Significance
In his proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, Wiles pioneered a method for relating two disparate collections of objects, namely Galois representations and modular forms. He parameterizes each collection by a certain space, and then the parameterizing spaces are shown to match, thereby associating a modular form to each Galois representation. However, the shape of the underlying parameterizing space typically remains somewhat mysterious. In this paper, the parameterizing space is explicitly determined under certain hypotheses, and the description turns out to be strikingly uniform when varying the data upon which the parameterizing space depends.
Keywords: number theory, modular forms, Galois representations
Abstract
Let N and p be prime numbers with such that . In a previous paper, we showed that there is a cuspform f of weight 2 and level whose ℓ-th Fourier coefficient is congruent to modulo a prime above p for all primes ℓ. In this paper, we prove that this form f is unique up to Galois conjugacy, and the extension of generated by the coefficients of f is exactly . We also prove similar results when a higher power of p divides .
1. Introduction
Let p be a prime number and let be a modular residual Galois representation. How many different Hecke eigenforms f give rise to , and what can be said about the p-adic field generated by the Hecke eigenvalues of f? One can fine-tune this question by constraining the various parameters involved. For instance, if one fixes the level of f but allows the weight to vary, then Buzzard, motivated by conjectures about slopes of modular forms, asked whether the degrees are bounded (1, question 4.4). In the case with level 1, Buzzard even suggested a bound of 2 on . We know of very little progress on this question in the twenty years since Buzzard asked it. (While preparing this article, we learned of recent work by Kimball Martin and Anna Medvedovsky giving examples of level-one f, where . There does not seem to be a consensus among experts about the question of boundedness.)
In this paper, we consider a question orthogonal to Buzzard’s: We fix the representation , where is the mod-p cyclotomic character. We are interested in Hecke eigenforms of fixed weight 2 that give rise to , but we allow the level to vary among certain prime powers. There is another way to phrase this in terms of Hecke algebras: There is a localization of the Hecke algebra whose minimal prime ideals correspond to Galois-conjugacy classes of such eigenforms, and we are interested in the number and degree of these minimal primes. For primes , in order to have a cuspidal eigenform of weight 2 and N-power level with mod-p residual representation , one must have (2, theorem 2.8), so the two cases of interest are when .
If the level is constrained to be prime, Mazur asked about the rank of the Hecke algebra (3, p. 140). [Calegari and Emerton (4) first pointed out the parallels between Mazur’s question and Buzzard’s.] In this prime-level case, the degrees of (and their sum—the rank of ) have a great deal of arithmetic significance. They have been studied using modular symbols by Merel (5) and Lecouturier (6), where they are shown to be related to special values of equivariant L-functions. Using Galois representations, Calegari–Emerton (4) and Wake–Wang-Erickson (7) show that these ranks are related to class groups and Massey products in Galois cohomology. In numerical examples, the most common scenario is that there is a unique cusp form giving rise to and its Hecke field is , but this is certainly not always the case. See the tables in refs. 3, p. 40 and 7, § 1.6 for data about the rank and irreducible components of in small prime level. It is not known whether the degrees of the are bounded independently of the level N. Heuristics given in ref. 7 suggest that, given a prime N with , the probability that there is a form f of level N such that is . This accounts for the numerical evidence that the degrees are usually small but suggests that they are unbounded.
In this paper, we consider the same representation and same weight 2, but we vary the level over squares of primes N such that . For such primes N, Mazur’s results imply that there are no newforms f of level giving rise to . However, in our previous work, we show that there is a newform of level with
residual representation (2, theorem B). Our main result in this paper is that in this case, we can compute the Hecke algebra explicitly. More precisely we have the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1.
Let be prime numbers such that , and let be the p-adic valuation of . Let be the Hecke algebra parameterizing modular forms of level and weight 2 with mod-p residual representation . Let , a cyclic group of order , let , and let be the subring fixed under the involution given by inversion on Δ. Then there is a canonical isomorphism of -algebras sending the augmentation ideal of to the Eisenstein ideal of .
Since minimal prime ideals of correspond to (Galois-conjugacy classes of) eigenforms, the theorem allows us to answer all of the questions asked at the start of this introduction: The fields correspond to the fraction fields of minimal primes of . The situation is particularly simple when (i.e. when ), in which case there is only one minimal prime of other than the augmentation ideal, and this prime has residue ring , so the theorem yields the following.
