊗H q (g2 , K2∞ ; A2 ).
p+q=n
For the rest of this section let G be a reductive group over Q (we only use
the Q-structure to define AG ). Let g be the Lie algebra of GR and let K∞ ≤
G(R) be a maximal compact subgroup. Let A be an admissible (aG \g, K∞ )-
module.
Theorem 15.7.2 (Poincare duality) One has that
H q (a\g, K∞ ; A) ∼
= H (dimR X)−q (a\g, K∞ ; A∨ )∨ .
t
u
Thus, in particular, to compute the (g, K∞ )-cohomology of a (aG \g, K∞ )-
module it suffices to understand the case where g is simple over R and when
q ≤ dimR X/2.
We now consider the cohomology of admissible representations of the form
π∞ ⊗ V
where π∞ is an irreducible unitary (g, K∞ )-module and V is an irreducible

representation of G trivial on AG . Let
θ : g −→ g (15.33)
be the Cartan involution. Its fixed point subalgebra is k, the Lie algebra of
K. Let p be its −1 eigenspace.
When π∞ is trivial we have (see [BW00, Corollary II.3.2]) the following
proposition:
Proposition 15.7.3 One has that

(
• 0 if V is nontrivial,
H (g, K∞ ; V ) =
(∧• p)K∞ if V is trivial.
t
u
We can interpret this proposition as saying that much of the cohomol-
ogy vanishes when V is nondegenerate. This phenomenon persists for other
π∞ . We now explain some vanishing theorems for cohomology in this con-
text. Combined with the Poincaré duality above these theorems indicate that
cohomology of ShK is concentrated around the degree equal to 12 dimR ShK .
For each θ-stable parabolic subalgebra q ≤ g ⊗ C let n(q) be its nilradical.
Let
15.8 Shimura varieties 309
P(V ) := {θ-stable parabolic subalgebras q : dim V n(q) = 1}

and let
c(V ) := min{dim(n(q) ∩ p) : q ∈ P(V )}.
Theorem 15.7.4 Assume that the kernel of π∞ is contained in k. Then
H i (aG \g, K∞ ; π∞ ⊗ V )
vanishes for i < c(V ∨ ).

Proof. See [BW00, §II.10]. t
u
We close this section by pointing out that Vogan and Zuckerman have
provided a classification of all (g, K∞ )-modules with nonzero cohomology
and computed the cohomology of these modules (see [VZ84]).
15.8 Shimura varieties
In this section we recall the notion of a Shimura variety. Although the founda-
tions of Shimura varieties were established by Shimura, a simpler formulation
of the theory was introduced by Deligne in [Del71]. Deligne’s formulation has
been almost universally adopted in the literature and we will use it here. An
introduction to [Del71] is contained in [Mil05]. Proofs for the results we state
below can be found in these references.
The Deligne torus is
S := ResC/R (Gm ). (15.34)
Note that S(R) = C× . The following definition is due to Deligne.

Definition 15.7. Let G be a connected reductive group over Q and let X
be a G(R)-conjugacy class of homomorphisms h : S → GR . The pair (G, X)
is a Shimura datum if
(a) For h ∈ X, only the characters z/z̄, 1, and z̄/z occur in the representation
ad ad
of S on Lie(G
√ )C defined by h. Here G := ad G/ZG is the adjoint group;
(b) θ = ad(h( −1)) is a Cartan involution of G ;
(c) Gad has no Q-factors on which the projection of h is trivial.
The condition (b) is equivalent to the statement that
Gad,(θ) (R) := {g ∈ Gad (C) : g = θ(ḡ)}
is compact. Conditions (a) and (b) together imply that X is a Hermitian

symmetric space for G.
Since ShK is a complex manifold in this case, a natural question is whether

K
Sh can be realized as the complex points of some variety. This is indeed
the case by a basic theorem of Baily and Borel which states that if K is
neat then ShK can be given the structure of the complex points of smooth
quasi-projective scheme over C in a canonical manner. One can say even
more.
For each x ∈ X, we have a cocharacter
ux (z) := hxC (z, 1),
where xC denotes be base change of x to C. Its image in
G\X∗ (G)(C)
is independent of the choice of x. Here G acts on X∗ (G) via conjugation and

G\X∗ (G) is the quotient in the sense of geometric invariant theory (see §17.1
for more information on this construction).
Let E := E(G, X) ⊂ C be the field of definition of ux . It is a number field,
independent of the choice of x ∈ X. It is called the reflex field of (G, X).
Theorem 15.8.1 For each neat K ≤ G(A∞ ) there exists a smooth quasi-
projective variety M (G, X)K defined over the reflex field E of (G, X) such
that
ShK = M (G, X)K (C)
and all the correspondence T (g) are defined over E. Furthermore, there is a
canonical such model, characterized by the Galois action on certain special
points. t
u
Definition 15.8. The Shimura variety attached to (G, X) is the projective
limit
M := M (G, X) := lim M (G, X)K
←−
K
K
of the canonical models of Sh .
Definition 15.9. A morphism of Shimura data (G, X) → (G0 , X 0 ) is a mor-
phism of algebraic groups G → G0 such that the induced map G(R) → G0 (R)
sends X to X 0 .
Definition 15.10. A morphism of Shimura varieties M (G, X)K → M (G0 , X 0 )K
is an inverse system of regular maps compatible with the action of Hecke cor-
respondences.
Theorem 15.8.2 A morphism of Shimura data induces a morphism of
Shimura varieties over the compositum E(G, X)E(G0 , X 0 ). Moreover, it is
a closed immersion if G → G0 is injective. t
u
√ a b

Example 15.1. Let G = GL2,Q and set h to be h(a + b −1) = −b a . In this
K
case each Sh(G, X) is a finite union of modular curves (see the end of §2.6).
Example 15.2. Let G = ResF/Q GL2 where F/Q is totally real. Take
aσ bσ
Y
h= −bσ aσ
σ
for embedding σ : F −→ R. Then the associated Shimura varieties are known

as Hilbert modular varieties.
Example 15.3. Let G = GSp2n . For a Z-algebra R, we have that
GSp2n (R) = {g ∈ GL2n (R) : g t Jg = c(g)J for some c(g) ∈ R× }

1
√ aI bJ

for J = . Take h to be h(a + b −1) = −bJ aI . The associated
1
Shimura varieties are known as Siegel modular varieties. This can be
generalized to totally real number fields as in the previous example, yielding
Hilbert-Siegel modular varieties.
Example 15.4. Let F be a totally real number field and k/F a totally imagi-
nary quadratic extension. Let D be a simple algebra with center k and assume
D admits an antiautomorphism ∗ that induces the nontrivial automorphism
of k/F . For Q-algebras R set
G(R) := {x ∈ D ⊗Q R : xx∗ ∈ R× }.
Assume we are given a homomorphism
h0 : C −→ D ⊗Q R
such that h0 (z)∗ = h0 (z̄). The restriction of h0 to C× then defines
h : S −→ GR .
Let X be the G(R)-conjugacy class of h. Then (G, X) is a Shimura datum.

The associated Shimura varieties are sometimes called Kottwitz varieties
since Kottwitz employed them to fantastic effect in the construction of Galois
representations attached to automorphic representations [Kot92]. There are
two key properties that make these varieties pleasant objects to consider.
First, if D is chosen appropriately ShK is compact. Second, the group G
is a form of a unitary similitude group, and thus for essentially half the
primes p the group GQp is a product of general linear groups. This fact was
exploited in the original proofs of the local Langlands correspondence for
GLn [HT01, Hen00].
Suppose that (G, X) is a Shimura datum with the reflex field E. Let K ≤
G(A∞ ) be a neat compact open subgroup. For simplicity assume that ShK
is compact. To ease the notation, let
M K := M (G, X)K ,
where M (G, X)K is as in Theorem 15.8.1. We can then consider the étale
cohomology groups
• •
Hét (MEK , Q` ) := Hét (M K ×E E, Q` ). (15.35)
We can also consider versions of these groups with coefficients in a local

system, but let us take trivial coefficients for simplicity. We refer the reader
to [Mil80] for proofs of the properties of étale cohomology we use below.
These groups are modules under the Hecke algebra Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K) and
GalE . Upon choosing an isomorphism Q` −→C ˜ and an embedding E ,→ C
one obtains a comparison isomorphism
•
Hét ˜ • (ShK , C)
(MEK , Q` )−→H (15.36)
that is Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K)-equivariant.

Combining this with (15.28) we obtain a decomposition
M
i
Hét (MEK , Q` ) = i
Hét (π ∞ ) ⊗ π ∞K
π∞
as GalE × Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K)-modules. Here Héti

(π ∞ ) is a GalE representation
on which Cc (G(A ) // K) acts trivially and GalE acts trivially on π ∞K . The
∞ ∞
sum is over all irreducible admissible G(A∞ )-representations π ∞ such that

there is an irreducible admissible representation π∞ of AG \G(R) such that
π∞ ⊗π ∞ occurs in L2 ([G]). The GalE -representation Hét i
(π ∞ ) is of dimension
X
m(π∞ ⊗ π ∞ ) dim H i (aG \g, K∞ ; π∞ )
π∞
where the sum is over irreducible admissible representations of AG \G(R) and

m(π∞ ⊗ π ∞ ) is the multiplicity of π∞ ⊗ π ∞ in L2 ([G]).
One has a conjectural description of the GalE × Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K)-modules
Hét (π ∞ ) ⊗ π ∞K in terms of the L-parameter of π. A nice survey is given
i
in [BR94b]. In many cases these conjectures have now been proven (see
[Shi11, CHLN11] for instance). This whole picture has an analogue when
M K is not assumed to be compact. However the technical complications in
the noncompact setting are enormous and have only recently been overcome
in key cases [Mor08, Mor10].
The emphasis so far has been on using these results to relate Galois rep-
resentations to automorphic representations. As we mentioned in §12.5, one
expects packets of tempered automorphic representations of G(A) to be pa-
rameterized by L-parameters LF → L G. The work on Shimura varieties de-
scribed above can sometimes allow one to establish this correspondence when
the L-parameter is C-algebraic in the sense of §12.8.
Lest the reader be misled, the description of the étale cohomology group
•
Hét (MEK , Q` ) in terms of automorphic representations is useful for more than
proving cases of Langlands functorality. In fact, this description is only the

beginning of the story. These étale cohomology groups are intimately tied to
two of the deepest conjectures in algebraic and arithmetic geometry, namely
the Tate [Tat94] and Beilinson-Bloch conjectures [Sch88, Nek94].
Let CH p (X)Q` denote the Chow group of codimension p cycles on X (with
Q` coefficients). There is a cycle class map
2p
cl : CH p (X)Q` −→ Hét (XE , Q` (p))GalE . (15.37)
Here (p) is the Tate twist.

Conjecture 15.8.3 (Tate) The map (15.37) is surjective.
The Beilinson-Bloch conjecture gives a description of the kernel of cl. We
will not make the conjecture precise, but note that it contains the Birch and
Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture as a special case.
2p
Now for general X it is difficult to compute Hét (XE , Q` (p))GalE , and
p
even more difficult to exhibit any elements in CH (X)Q` . Shimura vari-
eties provide an example where one can compute the Galois representation
2p
Hét (XE , Q` (p)) and produce at least some elements of CH p (X)Q` as we now
explain.
Assume that (H, XH ) is a Shimura datum with reflex field EH :=
E(H, XH ) that is equipped with a morphism
(H, XH ) −→ (G, X).
For simplicity assume that H is a subgroup of G and the morphism is the

inclusion. Write n for the real codimension of Sh(H, XH )KH in ShK for K <
G(A∞ ) (it is independent of the choice of K). In the étale setting we again
have a cycle class map
0 K∩H(A∞ ) n
Hét (M (H, XH )E , Q` ) −→ Hét (MEK , Q` (n/2))GalEEH . (15.38)
H
The image of this map is contained in cl(CH n/2 (X)Q` ). The map is com-
patible with the cycle class map of (15.29) under the relevant comparison
isomorphisms [DMOS82, §I]. Motivated by the Tate conjecture one is lead to
the following question:
Question 15.8.4 What part of the cohomology of
n
Hét (MEK , Q` (n/2))GalEEH
is in the Cc∞ (G(A∞ ) // K)-span of the image of (15.38)?

As explained in §15.6 this question can be rephrased in terms of the exis-
tence of distinguished representations satisfying certain local assumptions.
This was, in fact, the original motivation for the definition of a distinguished
representation as mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, and the an-

swer is still not well-understood. However, many interesting cases have been
studied [GH14, GW14, Kud97, MR87, Ram04, Yun11, Zha14].
There is also a connection between distinguished representations and the
Beilinson-Bloch conjecture mentioned above, though it is not as direct. For
many years S. Kudla and his collaborators have investigated this conjecture
in the context of Shimura varieties using a version of the Weil representation
[Kud04, KRY06]. Remarkably, W. Zhang discovered that the relative trace
formula can also be brought to bear [Zha12a]. In the function field setting,
analogues of the relative trace formula can even be used to give the strongest
results known towards the Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture [YZ17].
Exercises
15.1. Let Y be a Hausdorff topological space and let Γ be a discrete group

acting freely and properly discontinuously on it. Then there is a unique topol-
ogy on the set theoretic quotient Γ \Y such that the quotient map Y → Γ \Y
is a continuous local homeomorphism. In other words, for every y ∈ Y there is
an open neighborhood of y mapping homeomorphically onto an open neigh-
borhood of Γ y.
15.2. Let Γ and X be as in (15.3). Deduce that there is a unique manifold

structure on Γ \X such that the quotient map X → Γ \X is a local homeo-
morphism.
15.3. Prove that a congruence subgroup is arithmetic.
15.5. Compute the (gl2 , O2 (R))-cohomology of all irreducible admissible

(gl2 , O2 (R))-modules.
15.6. Prove the formula (15.7).
15.7. Prove that the isomorphism (15.25) is Hecke equivariant.

Chapter 16
Spectral Sides of Trace Formulae
A felicitous but unproved

conjecture may be of much more
consequence for mathematics
than the proof of many a
respectable theorem.
A. Selberg
Abstract An important tool for the study of automorphic forms is the

Arthur-Selberg trace formula, or more generally, the relative trace formula.
We consider the spectral side of these identities in this chapter.
16.1 The automorphic kernel function
The remaining chapters of this book are devoted to stating and proving simple
versions of trace formulae. These formulae all have a geometric side involving
integrals of a test function along certain orbits, and a spectral side involving
period integrals of automorphic forms.
In any of these formulae the first step in this is to employ a fundamental
idea first applied to the study of automorphic forms by Selberg [Sel56] that
we will now describe. Let G be a connected reductive group over a global
field F and as in §2.6 let
[G] := G(F )AG \G(AF ). (16.1)
For x ∈ AG \G(AF ), one has the regular representation
R(x) : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G]) (16.2)

ϕ 7→ (g 7→ ϕ(gx)) .
315
316 16 Spectral Sides of Trace Formulae
For
f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )),
consider the integral operator, the smooth version of the regular representa-
tion,
R(f ) : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G]) (16.3)

Z !
ϕ 7→ g 7→ f (x)ϕ(gx)dx .
AG \G(AF )
One has
Z
R(f )ϕ(x) = f (y)R(y)ϕ(x)dy
AG \G(AF )
Z
= f (x)ϕ(xy)dy
AG \G(AF )
Z
= f (x−1 y)ϕ(y)dy
AG \G(AF )
Z X
= f (x−1 γy)ϕ(y)dy.
[G] γ∈G(F )
Here to justify the last step one uses the unfolding lemma 9.2.4. In other
words, R(f ) is an integral operator with kernel
X
Kf (x, y) := f (x−1 γy). (16.4)
γ∈G(F )
This is the automorpic kernel function attached to f . It is a smooth

function of x and y. In fact, for (x, y) in a fixed compact set, the sum is finite
as we now check: Let
Ω1 × Ω2 ⊂ AG \G(AF ) × AG \G(AF )
be compact subsets. Let

(x, y) ∈ Ω1 × Ω2
then the only nonzero summands in Kf (x, y) correspond to γ satisfying γ ∈
Ω1 Supp(f )Ω2 .
The kernel Kf (x, y) can also be expanded spectrally. The easiest contri-
bution to describe is that given by the cuspidal spectrum as we now explain.
By Theorem 9.1.1 the restriction Rcusp (f ) of R(f ) to L2cusp ([G]) has kernel
X
Kf,cusp (x, y) := Kπ(f ) (x, y), (16.5)
π
16.1 The automorphic kernel function 317

tations π of AG \G(AF ) and
X
Kπ(f ) (x, y) = π(f )ϕ(x)ϕ(y) (16.6)
ϕ∈Bπ
for Bπ an orthonormal basis of L2cusp (π), the π-isotypical subspace of L2cusp ([G]).
Here π(f ) is just the restriction of R(f ) to the space of π. We note that π(f )
need not be finite rank in general, but it is if f is K∞ -finite by admissibility
of π (see Exercise 16.1).
We thus arrive at the identity that underlies all trace formulae:
X X
f (x−1 γy) = Kπ(f ) (x, y) + ∗ (16.7)
γ∈G(F ) π

tations of AG \G(AF ), and the ∗ denotes the contribution of the orthogonal
complement of L2cusp ([G]) in L2 ([G]). This contribution will be made precise
in §16.3. The left hand side is the geometric expansion of the kernel. The
right hand side is the spectral expansion of the kernel.
The key point here is that the right hand side manifestly contains all
automorphic representations of AG \G(AF ) whereas the left hand side, at
least a priori, does not involve automorphic representations at all. It packages
automorphic information in an entirely different manner. The goal is to play
these two different manners of encoding automorphic representations off of
eachother.
An evident method of extracting information from (16.7) is taking traces
as we now explain. As defined, Kπ(f ) (x, y) is only a function in the L2 sense;
a priori it is meaningless to evaluate it at a point. But
Z
(ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) −→ ϕ1 (g)ϕ2 (g)dg
[G]
is the pairing defining the metric on L2 ([G]). It follows that integrating

Kπ(f ) (x, y) along [G] embedded diagonally in [G] × [G] is always well-defined,
and
XZ X
Kπ(f ) (x, x)dx = m(π)tr π(f ), (16.8)
π [G] π
where m(π) is the multiplicity of π in L2cusp ([G]). Thus (16.8), in principle, is

equal to the integral of the left hand side of (16.7) over the diagonal (minus
the contribution of ∗). We say in principle because this integral is rarely
convergent. In any case, at the expense of a massive amount of work one can
make sense of the integral over the diagonal of the left hand side of (16.7)
and one obtains the Arthur-Selberg trace formula.
For the moment we leave the geometric expansion of the kernel and focus
on the spectral side. We return to the geometric side in §18.2 when we discuss
trace formulae in simple settings.
16.2 Relative traces
Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AG \G(AF ). As just men-

tioned, the integral of Kπ(f ) (x, y) over the diagonal copy of [G] gives the trace
of the operator π(f ).
There is no need to just integrate over the diagonal copy of [G] however.
Jacquet was the first to systematically study the integrals of Kπ(f ) (x, y) over
subgroups other than the diagonal copy of [G] (apart from twisted versions
of the diagonal embedding that appears in the twisted trace formula) [Jac97,
Jac05a]. These new integrals are called relative traces. They are introduced
in this section.
We start by clarifying the status of the function Kπ(f ) (x, y). As it stands,
it is only defined up to a measurable set. It is easy to remedy this. For
any closed subspace V ≤ L2cusp ([G]) let BV be an orthonormal basis of this
subspace. For f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )), R(f )|V is of trace class by Theorem 9.1.1
and hence its kernel admits an L2 expansion
X
Kf,V (x, y) = R(f )ϕ(x)ϕ(y) (16.9)
ϕ∈BV
(see (9.12)).
Lemma 16.2.1 There is a unique function that is smooth as a function of
(x, y) ∈ (AG \G(AF ))2 that is equal to the kernel Kf,V (x, y) almost every-
where.
Given the lemma, we can and do identify the kernel of R(f ) restricted to a
closed subspace of L2cusp ([G]) with a smooth function.
Proof. By the Dixmier-Malliavin lemma, Theorem 4.2.5, we can write f as a

finite sum of functions of the form
f1 ∗ f2 ∗ f3
for f1 , f2 , f3 ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). It clearly suffices to prove the lemma for f of
this special form, so we assume that f = f1 ∗ f2 ∗ f3 . For f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF ))
let
f ∨ (g) := f (g −1 ) and f ∗ (g) := f (g −1 ), (16.10)
where the bar denotes the complex conjugate. If ϕ1 , ϕ2 ∈ BV then

16.2 Relative traces 319
Z X
R(f )ϕ(x)ϕ(y)ϕ2 (x)ϕ1 (y)dxdy
[G]×[G] ϕ∈B
V
= (R(f )ϕ1 , ϕ2 )L2 ([G])

= (ϕ1 , R(f ∗ )ϕ2 )L2 ([G])
Z X
= ϕ(x)ϕ(y)R(f ∨ )ϕ2 (x)ϕ1 (y)dxdy.
[G]×[G] ϕ∈B
V
We deduce that
X X
R(f )ϕ(x)ϕ(y) = ϕ(x)R(f ∨ )ϕ(y). (16.11)
ϕ∈BV ϕ∈BV
Thus
X
Kf,V (x, y) = R(f1 ∗ f2 ∗ f3 )ϕ(x)ϕ(y)
ϕ∈BV
X
= R(f2 ∗ f3 )ϕ(x)R(f1∨ )ϕ(y)
ϕ∈BV
X
= (R(f2 ) × R(f1∨ )) R(f3 )ϕ(x)ϕ(y). (16.12)
ϕ∈BV
The function (16.12) is smooth as a function of (x, y) by Proposition 4.2.3.

This is the unique smooth function representing the kernel in the lemma. tu
We now prepare to define relative traces. Let
H ≤G×G
be a subgroup. We will assume that H is connected and that it is the direct

product (not semidirect product) of a unipotent and a reductive group. We
set
AG,H := AH ∩ (AG × AG ). (16.13)
Note that the containment AG,H ≤ AH is often proper. For example, it is

proper when G = GL2 and H is the maximal torus of diagonal matrices.
Implicit in the definition of R(f ) is a choice of measure on AG \G(AF ). To
define relative traces we additionally choose a Haar measure d(h` , hr ) on
AG,H \H(AF ). It induces a measure on AG,H H(F )\H(AF ).
Let
χ : H(AF ) −→ C×
be a quasi-character trivial on AG,H H(F ). We define the relative trace of
π(f ) with respect to H and χ to be
Z
rtrH,χ π(f ) = Kπ(f ) (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )d(h` , hr ). (16.14)
AG,H H(F )\H(AF )
This is well-defined by the following lemma:

Lemma 16.2.2 For any closed subspace V ≤ L2cusp ([G]) one has
Z
|Kf,V (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )|d(h` , hr ) < ∞.
AG,H H(F )\H(AF )
Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 16.2.1 we may assume f = f1 ∗ f2 ∗ f3 . Then

by (16.12)
X
Kf,V (x, y) = (R(f2 ) × R(f1∨ )) R(f3 )ϕ(x)ϕ(y). (16.15)
ϕ∈BV
The right hand side is rapidly decreasing by Theorem 9.7.1 and hence the
integral in the lemma converges by Proposition 14.3.3. t
u
The key property of relative traces is contained in the following proposi-

tion:
Proposition 16.2.3 Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF )
that is trivial on AG . The representation π ⊗ π ∨ of (AG \G(AF ))2 is (H, χ)-
distinguished if and only if rtrH,χ π(f ) 6= 0 for some f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )).
In the proof of Proposition 16.2.3 we are about to give we will apply Lemma
16.2.2 in the special case where V is a cuspidal automorphic representation
of AG \G(AF ). In this case we have two natural notions of smoothness of an
element of ϕ ∈ L2cusp ([G]). The first is that ϕ is a smooth vector, that is, it
is fixed by a compact open subgroup K ∞ ≤ G(A∞ F ) and it is smooth under
the action of G(F∞ ) in the sense of §4.2. The second is that ϕ is a smooth
function, that is, it is (equal a.e., and hence can be identified with) an element
of C ∞ (G(AF )) invariant on the left by AG G(F ). It is obvious that if ϕ is a
smooth function then it is a smooth vector. At least when ϕ is K∞ -finite we
have a converse:
Lemma 16.2.4 An element ϕ ∈ L2cusp (π) that is K∞ -finite is equal to a
smooth function almost everywhere.
Proof. Since ϕ is K∞ -finite it is equal almost everywhere to an automorphic

form by Theorem 6.5.2. t
u
Proof of Proposition 16.2.3: Recall the definition of the period integral Pχ

from (14.3). One has

Pχ Kπ(f ) = rtrH,χ π(f ),
16.2 Relative traces 321
where the convergence is justified by Lemma 16.2.2. Certainly Kπ(f ) lies in

the π ⊗ π ∨ isotypic subspace of L2 ([G]2 ) so we deduce the “if” direction.
Now assume that π ⊗ π ∨ is (H, χ)-distinguished. By Lemma 14.3.1 and
Exercise 16.3 there are K∞ -finite smooth functions ϕ, ϕ0 ∈ L2cusp (π) such that
Pχ (ϕ0 ⊗ ϕ) 6= 0. Upon renormalizing we can and do assume that ϕ has L2 -
norm 1. Using Proposition 4.5.5 and Exercise 5.6 choose f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF ))
such that π(f ) maps ϕ to ϕ0 and sends any vector in L2 (π) orthogonal to ϕ
to zero. Then
rtrH,χ π(f ) = Pχ (ϕ0 ⊗ ϕ).
2
Thus investigating which representations of (AG \G(AF ))2 are (H, χ)-
distinguished is equivalent to studying the linear forms
Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) −→ C

f 7−→ rtrH,χ π(f ).
The main result of this chapter relates the kernel function Kf,cusp (x, y) to
these distributions. It amounts to the computation of the cuspidal contribu-
tion to the spectral side of the relative trace formula:
Theorem 16.2.5 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). One has
Z X
Kf,cusp (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )d(h` , hr ) = rtrH,χ π(f ).
AG,H H(F )\H(AF ) π
Moreover, the integral on the left and the sum on the right are absolutely
convergent. In particular, if R(f ) has cuspidal image then
Z X
Kf (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )d(h` , hr ) = rtrH,χ π(f ).
After the proof of Theorem 16.2.5 we describe the general spectral expansion
of Kf (x, y) and then, in §16.4, describe how to construct function f such that
R(f ) has cuspidal image.
Proof. By the Dixmier-Malliavin lemma, Theorem 4.2.5, we can and do as-

sume f = f1 ∗ f2 ∗ f3 . Using (16.11) we have
X X
Kπ(f ) (x, y) = π(f2 ) × π(f1∨ )Kπ(f3 ) (x, y)
π π
X
≤ |π(f2 ) × π(f1∨ )Kπ(f3 ) (x, y)|.
π
By Proposition 9.6.1 and with the notation of that proposition this is bounded
by a constant depending on B1 , B2 ∈ R>0 and f1 , f2 times
X
max (α(sx ))−B1 (α(sy ))−B2 kKπ(f3 ) (x, y)k2
α1 ,α2 ∈∆
π
X (16.16)
= max (α(sx ))−B1 (α(sy ))−B2 tr π(f3∗ ∗ f3 ).
α1 ,α2 ∈∆
π
Since the operator Rcusp (f3∗ ∗f3 ) is trace class by Theorem 9.7.1 this converges
absolutely. We conclude that the sum
X
Kπ (x, y) (16.17)
π
converges absolutely and uniformly on compact subsets of [G]×[G] and hence

is a continuous function. On the other hand the operator Rcusp (f ) is trace
class by Theorem 9.1.1 therefore Kf,cusp (x, y) is equal to (16.17) in the L2
sense. Since Kf,cusp (x, y) is smooth by Lemma 16.2.1 we conclude that it is
equal to (16.17) pointwise. We can now use the estimate (16.16) together
with Proposition 14.3.3 to deduce the theorem. t
u
16.3 The full expansion of the automorphic kernel
Using Langlands’ decomposition of the entire spectrum L2 ([G]) we now give

the full spectral expansion of Kf (x, y), not just its restriction to the cuspidal
subspace. Assume for this section that F is a number field.
We will use the notation and terminology developed in Chapter 10. Let f ∈
Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). The automorphic kernel function Kf (x, y) has an expansion
X Z X X
−1
Kf (x, y) = nP E(x, I(σ, λ)(f )ϕ, λ)E(y, ϕ, λ)dλ (16.18)
P ia∗
P σ ϕ∈Bσ
where the sum on P is over all standard parabolic subgroups of G, the sum
on σ is over all irreducible representations of G(AF ) occurring in the discrete
spectrum of HP , and Bσ is over an orthonormal basis of the σ-isotypic sub-
space of σ in HP . This expression, a priori, only converges in L2 . However,
one can make sense of it pointwise by an analogue of the argument proving
Theorem 16.2.5 (see [Art78, §4]).
16.4 Functions with cuspidal image
The general spectral expansion of Kf (x, y) is formidable, and it becomes

more serious when one tries to integrate the kernel. In particular it is not
integrable over the diagonal copy of [G]. Arthur has spent much of his career
investigating truncated versions of the kernel. In particular these truncated
16.4 Functions with cuspidal image 323
versions are integrable over the diagonal and can be given spectral interpre-
tations ([Art05] is a nice introduction).
If we place assumptions on the test function f then the expansion can be
made much simpler. One such simplifying assumption is that the operator
R(f ) has cuspidal image. In this case Kf,cusp (x, y) = Kf (x, y). Lindenstrauss
and Venkatesh [LV07] have defined a large class of functions with purely
cuspidal image that essentially have no kernel when restricted to the cuspidal
spectrum, provided one is only interested in functions spherical at infinity. It
would be interesting to remove this assumption.
Before their work, there was a standard example of such functions that
can be used to good effect in studying local factors of automorphic represen-
tations. We recall it now.
Definition 16.1. Let v be a nonarchimedian place of a global field F . A func-
tion fv ∈ Cc∞ (G(Fv )) is said to be F -supercuspidal or simply supercuspidal
if Z
fv (gnh)dn = 0
N (Fv )
for all proper parabolic subgroups P < G (defined over F ) with unipotent
radical N and all g, h ∈ G(Fv ).
Lemma 16.4.1 If f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) is of the form f = fv f v for some
finite place v and fv is supercuspidal then R(f ) has cuspidal image.
Proof. Let P ≤ G be a proper F -rational parabolic subgroup with unipotent
radical N . As usual let [N ] := N (F )\N (AF ). For ϕ ∈ L2 ([G]), R(f )ϕ is
smooth and hence can be integrated over any compact subset. For all x ∈
AG \G(AF ) we have
Z Z Z
R(f )ϕ(nx)dn = f (g)ϕ(nxg)dgdn
[N ] [N ] AG \G(AF )
Z Z
= f (x−1 n−1 g)ϕ(g)dgdn
[N ] AG \G(AF )
Z Z X
= f (x−1 n−1 δg)ϕ(g)dgdn.
[N ] AG N (F )\G(AF ) δ∈N (F )
Taking a change of variables g 7→ δ −1 g this becomes

Z Z X
f (x−1 n−1 g)ϕ(g)dndg
AG N (F )\G(AF ) [N ] y∈N (F )
Z Z
= f (x−1 n−1 g)ϕ(g)dndg
AG N (F )\G(AF ) N (AF )
= 0,
where the last equality follows from the fact that the inner integral
Z
f (x−1 n−1 g)ϕ(g)dn
N (AF )
vanishes since fv is supercuspidal. t

u
Essentially all examples of supercuspidal functions are obtained using the

following lemma (see Exercise 16.4):
Lemma 16.4.2 Assume that ZG (Fv ) is compact for some v and that (πv , V )
is an irreducible supercuspidal representation of G(Fv ). If fv is a matrix
coefficient of πv then fv is F -supercuspidal.
The assumption that ZG (Fv ) is compact is not essential; see the discussion
of truncated matrix coefficients in [HL04]. This lemma indicates the intrinsic
limitation of supercuspidal functions: supercuspidal functions can only be
used to study representations that are supercuspidal at some place. For a
precise statement see Exercise 16.5.
Proof. Let P be a proper parabolic subgroup of G with unipotent radical N .

Let V /V (N ) be the space of coinvariants defined as (8.11) in §8.3. If
Z
fv (gnh)dn 6= 0
N (Fv )
for some g, h ∈ G(Fv ) then upon realizing V as a subspace of Cc∞ (G(Fv )) as

in the proof of Proposition 8.5.3 we obtain a nonzero map
V −→ V /V (N )
Z !
fv 7−→ g 7→ fv (gnh)dn
N (Fv )
contradicting the supercuspidality of πv . t

u
Exercises
16.1. Let K∞ be a maximal compact subgroup of G(F∞ ). If f is K∞ -finite,

then prove that π(f ) has finite image.
16.2. Prove that Kf,V (x, y) is independent of the choice of orthonormal basis.
16.3. For 1 ≤ i ≤ 2 let Gi be a reductive group over a number field F , let

Ki∞ ≤ AGi \Gi (F∞ ) be maximal compact subgroup, and let πi be a cuspidal
automorphic representation of AGi \Gi (AF ). Then a smooth function in
L2cusp ([G1 × G2 ])(π1 ⊗ π2 ) (16.19)

16.4 Functions with cuspidal image 325
need not be in the algebraic tensor product
L2cusp ([G1 ])(π1 ) ⊗ L2cusp ([G2 ])(π2 ).
Despite this show that a K1∞ × K2∞ -finite smooth function in (16.19) is a
finite sum of functions of the form ϕ1 ⊗ ϕ2 where ϕi is a Ki∞ -finite smooth
function in L2cusp ([Gi ])(πi ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ 2.
16.4. Let v be a finite place of the number field F and let G be a reductive
group over F . Assume that ZG (Fv ) is compact. Prove that any supercuspidal
function is a finite sum of matrix coefficients of supercuspidal representations
of G(Fv ).
16.5. Under the assumptions of Exercise 16.4 let f = fv f v ∈ Cc∞ (G(AF ))

where fv is a matrix coefficient of an irreducible supercuspidal representation
πv0 . Prove that if π is a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ) such
that Kπ(f ) (x, y) 6= 0 then πv ∼
= πv0 .
16.6. Let K∞ be a maximal compact subgroup of G(F∞ ). If f is K∞ -finite

prove that X
rtrH,χ π(f ) = Pχ (π(f )ϕ × ϕ)
ϕ∈Bπ
where we take the basis Bπ to consist of K∞ -finite forms (and hence smooth
by Proposition 4.4.2).
Chapter 17
Orbital Integrals
When I suggested the term

endoscopy to Shelstad I didn’t
know it had a medical meaning.
A. Ash
Abstract In this chapter we define and study orbital integrals. We then use
them to describe geometric sides of trace formulae.
17.1 Group actions, orbits and stabilizers
This chapter requires more serious algebraic geometry and Galois cohomology
than other chapters in this book. Moving forward, the main concepts that
we will require are various constructions and definitions related to relative
classes contained in the current section and the definition of relative orbital
integrals, given in §17.4 in the local setting and §17.7 in the adelic setting. If
desired, the other sections of this chapter can be omitted, although they will
be used in the proofs of results in §17.4 and §17.7.
We recall the notion of an algebraic group action and some construc-
tions involving it. These show up constantly in the study of trace formu-
lae, implicitly or explicitly, so we have summarized some useful results.
Our basic references for the geometric constructions in this chapter are
[MFK94, Mil17, Poo17].
Let k be a Noetherian ring, let H be a smooth (affine) group scheme over
k, and let X be an affine scheme of finite type over k. A morphism
a : X × H −→ X (17.1)
is a (right) action of H on X if the following diagram
327
328 17 Orbital Integrals
a×1
X × H × H −−−−H→ X × H
 

a×my

ay
a
X ×H −−−−→ X
commutes and the composite
1 ×e a
X −−X−−→ X × H −−−−→ X
is the identity. Here m is the multiplication map and e : Spec(k) → H is
the identity section. These assumptions imply, in particular, that for every
k-algebra R
a : X(R) × H(R) −→ X(R)
is a right action. One can formulate the notion of a left action in the analogous
manner. Let a : X × H → X and a0 : X 0 × H → X 0 be right actions of H on
affine schemes X and X 0 of finite type over k, respectively. A morphism of
right actions is a morphism of schemes b : X → X 0 such that
a
X × H −−−−→ X
 

b×1H y

yb
X 0 × H −−−−
0
→ X0
a
commutes. It is an isomorphism if b is an isomorphism.

For γ ∈ X(k) we have a morphism
a(γ, ·) : H −→ X.
We denote by Hγ the stabilizer of γ. Thus Hγ is a subgroup scheme that can

be constructed as a fiber product
Hγ = Spec(k) ×X H
where the map H → X is a(γ, ·) and the map from Spec(k) to X is given by
γ. In terms of points, for k-algebras R one has
Hγ (R) = {h ∈ H(R) : a(γ, h) = γ}. (17.2)
When k is a field the map Spec(k) → X defined by γ is a closed immersion,

and hence Hγ is a closed subgroup scheme of H.
Assume for the remainder of this section that k is a field. If I ≤ H
is an algebraic subgroup, then one can always define a quotient scheme I\H.
It is a separated scheme of finite type over k [Mil17, Theorem 7.18]. In fact
it is quasi-projective in the sense that it admits an immersion into projective
space (this is proven in the proof of [Mil17, Theorem 7.18]). It admits a
17.1 Group actions, orbits and stabilizers 329
basepoint b ∈ I\H(k) and is equipped with a morphism given on points in a

k-algebra R by
H(R) −→ I\H(R)
(17.3)
h 7−→ bh.
The fibers of this morphism are the right cosets of I(R) in H(R) [Mil17, §5(c)].
It is important to point out that the map (17.3) need not be surjective for a
given R. For more information we refer to Proposition 17.1.7. Of course we
can also form a right quotient H/I in the analogous manner.
Example 17.1. If I is a parabolic subgroup of a reductive group H then I\H

is projective. When H = GL2 and I = B is a Borel subgroup
B\GL2 ∼
= P1 .
The following is [Mil17, Proposition 7.17]:

Proposition 17.1.1 The natural map
Hγ \H −→ X
is an immersion. t
u
For affine schemes Y = Spec(A) for a ring A, denote by |Y | the set of
prime ideals of A equipped with the Zariski topology. In other words |Y |
is the underlying topological space of Y . The morphism a(γ, ·) induces a
continuous map of topological spaces |H| → |X|. The image
a(γ, |H|) ⊆ |X|
is open in its closure [Mil17, Proof of Proposition 1.65]. We define
O(γ) ⊂ X (17.4)
to be the subscheme with this image as its underlying set, given the reduced
induced scheme structure.
Proposition 17.1.2 The map a(γ, ·) induces an isomorphism
Hγ \H −→ O(γ).
The scheme O(γ) is smooth. Moreover, the map
H −→ O(γ)
is smooth if Hγ is smooth.
Proof. See [Mil17, Corollary 7.13 and Proposition 7.17] for the first assertion
and see [Mil17, Proposition 7.4 and Proposition 7.15] for the last two asser-
tions. t
u
For technical reasons later we will require the following complementary

result:
Lemma 17.1.3 If I ≤ H is a closed subgroup scheme then the morphism
I ◦ \H −→ I\H
is finite and flat (and in particular proper).
Proof. The quotient I ◦ \I is finite étale by [Mil17, Proposition 5.58] (Milne

takes étale to mean finite étale [Mil17, §A(i)]). Thus the result follows from
[Mil17, Proposition 7.15]. t
u
Definition 17.1. If O(γ) ⊂ X is closed we say that γ is relatively semisim-

ple. We say that γ is relatively regular if the dimension of O(γ) is maximal
among all γ ∈ X(k), where k is an algebraic closure of k.
Here the adjective relatively is short for relative to the action of H.

Relative semisimplicity has important consequences for Hγ :
Theorem 17.1.4 Assume that H ◦ is reductive. The orbit O(γ) is affine if

and only if (Hγ )◦ is reductive. In particular, if O(γ) is closed then (Hγ )◦ is
reductive. t
u
This was proven by Matsushima in characteristic zero [Mat60] and Haboush
[Hab78] and Richardson [Ric77] in arbitrary characteristic. We point out that
in general if the neutral component of Hγ is reductive it is not the case that
O(γ) is closed (see Exercise 17.2).
Example 17.2. Consider the situation when X = H and H acts via conjuga-
tion. Thus for k-algebras R the action is given by
X(R) × H(R) −→ X(R)

(γ, h) 7−→ h−1 γh.
We refer to this as the group case. In this setting O(γ) is the conjugacy
class of γ and Hγ is the centralizer of γ. Assume that k is perfect. Then an
element γ ∈ X(k) is relatively semisimple if and only if it is semisimple in
the usual sense of Definition 1.12 (see [Ste65, Corollary 6.13]). Moreover γ is
relatively regular if and only if γ is regular in the sense of [Ste65]. This is the
reason for the terminology relatively semisimple and relatively regular.
Example 17.3. Let X = h, where h := Lie H, and let H act on X via the
adjoint action. Even if one is primarily interested in the group case, it has
proven crucial to use this infinitisimal model of conjugation. For example,

the proof of the fundamental lemma was reduced to a Lie algebra version
by Waldspurger [Wal97, Wal06, Wal08, Wal09a, Wal09b]. It was this version
that was proved by Ngô [Ngô10b].
Example 17.4. Let G be a reductive group, let X = G, and let H ≤ G × G

be a subgroup. Then we have a natural action
G(R) × H(R) −→ G(R)

(g, (h` , hr )) 7−→ h−1
` ghr . (17.5)
We can recover (17.2) by taking H to be G embedded diagonally into G × G.
Definition 17.2. Let R be an k-algebra. A class is an element of
Γ (R) := X(R)/H(R).
A relatively semisimple class is an element of
Γss (k) := {γ ∈ X(k) : γ is relatively semisimple}/H(k). (17.6)
We use the notation [γ] for the class of γ.
From the point of view of algebraic geometry, the notion of a class is

too refined. In fact it turns out to be too refined even for some purposes in
automorphic representation theory. One needs to consider the coarser notion
of a geometric class. This entails some understanding of quotients of affine
schemes by reductive group actions, so we digress to discuss this topic.
The action of H on X corresponds to a morphism of k-algebras
a : O(X) −→ O(X) ⊗k O(H),

b (17.7)
where O(Y ) is the coordinate ring of the affine scheme Y (see §1.2). In other
words, a defined in (17.1) is just the map of affine schemes induced by the
map ba of k-algebras. Call an element r ∈ O(X) invariant if b a(r) = r ⊗ 1.
The set of invariant elements is a k-subalgebra, and by abuse of notation we
let
O(X)H ≤ O(X) (17.8)
be this subalgebra. If H ◦ is reductive we set
X/H := Spec(O(X)H ). (17.9)
This is the GIT quotient, Geometric Invariant Theory quotient, of X

by H. The inclusion (17.8) induces a morphism
p : X −→ X/H.
Often in the literature the GIT quotient is denoted by X // H and the stack
theoretic quotient is denoted by X/H or [X/H]. Since we only use GIT
quotients in this work and the doubleslash could be confused with notation
we use for double quotients (see (5.5) for example) we adopt the notation
above.
Let use explain why X/H deserves to be regarded as a quotient. Let p1 :
X ×H → X denote the projection to the first factor. A categorical quotient
of X by H is a k-scheme Y and a morphism p : X → Y such that
a
X × H −−−−→ X
 
p1 y
 p
y (17.10)
p
X −−−−→ Y
commutes and for any morphism q : X → Z from X to another k-scheme Z
such that
a
X × H −−−−→ X
 
p1 y
 q
y (17.11)
q
X −−−−→ Z
commutes there is a unique morphism χ : Y → Z such that q = χ ◦ p.
Concretely, the assertion that (17.11) commutes is a way to make precise the
assertion that q is constant on H-orbits. The universal property states that
any morphism constant on H-orbits factors through the categorical quotient.
As usual with universal properties, the definition immediately implies that
the categorical quotient is unique up to isomorphism if it exists.
As the reader probably has guessed the GIT quotient is a categorical quo-
tient [MFK94, Theorem 1.1], and this explains why it is reasonable to call it
a quotient. In fact, X/H is a uniform categorical quotient, , which im-
plies in particular that for all separable field extensions E/k the base change
(X/H)E is a categorical quotient of XE by HE .
For our purposes we will need to understand the points of X/H. This is
somewhat complicated. Let k ≤ k sep ≤ k be a separable closure and algebraic
closure of k, respectively. We recall that the closed points of the topological
space underlying a scheme Y of finite type over k can be identified with
Autk (k)-orbits of elements of Y (k) [GW10, Proposition 5.4]. Using this stan-
dard fact we can give a fairly concrete description of the points of X/H over
k:
Proposition 17.1.5 Assume that H ◦ is reductive. There is a bijection
γ ∈ X(k sep ) is relatively semisimple and

X/H(k)−→ ˜ O(γ) :
O(γ)(k sep ) is Galk -invariant
given by sending x ∈ X/H(k) to the closed H-orbit O in X such that Oksep

is the unique closed Hksep -orbit in the fiber of p : Xksep → (X/H)sep over x.
Under this identification the map X(k) → X/H(k) sends an H(k)-orbit
γH(k) to the unique closed orbit in the Zariski closure of γH(k sep ).
We will use the following standard fact in the proof of this proposition and
repeatedly below [Sta16, Lemma 32.25.6]:
Lemma 17.1.6 If Y is a smooth scheme over a field k then Y (k sep ) is dense
in the underlying topological space of Y . t
u
Proof of Proposition 17.1.5: Using the action of Galk (see [GW10, §5.2] for
example) one easily reduces the proposition to the case where k = k sep .
We henceforth assume that k = k sep . The morphism X → X/H is surjec-
tive (even universally submersive) [MFK94, Chapter 1.2, Theorem 1.1]. We
claim that the induced map
p : X(k sep ) −→ X/H(k sep ) (17.12)
is also surjective. An element of X/H(k sep ) defines a closed point x of

(X/H)ksep . Consider the fiber F of the morphism Xksep → (X/H)ksep over
x. One has that F(k) is nonempty. Thus Fk is smooth [Mil17, Proposition
7.4(b)]. This implies that F(k sep ) is nonempty by Lemma 17.1.6. Thus (17.12)
is surjective.
Now let x ∈ (X/H)(k sep ) and let F denote the fiber of p over x. It is
a closed subscheme of X and is a union of H-orbits. Let O be the orbit of
smallest dimension. We claim that is closed. Indeed, let O be the closure of O.
Then O − O, if nonempty, is a union of H-orbits of dimension strictly smaller
than the dimension of O. Thus O is closed. Any two closed H-orbits in X
can be separated by an element of O(X)H (see Chapter 1.2, Corollary 1.2
and Appendix C, Corollary A.1.3 of [MFK94]). Thus O is the unique closed
H-orbit in F. This implies the first claim of the proposition. The second
follows from the first. 2
We now drop our running assumption that H has reductive neutral com-
ponent. The following is a useful analogue of Proposition 17.1.5:
Proposition 17.1.7 For any smooth affine algebraic subgroup I ≤ H,
I\H(k) = {I(k sep )h ∈ I(k sep )\H(k sep ) : hξ(h−1 ) ∈ I(k sep ) for all ξ ∈ Galk }.
Proof. Using the action of Gal(k sep /k) (see [GW10, §5.2] for example) one
easily reduces the proposition to the case where k = k sep .
We henceforth assume that k = k sep . The morphism H → I\H is faithfully
flat and hence surjective [Mil17, Proposition 7.4(b)]. Arguing as in the proof
of Proposition 17.1.5 we deduce that
p : H(k sep ) −→ I\H(k sep ) (17.13)

is also surjective. Since the fibers are the cosets of I(k sep ) in H(k sep ) (see the
discussion around (17.3)) we deduce the proposition. t
u
We make the following definition:

Definition 17.3. Two relatively semisimple elements γ1 , γ2 ∈ X(k) are
in the same geometric relative class if O(γ1 ) = O(γ2 ). We denote by
Γgeo,ss (k) the set of relatively semisimple geometric classes.
By Proposition 17.1.5, when H has reductive neutral component one has
a bijection

Γgeo,ss (k)−→Im
˜ X(k) → X/H(k) . (17.14)
Still assuming H has reductive neutral component one has a natural sequence
of maps
Γss (k) −→ X(k)/H(k) −→ Γgeo,ss (k). (17.15)
If k = k sep , then the composite is an isomorphism by Proposition 17.1.5.

However, in general the first map is not surjective and the second map is not
injective (even if k = k sep ) (see Exercise 17.4). If k 6= k sep then the second
map is not in general surjective.
For use in §17.7 we record two lemmas.
Lemma 17.1.8 If γ ∈ X(k) is relatively semisimple with respect to H ◦ then
it is relatively semisimple with respect to H.
Proof. We can and do assume k = k. Let O(γ) be the H-orbit of γ in X

and let O(γ)0 be the H ◦ -orbit of γ. Then using bars to denote underlying
topological spaces,
[
|O(γ)| = |O(γ)0 h|.
h∈H ◦ (k)\H(k)
Therefore |O(γ)| is a finite union of closed subspaces of |X| and hence is

closed. t
u
Assume that
H ◦ := Hr × Hu (17.16)
with Hr reductive and Hu unipotent.

Lemma 17.1.9 An element γ ∈ X(k) is relatively semisimple with respect
to the action of H if it is relatively semisimple with respect to the action of
Hr .
Proof. We can and do assume k = k. By Lemma 17.1.8 it suffices to treat

the case H = H ◦ . Throughout this proof, γ is relatively semisimple. We first
deal with the case where γ is relatively regular with respect to the action of
Hr .
The subset Z ⊆ X(k) of points that are relatively regular with respect to
the action of Hr can be identified with the set of closed points in an open
subset of the underlying topological space of X. This is a consequence of the
upper semicontinuity of the dimension of stabilizers (see the discussion above
[MFK94, Definition 0.9], but be aware that the notion of regular in loc. cit. is
not the same as ours). Let
X reg ⊂ X
be the open subscheme of X with underlying topological space Z given the
reduced induced subscheme structure. Thus X reg (k) = Z. It is easy to see
that X reg is an H-invariant subscheme.
Assume for the moment that γ ∈ X reg (k). Now consider the GIT quotient
p : X −→ X/Hr
Using the universal property of categorical quotients and the fact that Hu
and Hr commute we see that the action of Hu on X induces an action of Hu
on X/Hr .
Let O(p(γ)) be the Hu orbit of p(γ). By [Mil17, Theorem 17.64] the orbit
O(p(γ)) is closed. Thus p−1 (O(p(γ))) is closed. But using Proposition 17.1.5
and our assumption that γ is regular one sees that p−1 (O(p(γ))) is the orbit
of γ under H.
Thus we have proven the proposition for γ ∈ X reg (k), in other words,
when γ is relatively regular with respect to Hr . We now reduce the general
case to this one. Let X 0 = X, X 1 = X − X reg , and for i > 1 let X i =
X i−1 − (X i−1 )reg . These subschemes are all preserved by H. Thus we have
a sequence of closed subschemes
X = X0 ⊇ X1 ⊇ · · · .
Since X is Noetherian this sequence stabilizes. It follows that there exists an

n such that (X n )reg = X n . Thus our sequence is
X = X0 ) X1 ) · · · ⊃ Xn ) ∅
where for each i one has X i−1 − X i = X (i−1)reg . Now let γ ∈ X(k) be
relatively semisimple with respect to Hr . Let i be the largest index such that
γ ∈ X i (k). Then γ is relatively regular in X i (k) with respect to the action of
Hr . Let O(γ) be the Hr -orbit of γ in X. Its intersection with X i is O(γ) itself,
and it is closed (being the intersection of two closed subschemes). Moreover
the H-orbit of γ in X is contained in X i . Thus we have reduced to the case
where γ is relatively regular with respect to Hr , as desired. t
u
17.2 Luna’s slice theorem
We assume until §17.4 below that H is a smooth algebraic group over a field
k with reductive neutral component that acts (on the right) on an affine k-
scheme X. The structure of X/H around sufficiently nice points γ ∈ X(k) has
a simple structure. Luna’s slice theorem, which we will state in this section,
makes this precise. Luna’s slice theorem will only be used in passing below,
so the reader should feel free to omit this section. However, it is useful for
developing an understanding of the quotient X/H.
If H acts on an affine scheme Y of finite type over k we let
X ×H Y := X × Y /H. (17.17)
Here the action of H on X × Y is the diagonal action. Let γ ∈ X(k) be rela-

tively semisimple and let S ⊂ X be a Hγ -stable affine subscheme containing
γ. We then have a right action
S × H × Hγ −→ S × H
given on points by (s, h)·h0 = (sh0 , h−1

0 h). The natural action map S ×H −→
X is constant on Hγ -orbits and hence induces a map
ϕ : S ×Hγ H −→ X.
Moreover, we have a natural isomorphism
(S ×Hγ H)/H −→S/H

˜ γ. (17.18)
In the setting above we therefore have a diagram

ϕ
S ×H γ H −−−−→ X
 
 
y y
ϕ/H
(S ×Hγ H)/H ∼
= S/Hγ −−−−→ X/H
We recall that a morphism X → Y of affine k-schemes of finite type over a

field k is étale if and only if it is smooth of relative dimension 0 (which is to
say that the dimension of X and Y are equal). One should think of an étale
map as an algebro-geometric analogue of a covering map.
Definition 17.4. We say that S as above is an étale slice of the action of

H on X at γ if
(a) The morphism ϕ is étale with open image U .
(b) The morphism ϕ/H is étale and the induced morphism
S ×Hγ H −→ S/Hγ ×U/H U/H

17.2 Luna’s slice theorem 337
is an isomorphism.
Luna’s slice theorem asserts the existence of étale slices under mild hy-
potheses (see [MFK94, Appendix D]):
Theorem 17.2.1 (Luna’s slice theorem) Assume that k is a character-
istic zero field. Étale slices S exist for any γ ∈ X(k) with closed orbit along
which X is normal. Moreover if X is smooth at γ then S can be taken to
be smooth with image a neighborhood of 0 in the normal vector space to the
orbit O(γ) at γ. t
u
One can use this theorem to give a nice description of the quotient X/H
itself. In more detail, for k-algebras R and subgroups H 0 ≤ H let
0
X H (R) := {x ∈ X(R) : xh = x for h ∈ H 0 (R0 ) and R-algebras R0 }.
(17.19)
This is a closed subscheme of X [Mil17, Theorem 7.1].

We have the following theorem, which is an amalgam of results of Luna
and Richardson (see [MFK94, Appendix D]):
Theorem 17.2.2 Assume that X is normal and that k has characteristic
zero. Let H 0 ≤ H be a subgroup with reductive neutral component. Then for
0
γ ∈ X H (k) the orbit of γ under H is closed if and only if the orbit of γ
under the normalizer NH (H 0 ) is closed. The map
0
X H /NH (H 0 ) −→ X/H (17.20)
is finite. If γ is a representative for a generic closed orbit in X, H 0 = Hγ

0
and X H is irreducible then the map (17.20) an isomorphism. t
u
There is a slightly more precise description of what is meant by a generic
closed orbit in [LR79], but yet more precision is needed in practice. This can
be achieved in a nice family of examples. We elaborate in the remainder of
the section.
When we consider the action of H on itself (X = H) via conjugation
the Chevalley restriction theorem provides a definitive description of the
quotient X/H [Ste65, §6]:
Theorem 17.2.3 Assume H is reductive and let T ≤ H be a maximal torus.
Then the inclusion T → H induces an isomorphism
T /W (H, T )−→H/H,
˜
where the action of H on H is via conjugation. t

u
In this case the stabilizer Hγ of γ ∈ H(k) is called the centralizer of γ and
is denoted Cγ,H . We refer to §1.7 for the definition of a maximal torus and
the corresponding Weyl group W (H, T ) of T in H.
The following is [Ste65, 2.11]:
Theorem 17.2.4 Assume H is reductive and that γ ∈ H(k) is semisimple.

Then γ is regular if and only if (Cγ,H )◦ is a maximal torus in H. t
u
In practice it is useful to know that one can place assumptions on H so
that Cγ,H itself is connected. To make this precise we recall some foundational
work of Steinberg. Let
σ : H −→ H
be an automorphism.
Definition 17.5. The automorphism σ is semisimple if there is a smooth

algebraic group G containing Hk and a semisimple γ ∈ NG (H)(k) such that
σ is equal to the restriction of conjugation by γ to Hk .
This is an intuitive definition, but the following more technical definition is

also quite useful in practice
Definition 17.6. The automorphism σ is quasi-semisimple or quass if σ
fixes a Borel subgroup B of Hk and a maximal torus of Hk contained in B.
In both of these definitions the conditions on σ are phrased in terms of the
automorphism it induces on Hk . A semisimple automorphism is quass by
[Ste68, Theorem 7.5]. Consider
H σ (R) := {h ∈ H(R) : σ(h) = h}. (17.21)
This is an algebraic subgroup of H. We have the following basic result of

Steinberg [Ste68, Theorem 9.1]:
Theorem 17.2.5 If H is a semisimple simply connected group and σ is a
quass automorphism of H then H σ is reductive (so it is connected). t
u
Corollary 17.2.6 If H is a reductive group with simply connected derived
group and γ ∈ H(k) then Cγ,H is connected.
The Jordan decomposition is badly behaved over imperfect fields. There-
fore we will make the following convention for the remainder of this section:
we say that an element γ ∈ H(k) is semisimple if its image under the
canonical map H(k) → H(k) is semisimple.
Proof. This is clear if H is semisimple. In the general case let H der ≤ H be

the derived group of H, let ZH ≤ H the center of H, and let ZH,t be the
maximal torus contained in ZH . We then have ZH,t H der = H [Mil17, Proof
of Proposition 21.60(c)]. Assume that γ ∈ H der (k). Then one checks that
Cγ,H = ZH,t Cγ,H der
and the lemma follows in this case. In general we have γ = zγ 0 where (z, γ 0 ) ∈
ZH,t (k̄) × H der (k̄) and one checks that
17.2 Luna’s slice theorem 339
(Cγ,H )k = Cγ 0 ,Hk̄ ,
so we deduce the corollary in this case as well. t

u
Without any additional assumptions on σ we can at least deduce the fol-
lowing result:
Theorem 17.2.7 If σ is semisimple, then (H σ )◦ is reductive.
Proof. We may assume that k = k. Choose G and γ as in the definition
of a semisimple automorphism as in Definition 17.5. The orbit of γ under
conjugatin by H is closed in G by [BT65, Théorème 10.2(a)]. The stabilizer
of γ is H σ , so we conclude by Theorem 17.1.4. t
u
Corollary 17.2.8 Assume that σ has finite order and that either the char-
acteristic of k is zero or the order of σ is coprime to the characteristic of k.
Then (H σ )◦ is reductive.
Proof. The automorphism σ is semisimple (see Exercise 17.6). t
u
Assume for the remainder of this section that the characteristic of k is not
2. Let G be a reductive group over k and let
σ : G −→ G
be an automorphism of order 2. There is an action of H := Gσ × Gσ on

X = G given on points in a k-algebra R by
X(R) × H(R) −→ X(R)

(17.22)
(g, (g` , gr )) 7−→ g`−1 ggr .
In this case the set Γ (R) is often known as the set of relative conjugacy
classes (see Example 17.4). They are a generalization of the notion of con-
jugacy classes in a strict sense (see Exercise 17.9).
There is a great deal of helpful geometry available in this special case that
aids in the study of the set of classes Γ (R) of Definition 17.2. It is useful to
introduce the map
Bσ : G −→ G
given on points by g 7→ g −σ g. We denote by Q the scheme-theoretic image of
Bσ . Then Q is a closed affine k-subscheme of G.
We have an isomorphism [Ric82, Lemma 2.4] of k-schemes
Bσ : Gσ \G −→ Q (17.23)
which intertwines the right action of G with the following action of G on Q:
Q(R) × G(R) −→ Q(R)

(17.24)
(g, q) 7−→ g −1 qg σ .
In particular one has an isomorphism of affine k-schemes
X/H = G/H = Gσ \G/Gσ −→Q/G

˜ σ
,
where the action on the right is given by (17.24).

For γ ∈ G(R) let
Cγ,Gσ := Cγ,G ∩ Gσ .
We leave the following lemma as an exercise (see Exercise 17.11).
Lemma 17.2.9 There is an isomorphism
Hγ (R) −→ CBσ (γ),Gσ (R)

(g1 , g2 ) 7−→ g2 .
t
u
We then have the following proposition:
Proposition 17.2.10 An element γ ∈ X(k) = G(k) is relatively semisimple
with respect to the action of H if and only if Bσ (γ) is semisimple in the usual
sense.
Proof. See [Ric82, §7]. t
u
We have seen that the notion of a maximal torus in a reductive group is ab-
solutely crucial. In the case of symmetric subgroups, the following definition
is a substitute:
Definition 17.7. A torus T ⊆ G is said to be σ-split if for all k-algebras R
and all t ∈ T (R) one has t−1 = tσ .
Beware that in [Ric82] a σ-split torus is called a “σ-anisotropic torus.”
It is not hard to see that if T is any σ-split torus then T ≤ Q. Indeed,
every element of T (k) is in the image of the isogeny t 7→ t2 = t−σ t. Moreover,
σ-split tori exist (see [Ric82, (2.6)] and [Vus74, §1]).
Let Tσ ≤ Q be a maximal σ-split torus. We have a corresponding Weyl
group
W (G, Tσ ) = NG (Tσ )/ZG (Tσ ), (17.25)
sometimes called the little Weyl group (see §1.7). Here NG (Tσ ) (resp. ZG (Tσ ))
is the normalizer (resp. centralizer) of Tσ in G. This is a finite étale group
scheme over k. We have the following generalization of the Chevalley restric-
tion theorem [Ric82, Corollary 11.5]:
Theorem 17.2.11 (Richardson) Let Tσ ⊆ G be a maximal σ-split torus.
The inclusion Tσ ,→ Q induces an isomorphism
∼
Tσ /W (G, Tσ ) −→ Q/Gσ .
t
u
17.3 Local geometric classes 341
17.3 Local geometric classes
Let k be a field. Suppose that γ ∈ X(k) has closed orbit under H and that
Hγ is smooth (we do not assume that H has reductive neutral component).
We then have a sequence
1 −→ Hγ (k) −→ H(k) −→ Hγ \H(k)
and we can identify the last object with O(γ)(k) by means of Proposition
17.1.2. We now briefly explain how to compute the image using a little Galois
cohomology. The reader should feel free to omit this discussion and refer back
to it later if necessary. Our primary reference is [Ser02, §I.5].
Recall that for a smooth affine algebraic group H over a field k one defines
Z 1 (k, H), the set of 1-cocycles of Galk in H(k sep ) to be the set of set
theoretic maps
c : Galk −→ H(k sep )

σ 7−→ c(σ)
that satisfy the cocycle condition
c(σ1 σ2 ) = c(σ1 )σ1 (c(σ2 )) (17.26)
for all σ1 , σ2 ∈ Galk . Two cocycles c and c0 are called cohomologous if

there is a h ∈ H(k sep ) such that c0 (σ) = h−1 c(σ)σ(h). This is an equivalence
relation, and the set of equivalence classes is denoted by
H 1 (k, H). (17.27)
It is the first Galois cohomology set of Galk in H (or more precisely

in H(k sep )). This is not a group unless H is commutative, but it does come
with a distinguished element, called the neutral element. It is the class
of the cocycle sending every element of Galk to 1. The cohomology sets are
functorial in H in the obvious sense. We also mention, though this is not at
all obvious from the definition, that the sets H 1 (k, H) can be computed in
many interesting cases. We refer to [Ser02] for more details.
When H is commutative the set H 1 (k, H) has a group structure, and using
this fact Borovoi was able to give a group structure on H 1 (k, H) all reductive
H (at least if k is of characteristic zero) [Bor98]. A nice reference is [Lab99].
We will not need this refinement, but it is extremely useful for the stabi-
lization of the trace formula [Lab99, KS99]. In fact, Borovoi’s constructions
borrow heavily from Kottwitz’s work on the stabilization of the trace formula.
If I → H is a morphism of smooth group schemes over k let
D(k, I, H) := ker(H 1 (k, I) → H 1 (k, H)). (17.28)

Here the kernel simply means all classes that are sent to the neutral element
of H 1 (k, H).
Now suppose that I ≤ H is a smooth subgroup scheme. We leave the
following lemma as Exercise 17.12:
Lemma 17.3.1 The map
cl : I\H(k) −→ D(k, I, H)
I(k sep )h 7−→ (σ 7→ hσ(h−1 ))
defines a bijection between the H(k)-orbits in I\H(k) and D(k, I, H). t

u
We refer to the map cl in the lemma as the class map. The lemma implies
that there is an exact sequence of pointed sets
1 −→ I(k)\H(k) −→ I\H(k) −→ D(k, I, H) −→ 1. (17.29)
In other words the set of classes in the geometric class of γ is in bijection

with D(k, I, H). This observation is the beginning of the theory of endoscopy,
first introduced by Langlands in [Lan83]. The groundwork of the theory was
laid by Kottwitz in [Kot84, Kot86b] and more recent useful references include
[KS99, Lab99].
To proceed further we require a description of the other H(k)-orbits in
I\H(k). By Proposition 17.1.7 any element of I\H(k) is a coset I(k sep )h
for some h ∈ H(k sep ) satisfying hσ(h−1 ) ∈ I(k sep ) for all σ. Let Ih be the
stabilizer of I(k sep )h under the action of H. Then tautologically we have
a
I\H(k) = Im(Ih (k)\H(k) → I\H(k)), (17.30)
h
where the disjoint union is over the set of H(k)-orbits in I\H(k) and the
implicit maps are given by
Ih (k)\H(k) −→ I\H(k)
x 7−→ I(k sep )hx.
We note that
cl(Im(Ih (k)\H(k) → I\H(k)))
is simply the class of the cocycle hσ(h−1 ).
The groups Ih are not isomorphic as h varies, but they are related in an
important manner. Two smooth algebraic groups Q and Q e are said to be
forms of each other if there is an isomorphism
ϕ : Qksep −→
˜ Q
e ksep .
The concept of a form arises naturally in the classification of algebraic groups;

one can proceed in many circumstances by classifying groups of a certain type
17.4 Local relative orbital integrals 343
over k sep and then classifying all of the groups over k that base change to a
given group over k sep . A form is called an inner form if for all σ ∈ Galk the
automorphism ϕ−1 ◦ σ ◦ ϕ of Qksep is an inner automorphism. It is easy to
check that the Ih are all inner forms of I (see Exercise 17.13).
Now suppose that k is a local field. In keeping with our usual notation for
local and global fields we let k = F . We record the following useful result
(see [Poo17, Proposition 3.5.73]):
Proposition 17.3.2 If X → Y is a smooth map of separated schemes of
finite type over F then X(F ) → Y (F ) is open. t
u
Using this proposition we prove the following lemma:
Lemma 17.3.3 Let I ≤ H be a smooth algebraic subgroup. The map
cl : I\H(F ) −→ D(F, I, H)
is continuous if we give D(F, I, H) the discrete topology. In particular the

image of I(F )\H(F ) in I\H(F ) is closed.
Proof. The last assertion follows from the first and Lemma 17.3.1. To prove
the first assertion it suffices to show that the preimage under cl of any point
in D(F, I, H) is open. This is equivalent to the assertion that the maps
Ih (F )\H(F ) −→ I\H(F )
of (17.30) have open image. By definition of the quotient topology on

Ih (F )\H(F ) this will follow if we show that the map H(F ) −→ I\H(F )
given by the action of H(F ) on the orbit of I(k sep )h is open. This map is
induced by a morphism of schemes φ : H → I\H. By Proposition 17.3.2 it
suffices to check that φ is smooth. The fibers of φ are isomorphic (as schemes)
to Ih , which is smooth since it is an inner form of the smooth group I. t
u
The following theorem gives conditions under which D(F, I, H) is finite:

Theorem 17.3.4 Assume I is a smooth algebraic group over F . If I is re-
ductive or F has characteristic zero then H 1 (F, I) is finite.
Proof. If F has characteristic zero this is contained in [Ser02, §III.4.2 and

4.3]. In the reductive case see [Ser02, §III.4.3, Remarks]. t
u
17.4 Local relative orbital integrals
Let F be a local field and let H be a smooth algebraic group defined over F
acting on a smooth affine scheme X. We define local relative orbital integrals
in this section.
Assume we are given a quasi-character χ : H(F ) −→ C× .
Definition 17.8. A relatively semisimple element γ ∈ X(F ) is χ-relevant

if χ is trivial on Hγ (F ).
If χ is understood we often omit it from notation and speak simply of relevant
elements. We require the notion of relevance to define local orbital integrals,
and only relevant γ will contribute to the global trace formula (see Theo-
rem 17.7.2 below). If χ is trivial then all relatively semisimple elements are
relevant.
Since we have assumed X is affine and smooth over F , if F is archimedean
then X(F ) is a smooth manifold, so Cc∞ (X(F )) is defined. If F is nonar-
chimedean we let Cc∞ (X(F )) be the space of compactly supported locally
constant functions on X(F ).
We require one more assumption on γ ∈ X(F ) before defining local relative
orbital integrals.
Definition 17.9. We say γ ∈ X(F ) is relatively unimodular if δH |Hγ =
δHγ .
See §3.2 for definition of the modular character δH . In particular if H ◦ is
reductive then relatively semisimple γ are unimodular by Theorem 17.1.4.
Now suppose we are given f ∈ Cc∞ (X(F )) and a relevant relative semisim-
ple and relatively unimodular γ ∈ X(F ). We fix right Haar measures dr h on
H(F ) and dr hγ on Hγ (F ). Because γ is relatively unimodular one can then
form the quotient measure ddrrhhγ (see Theorem 3.2.2). We can then form the
local relative orbital integral
Z
dr h
ROγ (f ) := ROχγ (f ) = f (γh)χ(h) . (17.31)
Hγ (F )\H(F ) dr hγ
Note that we have used the fact that γ is χ-relevant to define this integral.
This integral depends on the choice of measures, but traditionally they are
not encoded in the notation. In some applications it may be more natural to
replace Hγ by some subgroup of Hγ containing (Hγ )◦ .
Theorem 17.4.1 If γ ∈ X(F ) is relevant relatively unimodular and rela-

tively semisimple then the integral defining ROγ (f ) is absolutely convergent.
Proof. Since the measure ddrrhhγ is a Radon measure on Hγ (F )\H(F ), to show

the integral is well-defined and absolutely convergent it is enough to construct
a pull-back map
Cc∞ (X(F )) −→ Cc∞ (Hγ (F )\H(F ))
attached to the map
Hγ (F )\H(F ) −→ X(F )
(17.32)
Hγ (F )h 7−→ γh.
17.5 Torsors 345
Thus it suffices to show that this map is proper. The orbit O(γ) of γ is closed
in X. Hence O(γ)(F ) is closed in X(F ) by Theorem 2.2.1.
It therefore suffices to treat the case where X = O(γ) = Hγ \H. In this case
we invoke Lemma 17.3.3 to see that the image of Hγ (F )\H(F ) in Hγ \H(F )
is closed. t
u
17.5 Torsors
In this section we discuss torsors, which play a key role in §17.6. It is con-
venient to return to the more general setting of §17.1. Thus H is a smooth
group scheme over a Noetherian ring k acting (on the right) on an affine
scheme X of finite type over k.
For example one could take X = H with the natural right H action. This is
known as the trivial H-torsor. This example can be profitably generalized:
Definition 17.10. Assume X is faithfully flat over a Noetherian ring k. It
is an H-torsor if the map
1X × a : X × H −→ X × X
is an isomorphism.
An equivalent (and more intuitive) way to define a H-torsor is to say that
it is a scheme flat and of finite type over k equipped with an action of H
that becomes isomorphic to the trivial H- torsor after a faithfully flat finite
type base extension. For more details we refer the reader to [Poo17, §6.5.1].
Our definition is the specialization of the definition in [Poo17, §6.5.1] to the
case of affine Noetherian base schemes. The set of all isomorphism classes of
H-torsors is denoted by
q 1 (k, H) = H
H q 1 (Spec(k), H). (17.33)
fppf fppf
It is a pointed set with the class of the trivial torsor as neutral element. The
fppf stands for fidèlment plat de présentation finie, since torsors are required
to be faithfully flat and locally of finite presentation over k. Since we have
assumed H is smooth, H-torsors will in fact be smooth over Spec(k) [Poo17,
Remark 6.5.2]. Assume that k 0 a faithfully flat k-algebra of finite type. Then
one has a natural map
H q 1 (k 0 , H)
q 1 (k, H) −→ H (17.34)
fppf fppf
given by sending an H-torsor Y to its base extension Yk0 .

Suppose that I ≤ H is a smooth closed subgroup. Let Y be an I-torsor.
One has an action of I × H on Y × H given on points in a k-algebra R by
Y (R) × H(R) × I(R) × H(R) −→ Y (R) × H(R)

(17.35)
(y, h, i, h0 ) 7−→ (yi, i−1 hh0 ).
The actions of I and H commute.
Definition 17.11. The contracted product of Y and H
Y ∧I H := Y × H/I
is the quotient of Y × H by the action of I.
The contracted product Y ∧I H is an H-torsor, where the action is inherited

from the action of H in (17.35). We will not enter into a detailed discussion of
what is meant by a quotient in this context. Briefly, the action of I on Y × H
defines a quotient which is a presheaf of sets for the fppf site on Spec(k)
([Poo17, §6] is a useful reference for this concept). The corresponding sheaf
is representable [Poo17, Theorem 6.5.10]. The contracted product provides
us with a morphism of pointed sets
q 1 (k, I) −→ H
H q 1 (k, H) (17.36)
fppf fppf
sending the isomorphism class of an I-torsor Y to the isomorphism class of

Y ∧I H.
Assume momentarily that k is a field. Then there is a canonical bijection
q 1 (Spec(k), H)−→H
H ˜ 1 (k, H). (17.37)
fppf
It is constructed as follows. Suppose we are given an H-torsor X. Then, since

X is smooth we can choose x ∈ X(k sep ) by Lemma 17.1.6. Since the map
1X × a : X × H −→ X × X (17.38)
is an isomorphism we see that the map a(x, ·) : H(k sep ) → X(k sep ) is a bi-
jection. In particular for each σ ∈ Galk there is c(σ) ∈ H(k sep ) such that
σ(x) = x.c(σ). One checks that c(σ) is a 1 cocycle, and this is the defini-
tion of the map (17.37). We omit the construction of the inverse map (see
[Poo17, §5.12.4]). Using (17.37) we occasionally allow ourselves to identify
Hq 1 (Spec(k), H) and H 1 (k, H) when k is a field.
fppf
Lemma 17.5.1 Assume k is a field and that I is a smooth closed subgroup

of H. One has a commutative diagram
q 1 (k, I) −−−−→ H
H q 1 (k, H)
fppf fppf
 
∼y
 ∼
y
H 1 (k, I) −−−−→ H 1 (k, H),
17.5 Torsors 347
where the vertical arrows are given by the bijection (17.37), the top arrow is
given by (17.36) and the bottom arrow is given by observing that a cocycle
with coefficients in I(k sep ) has coefficients in H(k sep ).
Proof. We claim that there is a Galk -equivariant identificatiom
Y ∧I H(k sep ) = Y (k sep ) × H(k sep )/I(k sep ). (17.39)
To see this choose y ∈ Y (k 0 ) for some finite separable extension k 0 /k using

Lemma 17.1.6. There is then an isomorphism (I × H)k0 →(Y ˜ × H)k0 given on
points in a k 0 -algebra R by
I(R) × H(R)−→Y
˜ (R) × H(R)
(i, h) 7−→ (yi−1 , ih).
This intertwines the right action of I on I × H induced by its right action

on I with the left action of I on Y × H. Now I\I × H is, by construction,
a quotient in the category of fppf sheaves. Using the definition of a quotient
in the category of fppf sheaves given in [DG74, Expose IV, Definition 3.1.2]
one checks that I\I × H and Y ∧I H are isomorphic in the category of fppf
sheaves over Spec(k 0 ). This uses the well-known fact that schemes define fppf
sheaves [Poo17, Proposition 6.3.19]. Thus for all separable extensions L/k 0 of
finite degree we obtain a commutative diagram
∼
I × H(L) −−−−→ Y × H(L)
 
 
y y
∼
I\I × H(L) −−−−→ Y ∧I H(L),
where the vertical arrows are induced by the quotient maps in the category
of fppf sheaves over Spec(k 0 ) and the horizontal arrows are bijections. Taking
the direct limit over all separable finite extensions k sep ≥ L ≥ k we deduce the
same diagram for L = k sep . In this case the horizontal arrows are not GalL =
Galk equivariant. Despite this, one still deduces the claim from Proposition
17.1.7.
Let y ∈ Y (k sep ) and for each σ ∈ Galk let c(σ) ∈ I(k sep ) be the elements
such that σ(y) = yc(σ). Thus c is the cocycle attached to Y by (17.37). We
now pick (y × 1)I(k sep ) to be our basepoint in Y ∧I H(k sep ). Then
σ(y × 1)I(k sep ) = (yc(σ) × 1)I(k sep ) = (y × c(σ))I(k sep ).
t
u
17.6 Adelic classes
Let F be a global field, let H be a smooth algebraic group over F acting on an

affine scheme X of finite type over F on the right. Thus we are in the setting
of §17.1 in the special case where F = k. We now develop topological results
on H(AF ) classes in X(AF ) that are necessary to study global relative orbital
integrals (see Proposition 17.7.1). Our exposition is based on the treatment
in [GH15], and generalizes some of the results of loc. cit.
Theorem 17.6.1 Suppose that γ is relatively semisimple. Then the map
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) −→ X(AF )
is proper.
For γ as in the statement of the theorem one has that O(γ)(AF ) is closed
in X(AF ) by Theorem 2.2.1. It is therefore no loss of generality to assume
that X = O(γ), which is to say that there is a smooth subgroup I of H such
that X := I\H. For any finite set of places S of F including the infinite
places we set
Y
ObFS = OFv and OFS := F ∩ O bFS .
v6∈S
Thus OFS < F is the set of elements of F that are integral outside of the
finite places in S. Recall the notion of a model of an affine scheme reviewed
in §2.4. For a sufficiently large set of places S of F we can choose models H
and X of H and X = I\H over OFS , respectively, such that there is a map
H→X
whose generic fiber is the canonical map H → X [Poo17, Theorem 3.2.1]. We

let I be the schematic closure of I in H.
The map O bS → AS is an open topological embedding so
F F
bFS ) −→ X (ASF ) = X(ASF )

X (O (17.40)
is an open topological embedding by Exercise 2.2. Similarly we obtain, for

every finite place v, open topological embeddings
X (OFv ) −→ X (Fv ) = X(Fv ). (17.41)
We then have a homeomorphism of topological spaces