Corollary 1.2.
Let be prime numbers such that . Then there is a cuspidal eigenform f of level and weight 2 with coefficients in such that
[1] for all prime numbers ℓ, where is the maximal ideal of . Moreover, this form is the unique (up to Galois-conjugacy) cuspform satisfying Eq. 1.
Note that this implies that the fields are independent of N. Contrast this with the prime-level case, where the heuristic suggests that the degrees are unbounded as one varies over primes N with .
Of course, there is a variant of Corollary 1.2 when : In that case, there are r Galois-conjugacy classes, and the coefficient rings are for .
The proof of Theorem 1.1 uses Galois deformation theory, as pioneered by Mazur (8), to bound the size of by showing, essentially, that the possible ways to deform the residual Galois representation are limited. There are many previous works about deforming reducible residual representations, including refs. 9–15, that influenced our thinking, but we believe the idea to use deformation theory to understand ranks of Hecke algebras originates with ref. 4. We use the theory of pseudorepresentations with deformation conditions as developed in refs. 7 and 16.
1.1. Outline of the Paper.
The proof of Theorem 1.1 takes up most of the paper. We sketch the proof here, indicating in which sections the steps take place. Let R be the pseudodeformation ring of parameterizing deformations that have fixed determinant and that are unramified outside Np and finite-flat at p. (The theory of pseudodeformations is reviewed in Section 2.) As usual, there is a surjection . We define the “pseudo-minimal” quotient of R corresponding to deformations whose trace equals the trace of the trivial representation on inertia-at-N. In other words, parameterizes representations for which the semisimplification of the restriction to inertia-at-N is trivial. This includes representations that are unramified at N, but also representations that are Steinberg at N. However, Mazur’s results imply that there are no cuspforms of level that are congruent to the Eisenstein series, so one would expect that there are no representations that are Steinberg at N. In Section 3, we prove that this is true: . This key result shows that R is entirely determined by the local behavior at N. In Section 4, we define a local-at-N pseudodeformation ring , and prove that all local deformations come from inducing a character of , which gives an isomorphism . Together with , this gives surjections . To complete the proof, in Section 5, we show that these surjections are isomorphisms using Wiles’s numerical criterion, applying our previous results (2) to understand the congruence number. Finally, in Section 6, we indicate how our results are related to the Massey-products method of ref. 7.
2. Pseudodeformations
In this section, we review the aspects of deformation theory of pseudorepresentations that we will need in the next section. There are no new results in this section; it is a digest of material from many sources, including refs. 10, 12, 14, 17, and 18.
2.1. Pseudorepresentations.
The concept of a pseudorepresentation came about to codify the formal properties of the trace (or, more generally, the characteristic polynomial) of a representation. The first definition of pseudorepresentation was made by Wiles (19) for 2-dimensional representations and was later generalized by Taylor (20), Rouquier (21), and Chenevier (12). We will use Chenevier’s version, which he calls “determinants.”
Chenevier’s notion of pseudorepresentation mimics the properties of the determinant. For a commutative ring A, the determinant map has many well-known properties: It is multiplicative, in that and , and has degree n, in that for and . It is also a polynomial function in the entries of the matrix. In particular, if B is a commutative A-algebra, then one can also apply to an element of the tensor product and obtain, in a natural way, an element of B. In particular, taking allows one to define the characteristic polynomial of a matrix x.
Definition 2.1:
Let A be a commutative ring and E an A-algebra. A pseudorepresentation of E of degree d, written , is a collection of maps , one for each commutative A-algebra B, that are natural in B and satisfy:
and ,
for all and all . The map is abbreviated to D. The characteristic polynomial of for a fixed pseudorepresentation is defined to be .
If G is a group, then a pseudorepresentation of G of degree d over A, written , is a pseudorepresentation of .
In this paper, we will be interested exclusively in degree-two pseudorepresentations and only in the case where 2 is invertible in the ring A. In this case, pseudorepresentations have a simpler description (12, example 1.8), as we now recall. A d-dimensional pseudorepresentation is determined by the coefficients of for , which is a homogeneous polynomial of degree d. In particular, when these coefficients are determined by (22, proposition II.1):
Taking and specializing to , we find that the characteristic polynomial of is
Therefore we define the trace of D by the formula
For a degree-two pseudorepresentation of G, the trace satisfies relations
and , and
for all (12, lemma 7.7).