0
X(AF ) ∼
Y
= X(Fv ), (17.42)
v
17.6 Adelic classes 349
where the restricted direct product is taken with respect to the open sets
X (OFv ). The isomorphism depends on the choice of model of X. This discus-
sion is also valid with X and X replaced by H (resp. I) and H (resp. I). In
fact we discussed the algebraic group case in §2.3. Moreover, there are again
isomorphisms of topological groups
0 0
H(AF ) ∼ I(AF ) ∼
Y Y
= H(Fv ) and = I(Fv ), (17.43)
v v
where the restricted direct product is taken with respect to the subgroups
H(OFv ) (resp. I(OFv )) for all finite places v. These isomorphisms are induced
by the choice of the model of H and are compatible with the group actions
X(Fv )×H(Fv ) → X(Fv ) and X(AF )×H(AF ) → X(AF ) because we assumed
that there is a morphism H → X whose generic fiber is H → X. It is tempting
to try to define the quotient I\H and relate it to X , but we do not wish to
discuss representability of quotients over Dedekind rings. Fortunately coming
to grips with this issue is unnecessary for our purposes.
Lemma 17.6.2 Assume that I is connected. For a large enough finite set
bS ) in
of places S of F including the infinite places the inverse image of X (O F
S S S
H(AF ) is equal to I(AF )H(OF ). The morphism H → X induces a bijection
b
bS )\H(O
I(O bS )−→X bS ).
˜ (O
F F F
Proof. The map

H(AF ) → X(AF )
is open by [Con12b, Theorem 4.5]. For any finite set S of places of F contain-
ing the infinite places the subset H(O bS ) ⊂ H(AS ) is open and so its image
F F
is open in X(ASF ). Upon enlarging S we see that this image must be X (O bS )
F
by definition of the restricted direct topology on X(AF ) (see (17.43)).
Let v 6∈ S be a place of F . If h ∈ H(Fv ) is in the inverse image of X (OFv )
then there is some h0 ∈ H(OFv ) and an x ∈ I(Fvsep ) such that xh0 = h by
Proposition 17.1.7 which implies that x = hh0−1 ∈ I(Fv ). Thus we deduce
the first assertion of the lemma.
Again applying Proposition 17.1.7, if h, h0 ∈ H(OFv ) are mapped to the
same point of X (OFv ) then there is some x ∈ I(Fvsep ) such that xh = h0 . It
follows that x = h0 h−1 ∈ I(OFv ), and we deduce the second assertion of the
lemma. t
u
Proof of Theorem 17.6.1: As mentioned below the statement of Theorem

17.6.1, we can and do assume that X = O(γ) = Hγ \H. Since the map
Hγ◦ \H −→ Hγ \H
is proper by Lemma 17.1.3 the map

Hγ◦ \H(AF ) −→ Hγ \H(AF )
is proper by [Con12b, Proposition 4.4]. Here we have also used the fact,
mentioned above, that for any smooth algebraic subgroup I ≤ H the scheme
I\H is separated and of finite type over F [Mil17, Theorem 7.18].
Thus we are reduced to showing that for any connected smooth subgroup
I ≤ H the map
I(AF )\H(AF ) → I\H(AF )
is proper. To keep notation consistent with Lemma 17.6.2 we write X = I\H
and let X and H be defined as above that lemma.
Let Ω ⊂ X(AF ) be a compact set. We must show its inverse image in
I(AF )\H(AF ) is compact. Let S be a finite set of places of F including the
infinite places. It suffices to treat the case Ω = ΩS × Ω S where ΩS ⊂ X(FS )
and Ω S = X (O bS ) are compact since any compact subset admits a finite cover
F
by open sets whose closure is of this form.
Taking S sufficiently large and invoking Lemma 17.6.2, we see that the
inverse image of Ω S in H(ASF ) is I(ASF )H(O bS ). We conclude that the inverse
F
image of Ω S in I(ASF )\H(ASF ) is I(ASF )H(O bS ), hence compact. On the other
F
hand the inverse image of ΩS in I(FS )\H(FS ) is compact by Lemma 17.3.3.
2
We observe the following:
Lemma 17.6.3 If Y is an affine scheme of finite type over F then Y (F ) is
discrete and closed in Y (AF ).
Proof. The set F < AF is discrete and closed by Lemma 2.1.3 and hence we
conclude by Exercise 2.2. t
u
Using the techniques above we can prove a result which was used earlier
in Lemma 14.3.2:
Lemma 17.6.4 Let G be a reductive group over F and let H ≤ G be a
reductive subgroup. The image of G(F ) in AG \G(AF )/H(AF ) is discrete and
closed.
Here, of course, we have given AG \G(AF )/H(AF ) the quotient topology.
Proof. We begin by showing that the image of G(F ) in G(AF )/H(AF ) is

closed. Let
p : G(AF )/H(AF ) −→ G/H(AF )
be the natural map. The set G/H(F ) is discrete and closed in G/H(AF ) by
Lemma 17.6.3, so it suffices to show that for any x ∈ G/H(F ) the F -points of
the fiber p−1 (x) are discrete and closed in G(AF )/H(AF ). Under the natural
right action of H on G the stabilizer of any point is trivial, and every element
of G(AF ) is relatively semisimple. Applying propositions 17.1.5 and 17.1.7
we deduce that p−1 (x)(AF ) = p−1 (x)(F ) is a single point in G(AF )/H(AF )
hence discrete and closed. Thus the image of G(F ) in G(AF )/H(AF ) is closed.
Define G(AF )1 as in (2.10). The subset
G(AF )1 /(H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 ) ⊆ G(AF )/H(AF )
is a closed set containing G(F )(H(AF )∩G(AF )1 ), and hence G(F ) is discrete
and closed in G(AF )1 /(H(AF )∩G(AF )1 ). On the other hand the natural map
G(AF )1 /(H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 ) −→ AG \G(AF )/H(AF )

is a homeomorphism sending G(F ) H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 to AG G(F )H(AF ) so
we deduce the lemma. t
u
Theorem 17.6.1 gives us useful topological information about a single rel-

ative class. To proceed further we must analyze all of the H(AF )-orbits of
relatively semisimple elements of X(F ) in X(AF ). In the function field case
there are serious difficulties having to do with the fact that H 1 (Fv , I) can be
infinite for non-reductive I. This motivates the following definition:
Definition 17.12. An element γ ∈ X(F ) is gcf (Galois cohomologically
finite) if
|H 1 (Fv , Hγ /(Hγ )◦ )| < ∞
for all places v of F .
We emphasize that in the number field case all γ are gcf by Theorem 17.3.4.
Clearly γ is gcf if and only if every element of its class is gcf so it makes sense
to speak of a class being gcf.
In the local setting we analyzed classes in a geometric class using the class
map of Lemma 17.3.1. We now provide the adelic analogue.
Let I ≤ H be a smooth algebraic subgroup of the smooth algebraic group
H over F . We do not assume that H is reductive. Let X = I\H and let I,
H and X be smooth models of I, H and X over OFS for a sufficiently large
finite set of places S of F including the infinite places as in the beginning of
this section.
Recall the cohomology sets of (17.33). We let
q 1 (OF , I) −→ H
Dfppf (OFv , I, H) := ker(H q 1 (OF , H)), (17.44)
fppf v fppf v
where the map is given as in (17.34). There is a commutative diagram
q 1 (OF , I) −−−−→ H
H q 1 (OF , H)
fppf v fppf v
 

y

y (17.45)
H 1 (Fv , I) −−−−→ H 1 (Fv , H)

where the vertical arrows are given by (17.34), the top arrow is given by
(17.36), and the map on the bottom row corresponds to the obvious morphism
given by observing that a cocycle with coefficients in I(Fvsep ) tautologically
has coefficients in H(Fvsep ) (see Lemma 17.5.1). We let
D(OFv , I, H) := Im(Dfppf (OFv , I, H) → D(Fv , I, H)). (17.46)
We then set
0
Y
D(AF , I, H) := D(Fv , I, H)
v
where the prime indicates that we take the restricted direct product with
respect to D(OFv , I, H) ⊆ D(Fv , I, H). We note that if S 0 ⊇ S then the
natural map
D(AF , I, H) −→ D(AF , IOS0 , HOS0 )
F F
is an isomorphism.
Assume now that D(Fv , I, H) is finite for all v. In this case we give
H 1 (AF , H) a topology by stipulating that the open sets are all subsets that
are equal to
Y
ΩS 0 × D(OFv , I, H) (17.47)
v 0 6∈S 0
some finite set of places S 0 of F containing S, where ΩS 0 is any subset

for Q
of v∈S 0 D(Fv , I, H). With respect to this topology every set of the form
(17.47) is a compact open set.
The most important and nontrivial properties of D(AF , I, H) are con-
tained in the following theorem:
Q
Theorem 17.6.5 The image of the diagonal map D(F, I, H) → v D(Fv , I, H)
is contained in D(AF , I, H). If H 1 (Fv , I/I ◦ ) is finite for all v then
D(F, I, H) −→ D(AF , I, H)
is proper if we give D(F, I, H) the discrete topology.
Proof. Using (17.37) we may regard an element of D(F, I, H) as the isomor-

phism class of an I-torsor Y such that Y ∧I H is isomorphic to the trivial
H-torsor. By spreading out [Poo17, Theorem 3.2.1], for a sufficiently large
set of places S 0 ⊇ S the I-torsor Y is isomorphic as an I-torsor to the generic
I S0
fiber of a IOS0 -torsor Y such that Y ∧ OF HOS0 is isomorphic to a trivial
F F
HOS0 -torsor. This implies the first assertion of the theorem.
F
We claim that the inverse image of
Y Y
D(Fv , I, H) × D(OFv , I, H) (17.48)
v∈S 0 v6∈S 0
in D(F, I, H) is finite for all S 0 ⊇ S. This is enough to deduce the second

assertion of the theorem. It suffices to show that the inverse image of
Y Y
H 1 (Fv , I) × Im(H q 1 (Spec(OF ), I) → H 1 (Fv , I))
fppf v
v∈S 0 v6∈S 0
in H 1 (F, I) is finite. This set is denoted by HS1 0 (F, I) in [Poo17, Theorem

6.5.13], and we conclude by part (a) of that theorem. t
u
For every nonarchimedean place v of F let OFnrv be the ring of integers of
the maximal unramified extension Fvnr of Fv in some algebraic closure. We
will use the following lemma several times below:
Lemma 17.6.6 Let v be a nonarchimedean place of F . If Y is a smooth
scheme over Spec(OFv ) then
Y (OFnrv ) 6= ∅.
Proof. Let F be the residue field of OFv and let F be its algebraic closure. It
is the residue field of OFnrv . The surjection OFnrv → F induces a surjection
Y (OFnrv ) → Y (F)
by Hensel’s lemma [BLR90, §2.3, Proposition 5]. On the other hand Y (F) is
nonempty since Y is smooth by Lemma 17.1.6. t
u
Lemma 17.6.7 A class in H 1 (Fv , H) is in the image of the map from
Ȟ 1 (OFv , H) if and only if it is cohomologous to a cocycle with values in
H(OE ) for some finite unramified Galois extension E/Fv .
Proof. Let H be an HOFv -torsor. It is smooth over OFv , and hence there is
a finite unramified extension E/Fv such that Y(OE ) is nonempty by Lemma
17.6.6. The cocycle defined using this point y as in the definition of (17.37)
will take values in H(OE ). This implies the “only if” implication.
Conversely, let c : GalFv → H(OE ) be a cocycle, where E/Fv is an unram-
ified extension. This defines a descent datum on HOE and hence a H-torsor
Y (see [Poo17, Remark 4.4.7]). The cocycle attached to the generic fiber of
this torsor is c, so we deduce the converse assertion. t
u
For each place v we have a class map cl : I\H(Fv ) → D(Fv , I, H) as in
the proof of Lemma 17.3.1.
Lemma 17.6.8 The local class maps induce a map
cl : I\H(AF ) −→ D(AF , I, H).
If H 1 (Fv , I/I ◦ ) is finite for all v it sends compact sets to compact sets.
We do not know if cl is continuous.
Proof. Let OFnrv be the ring of integers of the maximal unramified extension
Fvnr in Fvsep . By spreading out, for S 0 large enough the map HOS0 → XOS0
F F
is smooth [Poo17, Theorem 3.2.1] and hence the map H(OFnrv ) → X (OFnrv ) is
surjective for v 6∈ S 0 by Lemma 17.6.6 applied to the fibers of the morphism
HOFv → XOFv for v 6∈ S 0 . Thus for v 6∈ S 0 given x ∈ X (OFv ) we can choose
h ∈ H(OFnrv ) such that I(F sep )h = x. Thus cl(x) is contained in D(OFv , I, H)
by Lemma 17.6.7. This implies the first assertion of the lemma.
For the second assertion in view of Lemma 17.3.1 it suffices to observe
that by the argument above cl(x) ∈ Dfppf (OFv , I, H) for v 6∈ S 0 . t
u
Proposition 17.6.9 Let A0 ≤ AH be a subgroup. One has a commutative
diagram
cl
1 −−−−→ I(F )\H(F ) −−−−→ I\H(F ) −−−−→ D(F, I, H)
   
   
ay
y y y
cl
1 −−−−→ I(AF )\H(AF )/A0 −−−−→ I\H(AF )/A0 −−−−→ D(AF , I, H).
The top row is an exact sequences of pointed sets, and the map a is proper if
we give D(F, I, H) the discrete topology.
We have incorporated the group A0 for use in the proof of Theorem 18.2.2
below. One checks that cl(x) = cl(xa) for all x ∈ I\H(AF ) and a ∈ AH so
the map cl : I\H(AF )/A0 → D(AF , I, H) is well-defined.
Proof. The commutativity of the diagram is clear, the top line is exact since
(17.29) is exact, and a is proper by Theorem 17.6.5. tu
We now prove that the set of relative classes inside a geometric class is
finite under suitable assumptions:
Theorem 17.6.10 Let A0 ≤ AH be a subgroup. Assume that H 1 (Fv , I/I ◦ ) is
finite for all v. Let Ω ⊆ I\H(AF )/A0 be a compact set. There are only finitely
many H(F )-orbits xH(F ) ⊆ I\H(F ) such that xH(AF )/A0 intersects Ω.
Proof. We use the diagram in Proposition 17.6.9. Let x ∈ I\H(F ). If
xH(AF )/A0 ∩ Ω 6= ∅
then cl(xH(AF )/A0 ) ∩ cl(Ω) 6= ∅ and hence by commutativity of the diagram

cl(xH(F )) ∩ a−1 (cl(Ω)) 6= ∅. Using Lemma 17.3.1, we deduce that the set of
H(F )-orbits xH(F ) in I\H(F ) such that xH(AF )/A0 intersects Ω is mapped
injectively via cl into
cl(I\H(F )) ∩ a−1 (cl(Ω)). (17.49)
The set cl(Ω) is compact by Lemma 17.6.8. Since a is proper, the set in
(17.49) is finite. t
u
17.7 Global relative orbital integrals 355
In §17.7 we will use Theorem 17.6.10 and the following finiteness result for
geometric classes:
Lemma 17.6.11 Assume H is reductive. Let Ω ⊂ X(AF ) be a compact set.
There are only finitely many relatively semisimple geometric classes in X(F )
whose H(AF )-orbit intersects Ω.
Proof. Let
p : X(AF ) −→ X/H(AF )
be the canonical map. By Proposition 17.1.5 an element of X/H(F ) may
be regarded as a relatively semisimple class. The set of relatively semisimple
geometric classes in X(F ) whose H(AF ) orbit intersects Ω injects into
X/H(F ) ∩ p(Ω). (17.50)
But p(Ω) is compact and X/H(F ) is discrete and closed in X/H(AF ) by

Lemma 17.6.3, so we deduce that (17.50) is finite. t
u
17.7 Global relative orbital integrals
For use in the relative trace formula we need to have global analogues of the
local orbital integrals (17.31). Before this we must discuss what we mean by
a smooth function in this setting.
For this section we continue to assume that F is a global field. Fix a
model of X over OFS in the sense of §2.4 and denote it again by X by abuse
of notation. Here S is a sufficiently large set of places of F including all
infinite places. Then for all v 6∈ S of F the characteristic function 1X(OFv ) is
an element of Cc∞ (X(Fv )). We define
Cc∞ (X(A∞ 0 ∞
F )) = ⊗v-∞ Cc (X(Fv ))
where the restricted direct product is taken with respect to the functions
1X(OFv ) . It turns out that Cc∞ (X(A∞ F )), defined in this manner, is equal to
the C-vector space of smooth compactly supported functions on X(A∞ F ) (see
Exercise (17.14)).
If F is a global function field we let Cc∞ (X(F∞ )) be the space of locally
constant compactly supported functions on X(F∞ ), and if F is a number
field we let Cc∞ (X(F∞ )) be the usual space of compactly supported smooth
functions on X(F∞ ), viewed as a real manifold. We then set
Cc∞ (X(AF )) := Cc∞ (X(F∞ )) ⊗ Cc∞ (X(A∞

F )).
Assume that
χ : H(AF ) −→ C×
is a quasi-character trivial on H(F ). For f ∈ Cc∞ (X(A∞ F )), we then consider

the global relative orbital integral
Z
χ dr h
ROγ (f ) := ROγ (f ) = f (γh)χ(h) . (17.51)
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) d r hγ
Definition 17.13. A relatively semisimple element γ ∈ X(F ) is χ-relevant

if χ is trivial on Hγ (AF ).
Proposition 17.7.1 If γ ∈ X(AF ) is relevant relatively semisimple and rel-
atively unimodular then the integral defining ROγ (f ) is absolutely convergent.
Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 17.4.1 it suffices to show that the map
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) −→ X(AF )
is proper. This is the content of Theorem 17.6.1. t

u
In practice one needs more than this result. More precisely, one needs
conditions under which the integral
Z X
f (γh)χ(h)dr h (17.52)
H(F )\H(AF ) γ
converges. This is a very delicate question in general and we will only address
it in special cases. We first make the assumption that
H ◦ := Hu × Hr (17.53)
where Hu is unipotent and Hr has reductive neutral component. This assump-

tion is necessary in order to obtain a convergent formula (Exercise 17.16).
We also restrict to relatively unimodular elements so that our orbital inte-
grals are well-defined, and to elements that whose Hr -orbit is closed, because
otherwise even the contribution of a single orbital integral can diverge (see
[Art05, p. 21]).
Let CX be the stabilizer of X under Hr , and let
A := ACX (17.54)
where ACX is defined as in (2.11). Clearly if A is nontrivial then (17.52) is

not absolutely convergent. Therefore we consider instead
Z X
f (γh)χ(h)dr h (17.55)
AH(F )\H(AF ) γ
where f ∈ Cc∞ (X(AF )). There is an obvious obstruction for the contribution
of a given γ to converge. Letting Hγ denote the stabilizer of γ in H, it is
possible that AHγ◦ is not contained in A, which implies that the contribution
of the class of (17.55) is not absolutely convergent by the unfolding argument

in the proof of Theorem 17.7.2 below. We exclude this possibility using the
notion of an elliptic element.
Definition 17.14. A γ ∈ X(F ) is relatively elliptic if AHγ ≤ A.
If γ ∈ X(F ) is relatively elliptic the measure
τ (Hγ ) := measdr hγ (Hγ (F )A\Hγ (AF )) (17.56)
is finite by Theorem 2.6.2. Here dr hγ is a right Haar measure on Hγ (F )A\Hγ (AF )

(which, traditionally, is not encoded into the notation).
Finally, in the function field case, we need to assume that our classes are
gcf in the sense of Definition 17.12 above. Upon imposing these restrictions,
the corresponding piece of (17.55) does indeed converge absolutely:
Theorem 17.7.2 Assume (17.53) and that χ is trivial on A. The expression
Z X
|f (γh)χ(h)|dh (17.57)
AH(F )\H(AF )
is convergent. Here the sum is over γ ∈ X(F ) that are gcf, relatively uni-
modular and relatively elliptic, and such that the Hr -orbit of γ is closed.
Moreover
Z X X0
f (γh)χ(h)dh = τ (Hγ ) ROγ (f ) (17.58)
AH(F )\H(AF ) [γ]∈Γ (F )
where the sum over γ on the left is as before and the prime indicates the sum
on the right is over all classes that are relevant, gcf, relatively unimodular
and elliptic and such that the Hr -orbit of γ is closed.
Several remarks are in order. First, the assumption that the Hr -orbit of
γ is closed implies that γ is relatively semisimple with respect to H (see
Lemma 17.1.9). We will use this fact without further mention below. The
assumption that γ is relatively unimodular is equivalent to the assertion that
Hγ is unimodular, which is implied by our assumption that the Hr -orbit of
γ is closed if H ◦ = Hr by Theorem 17.1.4. In the definition of ROγ (f ) we
dh
use the measure dh γ
on
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) = (A\Hγ (AF ))\(A\H(AF ))
where dhγ is a Haar measure on A\Hγ (AF ). We use the same measure dhγ in
the definition of τ (Hγ ). Finally, the assumption that γ is gcf is automatically
satisfied if Hγ is connected or F is a number field (Theorem 17.3.4).
We now handle the convergence claim in Theorem 17.7.2:
Proposition 17.7.3 The expression (17.57) is convergent.
Proof. We first reduce to the case H = H ◦ . One has

Z X
|f (γh)χ(h)|dh
AH(F )\H(AF )
Z Z !
X dh
= |f (γh◦ h)χ(h◦ h)|dh◦
H(F )H ◦ (AF )\H(AF ) AH ◦ (F )\H ◦ (AF ) dh◦
where dh◦ and dh are appropriately normalized Haar measures on H ◦ (AF )

and H(AF ). The set H ◦ (AF )\H(AF ) is compact [Con12a, Proposition 3.2.1],
so to prove that (17.57) is convergent we can and do assume H ◦ = H.
A relatively semisimple γ ∈ X(F ) has closed Hr -orbit if and only if any
element of its geometric class has closed Hr -orbit. Moreover, by Exercise
17.17, a relatively semisimple γ ∈ X(F ) is gcf (resp. relatively unimodular,
relatively elliptic) if and only if any element of its geometric class is gcf
(resp. relatively unimodular, relatively elliptic). Thus we can talk about a
geometric class having closed Hr -orbit, etc. With this in mind one has
Z X
|f (γh)χ(h)|dh
AH(F )\H(AF )
XZ X (17.59)
= |f (γh)χ(h)|dh.
[γ0 ] AH(F )\H(AF ) γ∈[γ ]
0
Here the outer sum is over elements of Γgeo,ss (F ) with closed Hr -orbit that are
gcf, relatively unimodular and relatively elliptic. Unfolding the inner integral
for a fixed geometric class [γ0 ] we obtain
Z X
|f (γh)χ(h)|dh
AH(F )\H(AF ) γ∈[γ ]
0
XZ
= |f (γh)χ(h)|dh
[γ] AHγ (F )\H(AF )
where the second sum is over the relative classes [γ] in the geometric class
[γ0 ]. This is equal to
Z
X dh
measdhγ (AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF )) |f (γh)χ(h)| (17.60)
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) dhγ
[γ]
where for each relatively unimodular γ the measure dhγ is a Haar measure
on A\Hγ (AF ). Here we are using the fact that γ is relatively unimodular to
conclude that dhγ is a Haar measure, not merely a right Haar measure. By
Theorem 2.6.2 the measure
τ (Hγ ) = measdhγ (AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF ))

is finite for all γ in (17.60) since all such γ are relatively elliptic. The sum
over [γ] in (17.60) is finite by Theorem 17.6.10. Thus by Proposition 17.7.1
we deduce that (17.60) is finite.
It therefore suffices to show that there are only finitely many relatively
semisimple geometric classes [γ0 ] that can contribute a nonzero summand to
(17.59). Let us return to (17.59). It is equal to
XZ X
|f (γhr hu )χ(hr hu )|dhr dhu
[γ0 ] AHr (F )\Hr (AF )×[Hu ] γ∈[γ ]
0
XZ X
= |fe(γhr )χ(hr )|dhr
[γ0 ] AHr (F )\Hr (AF ) γ∈[γ ]
0
where fe(x) := F |f (xhu )χ(hu )|dhu ∈ Cc∞ (X(AF )) with F is a compact

R
fundamental domain for Hu (F ) acting on Hu (AF ) (see Theorem 2.6.2). Here

the sums over [γ0 ] and γ are as in (17.59). We write this as
XXZ
|fe(γ 0 hr )χ(hr )|dhr (17.61)
[γ0 ] [γ 0 ] AHrγ 0 (F )\Hr (AF )
where the inner sum is over Hr (F )-orbits (not H(F )-orbits as above) in
[γ0 ] consisting of elements that are relatively unimodular, elliptic and gcf.
It follows from Lemma 17.6.11 that there are only finitely many closed Hr -
orbits in X(F ) that can contribute a nonzero summand to (17.61). This
implies that there are in fact only finitely many [γ0 ] that can contribute a
nonzero summand to (17.61), and hence to (17.59). t
u
Proof of Theorem 17.7.2: The convergence assertion of the theorem is the

content of Proposition 17.7.3. We now prove the identity. All of the manip-
ulations with integrals occurring in this proof are justified by Proposition
17.7.3.
Consider
Z X
f (γh)χ(h)dh (17.62)
AH(F )\H(AF )
where the sum is over γ with closed Hr -orbit that are relatively semisimple,
elliptic, unimodular and gcf. We unfold the integral to obtain
XZ
f (γh)χ(h)dh
[γ] AHγ (F )\H(AF )
XZ
= χ(h0 )dγ h0 ROγ (f )
[γ] AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF )
0
X
= τ (Hγ ) ROγ (f )
[γ]
where the first sum over γ is over H(F )-orbits in X(F ) with closed Hr -
orbit that are gcf and relatively elliptic and unimodular. The quotient
AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF ) is of finite volume by Theorem 2.6.2, and the integral over
it in the second expression above is nonzero if and only if γ is relevant. As
in the statement of the theorem, the prime on the sum in third expression
indicates that the sum is over relevant relatively elliptic unimodular classes
in X(F ) with closed Hr -orbit. 2
Exercises
17.1. Let H × X → X be an action of an affine algebraic group on an affine

scheme X over a field k. Prove that Hγ ≤ G is a closed subgroup scheme and
deduce that it is again an affine algebraic group.
17.2. Give an example of a reductive group H acting on an affine scheme

X over a field k and a γ ∈ X(k) such that O(γ) is not closed but Hγ is
reductive.
17.3. Let σ : H → H be an automorphism of the smooth algebraic group

H over a field k. Prove that H σ , defined as in (17.21), is a closed algebraic
subgroup of H.
17.4. Give examples to show that the map Γss (k) −→ H(k)\X(k) need not
be surjective and that the map
H(k)\X(k) −→ Γgeo,ss (k)
need not be injective.
17.5. Give an example to show that if H is a reductive group with simply

connected derived group and σ : H → H is a semisimple automorphism then
H σ need not be connected.
17.6. Let k be an algebraically closed field. Assume that γ ∈ GLn (k) has
finite order and that either k is of characteristic zero or that the order of
γ is coprime to the characteristic of k. Prove that γ is semisimple. Give a
counterexample to show that if the characteristic of k is positive and divides
the order of γ ∈ GLn (k) then γ need not be semisimple.
17.7. Let k be a field with algebraic closure k. Prove that two elements of
GLn (k) are GLn (k)-conjugate if and only if they are GLn (k)-conjugate.
17.8. Let k be a field with separable closure k sep . Prove that a conjugacy
class in GLn (k sep ) that is fixed under Gal(k sep /k) contains an element in
GLn (k).
17.9. Let G be a reductive group over a field k and let H ≤ G × G be the

diagonal copy of G. Construct a bijection between G(k)-conjugacy classes in
G(k) and
H(k)\G(k)/H(k).
17.10. Prove that (17.18) is an isomorphism.
17.11. Prove Lemma 17.2.9.
17.12. Using Proposition 17.1.7 prove Lemma 17.3.1.
17.13. Prove that the groups Ih appearing in (17.30) are all inner forms of
I.
17.14. Prove that the two definitions of Cc∞ (X(A∞

F )) given in §17.7 produce
the same space of functions.
17.15. Prove that if G is a commutative smooth algebraic group over a field

k and gσ , gσ0 are 1-cocycles, then
σ 7→ gσ gσ0
is a 1-cocycle. Deduce that this gives a law of composition on H 1 (k, G) that

endows it with the structure of an abelian group with the neutral element as
the identity element.
17.16. Give an example to show that (17.55) is not absolutely convergent if

H does not satisfy the assumption of (17.53).
17.17. Let F be a global field and let H be a smooth algebraic group over
F acting in an affine scheme X of finite type over F on the right. Prove that
γ ∈ X(F ) is relatively semisimple if and only if any element in O(γ) ∩ H(F )
is relatively semisimple. Assuming γ ∈ X(F ) is relatively semisimple, prove
moreover that γ satisfies the following conditions if and only if any element
of the geometric class of γ satisfies the following conditions:
(a) γ is relatively unimodular.
(b) γ is relatively elliptic.
(c) γ is gcf.
Chapter 18
Simple Trace Formulae
It is rare that you can take a

proof in the geometric setting
and convert it to the genuine
number theoretic setting. That is
what has transpired through
Ngô’s achievement on the
fundamental lemma, which has
provided a bridge and now
everybody is using this bridge.
P. Sarnak
Abstract In this chapter we prove a simple relative trace formula and

overview its various specializations. This recovers (simple versions of) es-
sentially all trace formulae that have appeared in the literature. Due to its
continuing importance in analytic number theory we work out the case of the
Petersson-Bruggeman-Kuznetsov trace formula is some detail.
18.1 A brief history of trace formulae
The trace formula is a powerful tool for understanding automorphic repre-

sentations on reductive groups. It is an expression for the integral operator
R(f ) introduced in §16.1 on the space of cusp forms in L2 ([G]) in terms of
orbital integrals. Relative trace formulae, which include the trace formula as
a special case, are formulae that describe period integrals of automorphic
forms in terms of the relative orbital integrals of Chapter 17.
The original trace formula was first introduced by Selberg in his seminal
1956 paper [Sel56]. He worked with an algebraic group G over the real num-
bers and discrete subgroup Γ ≤ G(R). Selberg gave a general formula in the
special case where Γ \G(R) is compact. Secondly he treated in detail certain
special noncompact quotient cases such as SL2 (Z)\SL2 (R) using the theory
363
364 18 Simple Trace Formulae
of Eisenstein series. His greatest achievement was proving the existence of

cusp forms on SL2 (R) invariant under SO2 (R) on the right. In fact he proved
an asymptotic for the number of such forms as a function of their Laplacian
eigenvalue. Results of this type are known as Weyl laws since the correspond-
ing asymptotics were proven by Weyl for general compact manifolds [Wey12].
This is discussed in §19.2 in next chapter.
The primary difference between the compact and noncompact case is the
necessity of understanding the analytic continuation of Eisenstein series and
their contribution to the trace formula. As explained in §10.4, Eisenstein
series allow one to describe the entire spectrum of L2 ([G]) in terms of cuspidal
representations on Levi subgroups of G. It is a bit of an understatement to
call this a generalization of Selberg’s work, because the low rank case treated
by Selberg offered very little insight into the general picture. The general
theory was established by Langlands in the 1960’s in groundbreaking work.
Incidentally, this work on Eisenstein series led Langlands to the formulation
of his functoriality conjecture. All of this earned him an Abel prize in 2018.
Giving a decomposition of L2 ([G]) in terms of Eisenstein series is a nec-
essary first step to generalizing Selberg’s trace formula, but it is not enough
by itself. Over a lifetime of work Arthur used the theory of Eisenstein series
as the basis for a completely general trace formula for an arbitrary reductive
group. The technical difficulties he overcame were so immense that the trace
formula is often called the Arthur-Selberg trace formula in honor of his
contributions.
Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). The basic idea behind the proof of the trace
formula is to integrate the automorphic kernel function Kf (g, h) of (16.4)
along the diagonal copy of [G] and evaluate the expression in two different
manners. Later, in [Jac86] (see also [Jac05a]), Jacquet realized that the trace
formula could be generalized in an extremely useful manner. The idea behind
Jacquet’s relative trace formula is to replace the diagonal integration in
the usual trace formula by integration along a pair of subgroups H1 × H2 ≤
G × G.
Our goal in this chapter is to give a simple version of the relative trace
formula. This is a matter of collecting our preparatory work in Chapter 16
and Chapter 17. In the proof we impose assumptions on the test function
f to ensure that various analytic difficulties disappear. This is the reason
we call the trace formula simple. The disadvantage is that in most cases
these assumptions restrict the class of automorphic representations one can
treat. In the context of the usual trace formula, Arthur’s work mentioned
above removes these assumptions. In the relative setting this is the subject
of ongoing work. See [Lap06, Zyd15, Zyd19].
18.2 A general simple relative trace formula 365
18.2 A general simple relative trace formula
Let F be a global field, let G be a reductive group over F , and let
H ≤G×G
be a subgroup. We always assume that H ◦ is the direct product of a reductive

and a unipotent group. This implies in particular that H(AF ) is unimodular.
In the setting of §17.1 we let X = G equipped with the right action of H
given on points in an F -algebra R by
G(R) × H(R) −→ G(R)

(18.1)
(g, (h` , hr )) −→ h−1
` ghr .
Let
AG,H : = AH ∩ (AG × AG )
(18.2)
A : = AH ∩ ∆(AG )
where
∆ : AG −→ AG × AG
is the diagonal embedding. Thus A ≤ AG,H . Let CG ≤ H be the stabilizer
(in H) of G. It is clear that A ≤ ACG . We assume throughout this section
that in fact A = ACG .
Let
χ : AG,H \H(AF ) −→ C×
be a quasi-character trivial on H(F ) and let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). As in
(16.14) we define the relative trace of π(f ) with respect to H and χ to be
Z
rtr π(f ) := rtrH,χ π(f ) = Kπ(f ) (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )d(h` , hr ).
AG,H H(F )\H(AF )
(18.3)
This depends on a choice of Haar measure d(h` , hr ) on AG,H \H(AF ).

We now define relative orbital integrals in this context. For every γ ∈ G(F )
that is relevant (see Definition 17.13) relatively semisimple (that is, has closed
H-orbit) and relatively unimodular (so Hγ (AF ) is unimodular) we can define
an orbital integral
Z
d(h` , hr )
ROγ (f ) := ROγ (f ) := A \H(A ) f (h−1
χ
r γh` )χ(h) . (18.4)
G,H F
A\H (A )
dhγ
γ F
Note that this is slightly different from the definition in (17.51). The root of
this is that it is more convenient for the spectral side of the trace formula to
work with functions on AG \G(AF ) instead of G(AF ). In order for Theorem
18.2.2 below to be valid it is important that we use the same Haar measure
d(h` , hr ) on AG,H \H(AF ) used in the definition of the relative trace, and dhγ
is a Haar measure on AG,H \Hγ (AF ). Thus d(hdh` ,h γ
r)
is a left AG,H \H(AF )-
invariant Radon measure on
(A\Hγ (AF ))\(AG,H \H(AF )).
It depends on the choice of Haar measure dhγ on A\Hγ (AF ). We now check
that this is well-defined by slightly modifying the proof of Proposition 17.7.1:
Proposition 18.2.1 If γ is relatively unimodular and semisimple then
Z
dh
f (h−1

r γh` )χ(h)
< ∞.
AG,H \H(AF )
A\H (A )
dhγ
γ F
Proof. Let
H(AF )0 = H(AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 × G(AF )1

Hγ (AF )0 = Hγ (AF ) ∩ G(AF )1 × G(AF )1 .
We have a commutative diagram

∼
Hγ (AF )\H(AF ) ←−−−− Hγ (AF )0 \H(AF )0 −−−−→ (A\Hγ (AF ))\(AG,H \H(AF ))
  

a(γ,·)y

a(γ,·)y
a(γ,·)
y
∼
G(AF ) ←−−−− G(AF )1 −−−−→ AG \G(AF )
where
a(γ, (h` , hr )) = h−1
` γhr
is the orbit map. The horizontal arrows from left to right are homeomor-
phisms, and the horizontal arrows from right to left are injections onto closed
subsets. The leftmost vertical arrow is proper by Theorem 17.6.1, and it fol-
lows that the middle, and hence right, vertical arrow is proper. As in the
proof of Theorem 17.4.1 and Proposition 17.7.1 this suffices to establish the
proposition. t
u
Since we have assumed A = ACG the measure
τ (Hγ ) := measdhγ (Hγ (F )A\Hγ (AF )) (18.5)
of (17.56) is finite if γ is relatively elliptic in the sense of Definition 17.14. Here

it is important that we take dhγ to be the same Haar measure on A\Hγ (AF )
that we used in the definition of the relative orbital integral (18.4) in order
for Theorem 18.2.2 below to be valid.
The following is the simple relative trace formula:
Theorem 18.2.2 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) be a function such that R(f ) has
cuspidal image and such that if the H(AF )-orbit of γ intersects the support of
f then the γ is gcf, relatively elliptic, relatively unimodular, and the Hr -orbit
of γ is closed. Then
X 0
X
rtr π(f ) = τ (Hγ )ROγ (f )
π [γ]∈Γ (F )
where the sum on the left is over (H, χ)-distinguished cuspidal automorphic
representations π and the sum on the right is over relevant relative classes
[γ] that are gcf, relatively unimodular, relatively elliptic, and such that the
Hr -orbit of γ is closed. Both sums are absolutely convergent.
We recall that if the Hr -orbit of γ is closed, then γ is relatively semisimple
by Lemma 17.1.9. Following Langlands, the left hand side of the trace for-
mula is called the spectral side and the right hand side of the trace formula
is called the geometric side. We call the trace formula of Theorem 18.2.2
general because its geometric set-up includes all trace formulae studied in
the literature as special cases. Indeed the formula does not hold for a general
connected algebraic subgroup H ≤ G × G without serious modification, so
in some sense it is as general as possible. It is simple because we have im-
posed assumptions on f to eliminate analytic difficulties on the spectral and
geometric sides.
In the proof of Theorem 18.2.2 we require the following analogue of Lemma
17.6.11:
Lemma 18.2.3 Assume that H is reductive and let Ω ⊂ AG \G(AF ) be a
compact set. The set of relatively semisimple geometric classes in G(F ) whose
H(AF )-orbit intersects Ω is finite.
Proof. As usual denote by X ∗ (G) := Hom(G, Gm ) the (algebraic) character

group of G and similarly for H. For each χ ∈ X ∗ (G) we obtain a character
χ ◦ a(1, ·) : H −→ Gm
given on points by (h` , hr ) 7→ χ(h−1

` hr ). We thus have a map
a(1, ·)∗ : X ∗ (G) −→ X ∗ (H)

χ 7−→ χ ◦ a(1, ·)
Let Y ≤ X ∗ (G) be the kernel of a(1, ·)∗ . Let

\
G(AF )0 := ker(χ ◦ | · | : G(AF ) → R>0 )
χ∈Y
Then G(F ) is contained in G(AF )0 and the action (18.1) of H(AF ) on G(AF )
preserves G(AF )0 . Moreover the inclusion G(AF )0 → G(AF ) induces a home-
omorphism
G(AF )0 /H(AF )−→A

˜ G \G(AF )/H(AF ). (18.6)
(see Exercise 18.1). Thus it suffices to show that given a compact subset Ω ⊂
G(AF )0 /H(AF ) there are only finitely many relatively semisimple geometric
classes in G(F ) whose image in G(AF )0 /H(AF ) intersects Ω. Let
p : G(AF )0 /H(AF ) → G/H(AF )
denote the restriction of the natural map G(AF )/H(AF ) → G/H(AF ) to the
GIT quotient. In view of Proposition 17.1.5 it suffices to observe that p(Ω)
is compact and G/H(F ) is discrete and closed by Lemma 17.6.3, hence
p(Ω) ∩ G/H(F )
is finite. t
u
Proof of Theorem 18.2.2: Let

X
Kf (g, h) = f (g −1 γh).
γ∈G(F )
Since we have assumed that R(f ) has cuspidal image one has
Kf (g, h) = Kf,cusp (g, h)
in the notation of (16.5). By Theorem 16.2.5 we have

Z X
Kf (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )d(h` , hr ) = rtr π(f ).
At this point if AG,H = A (which, by assumption, is ACG ) then we can invoke

Theorem 17.7.2 to finish the proof. In general we can still follow the argument
of the proof of Theorem 17.7.2. We now give the details. Unfolding the sum
above we have that it is equal to
XZ Z
d(h` , hr )
χ((h` , hr ))dhγ A \H(A ) f (h` , hr )χ((h` , hr ))
AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF ) G,H F dhγ
[γ] A\H (A ) γ F
where the sum on [γ] is over classes in Γ (F ) that are gcf, relatively uni-
modular, relatively elliptic, and such that the Hr -orbit of γ is closed. The
integral Z
χ((h` , hr ))dhγ
AHγ (F )\Hγ (AF )
is absolutely convergent for γ in the sum because γ is relatively elliptic, and

it is zero unless γ is relevant. Thus the sum above is equal to
0 Z
X d(h` , hr )
τ (Hγ ) f (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr ) (18.7)
AG,H \H(AF )
dhγ
[γ]∈Γ (F ) A\Hγ (AF )
0
X
= τ (Hγ ) ROγ (f )
[γ]∈Γ (F )
where the sum is over classes [γ] as in the statement of the theorem.
To justify the manipulations above we must check that
Z
X d(h` , hr )
τ (Hγ ) A \H(A ) |f (h` , hr )χ(h` , hr )| (18.8)
G,H F dhγ
[γ] A\H (A ) γ F
is finite, where the sum is over classes [γ] that are gcf, relatively unimod-
ular, relatively elliptic, and such that the Hr -orbit of γ is closed. The in-
tegral in (18.8) converges absolutely by Proposition 18.2.1. It therefore suf-
fices to prove that only finitely many classes [γ] can contribute a nonzero
summand to (18.8). Consider the contribution of a particular gcf, rela-
tively semisimple geometric class [γ0 ]. By Theorem 17.6.10 for any com-
pact set Ω ⊂ Hγ0 \H(AF )/AG,H there are only finitely many H(F )-orbits
xH(F ) ⊂ I\H(F ) such that xH(AF ) intersects Hγ \H(AF )/AG,H . This im-
plies that there are only finitely many relative classes in the geometric class
[γ0 ] that can contribute to the sum.
Lastly we show that there are only finitely many geometric classes that can
contribute to the sum. By the same argument used in the proof of Theorem
17.7.2 we are reduced to showing that for any compact set Ω ⊂ AG \G(AF )
there are only finitely many geometric classes in G with closed Hr -orbit whose
Hr (AF )-orbit intersects Ω. This is the content of Lemma 18.2.3. 2
We now make some comments on the assumptions on f in Theorem 18.2.2.
For more information on the assumption on f involving the geometric side
of the trace formula we refer to exercises 18.2, 18.3 and 18.4.
In practice in order to ensure that f has cuspidal image one assumes
f = fv f v with fv ∈ Cc∞ (G(Fv )) and f v ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AvF )) for some finite
place v where fv is supercuspidal. This suffices to ensure R(f ) has cuspidal
image by Lemma 16.4.1. Unfortunately, assuming that fv is supercuspidal
limits the set of π that can be studied using the simple relative trace formula:
Lemma 18.2.4 Let v be a finite place of F . Assume that f ∈ Cc∞ (G(Fv ))
is supercuspidal (not just F -supercuspidal). If πv is an admissible irreducible
representation of G(Fv ) and πv (f ) 6= 0 then πv is supercuspidal.
Proof. To ease notation we drop the subscript v, writing F := Fv , etc. This

was proven under the assumption that ZG (F ) is compact in Exercise 16.4. We
reduce to this case. This has the advantage of illustrating some techniques
useful for considering restrictions of representations to derived subgroups.
The restriction of π to ZG (F )Gder (F ) decomposes as a finite direct sum of
irreducible representations and hence the same is true of the restriction to
Gder (F ) since ZG (F ) acts via scalars on π:
π|Gder (F ) = ⊕ni=1 πi⊕m
Here πi ∼ = πj if and only if i = j and, as written, the multiplicity of each

πi is independent of i. The group G(F ) acts via conjugation on the set of
isomorphism classes of the πi , and if we let G(F )π1 ≤ G(F ) be the subgroup
fixing the isomorphism class of π1 the group G(F )/G(F )π1 permutes the iso-
morphism classes of the πi ’s transitively. Finally, the πi are admissible. For
all of this see [GK82, §2]. Since supercuspidal representations are representa-
tions whose matrix coefficients are square-integrable modulo the center π is
supercuspidal if and only if πi is supercuspidal for all i, which is equivalent
to πi being supercuspidal for a single i since G(F )/G(F )π1 acts transitively
on the set of representations.
Since π(f ) is nonzero there is a ϕ in the space of π such that
Z
f (g)π(g)ϕ 6= 0
G(F )
which implies that there exists an a ∈ G(F )/Gder (F ) such that

Z
f (ga)π(ga)ϕ 6= 0.
Gder (F )
Let fa (g) := f (ga). For some i the operator πi (fa ) is nonzero. Since f is
supercuspidal so is fa (as a function on Gder (F )) so we deduce that πi is
supercuspidal by Exercise 16.4. As already mentioned, this implies that π is
supercuspidal. t
u
Thus if we assume that fv is supercuspidal we can only study cuspidal

automorphic representations π such that πv is supercuspidal. When F = Q
and G is split and adjoint Lindenstrass and Venkatesh [LV07] found another
method to construct functions f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) that have cuspidal im-
age. This method is interesting for at least two reasons. First it requires one
to work with test functions that are not factorable. Second, provided that the
cuspidal automorphic representation π is spherical at infinity i.e. π∞ admits
a vector fixed under a maximal compact subgroup K∞ ≤ G(R) and is not
nearly equivalent to a globally induced representation one can find many test
functions f with cuspidal image such that π(f ) 6= 0. The restriction to repre-
sentations that are spherical at infinity (and the restriction to split adjoint G
over Q) does not seem to be essential, but significant work would be required
18.3 Products of subgroups 371
to remove it. This idea was applied again in [GH15], and it is likely that it
could be useful in much greater generality.
18.3 Products of subgroups
Assume that H = H1 × H2 ≤ G × G, where both H1 and H2 are subgroups of

G, and for each i the neutral component Hi◦ is either unipotent or reductive.
Assume moreover that χ = χ1 ⊗ χ2 , where χi is a character of Hi (AF ). In
this case the formula in Theorem 18.2.2 simplifies somewhat. Let K∞ be a
maximal compact subgroup of G(F∞ ).
Corollary 18.3.1 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) be a K∞ -finite function. As-
sume that R(f ) has cuspidal image and that if the H(AF )-orbit of γ inter-
sects the support of f then γ is gcf, relatively elliptic, and the Hr -orbit of γ
is closed. Then
X X 0
X
Pχ1 (π(f )ϕ)Pχ2 (ϕ) = τ (Hγ )ROγ (f )
π ϕ∈B(π) [γ]∈H2 (F )\G(F )/H1 (F )
where B(π) an orthonomal basis of L2cusp (π) consisting of K∞ -finite (and

hence smooth) vectors. Here the sum on the right is over relevant relative
classes [γ] that are gcf, relatively elliptic, and such that the Hr -orbit of γ is
closed.
Here we are using the notation (14.3) for the period integrals occurring
in the corollary. It is important to point out that the only π that contribute
a nonzero summand to the identity in Corollary 18.3.1 are π that are both
(H1 , χ1 ) and (H2 , χ2 )-distinguished. Moreover the assumption on relative
unimodularity in Theorem 18.2.2 can be (and is) dropped in the case at
hand. This sort of relative trace formula first appeared in work of Jacquet
[Jac86], and has been applied many times in the intervening years.
Proof. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AG \G(AF ). If f is
K∞ -finite, then π(f ) has finite image (see Exercise 16.1), so in the expansion
X
Kπ(f ) (x, y) = π(f )ϕ(x)ϕ(y) (18.9)
ϕ∈B(π)
of (16.9) only finitely many ϕ can contribute a nonzero summand. Thus

X
rtr π(f ) = Pχ1 (π(f )ϕ)Pχ2 (ϕ).
ϕ∈B(π)
To complete the proof we will show that a relatively semisimple element of

G(F ) is automatically relatively unimodular. If H1◦ and H2◦ are both reductive
then a relatively semisimple element has stabilizer with reductive neutral

component by Theorem 17.1.4. By Corollary 3.5.2 such a γ is unimodular.
Now assume that H1◦ is unipotent. For F -algebras R one has
Hγ (R) = {(h, γ −1 hγ) ∈ H1 (F ) × H2 (F ) : h ∈ γH2 γ −1 (R)}
The neutral component of this group is isomorphic to a subgroup of H1◦ .

Hence it is unipotent, which implies that Hγ (F ) is unimodular (see Exercise
(18.6)). t
u
18.4 The simple trace formula
The famous simple trace formula of Deligne and Kazhdan [DKV84] (see also
[Rog83, BDKV84]) is a special case of the simple relative trace formula of
Theorem 18.2.2. We explain this in the current section.
For γ ∈ G(F ) let
Cγ (R) := {g ∈ G(R) : gγg −1 = γ} (18.10)
be the centralizer of γ and let

Z
dg
Oγ (f ) = f (g −1 γg) (18.11)
Cγ (AF )\G(AF ) dgγ
whenever this integral is well-defined. This is the usual orbital integral of

f along the conjugacy class of γ. In this context the assertion that γ is gcf is
equivalent to the assertion that H 1 (Fv , Cγ /(Cγ )◦ ) is finite for all places v of
F . As usual, an element γ ∈ G(F ) is elliptic if AG = ACγ . This is equivalent
◦
to the assertion that Cγ /ZG is anisotropic.
The following simple trace formula is a corollary of Theorem 18.2.2:
Corollary 18.4.1 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). Assume that R(f ) has cuspidal
image and that any element of G(F ) that is G(AF )-conjugate to the support
of f is gcf, elliptic and semisimple. Then
X X
m(π)tr π(f ) = τ (Cγ )Oγ (f ). (18.12)
π γ
where the sum on the left is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic
representations of AG \G(AF ), m(π) is the multiplicity of π in the cuspidal
spectrum of L2 ([G]) and the sum on the right is over gcf, elliptic, semisimple
conjugacy classes in G(F ).
As in the statement of Theorem 18.2.2, some care must be taken with
measures in order for the identity above to be correct. We choose a Haar
measure dg 0 on AG \G(AF ) and for each semisimple γ a Haar measure dgγ0
18.5 The simple twisted trace formula 373
on AG \Cγ (AF ). Then we use dg 0 to define the operator π(f ) (and hence its
trace) and use dgγ0 to define τ (Cγ ). Finally we normalize the Radon measure
dg dg 0
dgγ on Cγ (AF )/G(AF ) used to define Oγ (f ) so that it corresponds to dgγ0
under the natural isomorphism
Cγ (AF )\G(AF )−→(A

˜ G \Cγ (AF ))\(AG \G(AF )). (18.13)
Proof. In Theorem 18.2.2 we take χ to be trivial and take H to be the

diagonal copy of G inside G × G. In this case A = AG,H = AG and Γ (F ) is
just the set of conjugacy classes in G(F ). Thus ROγ (f ) = Oγ (f ). All classes
are trivially relevant, and all semisimple classes are relatively unimodular by
Theorem 17.1.4 and Lemma 3.5.4. Moreover
Z
rtr π(f ) := Kπ(f ) (x, x)dx = m(π)tr π(f )
[G]
(see (16.8)). t
u
18.5 The simple twisted trace formula
Let θ be an automorphism of a connected reductive group G over number

field F . One then has a right action of G on itself by θ-conjugation, given
on points in an F -algebra R by
G(R) × G(R) −→ G(R)

(18.14)
(x, g) 7−→ g −1 xθ(g).
When θ is the identity this is simply conjugation. Following the lead of §18.4
we let
Cγθ (R) := {g ∈ G(R) : g −θ γg = γ}. (18.15)
be the θ-centralizer of γ. The intersection of AG and Cγθ (AF ) is AG ∩ AθG . We

define the twisted orbital integral
Z
dg
TOγ (f ) := f (g −1 γθ(g)) (18.16)
AG ∩AτG Cγθ (AF )\AG \G(AF ) dgγ
. We say that γ is θ-gcf if H 1 (Fv , Cγθ /Cγθ )◦ ) is finite for all places v of F .
Similarly we say γ is θ-semisimple if Cγθ has reductive neutral component
and θ-elliptic if Cγθ is elliptic, which is to say that ACγθ ≤ AG .
We now define the spectral counterpart of a twisted orbital integral. Let
Iθ : L2 ([G]) −→ L2 ([G])
(18.17)
ϕ 7−→ (g 7→ ϕ(θ−1 (g)).
Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of AG \G(AF ). If π is isomor-

phic to π θ (where π θ (g) := π(θ(g))) then the π-isotypic subspace L2cusp (π) of
L2cusp ([G]) is stable under Iθ , and thus we can consider the trace
tr(π(f ) ◦ Iθ ) := tr π(f ) ◦ Iθ : L2cusp (π) → L2cusp (π) .

(18.18)
This is the twisted trace of π(f ) (with respect to θ). We observe that π(f )◦
Iθ is acting on the whose π-isotypic space, so if π occurs with multiplicity
greater than 1 this is incorporated into the trace. In contrast, we separated
the trace and the multiplicity in the statement of Corollary 18.4.1.
The following is a simple version of the twisted trace formula:
Corollary 18.5.1 Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )). Assume that R(f ) has cuspidal
image and that any element of G(F ) that is G(AF )-conjugate to the support
of f is θ-gcf, θ-elliptic and θ-semisimple. Then
X 0
X
tr(π(f ) ◦ Iθ ) = τ (Cγθ )TOγ (f ). (18.19)
π [γ]
where the sum over π is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic

representations of AG \G(AF ) such that π θ ∼
= π and the sum on the right is
over θ-conjugacy classes in G(F ) that are θ-gcf, θ-elliptic and θ-semisimple.
Proof. In Theorem 18.2.2 we take χ to be trivial and take H to be the twisted

diagonal copy of G in G times G; that is, for F -algebras R one has
H(R) = {(g, θ(g)) : g ∈ G(R)}
In this case AG = AG,H , A = AG ∩AθG and Γ (F ) is just the set of τ -conjugacy

classes in G(F ). Moreover ROγ (f ) = TOγ (f ). All classes are trivially rel-
evant, and all τ -semisimple classes are relatively unimodular by Theorem
17.1.4. Moreover Z
rtr π(f ) := Kπ(f ) (x, xθ )dx
[G]
This vanishes if π ∼ 6 π θ (see Exercise 14.2), and if π ∼

= = π θ it is equal to
tr(π(f ) ◦ Iθ ) (see the discussion around (16.8)). t
u
Historically the twisted trace formula was first introduced by Saito [Sai75]
and Shintani [Shi79]. For a completely general twisted trace formula we refer
to [LW13]. A relative version of the simple twisted trace formula (which is
another special case of Theorem 18.2.2) was introduced in [Hah09]. We discuss
the relationship between the trace formula and the twisted trace formula in
Chapter 19.
18.6 A variant 375
18.6 A variant
It has proven to be beneficial to work with a variant of the simple relative

trace formula of Theorem 18.2.2. In this section we discuss the variant in im-
pressionistic terms to aid the reader when it is encountered in the literature.
Lt X be a smooth affine scheme over the global field F equipped with an
action of the reductive F -group G. Since X is smooth the Schwartz space
S(X(AF )) is defined (see §17.7).
Let H ≤ G be a subgroup such that H ◦ is the direct product of a reductive
group and a unipotent group and let χ : H(AF ) → C× be a character trivial
on (AG ∩ AH )H(F ). For each x ∈ X(F ) with closed orbit under G the
stabilizer Gx has reductive neutral component by Theorem 17.1.4 and we
can consider the subgroup
Hx := Gx × H ≤ G × G (18.20)
The character χ extends to a character
Gx (AF ) × H(AF ) −→ C×
(g, h) 7−→ χ(h)
which we will continue to denote by χ. We are now in the setting of §18.2,

and we can form the relative trace
rtrHx ,χ π(f ).
for any f ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )).

Now let Φ ∈ Cc∞ (AG \X(AF )). We assume that
Z X
|Φ(xh)χ|(h)dh
AG ∩AH H(F )\H(AF ) x∈X(F )
converges. For conditions ensuring convergence see Theorem 17.7.2. Thus the
integral
Z X
Φ(xh)χ(h)dh (18.21)
is well-defined.
Assume that for each x ∈ X(F ) we can choose fx ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF )) such
that
Z
Φ(xy) = fx (g −1 y)dg (18.22)
Gx (AF )
for y ∈ G(AF ). This is not always possible, see Exercise 18.7. Then
Z X
Φ(xh)χ(h)dh
X Z X (18.23)
= fx (h−1
1 γh2 )χ(h2 )dh1 dh2 .
x∈X(F )/G(F ) AHx ,χ Hx (F )\Hx (AF ) γ∈G(F )
Thus (18.21) is a sum over x ∈ X(F )/G(F ) of geometric sides (or spectral
sides) of relative trace formula for the various Hx . Studying (18.21) amounts
to studying distinction of automorphic representations by (Hx , χ) as x varies.
In particular, if X is homogeneous, the Hx are all inner forms of eachother.
This method of packaging distinction problems together has proven crucial,
especially in work on the Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture (see §14.7). We point
out that even when it is not possible to choose fx as in (18.22) it is still
possible to expand the function
X
Φ(xg) ∈ C ∞ ([G])
x∈X(F )
spectrally. More or less it will give something like the right hand side of
(18.23), but the fx involved will not necessarily be compactly supported.
In some sense, this is the key point. Replacing G by X has the effect
of changing the function space S(X(AF )). As an example, let E/F be a
quadratic extension and let G = ResE/F GLn and let X be the space of
Hermitian matrices with respect to E/F . Thus X(F ) is the space of n × n
matrices x with coefficients in E such that θ(x) = xt , where θ is a generator
of Gal(E/F ). Then there is a natural right action
X(R) × G(R) −→ X(R)

(x, g) 7−→ g t xθ(g)
The stabilizer of any invertible element of X(F ) is a unitary group. Jacquet

took H to be the unipotent radical of a Borel subgroup of G and χ to be a
generic character and then studied (18.21) in order to prove Theorem 14.5.2
[Jac05b, Jac10] (see also [Ngô99b, Ngô99a]). The fact that X is a linear space,
and hence admits a Fourier transform, turns out to be crucial.
One can also ask what happens when X is no longer smooth. This is
the subject of important ongoing research. We refer to [BK00, BK02, GL19,
Get14, Ngô14, Sak12].
18.7 The Petersson-Bruggeman-Kuznetsov formula
Given two nonzero integers m and n and a positive integer c, the classical
Kloosterman sum is defined as
18.7 The Petersson-Bruggeman-Kuznetsov formula 377
X
K(m, n; c) := e2πi(am+an)/c ,
1≤a≤c
(a,c)=1
where aa ≡ 1 (mod c). Petersson [Pet32] expressed a certain sum of Fourier

coefficients of holomorphic weight k cusp forms in terms of the Bessel function
Jk−1 and Kloosterman sums. Historically this was the first relative trace for-
mula, although cosmetically Petersson’s proof appears different. It involved
constructing a Poincare series and computing its coefficients in two different
manners rather than integrating an automorphic kernel function. Brugge-
man [Bru78] and Kuznetsov [Kuz80] later showed how to incorporate Maass
forms into the formula. Traditionally, the formula is called the Kuznetsov
formula.
Using the formula Kuznetsov was able to prove estimates for the sum
∞ √
X K(m, n; c) 2π mn
φ
c=1
c c
for suitable φ ∈ C ∞ (R>0 ). We refer to [IK04, Chapter 16] for more details.
There are many other analytic number theory papers that use the formula,
for example [Iwa02, GS83]. It has also played a role in work on Langlands’
beyond endoscopy proposal [Her11, Her12, Her16, Sar, Ven04].
Following Jacquet, we will derive the Kuznetsov formula as a relative trace
formula (see [KL08, KL13] for a nice exposition for GL2 , and [Ye00] for a
slightly different take on the higher rank case). The beautiful fact about this
trace formula is that the general simple relative trace formula of Theorem
18.2.2 (together with a small additional argument for the spectral side) can
be used to derive it in complete generality, with no additional assumptions on
the test functions involved. We state this precisely in Theorem 18.9.2 below.
In this sense it is analytically the simplest trace formula. The Petersson-
Kuznetsov formula remains an important tool in analytic number theory and
has not been fully exploited in higher rank (see, e.g. [BB15] for recent results
for GL3 ). We have therefore structured our treatment of the formula with
applications to analytic number theory in mind.
We now set notation. Let N := Nr ≤ GLr be the unipotent radical of
the Borel B := Br of upper triangular matrices and let T := Tr ≤ B be the
maximal torus of diagonal matrices. For this trace formula we take
H := N × N ≤ GLr × GLr .
Thus we have a right action
GLr × N × N −→ GLr
given on points by (n1 , n2 ) · γ = n−1

1 γn2 . For a global or local field F we
denote the stabilizer of a γ ∈ GLr (F ) under this action by
Nγ := Hγ ≤ N × N.
Thus for F -algebras R one has
Nγ (R) := (n, γ −1 nγ) : n ∈ N (R) ∩ γN (R)γ −1 .

(18.24)
Lemma 18.7.1 Every element of GLr (F ) is relatively semisimple, relatively

unimodular, and relatively elliptic.
Proof. For every γ ∈ GLr (F ) the stabilizer Nγ is unipotent, hence unimodu-

lar by Exercise 18.6. Moreover the fact that Nγ is unipotent implies that ANγ
is trivial and we deduce that γ is relatively elliptic. Finally we conclude from
[Mil17, Theorem 17.64] that every element of GLr (F ) is relatively semisim-
ple. t
u
The partial determinants
deti : GLr −→ Ga
given on points by
deti ( A∗i ∗∗ ) = det(Ai )
are invariant under the action of N × N for 1 ≤ i ≤ r. Here Ai is an i × i
matrix.
For every representative w ∈ GLr (F ) of the Weyl group we define a mor-
phism (of schemes, not group schemes)
Υw : Grm −→ GLr (18.25)
by
 
cr /cr−1

 cr−1 /cr−2 

Υw (c1 , . . . , cr ) = 
 ..  w.

(18.26)
 . 
 c2 /c1 
c1
By the Bruhat decomposition [Mil17, Example 21.46] one has

a
GLr (F ) = N (F )T (F )wN (F )
w∈W (GLr ,T )(F )
and thus every element of N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F ) has a representative of the

form Υw (c) for some c ∈ (F × )r . The orbit of a given w ∈ W (GLr , T )(F )
under N × N is called a Bruhat cell. Let
18.8 Kloosterman integrals 379
 
1
w0 =  . . . 
 
be (the standard representative of) the long Weyl element. The orbit of w0
is the unique open Bruhat cell [Mil17, Theorem 21.73]. Since it is possible to
choose test functions supported in this cell at a given place, elements of the
open Bruhat cell play a key role.
The map Υw0 gives a useful description of the open Bruhat cell:
Lemma 18.7.2 The Υw0 induces a bijection
Υw0 : (F × )r −→ N (F )\B(F )w0 B(F )/N (F ).
Moreover, the stabilizer Nγ of any element of B(F )w0 B(F ) is trivial.

This lemma implies in particular that all elements of the open Bruhat cell
are relevant.
Proof. It is clear that any element of N (F )\B(F )w0 B(F )/N (F ) is in the
image of the map Υw0 . On the other hand the partial determinants deti are
all N × N -invariant and
deti (Υw0 (c)) = ±ci ,
where ci is the ith entry of c and the sign ± depends only on i and r. Thus
Υw0 is injective. Thus Υw0 induces a bijection as claimed.
For the claim on triviality of stabilizers we can assume γ = tw0 for t ∈
T (F ) by what we have already proven. Then if (n1 , n2 ) ∈ Nγ (F ) one has
w0−1 t−1 n1 tw0 = n2 . (18.27)
The left hand side is in the unipotent radical of the Borel opposite to B, so
both sides must equal to I. t
u
18.8 Kloosterman integrals
The geometric side of the Kuznetsov formula is a sum of Kloosterman inte-

grals. We define Kloosterman integrals in this section and discuss their basic
properties. The reader unfamiliar with integrals over totally disconnected
groups may want to consult Appendix B and complete the exercises of that
appendix before reading this section.
We define a morphism
r−1
ν : Gm −→ T (18.28)
via
Qr−1 
i=1 mi
 .. 
 . 
ν(m) :=  . (18.29)
 
 mr−2 mr−1 
 mr−1 
1
We note that
1 m−1
   
1 x1 ∗ 1 x1 ∗
 .. ..   . .. . .. 
ν(m)−1 
 . .  ν(m) = 
 
.

(18.30)
 1 xr−1   1 m−1
r−1 xr−1

1 1
Let F be a global field and fix a nontrivial character
ψ : F \AF → C× .
ψv , where ψv : Fv → C× is a nontrivial character. For

Q
It factors as ψ := v
m ∈ F r−1 we set
 
1 x1 ∗ !
 .. ..  r−1
. .
X
ψm   := ψ mi xi . (18.31)
 
 1 xr−1  i=1
1
We also use the obvious local analogue of this notation.

We now discuss which elements of N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F ) are relevant. One
has
Sr −→W
˜ (GLr , T )(F ).
The map sends a permutation σ ∈ Sr to the class of the permutation matrix
wσ such that wσ has nonzero entries in the (i, σ(i)) positions.
The following lemma was attributed to Piatetski-Shapiro in [Fri87, p. 175].
Lemma 18.8.1 Assume m1 , m2 ∈ (F × )r−1 . A class in N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F )
is ψm1 ψ m2 -relevant only if it is a subset of N (F )T (F )wσ N (F ) where σ −1 (i) <
σ −1 (i + 1) implies σ −1 (i + 1) − σ −1 (i) = 1 for 1 ≤ i < r. In other words a
class contained in N (F )T (F )wσ N (F ) is relevant only if
 
Ir1
 Ir2 
wσ = 
 
. . 
 . 
Irk
Pk
where i=1 ri = r.
Pr−1
Proof. Consider u := I + i=1 xi Ei,i+1 where xi ∈ AF and Ei,j is the
elementary matrix with a 1 in the (i, j) position and zeros elsewhere. One
has
r−1
X
wσ uwσ−1 = I + xi Eσ−1 (i),σ−1 (i+1) .
i=1
−1 −1
Suppose that σ (i) < σ (i + 1). Then

(I + xi Eσ−1 (i),σ−1 (i+1) , I + xi Ei,i+1 ) : xi ∈ AF ≤ Nwσ (AF ).
In order for ψm1 ψ m2 to be trivial on this subgroup of Nwσ (AF ) it is necessary

that σ −1 (i + 1) − σ −1 (i) = 1. The proves that N (F )wσ N (F ) is ψm1 ψ m2 -
relevant only if σ −1 (i) < σ −1 (i + 1) implies σ −1 (i + 1) − σ −1 (i) = 1 for
1 ≤ i < r. On the other hand for c ∈ (F × )r−1 the element ν(c)wσ is ψm1 ψ m2 -
relevant only if wσ is ψm1 c ψ m2 -relevant by a change of variables. Here
m1 c := (m11 c1 , . . . , m1(r−1) cr−1 ),
where m1 = (m11 , . . . , m1(r−1) ) and c = (c1 , . . . , cr−1 ). Thus we deduce that

a general element of N (F )T (F )wσ N (F ) is ψm1 ψ̄m2 -relevant only if σ −1 (i) <
σ −1 (i + 1) implies σ −1 (i + 1) − σ −1 (i) = 1 for 1 ≤ i < r. t
u
For f ∈ Cc∞ (AGLr \GLr (AF )) and γ ∈ GLr (F ), we define the orbital
integral
Z
ROγ (f, m1 , m2 ) := f (n−1
1 γn2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2 .
Nγ (AF )\N (AF )2
(18.32)
It is sometimes called a Kloosterman integral. We use the analogous no-

tation in the local setting. By Proposition 18.2.1 and Lemma 18.7.1 it is
absolutely convergent.
Proposition 18.8.2 The sum
0
X
τ (Nγ ) |ROγ (f, m1 , m2 ) |
γ∈N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F )
is convergent and
Z
Kf (n1 , n2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2
[N ]2
0
X
= τ (Nγ )ROγ (f, m1 , m2 )
γ∈N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F )
where the sum is over relevant classes. Here, as usual, [N ] := N (F )\N (AF ).
By Lemma 18.7.1 every γ is relatively unimodular, relatively elliptic, and
relatively semisimple. Thus in the number field case we could invoke Theorem
18.2.2 to prove this proposition. In the function field case we do not know
if every γ ∈ GLr (F ) is gcf, and this is the obstruction to simply invoking
Theorem 18.2.2 in the function field case. Fortunately the gcf assumption
was just used to establish convergence in the proof of Theorem 17.7.2 and in
the current setting we can just proceed directly:
Proof. This follows from the same manipulations used in the proof of The-
orem 18.2.2. The only point one must check is that these manipulations are
justified. This follows from the observation that
Z X
|f (n−1
1 γn2 )|dn1 dn2
[N ]2 γ∈G(F )
is absolutely convergent because [N ] is compact. t

u
In the remainder of this section we assume that F is nonarchimedean

with ring of integers OF . For γ in the open Bruhat cell we will relate
ROγ (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 ) to classical Kloosterman sums, justifying calling
these orbital integrals Kloosterman integrals.
We start with some easy observations (compare [Ste87, Fri87]):
Lemma 18.8.3 The integral ROγ (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 ) is only nonzero if det γ ∈
OF× and deti (γ) ∈ OF for 1 ≤ i ≤ r.
Proof. This follows from the fact that the partial determinants deti are in-
variant under the action of N × N on GLr . t
u
Let f ∨ (g) := f (g −1 ).
Lemma 18.8.4 One has that
ROΥw (c) (f, m1 , m2 ) = ROΥw (c)−1 (f ∨ , −m2 , −m1 ).
Proof. We compute that

Z
f (n1−1 Υw (c)n2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2
(NΥw (c) (F )\N (F ))2
Z
= f ∨ ((n−1
1 Υw (c)n2 )
−1
)ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2
(NΥw (c) (F )\N (F ))2
Z
= f ∨ (n−1
2 Υw (c)
−1
n1 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2 ,
(NΥw (c)−1 (F )\N (F ))2
where the last equality is, by definition, ROΥw (c)−1 (f ∨ , −m2 , −m1 ). t
u
It turns out that for suitable c the integral ROΥw (c) (f, m1 , m2 ) defined in
(18.32) can be expressed as the product of Kloosterman sums, see Propo-
sition 18.8.6 below. To state this, we first prove a recursive relation for
ROΥw (c) (f, m1 , m2 ). To ease on notation, for m1 , m2 ∈ (F × )r−1 , we let
m1 := (m11 , m12 , . . . , m1(r−1) ) and m2 := (m21 , m22 , . . . , m2(r−1) ).
Then under suitable assumptions the local orbital integral of (18.32) on GLr
can be written as that of GLr−1 in the following way:
Lemma 18.8.5 Assume that c = (c1 , c2 , . . . , cr ) ∈ (OF ∩ F × )r and that
c1 , cr ∈ OF× . Then one has that
ROΥw0 (c) (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 )

= 1OF (m1(r−1) ) 1OF (m21 )ROΥwf0 (ec) (1GLr−1 (OF ) , m
e 1, m
e 2 ),
where w
e0 is the long Weyl element for GLr−1 ,
c = (c2 /c1 , c3 /c1 , . . . , cr /c1 ) ∈ (OF ∩ F × )r−1 ,

e
and m e 2 ∈ (F × )r−2 are obtained by removing the last entry m1(r−1) from
e 1, m
m1 and by removing the first entry m21 from m2 , respectively.
Proof. To ease notation, let C be the (r − 1) × (r − 1) matrix given by
 
cr /cr−1
.
C :=  .. .
 
c2 /c1
For n1 , n2 ∈ Nr−1 (F ), α1 , α2 ∈ F r−1 (the latter viewed as column vectors)

we compute
t t
n1 α1 C 1 α2 c α n C 1 α2 c α C
= 1 1 1 = 1 1
e
.
1 c1 n2 c1 n2 c1 c1 α2t
Here
e = c1 α2 α1t + n1 Cn2
C
is an (r−1)×(r−1) matrix, c1 α1 is a column vector, and c1 α2t is a row vector.
Since we assumed that c1 ∈ OF× and cr ∈ OF× , this matrix is in GLr (OF ) if
and only if α1 , α2 ∈ OFr−1 and n1 Cn2 ∈ GLr−1 (OF ). The lemma follows. t u
Proposition 18.8.6 Assume that c = (c1 , . . . , cr ) ∈ OFr ∩ (F × )r where cr ∈
OF× , cj 6∈ OF× , and ci ∈ OF× for all i 6= j. Then
ROΥw0 (c) (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 ) = 0
unless m1 , m2 ∈ OFr−1 , in which case it is equal to

−m2j x + m1(r−j−1) cj+1 cj−1 x

X
ψ . (18.33)
cj
x∈(OF /cj )×
Here we set cj−1 = 1 if j = 1.
Proof. By Lemma 18.8.5 iterated j−1 times we have that ROΥw0 (c) (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 )
vanishes unless m1(r−1) , . . . , m1(r−j) , m21 , . . . , m2(j−1) ∈ OF . Here m1i and
m2i are the ith entry of m1 and m2 respectively. Assuming this is the case,
the same lemma implies that
ROΥw0 (c) (1GLr (OF ) , m1 , m2 ) = ROΥwf0 (ec) (1GLr−j (OF ) , m

e 1, m
e 2 ).
Here w
e0 is the long Weyl element of GLr−j , and
c := (cj /cj−1 , cj+1 /cj−1 , . . . , cr /cj−1 ),

e
m
e 1 := (m11 , . . . , m1(r−j−1) ),
m
e 2 := (m2j , . . . , m2(r−1) ).
We now apply Lemma 18.8.4 to write this as
ROΥwf0 (ec)−1 (1GLr−j (OF ) , −m

e 2 , −m
e 1)
= ROΥwf0 (cj−1 /cr ,...,cj−1 /cj ) (1GLr−j (OF ) , −m
e 2 , −m
e 1 ).
Applying Lemma 18.8.5 this vanishes unless
m11 , . . . , m1(r−j−2) , m2(j+1) , . . . , m2(r−1) ∈ OF
in which case it is
ROΥw0 (cj /cj−1 ,cj+1 /cj ) (1GL2 (OF ) , −m2j , −m1(r−j−1) ).
We compute this directly. It is equal to

Z
1 −x cj+1 /cj 1y
1GL2 (OF ) 1 cj /cj−1 1
ψ(m2j x)ψ(m1(r−j−1) y)dxdy
Z
−cj x/cj−1 −cj xy/cj−1 + cj+1 /cj
= 1GL2 (OF ) ψ(m2j x)ψ(m1(r−j−1) y)dxdy
cj /cj−1 cj y/cj−1
!
−xy/cj−1 +cj+1
−m2j x + m1(r−j−1) y
Z
1 −x/cj−1
= 1GL2 (OF ) c j ψ dxdy.
|cj |2 cj /cj−1 y/cj−1 cj
This vanishes unless m1(r−j) , m2j ∈ OF , in which case it is equal to
−m2j x + m1(r−j−1) cj+1 cj−1 x

X
ψ ,
×
cj
x∈(OF /cj )
18.9 Sums of Whittaker coefficients 385
which completes the proof. t

u
When F = Qp one can choose the character ψ so that (18.33) is a classical

Kloosterman sums.
18.9 Sums of Whittaker coefficients
The spectral side of the Kuznetsov formula is a sum of Whittaker coefficients.

We make this precise in the current section and then prove the Kuznetsov
formula in Theorem 18.9.2 below.
Let f ∈ Cc∞ (AGLr \GLr (AF )). If π is a cuspidal automorphic representa-
tion of AGLr \GLr (AF ) then we can form the relative trace
Z
rtr(π(f ), m1 , m2 ) := Kπ(f ) (n1 , n2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2 . (18.34)
[N ]2
Since [N ] is compact this is absolutely convergent. We then have the following

theorem:
Theorem 18.9.1 Assume that R(f ) has cuspidal image. Then one has an
equality of absolutely convergent sums
X 0
X
rtr(π(f ), m1 , m2 ) = τ (Nγ )ROγ (f, m1 , m2 ) (18.35)
π γ∈N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F )
where the sum on the left is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic
representations of AGLr \GLr (AF ) and the sum on the right is over relevant
classes γ.
Proof. This is immediate from Theorem 16.2.5 and Proposition 18.8.2. t

u
For the remainder of the section we assume that F is a number field. We

will use Langlands’ spectral expansion of the automorphic kernel function
Kf (x, y) from §16.3 to give a general version of Theorem 18.9.1 that requires
no assumption on f .
Let B ≤ GLr be the Borel subgroup of upper triangular matrices (in each
factor) and call a parabolic subgroup P ≤ GLr standard if it contains B. We
let MP ≤ P be the unique Levi subgroup containing the maximal torus of
diagonal matrices. We let AP ≤ ResF/Q MP (R) be the connected component
of the identity (in the real topology) and let
aP := Lie AP .
Then Langlands’ spectral decomposition of L2 ([GLr ]) implies that

X XZ
Kf (x, y) = n−1
P KI(σ,λ)(f ) (x, y)dλ (18.36)
P σ iaP
where the sum on P is over standard parabolic subgroups of GLr , nP is the

order of the association class of P and the sum on σ is over isomorphism
classes of discrete automorphic representations of HP . Each σ occurs with
multiplicity 1 by the main theorem of [MgW89]. In §16.3 the sum over σ is
on the inside of the integral over iaP , but they can be moved outside by the
absolute convergence statements proven in [Art78, §4]. Here
X
.KI(σ,λ)(f ) (x, y) := E(x, I(σ, λ)(f )ϕ, λ)E(y, ϕ, λ) (18.37)
ϕ∈Bπ
where Bπ is an orthonormal basis of the σ-isotypic subspace of HP consist-

ing of vectors that are finite under a maximal compact subgroup K∞ ≤
GLr (F∞ ). This expression is only an L2 -expansion of the kernel. If f is finite
under a maximal compact subgroup of GLr (F∞ ) then the sum can be taken
to be finite and hence the identity (18.37) is valid pointwise. Even if this is
not the case the sum is still represented by a smooth function of x and y. We
refer to [Art78, §4] for proofs of these assertions.
We set
Z
rtr(I(σ, λ)(f ), m1 , m2 ) := KI(σ,λ)(f ) (n1 , n2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2 .
[N ]2
Since [N ] is compact this is absolutely convergent.