Conversely, if is a homomorphism and is a function such that the pair satisfy (1) and (2), then the formula
for and , defines a pseudorepresentation . In this way, one can think of a pseudorepresentation as the data of the functions D and . Moreover, if 2 is invertible in A, then one can recover from using formula (2) as .
Remark 2.2:
Thus far in the discussion, we have considered discrete groups and rings. For topological groups and rings, one considers continuous pseudorepresentations , which amounts to requiring that the functions and are continuous (see ref. 12, section 2.30). If is a continuous pseudorepresentation and is a dense subgroup, then D is determined by its restriction to H (12, example 2.31). To simplify the discussion below, we will always assume that pseudorepresentations are continuous if we are using topological groups.
Example 2.3:
Let G be a group and A be a commutative ring. If is a homomorphism, then the pair of functions is, of course, a pseudorepresentation. Moreover, if there is a subring such that D and T both have images in , then defines a pseudorepresentation .
This example can be seen as one of the major advantages of pseudorepresentations and is the purpose for which Wiles first used them. Note that it may not be true that there is a conjugate of ρ such that has values in . For instance, let G be the subgroup of generated by and , which is isomorphic to the quaternion group of order 8; the trace and determinant of all elements of G are in , but the inclusion cannot be conjugated to land in .
2.2. Cayley–Hamilton Algebras and Generalized Matrix Algebras.
Not every pseudorepresentation comes from a true representation as in Example 2.3. However, Chenevier has defined a generalization of representations, called Cayley-Hamilton representations, that provide a natural substitute (12, remark 7.19). In good situations, these Cayley-Hamilton representations are valued in a generalized matrix algebra, which have many useful properties in common with usual matrix algebras.
Definition 2.4:
Let A be a commutative ring and let E be an A-algebra. A degree-two pseudorepresentation is called Cayley–Hamilton if for all ,
A pair of an A-algebra E and a Cayley–Hamilton pseudorepresentation D is called a Cayley–Hamilton algebra.
If G is a group, then a Cayley–Hamilton representation of G is a triple , where is a Cayley–Hamilton algebra and is a group homomorphism. The composition defines a pseudorepresentation of G over A called the associated pseudorepresentation.
For example, the algebra with the pseudorepresentation given by the determinant is Cayley–Hamilton, by the Cayley–Hamilton Theorem (whence the name). A representation gives rise to a Cayley–Hamilton representation, just as in Example 2.3.
Definition 2.5:
Let A be a commutative ring and let E be an A-algebra that is finitely generated as an A-module. A (2-dimensional) generalized matrix algebra structure on E is the data of
an idempotent element ,
A-algebra isomorphisms and , where ,
such that the function defined by
satisfies for all .
An A-algebra E together with a generalized matrix algebra structure is called an A-GMA.
An example of an A-GMA is the matrix algebra with and the obvious isomorphisms and . In general, an A-GMA can be written in the form
where and are sub-A-modules of E. The multiplication can be written as
| [2] |
where is the map .
Conversely, if B and C are two finitely generated A-modules and is an A-linear map satisfying certain properties, then defining with the multiplication as in Eq. 2 defines an A-GMA (see refs. 10, section 1.3 and 18, example 3.1.7 for more precise statements).
Example 2.6:
If for a field k, then there is a GMA E given by
where is .
2.3. Pseudodeformation Rings.
Let G be a group and be a finite field of characteristic p and let be a pseudorepresentation. In this section, we discuss deformations of . We assume that G is profinite and satisfies Mazur’s finiteness condition: For every open normal subgroup , there are only finitely many continuous group homomorphisms . For instance, G could be the absolute Galois group of a local field or the Galois group of the maximal extension of a number field that is unramified outside a finite set.
Let be the category of complete local Noetherian -algebras with residue field . For an object A in , a deformation of to A is a pseudorepresentation such that . The set-valued functor on sending A to the set of deformations of to A is representable by a ring in (12, proposition E). The resulting pseudorepresentation is called the universal pseudodeformation.
A Cayley–Hamilton representation of G is said to have residual representation if the associated pseudorepresentation of G is a deformation of . The collection of Cayley–Hamilton representations with residual representation forms a category in a natural way, and this category has a universal object , which is a Cayley–Hamilton algebra over and whose associated pseudorepresentation is the universal pseudodeformation (14, proposition 3.6).