The following is the full version of the Bruggemann-Petersson-Kuznetsov
formula:
Theorem 18.9.2 One has

X XZ
n−1
P |rtr(I(σ, λ)(f ), m1 , m2 )|dλ < ∞.
P σ iaP
Moreover
X XZ
n−1
P rtr(I(σ, λ)(f ), m1 , m2 )dλ
P σ iaP
0
X
= τ (Nγ )ROγ (f, m1 , m2 ),
γ∈N (F )\GLr (F )/N (F )
where the prime indicates that the sum on the right is over relevant γ.
Proof. The absolute convergence statement follows from the fact that [N ] is
compact together with the estimates on the terms in the spectral expansion
(18.36) contained in [Art78, §4]. Thus by (18.36) we conclude that
Z
Kf (n1 , n2 )ψm1 (n1 )ψ m2 (n2 )dn1 dn2
[N ]2
X XZ
= n−1P rtr(I(σ, λ)(f ), m1 , m2 )dλ.
P σ iaP
The theorem now follows from Proposition 18.8.2. t

u
It is important to observe that only generic representations can contribute
to the spectral side of Theorem 18.9.2. In particular, for P = G only cuspidal
representations contribute by the following theorem:
Theorem 18.9.3 If π is a generic discrete automorphic representation of
AGLr \GLr (AF ) then π is cuspidal.
Proof. This is a combination of the main theorem of [MgW89] and [JL13,
Theorem 5.5]. t
u
In analytic number theory it is useful to understand the dependence of
the quantities rtr(I(σ, λ), m1 , m2 ) on m1 and m2 . We now make this explicit.
Assume I(σ, λ) is unramified outside a finite set S of places of F including
the infinite places. Assume moreover that I(σ, λ) is generic.
Let ψ := ψ1 , where ψm is defined in (18.31). Using the notation (11.3) we
have the following lemma:
Lemma 18.9.4 If I(σ, λ) is generic then there is a unique vector
bS
Y
W S ∈ W(I(σ, λ)S , ψ S )GLr (OF ) := W(I(σ, λ)v , ψv )GLr (OFv )
b
v6∈S
such that W S (I) = 1.

Proof. We first prove that I(σ, λ) is irreducible. This is equivalent to the
assertion that I(σ, λ)v is irreducible for all v. Since I(σ, λ)v is generic it is
irreducible for v|∞ (see below [Jac09, Lemma 2.5]). For nonarchimedean v the
representation I(σ, λ)v is known to be irreducible even if we do not assume
it is generic [Ber84].
To complete the proof we recall that by Theorem 11.3.1 Whittaker models
are unique. t
u
For f ∈ Cc∞ (A\GLr (AF )) and m1S , m2S ∈ (FS× )r−1 let
fm1S ,m2S (g) := f (ν(m1S )gν(m2 )−1 ) ∈ Cc∞ (AGLr \GLr (AF )) (18.38)
were ν is defined as in (18.28).

Lemma 18.9.5 Assume that f and I(σ, λ) are unramified outside S. One
has that
rtr(I(σ, λ)(fm1 ,m2 ), m1 , m2 ) = W S (ν(m1 ))W S (ν(m2 ))rtr(πλ (f ), 1, 1)

where W S is as in Lemma 18.9.4.

Here the 1 refers to the vector in (F × )r−1 that is identically 1 in all entries.
The quantity W S (ν(m1 )) can be computed in terms of the Satake parameters
of I(σ, λ)S using Corollary 11.4.2.
Proof. To ease notation in the proof write
fe := fm1S ,m2S .
We change variables
(n1 , n2 ) 7→ (ν(m1 )−1 n1 ν(m1 ), ν(m2 )−1 n2 ν(m2 ))
and use (18.30) to see that
rtr(π(fe), m1 , m2 )
Z
= KI(σ,λ)(fe) (ν(m1 )−1 n1 ν(m1 ), ν(m2 )−1 n2 ν(m2 ))ψ1 (n1 )ψ 1 (n2 )dn1 dn2
[N ]2
Z
= KI(σ,λ)(fe) (n1 ν(m1 ), n2 ν(m2 ))ψ(n1 )ψ(n2 )dn1 dn2 .
[N ]2
Here we have used the fact that KI(σ,λ)(fe) (g1 , g2 ) is left invariant under
G(F ) × G(F ). This in turn is equal to
Z
KI(σ,λ)(f ) (n1 ν(mS1 ), n2 ν(mS2 ))ψ(n1 )ψ(n2 )dn1 dn2 . (18.39)
[N ]2
The function
Z
(g1 , g2 ) 7−→ KI(σ,λ)(f ) (n1 g1 , n2 g2 )ψ(n1 )ψ(n2 )dn1 dn2
[N ]2
is a global Whittaker function for I(σ, λ)⊗I(σ, λ)∨ for the character (n1 , n2 ) 7→
ψ(n1 )ψ(n2 ) that is unramified outside S. Thus the lemma follows from
uniqueness of Whittaker models in Theorem 11.3.1. t
u
Exercises
18.1. Prove that (18.6) is a homeomorphism.
For the next three problems we assume that we are in the setting of §18.2.
Let v be a finite place of the global field F and let
f v ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AvF )), fv ∈ Cc∞ (G(Fv )), f := fv f v .

Let γ ∈ G(F ) and let Ω ⊂ AG \G(AF ) be the H(AF )-orbit of γ.
18.2. Prove that if fv is supported in the set of elements of G(Fv ) with closed
Hr -orbit and f (x) 6= 0 for some x ∈ Ω then γ is relatively semisimple.
18.3. Prove that if fv is supported in
{γ 0 ∈ G(Fv ) : Hγ 0 = Hγ◦0 }
and f (x) 6= 0 for some x ∈ Ω then γ is gcf.
18.4. Prove that if fv is supported in the set of elements of
{γ 0 ∈ G(Fv ) : (ZH ∩ ∆(ZG ))\Hγ 0 is anisotropic}
and f (x) 6= 0 for some x ∈ Ω then γ is relatively elliptic. Here ∆ : G → G×G

is the diagonal embedding.
18.5. For f ∈ Cc∞ (AGLr \GLr (F∞ )) and m1 , m2 ∈ (F∞

× r−1
) let
fm1∞ ,m2∞ (g) := f (ν(m1 )gν(m2 )−1 ).

× r
For c := (c1 , . . . , cr ) ∈ (F∞ ) , prove that
ROΥw (c) (fm1∞ ,m2∞ , m1 , m2 ) 6= 0
only if
|cr det(ν(m1 m−1
2 ))|v f Y
for some Y ∈ R>0 independent of v|∞ and c satisfies
|deti (ν(m1 )Υw (c)ν(m2 )−1 )|v f |cr det(ν(m1 m−1 i/r
2 ))|v
for all v|∞ and 1 ≤ i ≤ r. In particular, if w = w0 , then
ROΥw0 (c) (fm1∞ ,m2∞ , m1 , m2 ) = 0
unless
|ci |v f |cr det(ν(m1 m−1 i/r −1

2 ))|v |deti (ν(m1 )w0 ν(m2 ))|v
for all v|∞ and 1 ≤ i ≤ r.
18.6. Let H be a unipotent algebraic group over a local field F . Prove that
H(F ) is unimodular.
18.7. Let X be the space of n × n matrices, equipped with the natural action
of GLn on the right. Let Φ ∈ Cc∞ (X(AF )/AGLn ). Prove that the restriction
of Φ to GLn (AF )/AGLn is smooth but not compactly supported.
Chapter 19
Applications of Trace Formulae
What we know is not much.

What we do not know is immense
P.-S. de Laplace
Abstract In this chapter, we discuss applications of relative trace formulae.

Our goal is to provide an introduction to the key motifs of existence and
comparison underlying these applications.
19.1 Existence and comparison
Selberg’s motivation for proving the trace formula for SL2 over Q was to
prove the existence of cusp form that are fixed by SO2 (R). In the process he
actually estimated the number of such cusp forms in a suitable family and
showed that they exist in abundance. This was the first application of the
trace formula, and it can be viewed as a (quantifiable) existence result. We
discuss this result in §19.2.
Motivated by the Langlands functoriality conjecture, Jacquet and Lang-
lands [JL70] gave a very different type of application of the trace formula.
They compared two different trace formulae on different groups in order to de-
duce a relation between automorphic representations on the two groups. This
idea has been extended to what is known as the theory of twisted endoscopy
and continues to play a key role in automorphic representation theory. We
discuss this in the second part of the chapter. All sections of the chapter are
more or less brief surveys. Our main aim is merely to whet the appetite of
the reader and give them some guidance on further reading.
391
392 19 Applications of Trace Formulae
19.2 The Weyl law
Let M be a smooth compact Riemannian manifold with smooth bound-

ary ∂M . Associated to this datum is a Laplace-Beltrami operator ∆. Call
a function ϕ ∈ C ∞ (M ) ∩ L2 (M ) a Laplacian eigenform with eigenvalue λ if
ϕ|∂M = 0 and
∆ϕ = λϕ.
It is known that each eigenvalue λ is a positive real number, the set of eigen-
values is discrete and that L2 (M ) is the Hilbert space direct sum of the
corresponding eigenspaces L2 (M )(λ). Moreover dim L2 (M )(λ) < ∞ for each
λ. For X > 0, consider the counting function
√
N (X) := {dim L2 (M )(λ) : λ ≤ X}.
The following is the Weyl law (see [Wey12] and [MP49]):

Theorem 19.2.1 (The Weyl law) One has that
vol(M )
N (X) = X dim M + o(X dim M ) (19.1)
(4π)dim M/2 Γ ( dim2 M + 1)
as X → ∞. t
u
Consider the Shimura manifolds Sh(G, X)K of §15.2. These are finite unions
of Riemannian manifolds. When they are compact the Weyl law implies the
existence of an abundance of automorphic forms on them. However they are
often noncompact (see Theorem 2.6.2 for a precise statement). Even if one
compactifies Sh(G, X)K , it is still unclear in the noncompact case whether
the eigenforms produced by the Weyl law correspond to the continuous or
cuspidal spectrum. Selberg developed the trace formula for SL2 (over Q) to
address precisely this question [Sel56], and he proved an analogue of (19.2.1)
in this setting.
Müller [M0̈7] established the analogue of the Weyl law for G = SL(n) over
Q. His proof makes use of the full noninvariant trace formula of Arthur, and
can treat cuspforms that are not necessarily fixed by On (R). About the same
time Lindenstrauss and Venkatesh [LV07] proved an analogous result for all
split semisimple adjoint groups over Q. Notably, their method is soft in that
it does not require the full trace formula, only a simple analogue. It is based
on a novel construction of test functions with purely cuspidal image. Their
method currently only treats cuspforms that are fixed by a maximal compact
subgroup at infinity, but it is likely that this can be removed.
Using the same technique Getz and Hahn [GH15] established a relative
analogue of the Weyl law under some assumptions via the general simple
relative trace formula of Theorem 18.2.2. This relative Weyl law gives an
asymptotic formula for the number of Laplacian eigenfunctions on Sh(G, X)K
19.3 The comparison strategy 393
as in (15.1) weighted by the L2 -restriction norm over a locally symmetric

subspace associated to a subgroup H ≤ G.
The approach to the Weyl law via the full invariant Arthur-Selberg trace
formula is more complicated, but it still has its merits. The results mentioned
above give no control on the error term in the Weyl law. Using the trace
formula, a Weyl law for SLn over Q with remainder was established by Lapid
and Müller in [LM09] using the approach of [DKV79b, DKV79a] combined
with the Arthur-Selberg trace formula.
19.3 The comparison strategy
The Langlands’ functoriality conjecture predicts that for two reductive groups
G1 and G1 defined over a global field F and a L-map
r : L G1 −→ L G2 ,
there should be a transfer from L-packets of automorphic representations of

G1 (AF ) to L-packets of automorphic representations of G2 (AF ). The question
becomes how one should prove such a transfer. One option which has proven
to be effective is to study the geometric sides of suitable trace formulae for
G1 and G2 .
In more detail, suppose that we are given subgroups Hi ≤ Gi × Gi for
1 ≤ i ≤ 2 and characters χi : AGi ,Hi \Hi (AF ) −→ C× . For F -algebras R, the
groups Hi act on Gi via
Gi (R) × Hi (R) −→ Gi (R)

(g, (h` , hr )) 7−→ h−1
` ghr
as in (18.1). We assume that
Hi◦ = Hiu × Hir
where Hiu is unipotent and Hir is reductive. Let CGi be the centralizer of
Gi in Hi , and assume that ACi ≤ Ai , where Ai is the intersection of AGi ,Hi
and the diagonal copy of AGi . See §18.2 for this notation. Suppose that we
can construct a correspondence
{χ2 -relevant δ ∈ G2 (F )/H2 (F )} ! {χ1 -relevant γ ∈ G1 (F )/H1 (F )}.
For example, one might have a bijection, but often the situation is more
complicated. We refer to this as a geometric correspondence between
relevant relative classes. We say that the class of δ matches the class of γ
if the two classes correspond. Suppose that for matching δ and γ one can
relate the orbital integrals τ (G2δ )ROδ (f ) and τ (G1γ )ROγ (f G1 ) for suitable
test functions f ∈ Cc∞ (AG2 \G2 (AF )) and f G1 ∈ Cc∞ (AG1 \G1 (AF )). Then
one can hope to prove an identity of the form
X X
τ (G2δ )ROδ (f ) = τ (G1γ )ROγ (f G1 ). (19.2)
δ∈G2 (F )/H2 (F ) γ∈G1 (F )/H1 (F )
Here the sums over γ and δ are over χ1 and χ2 -relevant elements, respec-
tively, that are additionally relatively regular, relatively elliptic, relatively
unimodular and such that the H1r -orbit of γ (resp. the H2r -orbit of δ) is
closed. We are assuming these things so that sums are convergent by The-
orem 18.2.2. Assuming that an identity like (19.2) can be established for a
sufficiently rich set of test functions one can obtain a relationship between
(H1 , χ1 )-distinguished representations of G1 (AF ) × G1 (AF ) and (H2 , χ2 )-
distinguished representations of G2 (AF ) × G2 (AF ) and thereby deduce an
instance of Langlands functoriality (or its relative analogue due to Jacquet,
Sakellaridis, and Venkatesh). We will explain this in more detail momentar-
ily. Let us point out that in many cases one has to incorporate families of
(Gi , Hi , χi ) on both sides of the formula. We ignore this complication because
we are just speaking in rough terms at the moment.
Let us elaborate what we mean by a relation between τ (G2δ )ROδ (f ) and
τ (G1γ )ROγ (f G1 ). We assume for simplicity that the geometric correspon-
dence is a bijection, though this is rarely the case. One needs to be able
to relate the volumes τ (G1γ ) and τ (G2δ ) for matching γ and δ, but this is
usually not the key issue.
For almost all finite places v there exists a hyperspecial subgroup Kiv ≤
Gi (Fv ) by Proposition 2.4.3. The map
r : L G1 −→ L G2
induces an algebra homomorphism
r : Cc∞ (G2 (Fv ) // K2v ) −→ Cc∞ (G1 (Fv ) // K1v ) (19.3)
via Theorem 7.5.1 (see also Exercise 19.2).

One wants to prove that if γ and δ match then for almost all finite places
v one has the equality
ROδv (f ) = ROγv (r(f )) (19.4)
for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G2 (Fv ) // K2v ). This is often too naı̈ve. The equality will
only hold up to an explicit function of δv and γv called a transfer factor,
but we suppress this difficulty. Formulae of the form (19.4) are known as
the fundamental lemma for the Hecke algebra. The identity (19.4)
for f = 1K2v is known as the fundamental lemma, or the fundamental
lemma for the unit element of the Hecke algebra. In practice one
deduces the fundamental lemma for the Hecke algebra from the fundamental
19.3 The comparison strategy 395
lemma. Finally one needs to know that for all places v there sufficiently large
supply of functions f ∈ Cc∞ (G2 (Fv )) and f G1 ∈ Cc∞ (G1 (Fv )) that match,
meaning that when δ and γ match one has
ROδv (f ) = ROγv (f G1 ). (19.5)
Statements of this type are known as transfer. Of course for an arbitrary

f ∈ Cc∞ (AG2 \G2 (AF )) we will have f ∈ Cc∞ (G(F2v ) // K2v ) with K2v hy-
perspecial for almost all v, and in this case one can take f G1 = r(f ). As in
the statement of the fundamental lemma, hoping for an equality as simple as
(19.5) is often too naı̈ve; it will only hold up to an explicit transfer factor.
Given the fundamental lemma for the Hecke algebra and transfer, the
identity (16.7) implies an identity
X X
rtrH2 ,χ2 π 0 (f ) = rtrH1 ,χ1 π(f G1 ), (19.6)
π0 π
at least for f and f G1 satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 18.2.2. Here

the sum on the left is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic rep-
resentations π 0 of AG2 \G2 (AF ) such that π 0 ⊗ π 0∨ is (H2 , χ2 )-distinguished
and the sum on the right is over isomorphism classes of cuspidal automorphic
representations of AG1 \G1 (AF ) such that π ⊗ π ∨ is (H1 , χ1 )-distinguished.
Let S be a finite set of places of F including all the infinite places. If f
(resp. f G1 ) is fixed on the left and right under K1S (resp. K2S ) where Kiv is
hyperspecial for v 6∈ S then this identity implies
tr π 0S (f S ) rtrH2 ,χ2 π 0 (fS 1K1S ) = trπ S (f G1 S ) rtrG1 ,χ1 π(fSG1 1K2S )

X X
π0 π
(see Exercise 19.3). Though the set of representations on each side of this
equation is in general infinite, in practice one can use a version of linear
independence of characters to refine it to an identity
tr π 0S (f S )rtrH2 ,χ2 (π 0 (fS 1K1S ))

X
π 0 :π 0S ∼
=r(π0S )
(19.7)
tr π S (f G1 S )rtrH1 ,χ1 (π(fSG1 1K2S ))
X
=
π:π S ∼
=π0S
for each cuspidal automorphic representation π0 of AG1 \G1 (AF ). Of course,

both sums can be zero, but if one sum is nonzero the other is also nonzero.
If one can establish (19.7), then one can use it to establish a transfer from
(weak) L-packets of automorphic representations of AG2 \G2 (AF ) to (weak)
L-packets of automorphic representations of AG1 \G1 (AF ) and characterize
the image of the transfer. Often one can refine this comparison to the level
of L-packets (or even use it to define L-packets). We observe that in certain
circumstances it is better to start with a map of relative L-groups as explained

by Sakellaridis and Venkatesh [SV12].
To recap, we started with a geometric assumption of matching. Assuming
this we further assumed the fundamental lemma and transfer. Given this
pile of assumptions we asserted that one could prove instances of Langlands
functoriality. Amazingly, it is possible to make this all rigorous and prove
fantastic results using it.
19.4 Jacquet-Langlands transfer and base change
In this section we describe some settings where the general strategy in §19.3
has been successfully applied. They are related to the trace formula and the
twisted trace formula of §18.4 and §18.5. We assume for the remainder of
the chapter that F is a number field because most of the results we will cite
below are proven in this setting (though it seems likely that the proofs would
generalize).
We start by taking G1 to be an inner form of the quasi-split reductive
group G2 over F . We assume that Gder 2 is simply connected so that we can
apply Theorem 19.4.1 below. Then L G1 = L G2 and we take
r : L G1 −→ L G2 (19.8)
to be the identity map.

We take Hi ≤ Gi × Gi to be the diagonal copy of Hi and we take χ to
be trivial. Then in view of Proposition 17.1.5 Gi /Hi (F ) is just the space of
semisimple conjugacy classes in Gi (F ) that are Gal(F /F )-invariant. Using
this and the definition of an inner form one can construct an isomorphism of
affine F -schemes
G1 /H1 −→G
˜ 2 /H2 . (19.9)
This is almost the first step of the procedure explained in the previous section.
There is a slight wrinkle. Consider the map
{semisimple γ ∈ Gi (F )} −→ Gi /Hi (F ) (19.10)
sending γ to its geometric class. Because G1 need not be quasi-split, for i = 1

the map (19.10) need not be surjective. However, for i = 2 the group G2 is
quasi-split and hence the map (19.10) is surjective by the following theorem:
[Kot82]:
Theorem 19.4.1 (Kottwitz and Steinberg) Let G be a quasi-split group
over a characteristic zero field k with simply connected derived group. A
semisimple G(k)-conjugacy class fixed under Galk contains an element of
G(k). t
u
19.4 Jacquet-Langlands transfer and base change 397
This turns out to be enough. In the current setting, the fundamental lemma
for the Hecke algebra is trivial because G1Fv and G2Fv are isomorphic for
almost every place v (see Exercise 19.5). Thus proving transfer of automorphic
representations is reduced to understanding transfer of functions. Jacquet and
Langlands [JL70] were the first to introduce an argument of this type and
they used it to give a complete treatment of the special case where G1 is the
unit group of a quaternion algebra and G2 = GL2 . Because of this transfers
attached to the maps (19.8) are known as Jacquet-Langlands transfers.
Though the full theory of Jacquet-Langlands transfers is still not known,
many results exist in the literature. In particular the theory for GLn is fairly
complete. Let D be a simple algebra of dimension d2 over F . For F -algebras
R let
GLnD (R) := (D ⊗F Mn (R))× .
Let S be the (finite) set of places of F where Dv 6∼
= Md (Fv ). Here Mn (Fv ) is
the space of n × n matrices with entries in Fv .
For every place v we have a diagram
{semisimple δ ∈ GLnD (Fv )} {semisimple γ ∈ GLnd (Fv )}

 
pD y py (19.11)
 
t
GLnD / ∼ (F ) −−−−→ GLnd / ∼ (F )
where the quotients on the bottom are the GIT quotients of GLnD and GLnd
by the conjugation action of GLnD and GLnd , respectively, and the verti-
cal maps are the projections. The map p is surjective (Exercise 19.6), but
pD is not. We say that δ and γ match if t(pD (δ)) = p(γ). An irreducible
admissible representation π 0 of GLn (Fv ) is Dv -compatible if the character
Θπv (γ) is nonzero for some regular semisimple γ ∈ GLnd (Fv ) that matches
a δ ∈ GLnD (Fv ). See Theorem 8.5.1 for the definition of Θπ in the nonar-
chimedean case, the archimedean case is similar [Kna86, Theorem 10.25]. An
automorphic representation π 0 of AGLn \GLn (AF ) is D-compatible if πv is
Dv -compatible for all v ∈ S.
The following theorem is due to Badulescu and Grbac [Bad08] following
several previous works [Rog83, BDKV84], going back to [JL70], where the
n = 2 case was treated.
Theorem 19.4.2 (Jacquet-Langlands correspondence) There exists a
unique injection r from the set of isomorphism classes of discrete automorphic
representations of AGLnD \GLnD (AF ) to the set of isomorphism classes of
discrete automorphic representations of AGLnd \GLnd (AF ) such that r(π)v ∼ =
πv for v 6∈ S. The image consists of discrete automorphic representations π 0
that are D-compatible. t
u
Here we are using the isomorphism GLnD (Fv ) ∼
= GLnd (Fv ) for v 6∈ S to make
sense of the assertion that r(π)v ∼
= πv0 .
In the setting above the groups G1 and G2 were not that different from
eachother; indeed, they become isomorphic over the algebraic closure. Saito
and Shintani [Sai75, Shi79] discovered the first geometric correspondence in-
volving groups that are not isomorphic over the algebraic closure. It was fully
developed for GL2 by Langlands in [Lan80]. Take G1 = G to be reductive
with simply connected derived group, let E/F be a cyclic field extension, and
let θ be a generator of Gal(E/F ). We then take G2 = ResE/F G, and let
r : L G −→ L ResE/F G
be the map given by the diagonal embedding on the neutral component and
the identity on the Galois factor. To set up our geometric correspondence we
let the χi be trivial, let H1 be the diagonal copy of G in G × G, and let H2
be the θ-twisted diagonal defined by
H2 (R) := {(g, θ(g)) : g ∈ ResE/F G(R)} (19.12)
for F -algebras R. Thus G(F )/H1 (F ) is the space of conjugacy classes and
ResE/F G(F )/H2 (F ) is the space of θ-conjugacy classes in the sense of §18.5.
The geometric correspondence is defined as follows. A reference is [Kot82].
Let δ ∈ ResE/F G(F ) and let
N(δ) := θ[E:F ]−1 (δ) · θ[E:F ]−2 (δ) · · · δ.
View N(δ) as an element of G(E). Then
θ(N(δ)) = δN(δ)δ −1
which implies that the G(E)-conjugacy class of N(δ) is fixed under Gal(E/F ).
Thus there is an element of G(F ) in the conjugacy class by Theorem 19.4.1.
We call such an element a norm of δ. This gives us a map
{θ-semisimple θ-conjugacy classes in ResE/F G(F )}


(19.13)

y
{semisimple conjugacy classes in G(F )}.
We say that a θ-semisimple δ and a semisimple γ match if γ is a a norm of

δ (see §18.5 for the notion of a θ-semisimple class).
This geometric correspondence forms the basis for a comparison of the
trace formula of §18.4 and the twisted trace formula of §18.5. We point out
that one might anticipate such a comparison by consideration of the spectral
sides of the two trace formulae. Indeed, the image of the functorial transfer
induced by r is contained in the set of representations π 0 that satisfy π 0 ∼
= π 0θ ,
and the spectral side of the twisted trace formula is given in terms of such
representations.
19.5 Twisted endoscopy 399
Unlike in the Jacquet-Langlands case, the fundamental lemma is nontrivial

in this setting. However Kottwitz found a beautiful, direct, and simple argu-
ment establishing it [Kot86a]. The fundamental lemma for the whole Hecke
algebra was then deduced by Clozel [Clo90a] and Labesse [Lab90]. This was
the basis for the work of Arthur and Clozel on cyclic base change for GLn
stated in §13.5.
19.5 Twisted endoscopy
The twisted trace formula was formulated for an arbitrary automorphism θ

of an arbitrary reductive group G. There is no need to assume that Gder is
simply connected and there is no need to assume that G is an inner form
of GLn . Dealing with Gder that are not simply connected is a nontrivial
problem, but there are techniques available. The discussion of z-extensions
in [Kot82] gives the geometric comparison necessary to begin this extension.
Dealing with the case G 6= GLn is more serious. The key point is that for
essentially every reductive group other than GLn two semisimple elements
of G(F ) that are G(F )-conjugate need not be G(F ) conjugate. In particular
the cohomology sets D(F, I, G) of (17.28) need not be singletons.
In the settings described in §19.4 we did not really relate elements of
G1 (F )/H1 (F ) and G2 (F )/H2 (F ). We really related elements of G1 /H1 (F )
and G2 /H2 (F ). For general Gi and Hi these really are different, and the
difference can be measured in terms of the sets D(F, I, Gi ) of (17.28). Because
of this subtlety, to understand the quotient G2 /H2 (F ) it is appropriate to
place G1 into a whole family of so-called twisted endoscopic groups. This
subject is known as the theory of twisted endoscopy. It would take at least
another book to discuss this fully, and fortunately such books are already
available. The reader might start with [Kot84, Kot86b] which is based on
[Lan83, Lan79b]. More recent references include [KS99, Lab99, CHLN11].
Perhaps the definitive treatment is [MW16a, MW16b].
For arbitrary θ, the geometric comparison was made precise fairly early
in the references mentioned above, though it is far more complicated than
the geometric comparisons mentioned in §19.4 for the general linear group.
Originally it was expected that the fundamental lemma in this context would
be a routine combinatorial exercise as it was in the case of GL2 , and this is
why it was described it in unassuming terms as a lemma. In fact proving
the fundamental lemma, transfer, and then applying them became a struggle
of Homeric proportions involving at least two generations of mathematicians
over a span of almost 30 years.
While the fundamental lemma was isolated and made precise by Shelstad
and Langlands [LS87] Arthur began developing the trace formula in a form
that was designed to apply the lemma. It would take too much space to record
his work and accomplishments here; fortunately there is a freely available
archive of his work online. Some of the fruits of his work are described in
§13.5 and §13.8. We will also not give an overview of the “long march” (in
the words of Ngô, [Ngô10a]) to the fundamental lemma, preferring to leave
this to the survey [Ngô10a] written by the person who completed the proof
in his Fields medal-winning work.
We would be remiss to point out that despite the amazing success of
twisted endoscopy, it has obvious drawbacks. As currently understood it can
only hope to establish cases of functoriality where the image of the functorial
lift consists of representations that are isomorphic to their conjugates under a
single automorphism. A generalization to two automorphisms is proposed in
[Get12, Get14]. These papers are based on interconnected ideas of Braverman,
Kahzdan, L. Lafforgue Langlands, Ngô, and Sakellaridis [BK00, Laf14, Ngô14,
Sak12].
19.6 The interplay of distinction and twisted endoscopy
The theory of twisted endoscopy discussed in the previous section has reached
a degree of maturity. One understands how to compare the twisted trace
formulae and the trace formula. Since Jacquet has given us the new tool of
the relative trace formula, we now have a much broader arena to apply the
experience gained in the theory of twisted endoscopy and prove new results.
We mention a few geometric correspondences here and connect them to the
results on distinction reviewed in Chapter 14.
We start by explaining the comparison underlying Theorem 14.5.2 which
characterizes those representations of ResE/F GLn that are distinguished by
a quasi-split unitary group. Here E/F is a quadratic extension. In this case
our G1 = GLn and G2 = ResE/F GLn and
r : L GLn −→ L ResE/F GLn
is the base change map, given by the diagonal embedding on the neutral
component and the identity on the Galois factor.
In this case our basic outline from §19.3 must be modified along the lines
of §18.6. Thus for F -algebras R we let
X(R) := {x ∈ Mn (E ⊗F R) : θ(x) = xt }
where θ is the generator of Gal(E/F ). This admits an action of ResE/F GLn :
X(R) × ResE/F GLn (R) −→ X(R)

(x, g) 7−→ θ(g)t xg.
19.6 The interplay of distinction and twisted endoscopy 401
The stabilizer of any x ∈ X(F ) ∩ ResE/F GLn (F ) is a unitary group. The

function X
f (xg)
x∈X(F )
is right G(F ) invariant. As in §18.6 it can be expanded spectrally in terms

of automorphic representations of ResE/F GLn (AF ) that are distinguished by
some unitary group.
We take H2 = ResE/F Nn where Nn is the unipotent radical of the Borel
subgroup of upper triangular matrices in GLn . It acts on X via restriction of
the action of ResE/F GLn . We then let
χ2 : ResE/F Nn (AF ) → C×
u 7−→ ψ(uΘ(u)),
where ψ : Nn (AF ) → C× is a generic character (trivial on Nn (F )). We do

not need to modify the geometric setting for G1 . We can simply take
H1 (R) := {(u−t
1 , u2 ) : u1 , u2 ∈ Nn (R)}
for F -algebras R and let χ1 (u1 , u2 ) = ψ(u−1

1 u2 ). Note that this is precisely
the geometric setting of the Kuznetsov formula of §18.8, apart from slightly
modifying the action of the unipotent groups involved. Let T ≤ GLn be the
maximal torus of diagonal matrices. We have a diagram
T (F )
p2 p1
w &
X(F )/ResE/F Nn (F ) G1 (F )/Nn2 (F )
where the two arrows send an element of T (F ) to its class. We say that
a χ2 -relevant δ and and χ1 -relevant γ match if there is a t ∈ T (F ) such
that δ ∈ p2 (t) and γ ∈ p1 (t). In this setting the fundamental lemma was
conjectured by Jacquet and Ye [JY96] and proven in two different manners
by Ngô [Ngô99b, Ngô99a] and Jacquet [Jac04, Jac05b].
Jacquet and Rallis [JR11] later proposed a related comparison that even-
tually led to the proof of the results on the Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture
discussed in §14.7. A useful reference is [Cha19]. Let E/F be a quadratic
extension of number fields let Un be the quasi-split unitary group of §13.7.
We take
G1 = Un+1 × Un and G2 = ResE/F GLn+1 × ResE/F GLn
and let
r : L (Un+1 × Un ) −→ L (ResE/F GLn+1 × ResE/F GLn )

be induced by the standard representations L Un+1 → L ResE/F GLn+1 and

L
Un → ResE/F GLn (see §13.7). We take Hi ≤ Gi × Gi to be the subgroups
with points in an F -algebra R given by
H2 (R) : = {(( g 1 ) , g) : g ∈ ResE/F GLn } × GLn+1 × GLn (R)

H1 (R) : = ι(Un ) × ι(Un ),
where ι : Un → Un+1 × Un is an appropriate “diagonal” embedding. Thus

H2 is isomorphic to ResE/F GLn × GLn+1 × GLn and H1 is isomorphic to
Un × Un . Letting
η : F × \A× ×
F /NE/F (AE ) → {±1}
be the character attached to E/F by class field theory we set
χ2 ((( g 1 ) , g) , (g1 , g2 )) = η(det g1 )n+1 η(det g2 )n .
We take χ1 to be the trivial character. In this setting one has an isomorphism

of GIT quotients
G2 /H2 ∼
= G1 /H1
and we say that relatively regular relatively semisimple δ ∈ G2 (F ) and γ ∈
G1 (F ) match if their geometric classes correspond under this isomorphism.
It turns out that regular semisimple elements have trivial stabilizers so the
question of relevance is irrelevant here.
In this setting the fundamental lemma was proven by Yun [Yun11].
W. Zhang [Zha14] proved transfer and used it to deduce the global Gan-
Gross-Prasad conjecture for unitary groups under certain local restrictions.
For more details see §14.7.
Both of the comparisons mentioned above are in some sense much simpler
than the comparisons encountered in the theory of twisted endoscopy. The
origin of this is easy to pinpoint. It is that stabilizers of relatively regular
relatively semisimple elements are trivial. As the reader can see from Chapter
17, the Galois cohomology of centralizers creates a great deal of complication
in understanding orbital integrals. There is no reason to expect that one will
always be able to avoid nontrivial centralizers, and it is important to develop
relative analogues of the theory of twisted endoscopy discussed in §19.5.
As an example where it does not seem possible to avoid centralizers, we
discuss the comparison underlying Theorem 14.6.1. As discussed in §14.6 the
many variants of this setup are fertile ground for future research.
For a quadratic extension E/F we let UnE/F ≤ ResE/F GLn be the quasi-
split unitary group defined in §13.7. We give ourselves a biquadratic extension
EM
E L M
θ
σ τ
Thus σ is a generator for Gal(E/F ), etc.

Let G1 = ResE/F UnM/F and G2 = ResEM/F GLn . The map
r : L ResE/F (UnM/F )E −→ L ResEM/F GLn
under consideration is induced by the standard representation L UnM/F →

L
ResM/F GLn .
The automorphism σ induces an automorphism of ResE/F Un with Un
as its fixed point group, and hence an automorphism (still denoted σ) of
ResEM/F GLn with ResM/F GLn as its fixed point group. Likewise the auto-
morphism τ induces an automorphism of ResEM/F GLn with ResE/F Un as
its fixed point group. We set θ = στ . Its fixed point group is ResL/F UnEM/L .
For F -algebras R we take
H2 (R) = ResL/F UnEM/L (R) × ResE/F GLn (R)

H1 (R) = UnM/F (R) × UnM/F (R).
To relate these two quotients we use the constructions related to symmetric

subgroups recalled in §17.2. We have morphisms (of affine F -schemes, not
groups)
Bθ : ResEM/F GLn −→ ResEM/F

Bσ : ResE/F (UnM/F )E −→ ResE/F (UnM/F )E
defined as in (17.23). Let S be the scheme-theoretic image of Bθ and Q the

scheme-theoretic image of Bσ . We then have isomorphisms
G2 /H2 −→ S/ResE/F GLn (19.14)

G1 /H1 −→ Q/UnM/F (19.15)
where ResE/F GLn acts via τ -conjugation on S and Un acts via conjugation
on Q. This is formally similar to the geometric setting underlying base change
discussed in §19.4. One has a set of τ -conjugacy classes and a set of conjugacy
classes that one wishes to relate. For a relatively regular relatively semisimple
δ ∈ ResEM/F GLn (F ) we say that γ is a norm of δ if there is an h ∈ H2 (F )
such that
hγγ −σ h−1 = δδ −θ (δδ −θ ).
One can show that every relatively regular relatively semisimple δ admits a
norm, and we say that
δ ∈ G2 (F ) = ResEM/F GLn (F ) = GLn (EM )
and
γ ∈ G1 (F ) = ResE/F (UnM/F )E (F ) = UnEM/E (AE )
match if γ is a norm of δ. In this context the fundamental lemma can be
obtained from the fundamental lemma for base change, and transfer for a
sufficiently rich supply of test functions was proven in [GW14]. This provides
enough information to establish Theorem 14.6.1. However there is a relative
analogue of twisted endoscopy lurking here that has yet to be developed.
This theory of twisted relative endoscopy will probably be necessary to ob-
tain a version of Theorem 14.6.1 valid for arbitrary cuspidal automorphic
representations of UnEM/E (AE ).
Exercises
19.1. Relate the Laplace-Beltrami operator on a Shimura manifold Sh(G, X)K

and the Casimir operator of Exercise 4.6.
19.2. For i = 1, 2 let Gi be a reductive group over the nonarchimedean field

F admitting a hyperspecial subgroup Ki ≤ Gi (Fv ). If
r : L G1 −→ L G2
is an L-map prove that there is a unique algebra homomorphism
r : Cc∞ (G2 (F ) // K2 ) −→ Cc∞ (G1 (F ) // K1 ) (19.16)
such that if π is an irreducible admissible unramified representation of G1 (F )

with transfer r(π) to G2 (F ) then
tr r(π)(f ) = tr π(r(f ))
for all f ∈ Cc∞ (G2 (F ) // K2 ). Here we normalize the Haar measures implicit in
the traces so that the Ki are given measure 1. Observe that r(1K2v ) = 1K1v .
19.3. Let G be a reductive group over the global field F and let H ≤ G × G
and χ : AG,H \H(AF ) → C× be as in §18.2. Let S be a finite set of places of
F including the infinite places and let K S < G(ASF ) be a maximal compact
open subgroup such that Kv is hyperspecial for v 6∈ S. Let
f = fS f S ∈ Cc∞ (AG \G(AF ) // K S ).

Prove that
rtr(π(f )) = tr π(f S )rtr(π(fS 1K S )).
19.4. Prove that (19.9) is an isomorphism of F -schemes.
19.5. Let G1 and G2 be reductive groups over a global field F that are inner
forms of each other. Prove that G1Fv ∼
= G2Fv for all but finitely many places
v of F .
19.6. Let k be a field. Prove that every semisimple conjugacy class in

GLn (k sep ) that is fixed by Galk has an element in GLn (k). Prove more-
over that two elements γ1 , γ2 ∈ GLn (k) that are GLn (k sep )-conjugate are
GLn (k)-conjugate.
19.7. Let T ≤ GLn be a maximal torus over a field k. Prove that D(k, T, GLn ),
defined as in (17.28), has only one element.
Appendix A
The Iwasawa Decomposition
Abstract The Iwasawa decomposition plays an important role in the theory

of automorphic representations. We prove the existence of the decomposi-
tion and discuss its compatibility with the Levi decomposition of parabolic
subgroups.
A.1 Introduction
Let F be a local or global field and let P be a parabolic subgroup of a

reductive F group G. Fix a Levi subgroup M ≤ P and let N ≤ P be the
unipotent radical. Thus P = M N . In the local case we say that a maximal
compact subgroup K ≤ G(F ) is in good position with respect to (P, M )
if the Iwasawa decomposition
G(F ) = P (F )K (A.1)
holds and
P (F ) ∩ K = (M (F ) ∩ K)(N (F ) ∩ K). (A.2)
Similarly, if F is a global field we say that a maximal compact subgroup

K ≤ G(AF ) is in good position with respect to (P, M ) if it is good
position with respect to (PFv , MFv ) for all places v of F .
Our goal in this appendix is to prove the following theorem:
Theorem A.1.1 Let G be a reductive group over a global or local field F and
let P ≤ G be a parabolic subgroup with Levi subgroup M . There exists a max-
imal compact subgroup K of G(AF ) or G(F ), respectively, in good position
with respect to (P, M ). We can even assume that M (AF ) ∩ K and M (F ) ∩ K
are maximal compact subgroups of M (AF ) and M (F ), respectively.
407
408 A The Iwasawa Decomposition
The proof of this theorem, in general, invokes the formidable work of

Bruhat-Tits. However, at least outside of a finite set S of places of F in-
cluding all infinite places that in practice one can control, one can obtain
the decomposition using much less. Our aim in this appendix is to explain
this to readers who have some background in algebraic geometry. The proof
will also explain precisely how one chooses K, at least outside of finite set S.
The reason for including this material is twofold. First, in most applications
one needs at least a basic understanding of the relationship between the K
and P (AF ) occurring in the Iwasawa decomposition. Second, the proof gives
us the opportunity to introduce concepts and techniques that are useful in a
broad context.
A.2 The smooth case
In order to explain how one can choose K given P it is useful to discuss

notions of reductive and parabolic subgroups over the base ring OF . Our
primary reference for this is [Con14]. Before beginning we recall some ter-
minology that is ubiquitous in algebraic geometry (specialized to the case of
schemes over an affine base).
Let k be a commutative Noetherian ring with identity. A geometric point
of an affine scheme Spec(k) is just a morphism
s := Spec(L) → Spec(k)
where L is the algebraic closure of a field L. Recall from §1.2 that to give
such a morphism is equivalent to giving a morphism of k-algebras k → L.
A geometric fiber of a k-scheme X is the base change Xk where s is a
geometric point of Spec(k)
Definition A.1. A reductive group scheme G over k is an affine smooth

group scheme such that its geometric fibers are reductive groups.
This (trivially) recovers our original definition of reductive group when k

is a field. Now suppose G is a reductive group scheme over k.
Definition A.2. A parabolic subgroup scheme P of G is a smooth affine

k-group scheme equipped with a closed immersion P → G of group schemes
such that all geometric fibers of Ps are parabolic subgroups of Gs .
Assume we are given a reductive group scheme G and a parabolic subgroup

scheme P ≤ G. Consider the functor which assigns to any k-algebra R the set
of closed subgroup schemes of G that are étale locally conjugate to P. Then
this functor is representable by a scheme called G/P over k. This scheme is not
affine, but it is smooth and proper and equipped with a canonical k-ample line
bundle (and hence admits a canonical embedding into a projective space over
A.2 The smooth case 409
k) [Con14, Corollary 5.2.8]. We note that there is a natural transformation

of functors G → G/P given on points in a k-algebra R by
G(R) −→ (G/P)(R) (A.3)

−1
g 7−→ gP(R)g .
For fields this map (A.3) is surjective:

Lemma A.2.1 If k is a field then the map
G(k) −→ (G/P)(k)
is surjective and induces a bijection G(k)/P(k)→(G/P)(k).

˜
Proof. Let k be an algebraic closure of k. By the generalities on parabolic

subgroups over fields recalled after Theorem 1.9.1 every parabolic subgroup
of G(k) that is G(k)-conjugate to P is in fact G(k)-conjugate to P. t
u
The following lemma is extremely useful:
Lemma A.2.2 Let G be a smooth affine group scheme of finite type over a
discrete valuation ring O with finite residue field κ and let X be a G-torsor.
If the special fiber Gκ is connected then
X (O) 6= ∅.
Proof. Since G is smooth so is X [BLR90, §6.4]. Therefore, by Hensel’s lemma

[BLR90, §2.3, Proposition 5] the map X (O) → X (κ) is surjective. It therefore
suffices to show that X (κ) 6= ∅. But Xκ is a torsor under the connected affine
algebraic group Gκ , so X (κ) 6= ∅ by a theorem of Lang [Lan56]. t
u
We can now prove a version of the Iwasawa decomposition if we assume

the existence of the parabolic subgroup scheme P:
Theorem A.2.3 Suppose that S is a finite set of places of the global field
F containing all infinite places, that G is a reductive group scheme over OFS
and P ≤ G is a parabolic subgroup scheme over OFS . Then
G(ASF ) = P(ASF )G(O

bS ).
F
Proof. Suppose that g ∈ G(ASF ). Then g ∈ G(OFv ) for all but finitely many
places v, so it suffices to show that for every v 6∈ S one has
G(Fv ) = P(Fv )G(OFv ).
Fix v 6∈ S and let $ ∈ OFv be a uniformizer.

One has a commutative diagram
G(OFv ) −−−−→ G(Fv )

 

ay

y
b
(G/P)(OFv ) −−−−→ (G/P)(Fv ).
The scheme G/P is projective over OFv , hence proper, and thus the arrow
b is a bijection by the the valuative criterion of properness. Thus it suffices
to show that that the arrow a is surjective. The fiber of a over any point of
G/P(O) is a P-torsor, and hence has a point by Lemma A.2.2. t
u
A.3 The dynamic method
Now in the statement of Theorem A.1.1 there is no mention of the group

scheme G or P; one has only the reductive group G and its parabolic subgroup
P . To complete the proof of Theorem A.1.1 one must construct G and P given
G and P . One starts by choosing a faithful representation G → GLn . For a
sufficiently large finite set S of places of OF containing the infinite ones the
schematic closure G of G in GLnOFS is then reductive by Proposition 2.4.3.
Thus we can construct G. We now construct P.
Proposition A.3.1 Let S be a finite set of places of the global field F con-
taining all infinite places and let G be a reductive group scheme over OFS . Let
P be a parabolic subgroup of GF with Levi decomposition P = M N . After
possibly adding a finite set of places to S, the schematic closure P of P in G
is a parabolic subgroup scheme of G admitting a decomposition
P =MnN (A.4)
where M is a reductive group scheme, N is a connected smooth group scheme

with unipotent fibers, and MF = M , NF = N .
In the setting of the lemma we have P(OFv ) = M(OFv ) n N (OFv ) for
v 6∈ S. This implies that
P (Fv ) ∩ G(OFv ) = (M (Fv ) ∩ G(OFv ))(N (Fv ) ∩ G(OFv )),
the condition required in (A.2). We also note that M(OFv ) ≤ M (Fv ) is a

hyperspecial subgroup (and in particular is maximal, see Theorem 2.4.1).
To explain how to do this we will recall the so-called dynamic description
of parabolic subgroups. Many more details are contained in [Con14]. Suppose
we are given an affine group scheme G of finite type over a ring k and a
cocharacter, i.e. a morphism of group schemes
λ : Gm −→ G.
A.3 The dynamic method 411
This defines a left action of Gm on G
λ : Gm × G −→ G
given on points by
λ(t, g) := λ(t)gλ(t)−1 .
We say that limt→0 λ(t, g) exists if the morphism λ extends to a morphism
λ : Ga × G −→ G.
Example A.1. Let λ : Gm −→ GL3 be the cocharacter given as

 
t
λ(t) =  t−1 .
t−2
Then
a t 2 b t3 c
   
ab c
λ(t) d e f  λ(t)−1 = t−2 d e tf  .
hg i t−3 g t−1 h i
Thus limt→0 λ(t, g) exists if and only if g is a point of the Borel subgroup of
upper triangular matrices. Moreover limt→0 λ(t, g) = 1, the identity in GL3 ,
if and only if g lies in the group of strictly upper triangular matrices, and g
commutes with the action of λ if and only if g is a diagonal matrix.
Let P (λ) be the group functor on k-algebras given on a k-algebra R by
P (λ)(R) := {g ∈ G(R) : lim λ(t, g) exists}.

t→0
We also define
N (λ)(R) = {g ∈ G(R) : lim λ(t, g) = 1}

t→0
and let Z(λ)(R) ≤ G(R) be the subgroup that commute with the action λ.
We then have
P (λ)(R) = Z(λ)(R) n N (λ)(R). (A.5)
In the example above P (λ) turned out to be a parabolic subgroup of the

ambient group scheme. Moreover, the geometric fibers of N (λ) (resp. Z(λ))
turned out to be the unipotent radical (resp. Levi subgroup) of the corre-
sponding fiber of P (λ). This is a general phenomenon, and is the basis of the
so-called dynamic description of parabolic subgroups, which is summarized
in Theorem A.3.2 and Theorem A.3.3 below. For the proof of Theorem A.3.2
see [Con14, Theorem 4.1.7, Example 5.2.2] or [CGP10, §2.1]:
Theorem A.3.2 Assume that G is smooth. The functor P (λ) is represented

by a closed smooth subgroup of G. If G has connected fibers then so does P (λ).
If G is connected and reductive, T ≤ G is a maximal torus, and λ has image
in T then P (λ) is a parabolic subgroup scheme of G. t
u
Here T ≤ G is a maximal torus if it is a flat, closed subgroup scheme of G
such that for all geometric points s̄ of Spec(k) the fiber Ts̄ is a maximal torus
of Gs̄ .
Theorem A.3.3 Assume that k is a field and that G is a reductive group
over k. Let P ≤ G be a parabolic subgroup with Levi decomposition P = M N
and let T ≤ M be a maximal torus of G. There is a cocharacter λ : Gm → T
such that P = P (λ), M = Z(λ), and N = N (λ).
Proof. The fact that every P is a P (λ) is [Mil17, Theorem 25.1] and N =
N (λ) for any cocharacter λ such that P = P (λ). Since all Levi subgroups
of P are conjugate under P (k) we deduce that upon conjugating λ by an
element of P (k) we may assume that M = M (λ). t
u
Using these theorems we can now prove Proposition A.3.1:
Proof of Proposition A.3.1: Let P be a parabolic subgroup of G containing a

maximal torus T of G. Then there is a character λ : T → Gm such that P =
P (λ) by Theorem A.3.3. Choose a faithful representation G → GLn . Upon
choosing as sufficiently large finite set of places S of F we can assume that the
schematic closure G of G in GLnOFS is reductive (Proposition 2.4.3), that the
schematic closure T of T in G is a maximal torus of G [Con14, Corollary 3.1.8],
and that the cocharacter λ : Gm → T extends to a cocharacter Λ : Ga −→ T .
Let
P := P (Λ).
Then by Theorem A.3.2, P is a parabolic subgroup of G and we deduce the
proposition. 2
A.4 Proof of Theorem A.1.1
We now complete the proof of Theorem A.1.1. In view of Theorem A.2.3 and
Proposition A.3.1 it suffices to prove Theorem A.1.1 in the local case. Thus
we assume for the remainder of the section that F is a local field.
We will actually prove something more precise than what is required by
Theorem A.1.1. Fix a minimal parabolic subgroup P0 ≤ G and a Levi sub-
group M0 ≤ P0 . We write N0 for the unipotent radical of P0 . We call a
pair (P, M ) consisting of a parabolic subgroup P ≤ G and a Levi subgroup
M ≤ P a standard parabolic pair if P0 ≤ P and M0 ≤ M .
A.4 Proof of Theorem A.1.1 413
Theorem A.4.1 Assume F is archimedean. There is a maximal compact

subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that for any standard parabolic pair (P, M ) one has
P (F )K = G(F ), M (F ) ∩ K is a maximal compact subgroup of M (F ), and
P (F ) ∩ K = M (F ) ∩ K.
Proof. By [Kna02, Proposition 7.31] the Iwasawa decomposition G(F ) =

P (F )K holds for some maximal compact subgroup K ≤ G(F ). Since all
maximal compact subgroups are conjugate in the archimedean setting [Hel01,
Chapter VI.2], it follows that G(F ) = P (F )K holds for all maximal compact
subgroups K.
Let G(F )+ ≤ G(F ) be the identity component in the natural topology. The
assertion that K is a maximal compact subgroup of G(F ) is equivalent to the
statement that K ∩G(F )+ is maximal in G(F )+ and K meets all components
of G(F ). In view of this, the assertion that M (F ) ∩ K is a maximal compact
subgroup of M (F ) is part of [HC75, Lemma 8].
Consider the image of K in P (F )/N (F ) = M (F ). It is a compact subgroup
containing M (F ) ∩ K, hence equal to M (F ) ∩ K. If mn ∈ K with (m, n) ∈
M (F )×N (F ), we deduce that m ∈ M (F )∩K, and hence n ∈ N (F )∩K = I.
This completes the proof of the last assertion. t
u
Theorem A.4.2 Assume F is nonarchimedean. There is a maximal compact

subgroup K ≤ G(F ) such that for any standard parabolic pair (P, M ) one has
P (F )K = G(F ), M (F ) ∩ K is a maximal compact subgroup of M (F ), and
P (F ) ∩ K = (M (F ) ∩ K)(N (F ) ∩ K).
We do not know of a proof of this result that does not use Bruhat-Tits
theory. We will have to assume some of this in the proof. A survey is given
in [Tit79] and the proofs are contained in [BT72, BT84]. The paper [Lan00]
is also useful; there one can find the definition of the extended Bruhat-Tits
building. Let B e (G) denote the extended Bruhat-Tits building of G (over
F ). It is a topological space equipped with an action of G(F ) and is a union
of subsets called (extended) apartments Ae (G, S) indexed by the maximally
split tori S of G:
[
B e (G) := gAe (G, S). (A.6)
Usually B e (G) is denoted by B e (G, F ), etc, but since G is an F -group we have

omitted this from notation. The extended apartment Ae (G, S) is a X∗ (S)R -
torsor (affine X∗ (S)R -space) equipped with a homomorphism
NG (S)(F ) −→ Aff(Ae (G, S)) (A.7)
where Aff(Ae (G, S)) is the group of affine transformations of Ae (G, S).
Proof. Assume that S ≤ M0 is a maximal split torus. Let x ∈ Ae (G, S) be

such a special point [Lan00, §2.2] and let K be the stabilizer of x. Then
K is a maximal compact subgroup of G(F ) and one has P0 (F )K = G(F )
[BT72, 4.4.6(ii)]. It follows immediately that P (F )K = G(F ) for all standard

parabolic subgroups P of G.
We now claim that we can choose x so that for each standard parabolic
pair M (F ) ∩ K is a maximal compact subgroup of M (F ). Assuming this the
rest of the theorem follows as in the proof of Theorem A.4.1. The inclusion
M ≤ G induces an inclusion
B e (M ) −→ B e (G)
that is equivariant with respect to the action of M (F ). Moreover, the inclu-

sion sends Ae (M, S) bijectively to Ae (G, S). Let x ∈ Ae (G, S) be a special
point. Then one checks directly from the definition of a special point that the
inverse image of x in Ae (M, S) is again a special point. The claim follows. tu
A.5 An addendum in the hyperspecial case
Suppose that G is a reductive group over a local field F that is unramified

(quasi-split and split over an unramified extension). Thus there is a smooth
model G of G over OF with reductive fibers by Theorem 2.4.1. The group
G(OF ) is a hyperspecial subgroup of G(F ).
Lemma A.5.1 There is a parabolic subgroup scheme B ≤ G and a maximal
torus T ≤ B such that BF is a Borel subgroup of G and BOF /$ is a Borel
subgroup of GOF /$ .
Proof. We first check that a Borel subgroup exists. The functor assigning
to an OF scheme S the set of Borel subgroups of GS is representable by a
smooth proper OF -scheme, say X [DG74, XXII, Corollaire 5.8.3(i)]. We have
X (F ) = X (OF ) by the valuative criterion of properness, so there is a Borel
subgroup B ≤ G. The existence of T is [DG74, XXII, Corollaire 5.9.7] t
u
Lemma A.5.2 For B and T as in Lemma A.5.1 the subgroup T (OF ) =

T (F ) ∩ G(OF ) is a maximal compact subgroup of T (F ) and G(OF ) is in good
position with respect to (BF , TF ).
Proof. The assertion that T (OF ) ≤ T (F ) is a maximal compact subgroup is

[Mac17, Proposition 4.6]. One has a decomposition
B =T oN
where N is a connected smooth group scheme with unipotent fibers [DG74,

XXVI, Proposition 1.6]. In particular NF is the unipotent radical of BF . This
implies that G(OF ) is in good position with respect to (BF , TF ). t
u
Appendix B
Poisson Summation
Abstract In this appendix we define the adelic version of the Fourier trans-
form on a vector space and state the corresponding version of Poisson sum-
mation
B.1 The standard additive characters
In this appendix we define the adelic version of the Fourier transform on a

vector space and state the corresponding version of Poisson summation. All
of the material below is either implicit or explicit in Tate’s thesis [Tat67]. A
leisurely account is given in [RV99, Chapter 7]
The goal of this section is to fix a standard additive character on every
local field and an additive character of F \AF for every global field.
We first consider the case of completions of Q and Fp (t) for primes p. We
let
ψR : R −→ C×
a 7−→ e−2πia
and
ψQp : Qp −→ C×
a 7−→ e2πipr(a) .
Here the principal part pr(a) ∈ Z[p−1 ] is any element such that
a ≡ pr(a) (mod Zp ).
If F is a characteristic zero local field then it is an extension of a completion

F0 of Q, and we let
415
416 B Poisson Summation
ψF := ψ ◦ trF/F0 : F −→ C× .
We now treat the characteristic p case. We define the additive character
ψFp ((t)) : Fp ((t)) −→ C×

X r
an tn 7−→ e−2πia1 /p .
n=−∞
Here on the right the ai are representatives in Z for ai ∈ Fp . If $ is an

irreducible polynomial in Fp [t] and Fp (t)$ is the completion of Fp (t) at the
corresponding place and k is its residue field then we define
ψFp (t)$ : Fp (t)$ −→ C×

∞
X
an $n −→ e2πitrk/Fp (a−1 )/p .
n=r
Here the ai are in k (or rather a fixed set of representatives for k = Fp [t]/$ in
Fp [t]). On the right we are implicitly identifying trk/Fp (a−1 ) with an element
of Z mapping to it under the quotient map Z → Fp . If F is a characteristic
p local field then it is an extension of a completion F0 of Fp (t), and we let
ψF := ψ ◦ trF/F0 : F −→ C× .
One checks that all of the ψF we have defined are indeed nontrivial characters.
It is not hard to check the following lemma (see Exercise B.2):
Lemma B.1.1 If F is a local field and ψ : F → C× is any nontrivial char-
acter then there is a bijection
F −→ Fb
α 7−→ (x 7→ ψ(αx)) .
t
u
Here the right hand side is the unitary dual of F , which is simply the set of
characters of F , i.e. the set of continuous homomorphisms F → C× .
If F is a global field we let
Y
ψF := ψF v . (B.1)
v
This defines a nontrivial character of AF that is trivial on F . The global

analogue of Lemma B.1.1 is the following lemma:
Lemma B.1.2 If F is a global field and ψ : F \AF → C× is any nontrivial
character then there is a bijection
B.3 Global Schwartz spaces and Poisson summation 417
F \AF −→ F\
\AF
α 7−→ (x 7→ ψ(αx)) .
t
u
Again the right hand side is the unitary dual of F \AF , which is simply the
set of characters of F \AF , i.e. continuous homorphisms F \AF → C× .
B.2 Local Schwartz spaces and Fourier transforms
Let F be a local field. If F is nonarchimedean we define S(F ) = Cc∞ (F ), and

if F is archimedean we let S(F ) denote the usual Schwartz space. We refer
to S(F ) as the Schwartz space of F .
If W is a finite-dimensional F -vector space we define S(W ) analogously.
Let
h , i : W × W −→ F (B.2)
be a perfect pairing, let ψ : F → C× be a character, and let dy be a Haar

measure on W . In the case where W = F the pairing is usually taken to be
hx, yi := xy. For f ∈ S(W ) one has a Fourier transform
Z
f (x) :=
b f (y)ψ (hx, yi) dy
W
which is also an element of S(W ). In the archimedean case this is standard,

and in the nonarchimedean case it is Exercise B.5.
The Fourier transform depends on ψ, the pairing h , i and the Haar measure
dy. Given ψ and h , i there is a unique way to normalize dy so that the Fourier
inversion formula holds:
f (x) = (fb)∧ (−x). (B.3)
This Haar measure dy is known as the self-dual Haar measure (with

respect to the pairing and additive character).
B.3 Global Schwartz spaces and Poisson summation
Let F be a global field and let W be a finite dimensional F -vector space. For
an F -algebra R let W (R) := W ⊗F R. We define
S(W (AF )) := S(W (F∞ )) ⊗C Cc∞ (W (A∞

F )).
418 B Poisson Summation
When F is a number field we can view W (F∞ ) as an R-vector space to make

sense of S(W (F∞ )).
Let
h , i : W × W −→ F
be a perfect pairing, let ψ : F \AF → C× be a nontrivial character, and let dy
be a Haar measure on W (AF ). For f ∈ S(W (AF )) we then have an adelic
Fourier transform
Z
f (x) :=
b f (y)ψ (hx, yi) dy. (B.4)
W (AF )
Lemma B.3.1 One has fb ∈ S(W (AF )).

Proof. It suffices to verify the lemma in the special case where W = F r and
h , i is the standard product
r
X
h(x1 , . . . , xr ), (y1 , . . . , yr )i 7−→ xi yi .
i=1
Let S be a finite set of places of F including all the infinite places and all
places where Fv is ramified. If S is large enough then
f = fS 1(Ob S )r .
F
It also follows from (B.1.2) that ψ = ψS ψ S where ψ S = v6∈S ψFv ; that

Q
is, outside of S the character ψ S is the standard character. Finally we can

assume that dy = dyS dy S where dy S = v6∈S dyv and dyv (OFr v ) = 1 for
Q
v 6∈ S. Thus
fb = fbS 1
b bS r .
(O ) F
We already know that fbS ∈ S(W (F∞ )) ⊗ S(W (FS∞ )), so it suffices to check
that 1
b b S r = 1 b S . This is the content of Exercise B.7.
(O ) O t
u
F F
Given h , i, ψ and dy there is a unique choice of Haar measure dy on W (AF )

such that the Fourier inversion formula holds:
f (x) = (fb)∧ (−x). (B.5)
This is the self-dual Haar measure (with respect to h , i and ψ).

We can now state an adelic version of Poisson summation:
Theorem B.3.2 (Poisson summation) For f ∈ S(W (AF )) one has
X X
f (γ) = fb(γ).
γ∈W (F ) γ∈W (F )
t
u
B.3 Global Schwartz spaces and Poisson summation 419
Exercises
B.1. Let F be a local field. Prove that the maps ψF defined in §B.1 are
characters.
B.2. Prove Lemma B.1.1.
B.3. Let F be a global field. Prove that ψF is a character of AF trivial on F .
B.4. Prove Lemma B.1.2.
B.5. Let F be a nonarchimedean local field and let f ∈ Cc∞ (F ). Prove that
fb ∈ Cc∞ (F ). Here fb can be defined with respect to any Haar measure on F
and nontrivial character ψ : F → C× .
B.6. Prove that the Fourier inversion formula (B.3) holds when F is a nonar-
chimedean local field.
B.7. Let F be a nonarchimedean local field that is unramified over its prime
field. Show that
1bOF = 1OF
where the Fourier transform is defined with respect to the standard additive
character ψF and the Haar measure on F such that dy(OF ) = 1. Conclude
that this Haar measure is self-dual with respect to ψF and the pairing (x, y) 7→
xy.
Hints to selected exercises
Chapter 1
1.12 Use the fact that parabolic subgroups would have unipotent elements.
This would imply that B has zero divisors, contradicting the assumption that
it is a division algebra.
Chapter 2
2.10 Note that GLn (FS ) is an open subset of gln (FS ) for any finite set of
places S and use weak approximation for AF (see Theorem 2.1.4).
2.6 One approach uses the alternate definition of group schemes described
in Exercise 1.7.
2.14 In the archimedian case use the Gram-Schmidt process. In the nonar-
chimedian case one can proceed in an elementary manner using induction on
n. See [Bum97, Proposition 4.5.2].
2.15 Using the description of GL2 (Q)\GL2 (AQ )/K0 (1) given at the end of
§2.6 the exercise can be deduced from the following well-known fact: Every
element of the complex upper half plane is SL2 (Z)-equivalent (under Möbius
transformations) to an element z satifying −1 1
2 ≤ Re(z) ≤ 2 and |z| > 1.
Chapter 3
3.1 See [Fol95, Proposition 2.6].

3.2 Average a left Haar measure.
421
422 Hints to selected exercises
3.3 See [Fol95, §2.4], bearing in mind that δG (g) = ∆(g)−1 in the notation
of loc. cit.
3.13 Prove first that V admits a G-invariant inner product.
Chapter 4
4.2 See [Bum97, Theorem 2.4.1].

4.9 The proof is an extension of the well-known construction of all the
finite-dimensional irreducible representations of the Lie algebra sl2 .
Chapter 8
5.5 Show that V has a countable basis and invoke Lemma 4.1.
5.10 See [Car79].
5.11 To show that Vsm ≤ V is dense mimic the proof of Proposition 4.2.3.
For the other claims one uses the following fact: if X, Y are topological vector
spaces, Y is an F -space, M ⊆ X is a dense subspace, and λ : M → Y is a
continuous map, then Λ admits a (unique) continuous extension to X → Y
(see [Rud91, Chapter 1, Exercise 19]).
5.15 Use the fact that all hyperspecial subgroups are conjugate under
G/ZG (F ) (see §2.4).
5.16 Use the fact that all hyperspecial subgroups are conjugate under
G/ZG (F ) (see §2.4).
Chapter 6
6.7 Much of this amounts to computations and unwinding the definitions.

The only points that are not formal are relating the notion of cuspidality
on both sides of the isomorphism and the related issue of proving that the
automorphic forms associated to classical cuspidal automorphic forms are of
moderate growth. These issues are treated in detail in [Bum97, §3.2].
Hints to selected exercises 423
Chapter 8
8.5 Right exactness is the only point that is not obvious. Suppose that
one has a surjection A : V → W of smooth representations of M (F ). Let
ϕ : G → W be an element of IndG
P (W ), and choose a compact open subgroup
K ≤ G(F ) fixing ϕ. By Lemma 8.2.1 for all g ∈ G(F ) one has
−1
ϕ(g) ∈ V M (F )∩gKg .
−1 −1 −1
Since V M (F )∩gKg → W M (F )∩gKg is surjective there is a vg ∈ V M (F )∩gKg
such that a(vg ) = ϕ(g). Fix a minimal set of representatives X for P (F )\G(F )/K.
We then define
e : G −→ V
ϕ
nmxk 7−→ m.vx
for (n, m, x, k) ∈ N (F ) × M (F ) × X × K. The function ϕ

e is fixed by K and is
therefore smooth, and by construction A(ϕ) e = ϕ. Thus the map IndG P (V ) →
IndGP (W ) is surjective.
8.6 It is clear that ResG

P is additive. Assume that
0 −→ V1 −→ V2 −→ V3 −→ 0
is exact. It is easy to verify that V1N → V2N → V3N → 0 is exact. On the

other hand
V1 (N ) = V1 ∩ V2 (N ),
and it follows that V1N → V2N is injective.
8.7 If ϕ ∈ V and n ∈ N (F ) then there is a compact open subgroup KN ≤
N (F ) such that n0 ∈ KN . Choosing KN in this manner we see that
Z
π(n)(π(n0 )ϕ − ϕ)dn = 0.
KN
Conversely, suppose that ϕ ∈ V is such that

Z
π(n)ϕdn = 0
KN
for a compact open subgroup KN ≤ N (F ). Choose a compact open subgroup

0
0
KN ≤ KN such that ϕ ∈ V KN . Then
Z
1 X
0= π(n)ϕdn = 0 π(n)ϕ
KN [KN : KN ] 0n∈KN /KN
424 Hints to selected exercises
which implies
1 X
ϕ= 0 ] (π(n)ϕ − ϕ).
[KN : KN 0
n∈KN /KN
8.9 For each i let mi ≤ A be the annihilator of Vi . It is a maximal ideal, and

Pin= mj if and only if i = j. Choose a1 , . . . , an ∈ A such that ai ∈ mi and
m
i=1 ai = 1A , where 1A is the identity in A. Then 1 − ai is the identity on
Vi and zero on Vj for j 6= i.
0
8.15 Show that if J(σ a , λa ) and J(σ a , λa0 ) are linked then one of their
central characters is not unitary.
Chapter 9
9.4 See [Zhu93, Theorem 3.1.5].
Chapter 10
10.1 See [JZ87, §1].

10.2 See [JZ87, §1].
10.3 See [JZ87, §1].
Chapter 11
11.2 A Whittaker functional λ : Vsm → C× and a nonzero function ϕ ∈ Vsm

gives rise to a Whittaker function via
g 7−→ λ(π(g)ϕ).
Conversely, given a Whittaker model Vsm → W (ψ), we obtain a Whittaker

functional by
ϕ 7−→ W ϕ (I).
11.4 Consider the action of an unramified Hecke operator on J(λ). For µ
dominant relate the value of the Whittaker function at µ($) to the action
of the Hecke operator 1GL2 (OF )µ($)GL2 (OF ) . Then use that the eigenvalues of
such an operator can be computed in terms of λ by Proposition 7.6.5.
11.5 See [JS81b, §2.5].
Hints to selected exercises 425
Chapter 12
12.10 Assume first that the πi are all square-integrable. Then since all the πi
are tempered none of them are linked in the sense of §8.4. Hence we conclude
by Theorem 8.4.4. The general case can be reduced to this case by Theorem
8.4.5 and the transitivity of induction.
Chapter 15
15.4 Let
K(N ) := {g ∈ GLn (Z)
b : g ≡ In (mod N Z)}.
Then GLn (Q) ∩ K(N ) is the group in the proof of Lemma 15.2.1 and hence
is neat. Now observe that the set of eigenvalues of matrices in GLn (Q) ∩
g −1 K(N )g is independent of g ∈ GLn (A∞
Q ).
Chapter 17
17.2 Consider the natural action of Gm on X = Ga .
Chapter 18
18.1 Since G(AF ) = AG G(AF )1 by §2.6 and G(AF )1 ≤ G(AF )0 the map
G(AF )0 /H(AF ) −→ AG \G(AF )/H(AF )
is surjective. To check injectivity assume that ah` g1 h−1r = g2 for some a ∈

AG , (h` , hr ) ∈ H(AF ) and g1 , g2 ∈ G(AF )0 . For χ ∈ Y one has
1 = χ(ah` g1 h−1
r )χ(g2 )
−1
= χ(a)χ(h` h−1
r )χ(g1 )χ(g2 )
−1
= χ(a)
By the duality between tori and their character groups (Theorem 1.7.1) this
implies that a ∈ a(1, AH ), which is to say that a = h0−1 0 0 0
` hr for some (h` , hr ) ∈
AH .
Index
(H, χ)-character, 276 σ-anisotropic torus, 340

(H, χ)-distinguished σ-isotypic subspace, 80
global, 278 σ-split torus, 340
local, 276 v-adic metric, 30
(g, K)-module, 81 étale slice, 336
admissible, 81
(g, K∞ )-cohomology, 303 Sakellaridis-Venkatesh conjecture, 282,
1-cocycle, 341 286
A-packet, 248
C ∗ -algebra, 66 A-parameters, 272
Dv -compatible, 397 absolute product
H-distinguished affine scheme, 5
global, 278 absolute value, 30
local, 276 archimedean, 30
H-torsor, 345 nonarchimedean , 30
trivial, 345 trivial, 30
K-finite absolute values
adelic, 117 normalized, 30
K-finite vector, 80 additive L-function, 235
K-type σ, 80 additive group, 6
L-group, 133 adeles ring, 32
parabolic subgroup, 134 adelic L-parameter, 245
Levi subgroup, 135 tempered, 245
relevant, 135 adelic automorphic form
relevant Levi, 136 over a function field, 119
standard, 135 over a number field, 118
L-indistinguishable, 249 adelic Poisson summation, 418
L-map, 133 adelic quotient, 46
L-parameter, 233 adjoint group, 43
almost tempered, 243 adjoint representation, 13
equivalent, 234 admissible Hilbert representation, 102
tempered, 240 admissible module, 102
unramified, 241 admissible representation, 80, 102
R-valued points, 3 affine group scheme, 6
V -cohomological vector, 304 affine scheme, 3
Z(g)-finite, 116 algebraic group, 9
w-generic representation, 242 algebraic representation
427
428 Index
C-algebraic, 251 constant term of f along B, 138

L-algebraic, 251 constant term of f along P , 163
almost simple group, 44 continuous spectrum, 68
anisotropic group, 23 contracted product of Y and H, 346
arithmetic subgroup, 47, 297 contragredient representation, 103
Arthur SL2 , 272 Converse theory, 225
Artin conjecture, 258 coordinate ring, 3
Asai representation, 267, 284 cuspidal cohomology, 304
associated parabolic subgroup, 197 cuspidal function, 174
automorphic form, 116 cuspidal subspace, 120
cuspidal, 119, 191
automorphic induction, 261 decomposition
automorphic kernel, 322 continuous, 65
automorphic representation, 63, 114 discrete, 65
cuspidal, 120 decomposition of representation, 65
cuspidal in the L2 - sense, 120 Deligne torus, 8, 309
in the L2 sense, 114 derived subgroup, 10
over a function field, 119 dihedral representation, 259
over a number field, 119 Dirac sequence, 179
automorphy factor, 122 direct integral decomposition, 64
automorpic kernel function, 316 discrete global A-packets of Gn , 271
discrete series, 90, 91
base change, 8, 260 discrete spectrum, 68
Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification, 157 distinction, 275
Borel subgroup, 22 distribution, 159
Dixmier-Malliavin lemma, 77
Casimir element, 95 dynamic, 410, 411
Casselman and Shalika formula, 218
categorical quotient, 332 Eisenstein cohomology, 304
uniform, 332 Eisenstein series, 199
central isogeney, 43 equivalent inner forms, 289
central quasi-character of π, 94 essentially square integrable, 91
character, 15 essentially tempered, 91
of π, 91, 159
Chevalley restriction theorem, 337 factorizable module, 108
class, 331 faithful representation
class map, 342 affine group scheme, 7
closed immersion, 4 Fell topology, 65, 66
closed subscheme, 5 fiber product, 5
co-character, 15 finite type
cocycle condition, 341 affine scheme of, 3
coefficient of π, 161 finiteness of class numbers, 45
cohomological representation, 305 first Galois cohomology, 341
cohomological vector, 304, 305 Flath theorem, 108
cohomologous cocycles, 341 form of algebraic group, 342
compact operator, 179 Fourier transform
complex dual, 21 adelic, 418
conductor, 220 local, 417
congruence subgroup, 47, 297 fppf, 345
conjugate dual, 268 function field, 29
conjugate self-dual representation, 268 fundamental lemma, 394
connected
affine group scheme, 9 Gårding subspace, 77
affine scheme, 9 Gan-Gross-Prasad conjecture, 288
Index 429
generic character, 212 Jacquet-Langlands transfer, 397

global, 213 Jacquet-Mao fundamental lemma, 286
local, 213 Jacquet-Ye fundamental lemma, 283
generic fiber, 39 Jordan decomposition Theorem, 10
generic representation, 213
global, 215 Künneth formula, 307
local, 214 kernel function, 176
geometric correspondence, 393 Kottwitz variety, 311
geometric fiber, 408 Kuznetsov formula, 376
geometric point, 408
geometric relative class, 334 Langlands L-function, 249
GIT quotient, 331 Langlands class, 137, 145
global ψ-Whittaker function, 215 Langlands classification, 94
global L-packet, 245 Langlands correspondence, 229
automorphic, 245 archimedean, 237
global algebraic representation, 252 local, 239
C-algebraic, 252 Langlands data, 93
L-algebraic, 252 Langlands decomposition, 92
global field, 29 Langlands dual group, 133
global Langlands reciprocity, 247 Langlands functoriality conjecture
global Rankin-Selberg integral, 224 weak form, 145
global relative orbital integral, 356 Langlands group, 246
good position, 137, 163, 407 Langlands quotient, 93, 157
linked, 158
Harish-Chandra homorphism, 88 Langlands reciprocity law, 229
Hecke algebra, 99 Langlands-Shahidi method, 262
unramified, 128 left Haar measure, 56
Hecke character, 128 Levi decomposition, 12
Hermitian contragredient, 104 Levi subgroup, 12
Hilbert modular variety, 311 Lie algebra, 12
Hilbert representation, 102 Lie bracket, 12
Hilbert-Schmidt, 174 lift of the correspondence, 301
Hilbert-Schmidt norm, 174 limit of discrete series, 90
hull-kernel topology, 66 linear
hyperspecial subgroup, 40 affine group scheme, 7
local A-packets, 272
Ichino-Ikeda conjecture, 282 local L-packet, 242
icosahedral representation, 259 local field, 30
induced representation, 93, 149, 195 local Langlands conjecture, 241
inertia group, 233 local relative orbital integral, 344
infinitesimal character, 89 local system, 299
infinitesimally equivalent, 84 locally symmetric space, 296
inner form, 343 Luna’s slice theorem, 337
intertwining operator, 197
irreducible matching, 393, 395, 397, 398
affine scheme, 4 matrix coefficient, 78, 150
irreducible principal series, 90 minimal parabolic, 24
isobaric representation, 145, 206 model, 39
isotropic group, 23 moderate growth function, 115
Iwasawa decomposition, 47, 92, 138 adelic, 117
modular character, 140
Jacobi identity, 12 modular form, 122
Jacobson topology, 66 modular quasicharacter, 56, 149
Jacquet module, 154 monomorphism
430 Index
affine algebraic group, 7 quasicuspidal representation, 150

morphism quotient map
affine group scheme of, 6 affine algebraic group, 7
affine scheme of, 3
Lie algebra, 12 radical subgroup, 11
multiplicative group, 6 Ramanujan conjecture, 205
multiplicity one, 216 Ramanujan’s ∆-function, 124
rank
natural action, 55 algebraic group of, 16
neat arithmetic subgroup, 297 torus of, 14
neat compact open subgroup, 298 Rankin-Selberg L-function, 211
neat element, 297 global, 222
neutral component, 10 local, 218
neutral element, 341 unramified, 221
nilpotent element, 10 rapidly decreasing function, 191
nondegenerate module, 101 reduced
norm, 398 affine scheme, 4
number field, 29 root datum, 21
reduction theory, 48
octahedral representation, 259 reductive group, 11
odd representation, 259 reductive group scheme, 408
orbital integral, 166 reflex field, 310
regular action, 55
parabolic decent, 163 regular integral representation, 316
parabolic induction, 150, 151 regular representation, 173, 315
parabolic subgroup, 22 relative character, 276
minimal, 23 relative conjugacy class, 339
opposite, 25 relative Langlands program, 282
proper, 22 relative to the action of H, 330
standard, 24, 157 relative trace, 319
parabolic subgroup scheme, 408 relative Weyl law, 392
period integral, 277 relatively elliptic element, 357
Peter-Weyl Theorem, 79 relatively regular element, 330
pinning, 132 relatively semisimple class, 331
place, 30 relatively semisimple element, 330
archimedean, 30 relatively unimodular element, 344
finite, 30 relevant element, 344, 356
infinite, 30 representable functor, 3
nonarchimedean, 30 representation, 54
Plancherel measure, 92 affine group scheme, 7
Poincaré series, 177 pre-unitarizable, 54
Poincare duality, 308 pre-unitary, 54
positive roots, 26 quotient, 54
primitive ideal, 66 regular, 56
principal series, 140 unitarizable, 54
unramified, 142 unitary, 54
product formula, 32 restricted direct product, 38
restricted product topology, 32
quasi trivial restricted tensor product, 107
group, 43 right Haar measure, 56
torus, 43 ring of integers, 31
quasi-semisimple automorphism, 338 root datum, 20
quasi-split classical groups, 265 base, 131
quasi-split group, 23 root group, 131
Index 431
root spaces, 19 standard maximal compact, 237

root system, 19 strong approximation, 34, 42
base, 19 strong Artin conjecture, 258
rank, 19 strong multiplicity one, 223
reduced, 19 structure morphism, 6
roots, 19 subgroup scheme, 8
subquotient theorem, 93
Sakellaridis-Venkatesh conjecture, 288 subrepresentation, 54
Satake Isomorphsim, 129 subquotient, 54
Satake parameter, 137, 145 supercuspidal representation, 150
segment, 158 symmetric subgroup, 283
linked, 158 symmetric variety, 283
self-dual Haar measure
adelic, 418 Tamagawa measure, 62
local, 417 Tawagawa number, 62
semisimple automorphism, 338 td-type group, 97
semisimple element, 10, 338 tempered representation, 91
semisimple group, 10, 11 tetrahedral representation, 259
sheaf of section, 300 torus, 14
Shimura datum, 309 anisotropic, 16
Shimura manifold, 296 maximal, 16
Shimura variety, 295, 310 split, 14, 16
Shintani formula, 218 totally disconnected group, 97
Siegel modular variety, 311 trace, 174
Siegel set, 48 trace class, 174
simple general relative trace formula, trace norm, 174
366, 371 trace of π(f ), 159
simple relative trace formula, 364 transfer, 395
simple trace formula, 372 twisted endoscopic groups, 399
simple twisted trace formula, 373 twisted endoscopy, 399
simply connected group, 43 type I group, 65, 67
slowly increasing function, 115
adelic, 117 unfolding, 177
smooth uniform moderate growth, 115
affine scheme, 4 adelic, 117
algebraic group, 9 uniformizer, 31
smooth O-scheme, 41 unimodular group, 56
smooth dual, 103 unipotent element, 10
smooth endomorphisms, 161 unipotent group, 10
smooth function, 98 unipotent radical subgroup, 10
smooth relative characters, 277 unitarily equivalent, 54
smooth representation, 100 unitary dual, 65
smooth vector, 75 unramified L-packet, 242
smoothly (H, χ)-distinguished, 277 unramified group, 40, 105, 128
solvable group, 10 unramified outside of S, 144
special fiber, 39 unramified quasi-character, 140
Speh representation, 207 unramified representation, 106, 128
spherical Hecke algebra, 105
spherical representation, 106 valuation, 29
spherical subgroup, 281 Vogan L-packet, 282, 291
split group, 17
square integrable, 91 weak approximation, 42
stability of γ-factors, 266 weak global L-packet, 144
standard Borel space, 64 weak lift, 257
432 Index
weak transfer, 257 root system of, 20

weakly globally L-indistinguishable, 143 Weyl law, 392
weight spaces, 18 Whittaker datum, 242
weights, 18 Whittaker expansion, 215
Weil group, 230 Whittaker functional
Weil restriction of scalars, 8 archimedean, 214
Weil-Deligne group, 232 nonarchimedean, 213
Weyl chamber, 26 Whittaker model, 214
positive, 26
Weyl group, 16
little, 340 Zariski topology, 5
References
[AC89] James Arthur and Laurent Clozel. Simple algebras, base change,
and the advanced theory of the trace formula, volume 120 of An-
nals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Prince-
ton, NJ, 1989. 258, 261, 262, 283
[AG94] Avner Ash and David Ginzburg. p-adic L-functions for GL(2n).
Invent. Math., 116(1-3):27–73, 1994. 285
[AGR93] Avner Ash, David Ginzburg, and Steven Rallis. Vanishing
periods of cusp forms over modular symbols. Math. Ann.,
296(4):709–723, 1993. 279, 293
[Art78] James G. Arthur. A trace formula for reductive groups. I. Terms
associated to classes in G(Q). Duke Math. J., 45(4):911–952,
1978. 114, 199, 322, 386
[Art80] James Arthur. A trace formula for reductive groups. II. Applica-
tions of a truncation operator. Compositio Math., 40(1):87–121,
1980. 114, 199
[Art89] James Arthur. Unipotent automorphic representations: conjec-
tures. Astérisque, (171-172):13–71, 1989. Orbites unipotentes et
représentations, II. 244, 248
[Art90] James Arthur. Unipotent automorphic representations: global
motivation. In Automorphic forms, Shimura varieties, and L-
functions, Vol. I (Ann Arbor, MI, 1988), volume 10 of Perspect.
Math., pages 1–75. Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1990. 244, 248
[Art02] James Arthur. A note on the automorphic Langlands group.
Canad. Math. Bull., 45(4):466–482, 2002. Dedicated to Robert
V. Moody. 246
[Art05] James Arthur. An introduction to the trace formula. In Har-
monic analysis, the trace formula, and Shimura varieties, vol-
ume 4 of Clay Math. Proc., pages 1–263. Amer. Math. Soc.,
Providence, RI, 2005. 195, 198, 199, 200, 201, 323, 356
[Art13] James Arthur. The endoscopic classification of representations,
volume 61 of American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publi-
433
434 References
cations. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2013.