Now assume that for two distinct characters . In this case, there is a natural generalized matrix algebra structure on , written as
| [3] |
with the property that, if is written as , then . See refs. 10, lemma 1.4.3 and 12, theorem 2.22 for more details.
2.4. Tangent Spaces.
The (equicharacteristic) tangent space to a deformation functor is the set of first-order deformations (that is, deformations with values in the dual numbers); this set is naturally a vector space over the residue field. For a representation , this means looking at deformations . It is well known that, in this case, the tangent space can be identified with the group cohomology (see (23, proposition 1, pg. 284), for instance). The identification sends a cocycle to the deformation
The computation of the tangent space of a pseudodeformation ring is similar to this but is complicated by the fact that not all of these deformations alter the pseudorepresentation. For instance, if for distinct characters and , then there is an isomorphism of G-modules . If , then the deformation amounts to deforming the two characters and separately and does change the pseudorepresentation. However, if , then This is a nontrivial deformation of , but, since the trace and determinant are unchanged, it is a trivial pseudodeformation.
To get a nontrivial pseudodeformation out of cocycles and one has to assume more. Namely, if the cup product vanishes in , then there is a cochain such that . There is also a cochain such that , namely , where is the function . If, in addition, there is a cochain such that , then one can define a representation using these data by
| [4] |
Note that this is not a deformation of as a representation, since its residual representation is , but it is a pseudodeformation. Let
| [5] |
be the associated pseudorepresentation, and note that it involves ϕ, b, and c, but not . In fact, one can prove that defines a pseudodeformation without assuming the existence of the cochain (this can be proven using the GMA of Example 2.6).
An exact description of the tangent space of a pseudodeformation ring has been worked out beautifully by Bellaïche in ref. 17 and generalized by Wang-Erickson in ref. 24, section 3.3. Let be for distinct characters and . Let be the maximal ideal of and let be the tangent space. By ref. 17, theorem A), there is an exact sequence
| [6] |
The subspace corresponds to the reducible deformations that deform and separately. For and such that , the corresponding element of is exactly Eq. 5.
2.5. Reducibility Ideal.
We now return to the situation of Eq. 3, so for distinct characters . We say that a deformation D of is reducible if for deformations of . The reducible deformations define a subfunctor of the pseudodeformation functor that is represented by a quotient of . The kernel of the map is called the ideal of reducibility.
The ring is fairly easy to understand: It can be identified with the completed tensor product of deformation rings of the characters (see ref. 18, proposition 4.3.4). The ideal of reducibility is related to the GMA-structure on by a theorem of Bellaïche and Chenevier: is the image of the map defined by the GMA-structure Eq. 3 (see ref. 10, section 1.5.1). In particular, there is a surjective map
| [7] |
Moreover, certain quotients of the modules and can be understood using group cohomology. Let be a morphism in , and let be the corresponding deformations of and . Then there is an isomorphism
| [8] |
by ref. 10, theorem 1.5.6 and a similar isomorphism for with the roles of and reversed.
Taken together, these results can give a fairly clear picture of the structure of , especially when the cohomology groups and are small.
Example 2.7:
Suppose that and are both 1-dimensional -vector spaces. Then Eq. 8 and Nakayama’s lemma imply that and are both cyclic -modules. By Eq. 7, this implies that is a principal ideal.
To see how this compares to the tangent space sequence Eq. 6, consider the reduction of Eq. 7 modulo :
Taking the -dual of this composite map and using Eq. 8 gives a map
that equals the map in Eq. 6.
2.6. Deformation Conditions.
For applications to number theory, often one wants to consider deformations that satisfy certain conditions rather than the universal deformations considered thus far. For instance, one often wants to understand Galois representations that “come from geometry,” a condition that is usually expressed in terms of ramification and p-adic Hodge theory. For deformations of representations, Ramakrishna worked out a theory for deformations with conditions (25), and this theory has been generalized to pseudodeformations (18).
A deformation condition on representations of a group G is a full subcategory of the category of finite -modules that is closed under isomorphisms, submodules, quotient modules, and finite direct sums. We think of this as a condition on modules, so we say that a module “has ” if it is in . By definition, a pseudorepresentation of G with values in a finite ring A in has if there is a Cayley–Hamilton representation over A such that the -module E has and such that . A general ring A in is a limit of finite rings, so the definition is extended to A by taking limits.