Orthogonal and symplectic groups. 208, 243, 247, 248, 257, 266,
269, 270, 271, 272, 288
[AS06] Mahdi Asgari and Freydoon Shahidi. Generic transfer for general
spin groups. Duke Math. J., 132(1):137–190, 2006. 269
[AS14] Mahdi Asgari and Freydoon Shahidi. Image of functoriality for
general spin groups. Manuscripta Math., 144(3-4):609–638, 2014.
269
[AT09] Emil Artin and John Tate. Class field theory. AMS Chelsea
Publishing, Providence, RI, 2009. Reprinted with corrections
from the 1967 original. 231
[Bad08] Alexandru Ioan Badulescu. Global Jacquet-Langlands corre-
spondence, multiplicity one and classification of automorphic
representations. Invent. Math., 172(2):383–438, 2008. With an
appendix by Neven Grbac. 208, 397
[BB15] Valentin Blomer and Jack Buttcane. On the subconvex-
ity problem for L-functions on GL(3). arXiv e-prints, page
arXiv:1504.02667, Apr 2015. 377
[BDKV84] J. N. Bernstein, P. Deligne, D. Kazhdan, and M. F. Vigneras.
Représentations des groupes réductifs sur un corps local. Travaux
en Cours. Hermann, Paris, 1984. 372, 397
[Ber] J. N. Bernšteı̆n. Representations of p-adic groups.
Available at http://www.math.tau.ac.il/
˜bernstei/Unpublished_texts/unpublished_texts/
Bernstein93new-harv.lect.from-chic.pdf. 151, 158
[Ber74] J. N. Bernstein. All reductive p-adic groups are tame.
Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen., 8(2):3–6, 1974. 103
[Ber84] Joseph N. Bernstein. P -invariant distributions on GL(N ) and
the classification of unitary representations of GL(N ) (non-
Archimedean case). In Lie group representations, II (College
Park, Md., 1982/1983), volume 1041 of Lecture Notes in Math.,
pages 50–102. Springer, Berlin, 1984. 387
[Beu16] Raphaël Beuzart-Plessis. Comparison of local spherical charac-
ters and the Ichino-Ikeda conjecture for unitary groups. arXiv
e-prints, page arXiv:1602.06538, Feb 2016. 292
[BFOR17] Kathrin Bringmann, Amanda Folsom, Ken Ono, and Larry
Rolen. Harmonic Maass forms and mock modular forms: the-
ory and applications, volume 64 of American Mathematical So-
ciety Colloquium Publications. American Mathematical Society,
Providence, RI, 2017. 122
[BG14] Kevin Buzzard and Toby Gee. The conjectural connections be-
tween automorphic representations and Galois representations.
In Automorphic forms and Galois representations. Vol. 1, vol-
ume 414 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., pages 135–187.
Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2014. 250, 253
References 435
[BH06] Colin J. Bushnell and Guy Henniart. The local Langlands con-
jecture for GL(2), volume 335 of Grundlehren der Mathematis-
chen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical
Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2006. 151
[BJ79] A. Borel and H. Jacquet. Automorphic forms and automorphic
representations. In Automorphic forms, representations and L-
functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Oregon State Univ., Cor-
vallis, Ore., 1977), Part 1, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., XXXIII,
pages 189–207. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1979. With
a supplement “On the notion of an automorphic representation”
by R. P. Langlands. 204
[BK00] A. Braverman and D. Kazhdan. γ-functions of representations
and lifting. Geom. Funct. Anal., (Special Volume, Part I):237–
278, 2000. With an appendix by V. Vologodsky, GAFA 2000 (Tel
Aviv, 1999). 376, 400
[BK02] Alexander Braverman and David Kazhdan. Normalized inter-
twining operators and nilpotent elements in the Langlands dual
group. volume 2, pages 533–553. 2002. Dedicated to Yuri I.
Manin on the occasion of his 65th birthday. 376
[BLR90] Siegfried Bosch, Werner Lütkebohmert, and Michel Raynaud.
Néron models, volume 21 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer
Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)].
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990. 8, 353, 409
[BLS96] A. Borel, J.-P. Labesse, and J. Schwermer. On the cuspidal coho-
mology of S-arithmetic subgroups of reductive groups over num-
ber fields. Compositio Math., 102(1):1–40, 1996. 305
[BMS67] H. Bass, J. Milnor, and J.-P. Serre. Solution of the congruence
subgroup problem for SLn (n ≥ 3) and Sp2n (n ≥ 2). Inst. Hautes
Études Sci. Publ. Math., (33):59–137, 1967. 297
[Bor79] A. Borel. Automorphic L-functions. In Automorphic forms, rep-
resentations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Ore-
gon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 2, Proc. Sympos.
Pure Math., XXXIII, pages 27–61. Amer. Math. Soc., Provi-
dence, R.I., 1979. 134, 136, 137, 139
[Bor91] Armand Borel. Linear algebraic groups, volume 126 of Gradu-
ate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, second
edition, 1991. 2, 16, 23, 24, 43, 280
[Bor97] Armand Borel. Automorphic forms on SL2 (R), volume 130 of
Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1997. 175, 176, 179, 180
[Bor98] Mikhail Borovoi. Abelian Galois cohomology of reductive groups.
Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 132(626):viii+50, 1998. 341
[Bor07] Armand Borel. Automorphic forms on reductive groups. In Au-
tomorphic forms and applications, volume 12 of IAS/Park City
436 References
Math. Ser., pages 7–39. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2007.
117
[Bor09] M. V. Borovoi. The defect of weak approximation for homoge-
neous spaces. II. Dal0 nevost. Mat. Zh., 9(1-2):15–23, 2009. 43,
44
[BP16] Raphaël Beuzart-Plessis. La conjecture locale de Gross-Prasad
pour les représentations tempérées des groupes unitaires. Mém.
Soc. Math. Fr. (N.S.), (149):vii+191, 2016. 291
[BR94a] Laure Barthel and Dinakar Ramakrishnan. A nonvanishing result
for twists of L-functions of GL(n). Duke Math. J., 74(3):681–700,
1994. 219
[BR94b] Don Blasius and Jonathan D. Rogawski. Zeta functions of
Shimura varieties. In Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), volume 55
of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 525–571. Amer. Math. Soc.,
[Bru78] R. W. Bruggeman. Fourier coefficients of cusp forms. Invent.
Math., 45(1):1–18, 1978. 377
[BS98] Rolf Berndt and Ralf Schmidt. Elements of the representa-
tion theory of the Jacobi group. Modern Birkhäuser Classics.
Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 1998. [2011 reprint of the
1998 original] [MR1634977]. x, 63, 81, 182
[BT65] Armand Borel and Jacques Tits. Groupes réductifs. Inst. Hautes
Études Sci. Publ. Math., (27):55–150, 1965. 280, 339
[BT72] F. Bruhat and J. Tits. Groupes réductifs sur un corps local. Inst.
Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (41):5–251, 1972. 413, 414
[BT84] F. Bruhat and J. Tits. Groupes réductifs sur un corps local. II.
Schémas en groupes. Existence d’une donnée radicielle valuée.
Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (60):197–376, 1984. 413
[Bum97] Daniel Bump. Automorphic forms and representations, vol-
ume 55 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. 74, 84, 89, 123, 421,
422
[Bum05] Daniel Bump. The Rankin-Selberg method: an introduction and
survey. In Automorphic representations, L-functions and appli-
cations: progress and prospects, volume 11 of Ohio State Univ.
Math. Res. Inst. Publ., pages 41–73. de Gruyter, Berlin, 2005.
268
[Bum13] Daniel Bump. Lie groups, volume 225 of Graduate Texts in Math-
ematics. Springer, New York, second edition, 2013. 222
[BW00] A. Borel and N. Wallach. Continuous cohomology, discrete sub-
groups, and representations of reductive groups, volume 67 of
Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathemati-
cal Society, Providence, RI, second edition, 2000. 157, 302, 303,
305, 307, 308, 309
References 437
[BZ77] J. N. Bernstein and A. V. Zelevinsky. Induced representations

of reductive p-adic groups. I. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4),
10(4):441–472, 1977. 157, 158
[Car79] P. Cartier. Representations of p-adic groups: a survey. In Auto-
morphic forms, representations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos.
Pure Math., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part
1, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., XXXIII, pages 111–155. Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1979. 97, 137, 143, 151, 422
[Cas] W. Casselman. Introduction to the theory of admissible repre-
sentations of p-adic reductive groups. 143, 151, 155
[Cas67] J. W. S. Cassels. Global fields. In Algebraic Number The-
ory (Proc. Instructional Conf., Brighton, 1965), pages 42–84.
Thompson, Washington, D.C., 1967. 34
[Cas89] W. Casselman. Canonical extensions of Harish-Chandra modules
to representations of G. Canad. J. Math., 41(3):385–438, 1989.
81
[CF86] J. W. S. Cassels and A. Fröhlich, editors. Algebraic number the-
ory. Academic Press, Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publish-
ers], London, 1986. Reprint of the 1967 original. 29
[CFGK17] Yuanqing Cai, Solomon Friedberg, David Ginzburg, and Eyal
Kaplan. Doubling constructions and tensor product ${L}$-
functions: the linear case. arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:1710.00905,
Oct 2017. 269
[CFK18] Yuanqing Cai, Solomon Friedberg, and Eyal Kaplan. Dou-
bling constructions: local and global theory, with an application
to global functoriality for non-generic cuspidal representations.
arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:1802.02637, Feb 2018. 269
[CGP10] Brian Conrad, Ofer Gabber, and Gopal Prasad. Pseudo-reductive
groups, volume 17 of New Mathematical Monographs. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2010. 11, 411
[Cha19] Pierre-Henri Chaudouard. On relative trace formulae: the case of
Jacquet-Rallis. Acta Math. Vietnam., 44(2):391–430, 2019. 401
[Che58] Claude Chevalley. Séminaire C. Chevalley, 1956–1958. Classifi-
cation des groupes de Lie algébriques. pages ii+166 + ii+122 pp.
(mimerographed), 1958. 18
[CHH88] M. Cowling, U. Haagerup, and R. Howe. Almost L2 matrix co-
efficients. J. Reine Angew. Math., 387:97–110, 1988. 91
[CHLN11] Laurent Clozel, Michael Harris, Jean-Pierre Labesse, and Bao-
Châu Ngô, editors. On the stabilization of the trace formula, vol-
ume 1 of Stabilization of the Trace Formula, Shimura Varieties,
and Arithmetic Applications. International Press, Somerville,
MA, 2011. 312, 399
[CKM04] James W. Cogdell, Henry H. Kim, and M. Ram Murty. Lectures
on automorphic L-functions, volume 20 of Fields Institute Mono-
438 References
graphs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2004.

250, 262, 268
[CKPSS04] J. W. Cogdell, H. H. Kim, I. I. Piatetski-Shapiro, and F. Shahidi.
Functoriality for the classical groups. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes
Études Sci., (99):163–233, 2004. 225, 266
[CL10] Pierre-Henri Chaudouard and Gérard Laumon. Le lemme fonda-
mental pondéré. I. Constructions géométriques. Compos. Math.,
146(6):1416–1506, 2010. 270
[CL12] Pierre-Henri Chaudouard and Gérard Laumon. Le lemme fon-
damental pondéré. II. Énoncés cohomologiques. Ann. of Math.
(2), 176(3):1647–1781, 2012. 270
[Clo90a] Laurent Clozel. The fundamental lemma for stable base change.
Duke Math. J., 61(1):255–302, 1990. 399
[Clo90b] Laurent Clozel. Motifs et formes automorphes: applications du
principe de fonctorialité. In Automorphic forms, Shimura vari-
eties, and L-functions, Vol. I (Ann Arbor, MI, 1988), volume 10
of Perspect. Math., pages 77–159. Academic Press, Boston, MA,
1990. 250, 251
[Clo07] L. Clozel. Spectral theory of automorphic forms. In Automorphic
forms and applications, volume 12 of IAS/Park City Math. Ser.,
pages 43–93. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2007. 67, 146,
248
[Clo16] L. Clozel. Errata: Motifs et formes automorphes: applications du
principe de fonctorialité [MR1044819]. In Autour des motifs—
École d’été Franco-Asiatique de Géométrie Algébrique et de
Théorie des Nombres Asian-French Summer School on Algebraic
Geometry and Number Theory. Vol. III, volume 49 of Panor.
Synthèses, pages 61–63. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 2016. 251
[Cog07] James W. Cogdell. L-functions and converse theorems for GLn .
In Automorphic forms and applications, volume 12 of IAS/Park
City Math. Ser., pages 97–177. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
RI, 2007. 212, 216
[Con02] Brian Conrad. A modern proof of Chevalley’s theorem on alge-
braic groups. J. Ramanujan Math. Soc., 17(1):1–18, 2002. 68
[Con12a] Brian Conrad. Finiteness theorems for algebraic groups over
function fields. Compos. Math., 148(2):555–639, 2012. 44, 46,
279, 358
[Con12b] Brian Conrad. Weil and Grothendieck approaches to adelic
points. Enseign. Math. (2), 58(1-2):61–97, 2012. 34, 69, 349,
350
[Con14] Brian Conrad. Reductive group schemes. In Autour des schémas
en groupes. Vol. I, volume 42/43 of Panor. Synthèses, pages 93–
444. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 2014. 14, 16, 42, 132, 408, 409,
410, 411, 412
References 439
[CPS94] J. W. Cogdell and I. I. Piatetski-Shapiro. Converse theorems for

GLn . Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (79):157–214, 1994.
273
[CPS99] J. W. Cogdell and I. I. Piatetski-Shapiro. Converse theorems for
GLn . II. J. Reine Angew. Math., 507:165–188, 1999. 226, 273
[CPSS11] J. W. Cogdell, I. I. Piatetski-Shapiro, and F. Shahidi. Functorial-
ity for the quasisplit classical groups. In On certain L-functions,
volume 13 of Clay Math. Proc., pages 117–140. Amer. Math. Soc.,
Providence, RI, 2011. 265, 266
[CS80] W. Casselman and J. Shalika. The unramified principal series
of p-adic groups. II. The Whittaker function. Compositio Math.,
41(2):207–231, 1980. 217, 218
[CST17] J. W. Cogdell, F. Shahidi, and T.-L. Tsai. Local Langlands
correspondence for GLn and the exterior and symmetric square
ε-factors. Duke Math. J., 166(11):2053–2132, 2017. 268
[CZ16] Pierre-Henri Chaudouard and Michal Zydor. Le transfert sin-
gulier pour la formule des traces de Jacquet-Rallis. arXiv e-
prints, page arXiv:1611.09656, Nov 2016. 292
[Dd80] V. G. Drinfel0 d. Langlands’ conjecture for GL(2) over functional
fields. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathe-
maticians (Helsinki, 1978), pages 565–574. Acad. Sci. Fennica,
Helsinki, 1980. 273
[Dd87a] V. G. Drinfel0 d. Cohomology of compactified moduli varieties of
F -sheaves of rank 2. Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat.
Inst. Steklov. (LOMI), 162(Avtomorfn. Funkts. i Teor. Chisel.
III):107–158, 189, 1987. 273
[Dd87b] V. G. Drinfel0 d. Moduli varieties of F -sheaves. Funktsional.
Anal. i Prilozhen., 21(2):23–41, 1987. 273
[Dd88] V. G. Drinfel0 d. Proof of the Petersson conjecture for GL(2) over
a global field of characteristic p. Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen.,
22(1):34–54, 96, 1988. 273
[Del71] Pierre Deligne. Travaux de Shimura. In Séminaire Bourbaki,
23ème année (1970/71), Exp. No. 389, pages 123–165. Lecture
Notes in Math., Vol. 244. Springer, Berlin, 1971. 309
[Del73a] P. Deligne. Formes modulaires et représentations de GL(2). In
Modular functions of one variable, II (Proc. Internat. Summer
School, Univ. Antwerp, Antwerp, 1972), pages 55–105. Lecture
Notes in Math., Vol. 349. Springer, Berlin, 1973. 124
[Del73b] P. Deligne. Les constantes des équations fonctionnelles des fonc-
tions L. pages 501–597. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 349, 1973.
236
[Del75] P. Deligne. Correction to: “Les constantes des équations fonc-
tionelles des fonctions L” (modular functions of one variable, ii
(Proc. Internat. Summer School, Univ. Antwerp, Antwerp, 1972),
440 References
pp. 501–597, Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 349, Springer, Berlin,

1973). pages p. 149. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 476, 1975. 236
[DG74] C. Demazure and P. Grothendieck. Schémas en groupes, volume
151–153 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1974. 2, 3, 18, 347, 414
[Dix77] Jacques Dixmier. C ∗ -algebras. North-Holland Publishing Co.,
Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977. Translated from the French
by Francis Jellett, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15.
64, 67, 91
[DKV79a] J. J. Duistermaat, J. A. C. Kolk, and V. S. Varadarajan. Erra-
tum: “Spectra of compact locally symmetric manifolds of nega-
tive curvature”. Invent. Math., 54(1):101, 1979. 393
[DKV79b] J. J. Duistermaat, J. A. C. Kolk, and V. S. Varadarajan. Spectra
of compact locally symmetric manifolds of negative curvature.
Invent. Math., 52(1):27–93, 1979. 393
[DKV84] P. Deligne, D. Kazhdan, and M.-F. Vignéras. Représentations
des algèbres centrales simples p-adiques. In Representations of
reductive groups over a local field, Travaux en Cours, pages 33–
117. Hermann, Paris, 1984. 372
[DM78] Jacques Dixmier and Paul Malliavin. Factorisations de fonctions
et de vecteurs indéfiniment différentiables. Bull. Sci. Math. (2),
102(4):307–330, 1978. 77, 192
[DMOS82] Pierre Deligne, James S. Milne, Arthur Ogus, and Kuang-yen
Shih. Hodge cycles, motives, and Shimura varieties, volume 900
of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New
York, 1982. 313
[Do15] Viet Cuong Do. Le lemme fondamental métaplectique de Jacquet
et Mao en égales caractéristiques. Bull. Soc. Math. France,
143(1):125–196, 2015. 286
[DS05] Fred Diamond and Jerry Shurman. A first course in modular
forms, volume 228 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-
Verlag, New York, 2005. 122, 124
[Dyn52] E. B. Dynkin. Maximal subgroups of the classical groups. Trudy
Moskov. Mat. Obšč., 1:39–166, 1952. 22
[EH00] David Eisenbud and Joe Harris. The geometry of schemes, vol-
ume 197 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag,
New York, 2000. 3
[FJ93] Solomon Friedberg and Hervé Jacquet. Linear periods. J. Reine
Angew. Math., 443:91–139, 1993. 285
[Fli88] Yuval Z. Flicker. Twisted tensors and Euler products. Bull. Soc.
Math. France, 116(3):295–313, 1988. 284
[FLO12] Brooke Feigon, Erez Lapid, and Omer Offen. On representations
distinguished by unitary groups. Publications mathématiques de
l’IHÉS, 115(1):185–323, Jun 2012. 283
References 441
[Fol95] Gerald B. Folland. A course in abstract harmonic analysis. Stud-

ies in Advanced Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995.
53, 55, 56, 57, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 421, 422
[Fri87] Solomon Friedberg. Poincaré series for GL(n): Fourier expansion,
Kloosterman sums, and algebreo-geometric estimates. Math. Z.,
196(2):165–188, 1987. 177, 380, 382
[FZ95] Yuval Z. Flicker and Dmitrii Zinoviev. On poles of twisted tensor
L-functions. Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci., 71(6):114–116,
1995. 284
[Get12] Jayce R. Getz. An approach to nonsolvable base change and
descent. J. Ramanujan Math. Soc., 27(2):143–211, 2012. 259,
262, 400
[Get14] Jayce R. Getz. A summation formula for the Rankin-Selberg
monoid and a nonabelian trace formula. arXiv e-prints, page
arXiv:1409.2360, Sep 2014. 376, 400
[GG12] J. R. Getz and M. Goresky. Hilbert modular forms with coeffi-
cients in intersection homology and quadratic base change, vol-
ume 298 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkhäuser/Springer Basel
AG, Basel, 2012. 122, 307
[GGP12a] Wee Teck Gan, Benedict H. Gross, and Dipendra Prasad.
Restrictions of representations of classical groups: examples.
Astérisque, (346):111–170, 2012. Sur les conjectures de Gross
et Prasad. I. 288
[GGP12b] Wee Teck Gan, Benedict H. Gross, and Dipendra Prasad. Sym-
plectic local root numbers, central critical L values, and restric-
tion problems in the representation theory of classical groups.
Astérisque, (346):1–109, 2012. Sur les conjectures de Gross et
Prasad. I. 288, 289, 291, 292
[GH14] J. R. Getz and H. Hahn. Algebraic cycles and Tate classes on
Hilbert modular varieties. Int. J. Number Theory, 10(1):161–176,
2014. 285, 314
[GH15] Jayce R. Getz and Heekyoung Hahn. A general simple relative
trace formula. Pacific J. Math., 277(1):99–118, 2015. x, 348, 371,
392
[GJ72] Roger Godement and Hervé Jacquet. Zeta functions of simple al-
gebras. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 260. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin-New York, 1972. 212
[GJ78] Stephen Gelbart and Hervé Jacquet. A relation between auto-
morphic representations of GL(2) and GL(3). Ann. Sci. École
Norm. Sup. (4), 11(4):471–542, 1978. 263
[GJR04] David Ginzburg, Dihua Jiang, and Stephen Rallis. On the non-
vanishing of the central value of the Rankin-Selberg L-functions.
J. Amer. Math. Soc., 17(3):679–722, 2004. 291
[GJR05] David Ginzburg, Dihua Jiang, and Stephen Rallis. On the nonva-
nishing of the central value of the Rankin-Selberg L-functions. II.
442 References
In Automorphic representations, L-functions and applications:

progress and prospects, volume 11 of Ohio State Univ. Math. Res.
Inst. Publ., pages 157–191. de Gruyter, Berlin, 2005. 291
[GK82] S. S. Gelbart and A. W. Knapp. L-indistinguishability and R
groups for the special linear group. Adv. in Math., 43(2):101–
121, 1982. 370
[GL06] Stephen S. Gelbart and Erez M. Lapid. Lower bounds for L-
functions at the edge of the critical strip. Amer. J. Math.,
128(3):619–638, 2006. 200, 268
[GL19] Jayce R. Getz and Baiying Liu. A summation formula for triples
of quadratic spaces. Adv. Math., 347:150–191, 2019. 376
[GN10] Dennis Gaitsgory and David Nadler. Spherical varieties and
Langlands duality. Mosc. Math. J., 10(1):65–137, 271, 2010. 281
[God66] R. Godement. The spectral decomposition of cusp-forms. In
Algebraic Groups and Discontinuous Subgroups (Proc. Sympos.
Pure Math., Boulder, Colo., 1965), pages 225–234. Amer. Math.
Soc., Providence, R.I., 1966. 175, 181
[God15] Roger Godement. Analysis. IV. Universitext. Springer, Cham,
2015. Integration and spectral theory, harmonic analysis, the
garden of modular delights, Translated from the French edition
by Urmie Ray. 75
[GP92] Benedict H. Gross and Dipendra Prasad. On the decomposition
of a representation of SOn when restricted to SOn−1 . Canad. J.
Math., 44(5):974–1002, 1992. 288
[GR10] Benedict H. Gross and Mark Reeder. Arithmetic invariants of
discrete Langlands parameters. Duke Math. J., 154(3):431–508,
2010. 232, 233
[Gro98] Benedict H. Gross. On the Satake isomorphism. In Galois rep-
resentations in arithmetic algebraic geometry (Durham, 1996),
volume 254 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., pages 223–
237. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1998. 129
[GRS01] David Ginzburg, Stephen Rallis, and David Soudry. Generic
automorphic forms on SO(2n + 1): functorial lift to GL(2n),
endoscopy, and base change. Internat. Math. Res. Notices,
(14):729–764, 2001. 266, 268
[GS83] D. Goldfeld and P. Sarnak. Sums of Kloosterman sums. Invent.
Math., 71(2):243–250, 1983. 377
[GW09] Roe Goodman and Nolan R. Wallach. Symmetry, representa-
tions, and invariants, volume 255 of Graduate Texts in Mathe-
matics. Springer, Dordrecht, 2009. 160, 283, 286
[GW10] Ulrich Görtz and Torsten Wedhorn. Algebraic geometry I. Ad-
vanced Lectures in Mathematics. Vieweg + Teubner, Wiesbaden,
2010. Schemes with examples and exercises. 3, 41, 332, 333
References 443
[GW14] Jayce R. Getz and Eric Wambach. Twisted relative trace for-
mulae with a view towards unitary groups. Amer. J. Math.,
136(1):1–58, 2014. 287, 314, 404
[GZ86] Benedict H. Gross and Don B. Zagier. Heegner points and deriva-
tives of L-series. Invent. Math., 84(2):225–320, 1986. 292
[Hab78] W. J. Haboush. Homogeneous vector bundles and reductive
subgroups of reductive algebraic groups. Amer. J. Math.,
100(6):1123–1137, 1978. 330
[Hah09] Heekyoung Hahn. A simple twisted relative trace formula. Int.
Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (21):3957–3978, 2009. x, 374
[Har74] G. Harder. Chevalley groups over function fields and automor-
phic forms. Ann. of Math. (2), 100:249–306, 1974. 183
[Har77] Robin Hartshorne. Algebraic geometry. Springer-Verlag, New
York-Heidelberg, 1977. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 52.
3
[Har04] David Harari. Weak approximation on algebraic varieties. In
Arithmetic of higher-dimensional algebraic varieties (PaloAlto,
CA, 2002), volume 226 of Progr. Math., pages 43–60. Birkhäuser
Boston, Boston, MA, 2004. 42
[Har11] Günter Harder. Lectures on algebraic geometry I. Aspects of
Mathematics, E35. Vieweg + Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden, re-
vised edition, 2011. Sheaves, cohomology of sheaves, and appli-
cations to Riemann surfaces. 301, 306
[HC53] Harish-Chandra. Representations of a semisimple Lie group on
a Banach space. I. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 75:185–243, 1953.
84, 102
[HC68] Harish-Chandra. Automorphic forms on semisimple Lie groups.
Notes by J. G. M. Mars. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, No. 62.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1968. 116
[HC70a] Harish-Chandra. Eisenstein series over finite fields. In Functional
analysis and related fields (Proc. Conf. M. Stone, Univ. Chicago,
Chicago, Ill., 1968), pages 76–88. Springer, New York, 1970. 150,
195
[HC70b] Harish-Chandra. Harmonic analysis on reductive p-adic groups.
Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 162. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-
New York, 1970. Notes by G. van Dijk. 103
[HC75] Harish-Chandra. Harmonic analysis on real reductive groups. I.
The theory of the constant term. J. Functional Analysis, 19:104–
204, 1975. 413
[HC99] Harish-Chandra. Admissible invariant distributions on reductive
p-adic groups, volume 16 of University Lecture Series. American
Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1999. Preface and notes
by Stephen DeBacker and Paul J. Sally, Jr. 160
444 References
[Hec37a] E. Hecke. Über Modulfunktionen und die Dirichletschen Reihen

mit Eulerscher Produktentwicklung. I. Math. Ann., 114(1):1–28,
1937. 124
[Hec37b] E. Hecke. Über Modulfunktionen und die Dirichletschen Reihen
mit Eulerscher Produktentwicklung. II. Math. Ann., 114(1):316–
351, 1937. 124
[Hel00] A. G. Helminck. On the classification of k-involutions. Adv.
Math., 153(1):1–117, 2000. 283
[Hel01] Sigurdur Helgason. Differential geometry, Lie groups, and sym-
metric spaces, volume 34 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. Corrected
reprint of the 1978 original. 413
[Hen00] Guy Henniart. Une preuve simple des conjectures de Langlands
pour GL(n) sur un corps p-adique. Invent. Math., 139(2):439–
455, 2000. 239, 311
[Her11] P. Edward Herman. Beyond endoscopy for the Rankin-Selberg
L-function. J. Number Theory, 131(9):1691–1722, 2011. 377
[Her12] P. Edward Herman. The functional equation and beyond en-
doscopy. Pacific J. Math., 260(2):497–513, 2012. 377
[Her16] P. Edward Herman. Quadratic base change and the analytic con-
tinuation of the Asai L-function: a new trace formula approach.
Amer. J. Math., 138(6):1669–1729, 2016. 377
[HL04] Michael Harris and Jean-Pierre Labesse. Conditional base change
for unitary groups. Asian J. Math., 8(4):653–683, 2004. 324
[HLR86] G. Harder, R. P. Langlands, and M. Rapoport. Algebraische
Zyklen auf Hilbert-Blumenthal-Flächen. J. Reine Angew. Math.,
366:53–120, 1986. 275, 285, 296
[HLTT16] M. Harris, K-W Lan, R. Taylor, and J. Thorne. On the rigid co-
homology of certain Shimura varieties. Res. Math. Sci., 3:Paper
No. 37, 308, 2016. 253
[HT01] Michael Harris and Richard Taylor. The geometry and cohomol-
ogy of some simple Shimura varieties, volume 151 of Annals of
Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ,
2001. With an appendix by Vladimir G. Berkovich. 239, 262,
311
[Hub91] A. Huber. On the Parshin-Beı̆linson adèles for schemes. Abh.
Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg, 61:249–273, 1991. 34
[Hum75] James E. Humphreys. Linear algebraic groups. Springer-Verlag,
New York-Heidelberg, 1975. Graduate Texts in Mathematics,
No. 21. 2, 43
[Hum78] James E. Humphreys. Introduction to Lie algebras and repre-
sentation theory, volume 9 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics.
Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1978. Second printing, re-
vised. 20
References 445
[Hum95] James E. Humphreys. Conjugacy classes in semisimple algebraic

groups, volume 43 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1995. 168
[Igu00] Jun-ichi Igusa. An introduction to the theory of local zeta func-
tions, volume 14 of AMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathematics.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; International
Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000. 168, 169
[II10] Atsushi Ichino and Tamutsu Ikeda. On the periods of automor-
phic forms on special orthogonal groups and the Gross-Prasad
conjecture. Geom. Funct. Anal., 19(5):1378–1425, 2010. 282
[IK04] Henryk Iwaniec and Emmanuel Kowalski. Analytic number the-
ory, volume 53 of American Mathematical Society Colloquium
Publications. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI,
2004. 377
[Ive86] Birger Iversen. Cohomology of sheaves. Universitext. Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, 1986. 301
[Iwa02] Henryk Iwaniec. Spectral methods of automorphic forms, vol-
ume 53 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathe-
matical Society, Providence, RI; Revista Matemática Iberoamer-
icana, Madrid, second edition, 2002. 377
[Jac64] Nathan Jacobson. Structure of rings, volume 37 of American
Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, Revised edition.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1964. 86
[Jac71] Hervé Jacquet. Représentations des groupes linéaires p-adiques.
In Theory of group representations and Fourier analysis (Centro
Internaz. Mat. Estivo (C.I.M.E.), II Ciclo, Montecatini Terme,
1970), pages 119–220. Edizioni Cremonese, Rome, 1971. 155, 207
[Jac86] Hervé Jacquet. Sur un résultat de Waldspurger. Ann. Sci. École
Norm. Sup. (4), 19(2):185–229, 1986. 286, 364, 371
[Jac97] Hervé Jacquet. Automorphic spectrum of symmetric spaces.
In Representation theory and automorphic forms (Edinburgh,
1996), volume 61 of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 443–455.
Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997. 318
[Jac04] Hervé Jacquet. Kloosterman identities over a quadratic exten-
sion. Ann. of Math. (2), 160(2):755–779, 2004. 283, 401
[Jac05a] Hervé Jacquet. A guide to the relative trace formula. In Auto-
morphic representations, L-functions and applications: progress
and prospects, volume 11 of Ohio State Univ. Math. Res. Inst.
Publ., pages 257–272. de Gruyter, Berlin, 2005. 199, 282, 318,
364
[Jac05b] Hervé Jacquet. Kloosterman identities over a quadratic exten-
sion. II. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 38(4):609–669, 2005.
283, 376, 401
[Jac09] Hervé Jacquet. Archimedean Rankin-Selberg integrals. In Auto-
morphic forms and L-functions II. Local aspects, volume 489 of
446 References
Contemp. Math., pages 57–172. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,

RI, 2009. 218, 220, 387
[Jac10] Hervé Jacquet. Distinction by the quasi-split unitary group. Is-
rael J. Math., 178:269–324, 2010. 283, 376
[Jan14] Chris Jantzen. Tempered representations for classical p-adic
groups. Manuscripta Math., 145(3-4):319–387, 2014. 157
[Ji98] Lizhen Ji. The trace class conjecture for arithmetic groups. J.
Differential Geom., 48(1):165–203, 1998. 175
[JL70] H. Jacquet and R. P. Langlands. Automorphic forms on GL(2).
Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 114. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-
New York, 1970. 102, 391, 397
[JL13] Dihua Jiang and Baiying Liu. On Fourier coefficients of auto-
morphic forms of GL(n). Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (17):4029–
4071, 2013. 387
[JLR93] Hervé Jacquet, King F. Lai, and Stephen Rallis. A trace formula
for symmetric spaces. Duke Math. J., 70(2):305–372, 1993. 281,
282
[JLR99] Hervé Jacquet, Erez Lapid, and Jonathan Rogawski. Periods of
automorphic forms. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 12(1):173–240, 1999.
199, 281
[JPSS83] H. Jacquet, I. I. Piatetskii-Shapiro, and J. A. Shalika. Rankin-
Selberg convolutions. Amer. J. Math., 105(2):367–464, 1983. 218,
222, 223
[JR92] Hervé Jacquet and Stephen Rallis. Symplectic periods. J. Reine
Angew. Math., 423:175–197, 1992. 286
[JR11] Hervé Jacquet and Stephen Rallis. On the Gross-Prasad conjec-
ture for unitary groups. In On certain L-functions, volume 13 of
Clay Math. Proc., pages 205–264. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
RI, 2011. 291, 401
[JS81a] H. Jacquet and J. A. Shalika. On Euler products and the classifi-
cation of automorphic forms. II. Amer. J. Math., 103(4):777–815,
1981. 145, 204
[JS81b] H. Jacquet and J. A. Shalika. On Euler products and the clas-
sification of automorphic representations. I. Amer. J. Math.,
103(3):499–558, 1981. 145, 424
[JS83] Hervé Jacquet and Joseph Shalika. The Whittaker models of
induced representations. Pacific J. Math., 109(1):107–120, 1983.
158, 159, 225, 244
[JY96] Hervé Jacquet and Yangbo Ye. Distinguished representations
and quadratic base change for GL(3). Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
348(3):913–939, 1996. 283, 401
[JZ87] H. Jacquet and D. Zagier. Eisenstein series and the Selberg trace
formula. II. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 300(1):1–48, 1987. 424
[Kal16] Tasho Kaletha. The local Langlands conjectures for non-quasi-
split groups. In Families of automorphic forms and the trace
References 447
formula, Simons Symp., pages 217–257. Springer, [Cham], 2016.