With this definition, the constructions and properties carried out in this section extend to pseudorepresentations with . In particular, there are quotients and of and that parameterize deformations and having property (18, section 2.5). Moreover, the analogs of Eqs. 7 and 8 hold with the -versions, except that, in Eq. 8, the group cohomology needs to be replaced by the group of extensions
where has (18, section 4.3). [This group is a natural generalization of the Bloch–Kato cohomology groups , , and (26, section 3, pg. 352).]
3. Reduction to a Local Problem
In this section, we prove some important reductions toward the proof of Theorem 1.1. First, we define the Hecke algebra and the pseudodeformation ring R that are relevant to the problem and prove that there is a surjection . Then we analyze the tangent space of R and use this to prove the key result: The pseudo-minimal quotient of R is equal to .
3.1. The Hecke Algebra.
Denote by the space of modular forms of weight 2 and level with integral coefficients and the submodule of cusp forms. Let be the subring of generated by the Hecke operators for all n. Let I, called the Eisenstein ideal, be the ideal in generated by and for all . Let be the maximal ideal generated by I and p, and let be the completion of at . Finally, denotes the maximal quotient of that acts faithfully on . The quotient is generated by a single Eisenstein series E, which is an eigenform for all . Its -eigenvalue is 0, and its -eigenvalue is for all primes (2, theorem 2.8).
3.2. The Pseudodeformation Ring.
Let be the Galois group of the maximal extension of that is unramified outside ∞, N, and p. Fix embeddings of into and , and let be the corresponding decomposition groups at N and p. Let and be their respective inertia groups. Let be the pseudorepresentation . Let be the “finite-flat” condition; that is, is the category of finite -modules M such that there is a finite-flat group scheme over such that as -modules. This is a deformation condition by ref. 25, section 2. Let R be the quotient of parameterizing deformations that have determinant equal to the p-adic cyclotomic character, which we denote by ϵ. That is, R is the quotient by the ideal generated by for all . Abusing notation slightly, let denote the composition of the universal deformation with .
Lemma 3.1.
There is a surjective -algebra homomorphism .
Proof: Since is known to be reduced, there is an injection , where ranges over the minimal primes of . There is one minimal prime given by the action of on the Eisenstein series E. The other minimal primes are the kernels of the maps for eigenforms f in . Such forms f have all of their Hecke eigenvalues congruent to those of E; in particular, each such f is ordinary at p (since is a unit) and has . (In fact, using Katz’s result on the injectivity of the theta operator on weight 2 forms, one can show that every cuspform f with is ordinary at p.) Let S be the set of such cuspidal eigenforms. Then there is an injection
sending to . We will identify with the image of this injection and construct a homomorphism whose image is .
For each , the Galois representation defines a pseudorepresentation that deforms . Since the level of f is prime to p, satisfies the finite flat condition; indeed, the Galois representation of f comes from that of an abelian variety with good reduction at p. Also, the determinant of is ϵ since f has weight 2 and trivial Nebentypus. Hence defines a map . There is also a map given by the pseudorepresentation . This defines a map
We have to show that the image of Φ is . For a prime , since , the map Φ sends to the image of . Since the elements topologically generate R by Chebotarov density, this implies that the image of Φ equals the -subalgebra of generated by . It remains to show that this subalgebra contains and . Since every is new at , it follows that . But as well, so in . Finally, is in the subalgebra generated by by the ordinary property. To see this, let be the unique unit root of . The fact that f is ordinary at p implies that, for ,
where is the unramified character of sending to x. If is an element such that , then
so the (unique) unit root α of in equals the image of . Since the nonunit root of is , it follows that is in the image of R, as desired.
Let be the quotient of R that parameterizes reducible deformations.
Lemma 3.2.
The homomorphism given by the reducible deformation is an isomorphism.
Proof: The ring is the completed tensor product of the finite flat deformation rings of ω and 1, with universal deformation , where and are the universal finite flat deformations and ω and 1, respectively (18, proposition 4.3.4). Fixing the determinant to be ϵ gives in , so it suffices to show that in . A deformation of 1 factors through the maximal abelian pro-p quotient of , which, by the Kronecker–Weber theorem, is the pro-p quotient of . Since , the maximal pro-p quotient is unramified at N. Recall that finite flat characters of are an unramified character times either the trivial character or the p-adic cyclotomic character. In particular, the projections of and in are both of this form, which forces to be unramified at p. Thus is unramified everywhere and hence trivial.