240, 243
[Kap15] Eyal Kaplan. Complementary results on the Rankin-Selberg
gamma factors of classical groups. J. Number Theory, 146:390–
447, 2015. 268
[Kil88] Wilhelm Killing. Die Zusammensetzung der stetigen endlichen
Transformationsgruppen. Math. Ann., 33(1):1–48, 1888. 21
[Kil90] Wilhelm Killing. Die Zusammensetzung der stetigen endlichen
Transformationsgruppen. Math. Ann., 36(2):161–189, 1890. 21
[Kim03] Henry H. Kim. Functoriality for the exterior square of GL4 and
the symmetric fourth of GL2 . J. Amer. Math. Soc., 16(1):139–
183, 2003. With appendix 1 by Dinakar Ramakrishnan and ap-
pendix 2 by Kim and Peter Sarnak. 263, 264
[Kis09] Mark Kisin. Modularity of 2-adic Barsotti-Tate representations.
Invent. Math., 178(3):587–634, 2009. 260
[KL08] Andrew Knightly and Charles Li. Petersson’s trace formula
and the Hecke eigenvalues of Hilbert modular forms. In Modu-
lar forms on Schiermonnikoog, pages 145–187. Cambridge Univ.
Press, Cambridge, 2008. 377
[KL13] A. Knightly and C. Li. Kuznetsov’s trace formula and the
Hecke eigenvalues of Maass forms. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.,
224(1055):vi+132, 2013. 377
[Kna86] Anthony W. Knapp. Representation theory of semisimple groups,
volume 36 of Princeton Mathematical Series. Princeton Univer-
sity Press, Princeton, NJ, 1986. An overview based on examples.
26, 57, 60, 92, 397
[Kna94] A. W. Knapp. Local Langlands correspondence: the
Archimedean case. In Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), volume 55
of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 393–410. Amer. Math. Soc.,
[Kna02] Anthony W. Knapp. Lie groups beyond an introduction, volume
140 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston,
MA, second edition, 2002. 74, 80, 91, 93, 94, 164, 413
[Kob93] Neal Koblitz. Introduction to elliptic curves and modular forms,
volume 97 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag,
New York, second edition, 1993. 122, 124
[Kon03] Takuya Konno. A note on the Langlands classification and ir-
reducibility of induced representations of p-adic groups. Kyushu
J. Math., 57(2):383–409, 2003. 157
[Kot82] Robert E. Kottwitz. Rational conjugacy classes in reductive
groups. Duke Math. J., 49(4):785–806, 1982. 396, 398, 399
[Kot84] Robert E. Kottwitz. Stable trace formula: cuspidal tempered
terms. Duke Math. J., 51(3):611–650, 1984. 342, 399
[Kot86a] Robert E. Kottwitz. Base change for unit elements of Hecke
algebras. Compositio Math., 60(2):237–250, 1986. 399
448 References
[Kot86b] Robert E. Kottwitz. Stable trace formula: elliptic singular terms.

Math. Ann., 275(3):365–399, 1986. 342, 399
[Kot88] Robert E. Kottwitz. Tamagawa numbers. Ann. of Math. (2),
127(3):629–646, 1988. 62
[Kot92] Robert E. Kottwitz. On the λ-adic representations associated to
some simple Shimura varieties. Invent. Math., 108(3):653–665,
1992. 311
[Kot05] Robert E. Kottwitz. Harmonic analysis on reductive p-adic
groups and Lie algebras. In Harmonic analysis, the trace for-
mula, and Shimura varieties, volume 4 of Clay Math. Proc., pages
393–522. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2005. 160
[Kri19] Rahul Krishna. A new proof of the Waldspurger formula, I.
Algebra Number Theory, 13(3):577–642, 2019. 292
[KRY06] Stephen S. Kudla, Michael Rapoport, and Tonghai Yang. Mod-
ular forms and special cycles on Shimura curves, volume 161
of Annals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ, 2006. 314
[KS99] Robert E. Kottwitz and Diana Shelstad. Foundations of twisted
endoscopy. Astérisque, (255):vi+190, 1999. 341, 342, 399
[KS02] Henry H. Kim and Freydoon Shahidi. Functorial products for
GL2 × GL3 and the symmetric cube for GL2 . Ann. of Math. (2),
155(3):837–893, 2002. With an appendix by Colin J. Bushnell
and Guy Henniart. 263, 264
[KS15] Toshiyuki Kobayashi and Birgit Speh. Symmetry breaking for
representations of rank one orthogonal groups. Mem. Amer.
Math. Soc., 238(1126):v+110, 2015. 307
[KS17] F. Knop and B. Schalke. The dual group of a spherical variety.
Trans. Moscow Math. Soc., 78:187–216, 2017. 283, 286
[Kud97] Stephen S. Kudla. Algebraic cycles on Shimura varieties of or-
thogonal type. Duke Math. J., 86(1):39–78, 1997. 314
[Kud04] Stephen S. Kudla. Special cycles and derivatives of Eisenstein
series. In Heegner points and Rankin L-series, volume 49 of
Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., pages 243–270. Cambridge Univ.
Press, Cambridge, 2004. 314
[Kuz80] N. V. Kuznecov. The Petersson conjecture for cusp forms of
weight zero and the Linnik conjecture. Sums of Kloosterman
sums. Mat. Sb. (N.S.), 111(153)(3):334–383, 479, 1980. 377
[KW09a] Chandrashekhar Khare and Jean-Pierre Wintenberger. Serre’s
modularity conjecture. I. Invent. Math., 178(3):485–504, 2009.
259
[KW09b] Chandrashekhar Khare and Jean-Pierre Wintenberger. Serre’s
modularity conjecture. II. Invent. Math., 178(3):505–586, 2009.
259
References 449
[Lab90] J.-P. Labesse. Fonctions élémentaires et lemme fondamental pour

le changement de base stable. Duke Math. J., 61(2):519–530,
1990. 399
[Lab99] Jean-Pierre Labesse. Cohomologie, stabilisation et changement
de base. Astérisque, (257):vi+161, 1999. Appendix A by Laurent
Clozel and Labesse, and Appendix B by Lawrence Breen. 341,
342, 399
[Laf02] Laurent Lafforgue. Chtoucas de Drinfeld et correspondance de
Langlands. Invent. Math., 147(1):1–241, 2002. 273
[Laf14] Laurent Lafforgue. Noyaux du transfert automorphe de Lang-
lands et formules de Poisson non linéaires. Jpn. J. Math., 9(1):1–
68, 2014. 400
[Laf18] Vincent Lafforgue. Chtoucas pour les groupes réductifs et
paramétrisation de Langlands globale. J. Amer. Math. Soc.,
31(3):719–891, 2018. 273
[Lan] R. P. Langlands. Letter to andré weil. 130, 199, 255
[Lan56] S. Lang. Algebraic groups over finite fields. Amer. J. Math.,
78:555–563, 1956. 409
[Lan70] R. P. Langlands. Problems in the theory of automorphic forms.
In Lectures in modern analysis and applications, III, pages 18–
61. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 170. Springer, Berlin, 1970. 130,
199, 248, 255
[Lan71] R. P. Langlands. Euler products. Yale University Press, New
Haven, Conn.-London, 1971. A James K. Whittemore Lecture in
Mathematics given at Yale University, 1967, Yale Mathematical
Monographs, 1. 199, 250, 262
[Lan76] R. P. Langlands. On the functional equations satisfied by Eisen-
stein series. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 544. Springer-
Verlag, Berlin, 1976. 195, 199
[Lan79a] R. P. Langlands. Automorphic representations, Shimura vari-
eties, and motives. Ein Märchen. In Automorphic forms, repre-
sentations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Oregon
State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 2, Proc. Sympos. Pure
Math., XXXIII, pages 205–246. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
R.I., 1979. 204, 246
[Lan79b] R. P. Langlands. Stable conjugacy: definitions and lemmas.
Canadian J. Math., 31(4):700–725, 1979. 399
[Lan80] R. P. Langlands. Base change for GL(2), volume 96 of Annals
of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton,
N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1980. 259, 261, 398
[Lan83] R. P. Langlands. Les débuts d’une formule des traces stable,
volume 13 of Publications Mathématiques de l’Université Paris
VII [Mathematical Publications of the University of Paris VII].
Université de Paris VII, U.E.R. de Mathématiques, Paris, 1983.
342, 399
450 References
[Lan89] R. P. Langlands. On the classification of irreducible represen-

tations of real algebraic groups. In Representation theory and
harmonic analysis on semisimple Lie groups, volume 31 of Math.
Surveys Monogr., pages 101–170. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
RI, 1989. 237, 239, 250
[Lan95] S. Lang. Introduction to modular forms, volume 222 of
Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental
Principles of Mathematical Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1995. With appendixes by D. Zagier and Walter Feit, Corrected
reprint of the 1976 original. 122, 124
[Lan00] Erasmus Landvogt. Some functorial properties of the Bruhat-
Tits building. J. Reine Angew. Math., 518:213–241, 2000. 413
[Lan04] R. P. Langlands. Beyond endoscopy. In Contributions to au-
tomorphic forms, geometry, and number theory, pages 611–697.
Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 2004. 262
[Lap06] Erez M. Lapid. On the fine spectral expansion of Jacquet’s rel-
ative trace formula. J. Inst. Math. Jussieu, 5(2):263–308, 2006.
364
[Lau87] G. Laumon. Transformation de Fourier, constantes d’équations
fonctionnelles et conjecture de Weil. Inst. Hautes Études Sci.
Publ. Math., (65):131–210, 1987. 273
[Lau96] Gérard Laumon. Cohomology of Drinfeld modular varieties. Part
I, volume 41 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996. Geometry, count-
ing of points and local harmonic analysis. 104, 164, 167
[LM09] Erez Lapid and Werner Müller. Spectral asymptotics for arith-
metic quotients of SL(n, R)/SO(n). Duke Math. J., 149(1):117–
155, 2009. 393
[Lor08] Falko Lorenz. Algebra. Vol. II. Universitext. Springer, New York,
2008. Fields with structure, algebras and advanced topics, Trans-
lated from the German by Silvio Levy, With the collaboration of
Levy. 30, 59
[LR79] D. Luna and R. W. Richardson. A generalization of the Chevalley
restriction theorem. Duke Math. J., 46(3):487–496, 1979. 337
[LR98] E. M. Lapid and J. D. Rogawski. On twists of cuspidal repre-
sentations of GL(2). Forum Math., 10(2):175–197, 1998. 262
[LR03] E. M. Lapid and J. D. Rogawski. Periods of Eisenstein series:
the Galois case. Duke Math. J., 120(1):153–226, 2003. 281
[LRS93] G. Laumon, M. Rapoport, and U. Stuhler. D-elliptic sheaves
and the Langlands correspondence. Invent. Math., 113(2):217–
338, 1993. 239
[LS87] R. P. Langlands and D. Shelstad. On the definition of transfer
factors. Math. Ann., 278(1-4):219–271, 1987. 399
References 451
[LV07] Elon Lindenstrauss and Akshay Venkatesh. Existence and Weyl’s

law for spherical cusp forms. Geom. Funct. Anal., 17(1):220–251,
2007. 323, 370, 392
[LW13] Jean-Pierre Labesse and Jean-Loup Waldspurger. La formule des
traces tordue d’après le Friday Morning Seminar, volume 31 of
CRM Monograph Series. American Mathematical Society, Prov-
idence, RI, 2013. With a foreword by Robert Langlands [dual
English/French text]. 374
[M0̈0] W. Müller. On the singularities of residual intertwining opera-
tors. Geom. Funct. Anal., 10(5):1118–1170, 2000. 200
[M0̈7] Werner Müller. Weyl’s law for the cuspidal spectrum of SLn .
Ann. of Math. (2), 165(1):275–333, 2007. 392
[Mac17] Marco Maculan. Maximality of hyperspecial compact subgroups
avoiding Bruhat-Tits theory. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble),
67(1):1–21, 2017. 40, 414
[Mao98] Zhengyu Mao. A fundamental lemma for metaplectic correspon-
dence. J. Reine Angew. Math., 496:107–129, 1998. 286
[Mat60] Yozô Matsushima. Espaces homogènes de Stein des groupes de
Lie complexes. Nagoya Math. J, 16:205–218, 1960. 330
[Mat13] Nadir Matringe. Essential Whittaker functions for GL(n). Doc.
Math., 18:1191–1214, 2013. 203, 221
[Men65] Jens L. Mennicke. Finite factor groups of the unimodular group.
Ann. of Math. (2), 81:31–37, 1965. 297
[MFK94] D. Mumford, J. Fogarty, and F. Kirwan. Geometric invariant
theory, volume 34 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Gren-
zgebiete (2) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (2)].
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, third edition, 1994. 16, 43, 129, 327,
332, 333, 335, 337
[Mg02] C. Mœ glin. Sur la classification des séries discrètes des groupes
classiques p-adiques: paramètres de Langlands et exhaustivité.
J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 4(2):143–200, 2002. 157
[MgT02] Colette Mœ glin and Marko Tadić. Construction of discrete series
for classical p-adic groups. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 15(3):715–786,
2002. 157
[MgW89] C. Mœ glin and J.-L. Waldspurger. Le spectre résiduel de GL(n).
Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 22(4):605–674, 1989. 207, 386,
387
[Mil80] James S. Milne. Étale cohomology, volume 33 of Princeton Math-
ematical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.,
1980. 312
[Mil05] J. S. Milne. Introduction to Shimura varieties. In Harmonic
analysis, the trace formula, and Shimura varieties, volume 4 of
Clay Math. Proc., pages 265–378. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
RI, 2005. 9, 309
452 References
[Mil10] John Milnor. Collected papers of John Milnor. V. Algebra. Amer-

ican Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010. Edited by Hy-
man Bass and T. Y. Lam. 297
[Mil17] J. S. Milne. Algebraic groups, volume 170 of Cambridge Studies in
Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
2017. The theory of group schemes of finite type over a field. 2,
7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20, 168, 290, 327, 328, 329, 330, 333, 335,
337, 338, 350, 378, 379, 412
[Miy06] Toshitsune Miyake. Modular forms. Springer Monographs
in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, english edition, 2006.
Translated from the 1976 Japanese original by Yoshitaka Maeda.
122, 124
[MM97] M. Ram Murty and V. Kumar Murty. Non-vanishing of L-
functions and applications, volume 157 of Progress in Mathe-
matics. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1997. 258
[Mok15] Chung Pang Mok. Endoscopic classification of representa-
tions of quasi-split unitary groups. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.,
235(1108):vi+248, 2015. 134, 208, 243, 266, 270, 285, 288
[Moo65] Calvin C. Moore. Decomposition of unitary representations de-
fined by discrete subgroups of nilpotent groups. Ann. of Math.
(2), 82:146–182, 1965. 67
[Mor] L. J. Mordell. Note on Certain Modular Relations Considered by
Messrs. Ramanujan, Darling, and Rogers. Proc. London Math.
Soc., S2-20(1):408. 124
[Mor08] Sophie Morel. Complexes pondérés sur les compactifications de
Baily-Borel: le cas des variétés de Siegel. J. Amer. Math. Soc.,
21(1):23–61, 2008. 299, 312
[Mor10] Sophie Morel. On the cohomology of certain noncompact Shimura
varieties, volume 173 of Annals of Mathematics Studies. Prince-
ton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2010. With an appendix by
Robert Kottwitz. 312
[Mos56] G. D. Mostow. Fully reducible subgroups of algebraic groups.
Amer. J. Math., 78:200–221, 1956. 11
[MP49] S. Minakshisundaram and Å . Pleijel. Some properties of the
eigenfunctions of the Laplace-operator on Riemannian manifolds.
Canadian J. Math., 1:242–256, 1949. 392
[MR87] V. Kumar Murty and Dinakar Ramakrishnan. Period relations
and the Tate conjecture for Hilbert modular surfaces. Invent.
Math., 89(2):319–345, 1987. 314
[Mül89] Werner Müller. The trace class conjecture in the theory of auto-
morphic forms. Ann. of Math. (2), 130(3):473–529, 1989. 175
[Mül98] W. Müller. The trace class conjecture in the theory of automor-
phic forms. II. Geom. Funct. Anal., 8(2):315–355, 1998. 175
[Mum99] David Mumford. The red book of varieties and schemes, volume
1358 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
References 453
expanded edition, 1999. Includes the Michigan lectures (1974)

on curves and their Jacobians, With contributions by Enrico Ar-
barello. 3, 17
[Mur] F. Murnaghan. Representations of reductive p-adic
groups. Available at http://www.math.toronto.edu/
murnaghan/courses/mat1197/notes.pdf. 151
[MV07] I. Mirković and K. Vilonen. Geometric Langlands duality and
representations of algebraic groups over commutative rings. Ann.
of Math. (2), 166(1):95–143, 2007. 137
[MW95] C. Mœglin and J.-L. Waldspurger. Spectral decomposition and
Eisenstein series, volume 113 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathemat-
ics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. Une para-
phrase de l’Écriture [A paraphrase of Scripture]. 191, 195, 198,
200
[MW12] Colette Mœglin and Jean-Loup Waldspurger. La conjecture lo-
cale de Gross-Prasad pour les groupes spéciaux orthogonaux: le
cas général. Astérisque, (347):167–216, 2012. Sur les conjectures
de Gross et Prasad. II. 291
[MW16a] Colette Moeglin and Jean-Loup Waldspurger. Stabilisation de
la formule des traces tordue. Vol. 1, volume 316 of Progress in
Mathematics. Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, 2016. 243, 270, 399
[MW16b] Colette Moeglin and Jean-Loup Waldspurger. Stabilisation de
la formule des traces tordue. Vol. 2, volume 317 of Progress in
Mathematics. Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, 2016. 243, 270, 399
[Nek94] Jan Nekovář. Beı̆linson’s conjectures. In Motives (Seattle, WA,
1991), volume 55 of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 537–570.
Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994. 313
[Neu99] Jürgen Neukirch. Algebraic number theory, volume 322 of
Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental
Principles of Mathematical Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1999. Translated from the 1992 German original and with a note
by Norbert Schappacher, With a foreword by G. Harder. 29
[Ngô99a] Báo Châu Ngô. Faisceaux pervers, homomorphisme de change-
ment de base et lemme fondamental de Jacquet et Ye. Ann. Sci.
École Norm. Sup. (4), 32(5):619–679, 1999. 283, 376, 401
[Ngô99b] Báo Châu Ngô. Le lemme fondamental de Jacquet et Ye en
caractéristique positive. Duke Math. J., 96(3):473–520, 1999.
283, 376, 401
[Ngô10a] Báo Châu Ngô. Endoscopy theory of automorphic forms. In Pro-
ceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians. Vol-
ume I, pages 210–237. Hindustan Book Agency, New Delhi, 2010.
400
[Ngô10b] Bao Châu Ngô. Le lemme fondamental pour les algèbres de Lie.
Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci., (111):1–169, 2010. 270,
331
454 References
[Ngô10c] Báo Châu Ngô. Survey on the fundamental lemma. In Cur-

rent developments in mathematics, 2009, pages 1–21. Int. Press,
Somerville, MA, 2010. 270
[Ngô14] Báo Châu Ngô. On a certain sum of automorphic L-functions.
In Automorphic forms and related geometry: assessing the legacy
of I. I. Piatetski-Shapiro, volume 614 of Contemp. Math., pages
337–343. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2014. 376, 400
[Oes84] Joseph Oesterlé. Nombres de Tamagawa et groupes unipotents
en caractéristique p. Invent. Math., 78(1):13–88, 1984. 60
[Off06] Omer Offen. On symplectic periods of the discrete spectrum of
GL2n . Israel J. Math., 154:253–298, 2006. 281, 286
[Pet32] Hans Petersson. Über die Entwicklungskoeffizienten der auto-
morphen Formen. Acta Math., 58(1):169–215, 1932. 377
[Poo17] Bjorn Poonen. Rational points on varieties, volume 186 of Grad-
uate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society,
Providence, RI, 2017. x, 327, 343, 345, 346, 347, 348, 352, 353,
354
[PR94] V. Platonov and A. Rapinchuk. Algebraic groups and number
theory, volume 139 of Pure and Applied Mathematics. Academic
Press Inc., Boston, MA, 1994. Translated from the 1991 Russian
original by Rachel Rowen. 42, 43, 44, 47
[Pra77] G. Prasad. Strong approximation for semi-simple groups over
function fields. Ann. of Math. (2), 105(3):553–572, 1977. 44
[Pra19] Dipendra Prasad. Generic representations for symmetric spaces.
Adv. Math., 348:378–411, 2019. With an appendix by Yiannis
Sakellaridis. 293
[PS16] Vincent Pilloni and Benoı̂t Stroh. Surconvergence, ramification
et modularité. Astérisque, (382):195–266, 2016. 259, 260
[PWZ19] Aaron Pollack, Chen Wan, and Michal Zydor. On the
residue method for period integrals. arXiv e-prints, page
arXiv:1903.02544, Mar 2019. 288
[Raj02] C. S. Rajan. On the image and fibres of solvable base change.
Math. Res. Lett., 9(4):499–508, 2002. 262
[Ram94] D. Ramakrishnan. Pure motives and automorphic forms. In
Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), volume 55 of Proc. Sympos. Pure
Math., pages 411–446. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994.
246
[Ram00a] Dinakar Ramakrishnan. Modularity of the Rankin-Selberg L-
series, and multiplicity one for SL(2). Ann. of Math. (2),
152(1):45–111, 2000. 264
[Ram00b] S. Ramanujan. On certain arithmetical functions [Trans. Cam-
bridge Philos. Soc. 22 (1916), no. 9, 159–184]. In Collected papers
of Srinivasa Ramanujan, pages 136–162. AMS Chelsea Publ.,
References 455
[Ram04] Dinakar Ramakrishnan. Algebraic cycles on Hilbert modular

fourfolds and poles of L-functions. In Algebraic groups and arith-
metic, pages 221–274. Tata Inst. Fund. Res., Mumbai, 2004. 285,
314
[Rap14] A. S. Rapinchuk. Strong approximation for algebraic groups. In
Thin groups and superstrong approximation, volume 61 of Math.
Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., pages 269–298. Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, 2014. 44
[Ric77] R. W. Richardson. Affine coset spaces of reductive algebraic
groups. Bull. London Math. Soc., 9(1):38–41, 1977. 330
[Ric82] R. W. Richardson. Orbits, invariants, and representations associ-
ated to involutions of reductive groups. Invent. Math., 66(2):287–
312, 1982. 281, 339, 340
[Rog83] Jonathan D. Rogawski. Representations of GL(n) and division
algebras over a p-adic field. Duke Math. J., 50(1):161–196, 1983.
372, 397
[Rud91] Walter Rudin. Functional analysis. International Series in Pure
and Applied Mathematics. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, second
edition, 1991. 422
[RV99] D. Ramakrishnan and R. J. Valenza. Fourier analysis on number
fields, volume 186 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-
Verlag, New York, 1999. 29, 415
[Sai75] Hiroshi Saito. Automorphic forms and algebraic extensions of
number fields. Proc. Japan Acad., 51(4):229–233, 1975. 261,
374, 398
[Sak08] Yiannis Sakellaridis. On the unramified spectrum of spherical va-
rieties over p-adic fields. Compos. Math., 144(4):978–1016, 2008.
282
[Sak12] Yiannis Sakellaridis. Spherical varieties and integral represen-
tations of L-functions. Algebra Number Theory, 6(4):611–667,
2012. 376, 400
[Sak13] Yiannis Sakellaridis. Spherical functions on spherical varieties.
Amer. J. Math., 135(5):1291–1381, 2013. 282
[Sar] Peter Sarnak. Comments on Langlands’ lecture ”Endoscopy and
Beyond”. 377
[Sar05] Peter Sarnak. Notes on the generalized Ramanujan conjectures.
In Harmonic analysis, the trace formula, and Shimura varieties,
volume 4 of Clay Math. Proc., pages 659–685. Amer. Math. Soc.,
[Sat63] Ichirô Satake. Theory of spherical functions on reductive alge-
braic groups over p-adic fields. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ.
Math., (18):5–69, 1963. 137
[Sch88] Peter Schneider. Introduction to the Beı̆linson conjectures. In
Beı̆linson’s conjectures on special values of L-functions, volume 4
456 References
of Perspect. Math., pages 1–35. Academic Press, Boston, MA,

1988. 313
[Sch15] Peter Scholze. On torsion in the cohomology of locally symmetric
varieties. Ann. of Math. (2), 182(3):945–1066, 2015. 253
[Sel56] A. Selberg. Harmonic analysis and discontinuous groups in
weakly symmetric Riemannian spaces with applications to
Dirichlet series. J. Indian Math. Soc. (N.S.), 20:47–87, 1956.
199, 315, 363, 392
[Sel63] Atle Selberg. Discontinuous groups and harmonic analysis. In
Proc. Internat. Congr. Mathematicians (Stockholm, 1962), pages
177–189. Inst. Mittag-Leffler, Djursholm, 1963. 199
[Ser72] Jean-Pierre Serre. Propriétés galoisiennes des points d’ordre fini
des courbes elliptiques. Invent. Math., 15(4):259–331, 1972. 230
[Ser73] J.-P. Serre. A course in arithmetic. Springer-Verlag, New York-
Heidelberg, 1973. Translated from the French, Graduate Texts
in Mathematics, No. 7. 122, 124
[Ser02] Jean-Pierre Serre. Galois cohomology. Springer Monographs
in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, english edition, 2002.
Translated from the French by Patrick Ion and revised by the
author. 289, 341, 343
[Ser06] Jean-Pierre Serre. Lie algebras and Lie groups, volume 1500 of
Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2006.
1964 lectures given at Harvard University, Corrected fifth print-
ing of the second (1992) edition. 40, 100, 169, 244
[Sha74] J. A. Shalika. The multiplicity one theorem for GLn . Ann. of
Math. (2), 100:171–193, 1974. 214, 216
[Sha88] Freydoon Shahidi. On the Ramanujan conjecture and finiteness
of poles for certain L-functions. Ann. of Math. (2), 127(3):547–
584, 1988. 262
[Sha90] Freydoon Shahidi. A proof of Langlands’ conjecture on
Plancherel measures; complementary series for p-adic groups.
Ann. of Math. (2), 132(2):273–330, 1990. 242, 268
[Sha10] Freydoon Shahidi. Eisenstein series and automorphic L-
functions, volume 58 of American Mathematical Society Col-
loquium Publications. American Mathematical Society, Provi-
dence, RI, 2010. 199, 212, 250, 262, 268
[Sha11] Freydoon Shahidi. Arthur packets and the Ramanujan conjec-
ture. Kyoto J. Math., 51(1):1–23, 2011. 248
[She82] D. Shelstad. L-indistinguishability for real groups. Math. Ann.,
259(3):385–430, 1982. 239
[Shi76] Takuro Shintani. On an explicit formula for class-1 “Whit-
taker functions” on GLn over P -adic fields. Proc. Japan Acad.,
52(4):180–182, 1976. 218
[Shi79] Takuro Shintani. On liftings of holomorphic cusp forms. In Auto-
morphic forms, representations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos.
References 457
Pure Math., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 2,

Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., XXXIII, pages 97–110. Amer. Math.
Soc., Providence, R.I., 1979. 261, 374, 398
[Shi94] Goro Shimura. Introduction to the arithmetic theory of auto-
morphic functions, volume 11 of Publications of the Mathemati-
cal Society of Japan. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ,
1994. Reprint of the 1971 original, Kanô Memorial Lectures, 1.
122, 124
[Shi11] Sug Woo Shin. Galois representations arising from some compact
Shimura varieties. Ann. of Math. (2), 173(3):1645–1741, 2011.
312
[Sil79] Allan J. Silberger. Introduction to harmonic analysis on reductive
p-adic groups, volume 23 of Mathematical Notes. Princeton Uni-
versity Press, Princeton, N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo,
1979. Based on lectures by Harish-Chandra at the Institute for
Advanced Study, 1971–1973. 91
[Sli84] Mohamed Hachmi Sliman. Théorie de Mackey pour les groupes
adéliques. Astérisque, (115):151, 1984. 63, 67, 182
[Sou05] David Soudry. On Langlands functoriality from classical groups
to GLn . Astérisque, (298):335–390, 2005. Automorphic forms. I.
268
[Spe83] Birgit Speh. Unitary representations of Gl(n, R) with nontrivial
(g, K)-cohomology. Invent. Math., 71(3):443–465, 1983. 207
[Spr79] T. A. Springer. Reductive groups. In Automorphic forms, repre-
sentations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Oregon
State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 1, Proc. Sympos. Pure
Math., XXXIII, pages 3–27. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I.,
1979. 290
[Spr94] T. A. Springer. Reduction theory over global fields. Proc. Indian
Acad. Sci. Math. Sci., 104(1):207–216, 1994. K. G. Ramanathan
memorial issue. 48
[Spr09] T. A. Springer. Linear algebraic groups. Modern Birkhäuser
Classics. Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, second edition,
2009. 2, 43, 169
[Sta16] The Stacks Project Authors. Stacks project. http://stacks.
math.columbia.edu, 2016. 333
[Ste65] Robert Steinberg. Regular elements of semisimple algebraic
groups. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (25):49–80, 1965.
129, 166, 330, 337
[Ste68] Robert Steinberg. Endomorphisms of linear algebraic groups.
Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, No. 80. Ameri-
can Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1968. 338
[Ste87] Glenn Stevens. Poincaré series on GL(r) and Kloostermann
sums. Math. Ann., 277(1):25–51, 1987. 177, 382
458 References
[Sun17] Binyong Sun. The nonvanishing hypothesis at infinity for

Rankin-Selberg convolutions. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 30(1):1–25,
2017. 307
[SV12] Y. Sakellaridis and A. Venkatesh. Periods and harmonic analysis
on spherical varieties. ArXiv e-prints, February 2012. 282, 396
[Tat67] J. T. Tate. Fourier analysis in number fields, and Hecke’s zeta-
functions. In Algebraic Number Theory (Proc. Instructional
Conf., Brighton, 1965), pages 305–347. Thompson, Washington,
D.C., 1967. 212, 415
[Tat79] J. Tate. Number theoretic background. In Automorphic forms,
representations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.,
Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 2, Proc. Sym-
pos. Pure Math., XXXIII, pages 3–26. Amer. Math. Soc., Prov-
idence, R.I., 1979. 230, 236
[Tat94] John Tate. Conjectures on algebraic cycles in l-adic cohomology.
In Motives (Seattle, WA, 1991), volume 55 of Proc. Sympos. Pure
Math., pages 71–83. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994. 313
[Tit79] J. Tits. Reductive groups over local fields. In Automorphic forms,
representations and L-functions (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.,
Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., 1977), Part 1, Proc. Sym-
pos. Pure Math., XXXIII, pages 29–69. Amer. Math. Soc., Prov-
idence, R.I., 1979. 40, 128, 145, 241, 413
[Tun81] Jerrold Tunnell. Artin’s conjecture for representations of octa-
hedral type. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 5(2):173–175, 1981.
259
[Ven04] Akshay Venkatesh. “Beyond endoscopy” and special forms on
GL(2). J. Reine Angew. Math., 577:23–80, 2004. 377
[Vog93] David A. Vogan, Jr. The local Langlands conjecture. In Repre-
sentation theory of groups and algebras, volume 145 of Contemp.
Math., pages 305–379. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1993.
252
[Vus74] Thierry Vust. Opération de groupes réductifs dans un type de
cônes presque homogènes. Bull. Soc. Math. France, 102:317–333,
1974. 283, 340
[VZ84] David A. Vogan, Jr. and Gregg J. Zuckerman. Unitary represen-
tations with nonzero cohomology. Compositio Math., 53(1):51–
90, 1984. 309
[Wal88] Nolan R. Wallach. Real reductive groups. I, volume 132 of Pure
and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA,
1988. 74, 80, 86, 88, 237
[Wal92] Nolan R. Wallach. Real reductive groups. II, volume 132 of Pure
and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA,
1992. 74, 81, 92
[Wal97] J.-L. Waldspurger. Le lemme fondamental implique le transfert.
Compositio Math., 105(2):153–236, 1997. 331
References 459
[Wal03] J.-L. Waldspurger. La formule de Plancherel pour les groupes

p-adiques (d’après Harish-Chandra). J. Inst. Math. Jussieu,
2(2):235–333, 2003. 92
[Wal06] J.-L. Waldspurger. Endoscopie et changement de caractéristique.
J. Inst. Math. Jussieu, 5(3):423–525, 2006. 331
[Wal08] J.-L. Waldspurger. L’endoscopie tordue n’est pas si tordue. Mem.
Amer. Math. Soc., 194(908):x+261, 2008. 331
[Wal09a] J.-L. Waldspurger. à propos du lemme fondamental pondéré
tordu. Math. Ann., 343(1):103–174, 2009. 331
[Wal09b] Jean-Loup Waldspurger. Endoscopie et changement de car-
actéristique: intégrales orbitales pondérées. Ann. Inst. Fourier
(Grenoble), 59(5):1753–1818, 2009. 331
[Wat79] William C. Waterhouse. Introduction to affine group schemes,
volume 66 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1979. 2, 9, 10, 15
[Wei67] André Weil. über die Bestimmung Dirichletscher Reihen durch
Funktionalgleichungen. Math. Ann., 168:149–156, 1967. 273
[Wey12] Hermann Weyl. Das asymptotische Verteilungsgesetz der Eigen-
werte linearer partieller Differentialgleichungen (mit einer An-
wendung auf die Theorie der Hohlraumstrahlung). Math. Ann.,
71(4):441–479, 1912. 364, 392
[Xue17] Hang Xue. On the global gan–gross–prasad conjecture for uni-
tary groups: Approximating smooth transfer of jacquet–rallis.
Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Jour-
nal), 01 2017. 292
[Ye00] Yangbo Ye. A Kuznetsov formula for Kloosterman sums on GLn .
Ramanujan J., 4(4):385–395, 2000. 377
[Yu] J.K. Yu. Smooth models associated to concave functions in
bruhat-tits theory. (Preprint). 39
[Yun11] Zhiwei Yun. The fundamental lemma of Jacquet and Rallis.
Duke Math. J., 156(2):167–227, 2011. With an appendix by Julia
Gordon. 292, 314, 402
[YZ17] Zhiwei Yun and Wei Zhang. Shtukas and the Taylor expansion
of L-functions. Ann. of Math. (2), 186(3):767–911, 2017. 292,
314
[YZ19] Zhiwei Yun and Wei Zhang. Shtukas and the Taylor expansion
of L-functions (II). Ann. of Math. (2), 189(2):393–526, 2019. 292
[Zel80] A. V. Zelevinsky. Induced representations of reductive p-adic
groups. II. On irreducible representations of GL(n). Ann. Sci.
École Norm. Sup. (4), 13(2):165–210, 1980. 157, 158, 159, 240
[Zha12a] Wei Zhang. Gross-Zagier formula and arithmetic fundamental
lemma. In Fifth International Congress of Chinese Mathemati-
cians. Part 1, 2, volume 2 of AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math., 51, pt.
1, pages 447–459. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2012. 314
460 References
[Zha12b] Wei Zhang. On arithmetic fundamental lemmas. Invent. Math.,

188(1):197–252, 2012. 292
[Zha14] Wei Zhang. Fourier transform and the global Gan-Gross-Prasad
conjecture for unitary groups. Ann. of Math. (2), 180(3):971–
1049, 2014. 292, 314, 402
[Zhu93] Ke He Zhu. An introduction to operator algebras. Studies in
Advanced Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1993. 179,
424
[Zyd15] Michal Zydor. Les formules des traces relatives de jacquet-rallis
grossières. arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:1510.04301, Oct 2015. 364
[Zyd19] Michal Zydor. Periods of automorphic forms over reductive sub-
groups. arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:1903.01697, Mar 2019. 281,
364

An Introduction To Automorphic Representations: Jayce R. Getz, Heekyoung Hahn

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction To Automorphic Representations: Jayce R. Getz, Heekyoung Hahn

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction To Automorphic Representations: Jayce R. Getz, Heekyoung Hahn

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jayce R.

Getz, Heekyoung Hahn

August 26, 2019

The instructor of an introductory course on automorphic representations, the

This book is written so that it can be used as a text for a semester or

Distinction and Period Integrals §14.2, §14.3, §14.4, §14.5

Durham, NC, Jayce R. Getz

3.9 Type I groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

4 Archimedean Representation Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

5 Representations of Totally Disconnected Groups . . . . . . . . . . 97

6 Automorphic Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

7 Unramified Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

8 Nonarchimedean Representation Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

9 The Cuspidal Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

10 Eisenstein Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

11 Rankin-Selberg L-functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

12 Langlands Functoriality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

13 Known Cases of Global Langlands Functoriality . . . . . . . . . . 255

14 Distinction and Period Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

15 The Cohomology of Locally Symmetric Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

16 Spectral Sides of Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315

17 Orbital Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

18 Simple Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363

19 Applications of Trace Formulae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

A The Iwasawa Decomposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407

B Poisson Summation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Hints to selected exercises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421

Before Genesis, God gave the

Someone beginning to learn the theory of automorphic representations does

1.2 Affine schemes

Throughout this chapter we let k be a commutative Noetherian ring with

Spec(A) : Algk −→ Set (1.1)

Moreover, if φ : A → B is a morphism of k-algebras, then we obtain for each

Spec(B)(R) −→ Spec(A)(R) (1.2)

This collection of maps is an example of what is known as a natural transfor-

X(R) −→ Y (R) (1.3)

such that for all morphisms of k-algebras R → R0 the following diagram

X(R) −−−−→ Y (R)

One can check that (1.2) is a natural transformation of functors.

Spec : Algk −→ AffSchk

and refer to it as the coordinate ring of S.

for some (finite) set of indeterminates t1 , . . . , tn and finite set of polynomials

Gna := Spec(k[t1 , . . . , tn ]).

is a closed immersion if the associated map O(Y ) −→ O(X) is surjective.

If X → Y is a closed immersion then O(X) ∼ = O(Y )/I for some ideal I

V (S) = {p ∈ Spec(A) : p ⊇ S}.

X = Spec A, Y = Spec B, Z = Spec C

be k-schemes equipped with morphisms f : X → Y and g : Z → Y . We can

where A and C are regarded as B-algebras via the maps B → A and B → C

(X ×Y Z)(R) = X(R) ×Y (R) Z(R)

X(R) ×Y (R) Z(R) := {(x, z) ∈ X(R) × Z(R) : f (x) = g(z)}. (1.6)

namely the morphism induced by the ring homomorphism k → A that gives

It follows from (1.6) that for k-algebras R,

(X × Z)(R) = X(R) × Z(R).

1.3 Group schemes

Definition 1.6. An affine group scheme over k is a functor

representable by a k-algebra. A morphism of affine group schemes H → G

Here a natural transformation of functors is defined as in the previous section,

to be group homomorphisms, not just maps of sets. It is clear that an affine

Lie G −→ Homk-linear (ker()/ ker()2 , k)