Let be the reducibility ideal of R; Lemma 3.2 implies that . Let and . By Eq. 7, there is a surjective map
Lemma 3.3.
The R-modules B and C are cyclic and J is a principal ideal.
Proof: By ref. 18, theorem 4.3.5 (which is the analog of Eq. 8 with deformation conditions), there are isomorphisms
These groups have been computed to be one-dimensional in ref. 7, proposition 6.3.2 and lemma 6.3.6, respectively.* Note that the same reference shows that the groups , with no ramification at N, are trivial; we will use this fact in the proof of the next proposition.
Since and are one dimensional, Nakayama’s lemma implies that B and C are cyclic R-modules. Then the surjection of Eq. 7 implies that J is principal.
Proposition 3.4.
There is an isomorphism
given by a pseudorepresentation of the form Eq. 5 with and , where b and c are cocycles representing generators of the groups and , respectively. Moreover, b and c are ramified at N.
Proof: By Lemma 3.3, there is an element that generates J. By Lemma 3.2, . This implies that , and that the maximal ideal of is principal. There is a surjection by Lemma 3.1, and is a free -module of rank at least 2 by ref. 2, theorem B, so . Hence is isomorphic to . This isomorphism defines an element of the tangent space of . This element cannot be a reducible deformation by Lemma 3.2, so it must be of the claimed form. Finally, the last statement follows from the fact, mentioned in the proof of Lemma 3.3, that the groups , with no ramification at N, are trivial.
Let be the quotient of R by the ideal generated by for all . This is called the pseudo-minimal quotient as it parameterizes pseudorepresentations that equal the trivial pseudorepresentation on . A pseudorepresentation is called minimal if it comes from a Cayley–Hamilton representation such that . A pseudo-minimal pseudorepresentation need not be minimal: A Steinberg-at-N representation is pseudo-minimal but not minimal.
Under the surjection of Lemma 3.1, the quotient should correspond to quotient of that acts on forms of level . Since , results of Mazur (3, proposition II.9.7) imply that there are no cuspforms f of weight 2 and level such that . Thus, if then one expects that . Indeed, this is the case.
Lemma 3.5.
The map given by the deformation is an isomorphism.
Proof: The deformation is obviously pseudo-minimal (in fact, minimal), so it defines a surjective homomorphism . To show it is an isomorphism, it is enough to show that the tangent space of is trivial. Since the tangent space of is one-dimensional and generated by by Proposition 3.4, it is enough to show that is not pseudo-minimal. Recall the formula Eq. 5
Since ω is unramified at N, for this equation simplifies to
Since b and c are ramified at N, there is such that . This implies that ϵ is in the kernel of the map
completing the proof.
4. Computation of the Local Deformation Ring
In this section, we define a local deformation ring that is naturally augmented over with augmentation ideal I. The global deformation ring R is an -algebra in a natural way, and the extension IR of I to R is the kernel of the map . In particular, Lemma 3.5 implies that . This says that the global deformations are completely controlled by the local deformations; indeed, by Nakayama’s lemma, it says that R is a cyclic -module. Finally, we completely characterize the local deformations, proving that they all come from inducing a character of , and deduce an isomorphism .
4.1. The Deformation Ring of the Supercuspidal Character.
One way to construct a deformation of with unramified determinant is to induce a character from . As a preliminary to considering such inductions, we recall some properties of the universal such character.
Let be the universal deformation ring of the trivial character , where . By ref. 8, section 1.4, there is an isomorphism
where is the maximal abelian pro-p quotient and the universal character is the tautological one. Fix a choice of Frobenius element . The local Artin map induces an isomorphism that sends to N. Let Λ denote the quotient of given by identifying with . Using the local Artin isomorphism as an identification, Λ is identified with , where is a cyclic group of order , where . (Here is the p-adic valuation normalized such that .) Denote the universal character by . Let be a generator.
Consider the Galois representation
| [9] |
given by inducing . This is a deformation of and it satisfies . For , the trace of is given by
| [10] |
This lands in the subring fixed by the involution ι that acts as inversion on group-like elements. For later use, we recall the structure of the ring .
Lemma 4.1.
There is an isomorphism given by , where is a distinguished polynomial of degree with .
Proof: First, note that is equal to the subring of Λ generated by . Indeed, every element of can be represented by a symmetric polynomial in and , and every such polynomial is a polynomial in .
Next note that the map
| [11] |
sending to is injective with p-torsion cokernel. Taking ι-fixed parts gives a map
again injective with p-torsion cokernel. Hence the surjective map given by sends to zero, where is the product of the minimal polynomials of . The induced map is a surjective homomorphism of free -modules of the same finite rank, so it is an isomorphism. Since each ring is totally ramified over , the polynomials are Eisenstein, so .
4.2. A Computation of an Inertial Pseudodeformation Ring.
We now define a kind of local deformation ring . Roughly speaking, it is the ring parameterizing “deformations on inertia that extend to the decomposition group.” The main result of this section is Proposition 4.4, which states that all inertia deformations that extend to the decomposition group are supercuspidal, in the sense that they arise from an induction construction.
We first recall some properties of local Galois groups. There is an exact sequence
where is the maximal unramified extension. The group is isomorphic to and hence is topologically generated by . The group is complicated, but its maximal pro-p quotient is procyclic. Let be an element that topologically generates . Frobenius acts on the image of τ in by
If ρ is a representation of that extends to a representation of , then and must be conjugate and thus have the same traces and determinants. This motivates the following definition.
Definition 4.2:
Let be the quotient of by the ideal generated by
for all , and
.
The pseudorepresentation associated to the trivial representation defines a map , making into an augmented -algebra. Let be the augmentation ideal; explicitly, it is the ideal generated by for all .
Of course, if is a deformation of with unramified determinant, then defines a map . Thus restricting the universal pseudodeformation to induces a ring homomorphism . The following lemma shows we are in the unusual situation that this map is surjective.
Lemma 4.3.
The natural map is surjective.
Proof: Let be the augmentation ideal of as in Definition 4.2. The ideal IR is generated by for all , which is exactly the kernel of , so . By Lemma 3.5, this implies . Then by Nakayama’s lemma, the map is surjective.
There is a quotient of that parameterizes supercuspidal (that is, induced) deformations. Indeed, the pseudorepresentation constructed in the previous section is the universal induced representation. By Eq. 10, its pseudorepresentation on inertia has values in the subring of Λ. This defines a surjective homomorphism . The following proposition shows that, in fact, all deformations are supercuspidal. (Note that such deformations are allowed to be reducible; for instance is supercuspidal as it is the induction of the trivial character.)
Proposition 4.4.
The map is an isomorphism of augmented -algebras.
Proof: Let be the quotient of by the ideal generated by for all . That is, is the universal deformation ring of the trivial 2-dimensional pseudorepresentation on having trivial determinant. Let be the universal deformation. Consider the representation
obtained as the composite
The pseudorepresentation of defines a map
We claim that ψ is an isomorphism, with inverse given by the map
Since , the composition is the identity. On the other hand, the map
defines a pseudorepresentation . To see that is the identity, it is enough to show that . Since they both have trivial determinant, it suffices to show . By construction,
Then, by the pseudorepresentation identity Item 2, this implies that for all n,
Since and are continuous and agree on a dense subgroup of , they are equal on (Remark 2.2). Finally, both and send every element to 2. Indeed, for any Cayley–Hamilton representation inducing either one, since , the image of ρ is pro-p, so ρ factors through . Since and factor through and agree on , they agree on .
Now, since is the quotient of by the relation , the map ψ induces an isomorphism , where . To compute more explicitly, it is convenient to pass to an overring of that contains the eigenvalues of , which are the roots of the polynomial . Over the ring
the eigenvalues† of are λ and , so . Since is a torsion-free -module, it follows that , so that the map
induced by is injective. Thus is isomorphic to the subring generated by in the ring A defined by
This presentation of A can be simplified by factoring:
Noting that is a unit and that, since and the ratios
are units, the ring A can be written as
Note that there is a surjective homomorphism given by , which gives the presentation . In this presentation, is the subring generated by . Factoring into a product of irreducible polynomials yields an embedding
with λ mapping to in the rightmost factors. This map induces the map Eq. 11 on the quotient Λ of A. Hence there is a commutative diagram
![]() |
in which the leftmost vertical arrow is the map induced on the subrings generated by in the middle vertical arrow. The rightmost vertical arrow is just the identity on the summands indexed by . To see that the map is injective, it is enough to show that the kernel of the rightmost vertical arrow has trivial intersection with the subring of A generated by . Since the kernel of this arrow is contained in the factor, and maps to zero in this factor, this is clear.
5. Proof of Theorem 1.1
Combining Lemmas 3.1, 4.3, and Proposition 4.4, we find that there is a chain of surjective ring homomorphisms
| [12] |
Letting denote the composition of these maps, we have a commutative diagram
![]() |
[13] |
as in the set up of Wiles’s numerical criterion (27, appendix), as improved by Lenstra (28) (see also ref. 29). Let be the augmentation ideal in and the Eisenstein ideal in . It is well known and easy to see that is the kernel of the quotient of that acts faithfully on cuspforms.
Theorem 5.1.
The surjective maps in Eq. 12 are all isomorphisms.
Proof: Let be a generator of the ideal . By the numerical criterion (29, criterion I), it is enough to show . It follows immediately from Lemma 4.1 that . Since , to show that , it is enough to show that the composite map
factors through . In other words, it is enough to show that the Eisenstein series E is a cuspform modulo . This follows from ref. 2, corollary 2.6, completing the proof.
Remark 5.2:
Since the ring is monogenic, there is an alternative argument that does not use the numerical criterion (but still uses the fact that ). For this, note that the surjection φ and Lemma 4.1 imply that has a presentation , where is a monic divisor of . Then η can be interpreted as the constant term (up to a p-adic unit). But since , this implies that . Since , this implies , as desired.
This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.
6. Complement: Relation to Massey Products
We have proven an isomorphism by identifying R with a local deformation ring. Since the local deformation ring is so explicit, this gives us complete understanding of R, and in particular, its rank. In ref. 7, another method for studying the rank of R is introduced, using obstructions in Galois cohomology that come from Massey products. One might hope to use Theorem 1.1 and reverse the arguments of ref. 7 to obtain nontrivial arithmetic results about vanishing of Massey products. In this section, we indicate how our results are related to Massey products and conclude that the Massey products involved are particularly simple and not arithmetically interesting. (This explains why the rank is basically constant in our case, rather than varying in an arithmetically interesting way as in ref. 7.) We do not give another complete proof of Theorem 1.1 (although there is little doubt that one could give a proof along these lines). Instead we attempt to illustrate why Theorem 1.1 is reasonable from the point of view of ref. 7.
6.1. The Strategy for Relating Massey Products to Ranks.
It follows from Proposition 3.4 that the tangent space of is one-dimensional and spanned by a tangent vector . So, there is an isomorphism for some (including possibly if ). This d is then the -dimension of , which is an upper bound on the rank of R. One can study d one step at a time: if and only if the tangent vector given by lifts to a map . If , then if and only if the map lifts to a map , and so on.
Given this interpretation of the -dimension of in terms of lifts of the tangent vector, we now sketch how this is related to the vanishing of certain elements, called Massey products, in Galois cohomology . For this, consider the problem of lifting to a map . Recall that comes from the trace of a representation Eq. 4 that can be written as
where is a choice of 1-cochain satisfying , , and is a cochain satisfying . A map lifting might come from a deformation of the form
(See Remark 6.1 below for pseudodeformations that may not arise from such a .) Here the functions , , , and are 1-cochains‡ that, in order for to be a homomorphism, must satisfy conditions on their coboundaries. For instance, satisfies
The right-hand side of this equation is a 2-cocycle, and the equation expresses the fact that this 2-cocycle is a 2-coboundary (i.e. it vanishes in cohomology). A similar thing is true for the equations governing , , and . Conversely, without knowing that exists, if one knew that the relevant 2-cocycles were 2-coboundaries, one could define using these equations. The cohomology classes of these 2-cocycles are examples of Massey products. This shows that Massey products are obstructions: The representation exists if and only if the Massey products vanish.
Remark 6.1:
We have glossed over several points in this sketch. First, it is not clear that a pseudodeformation of must come from a true representation like . This can be remedied by instead looking for deformations in the universal Cayley–Hamilton algebra. The results of Section 3 imply that this Cayley–Hamilton algebra is a GMA with a particularly simple form, so the true representations considered above are not too different from the universal case. The main caveat is that, just as one does not need the cochain in order to define , one also does not need the cochain in order to define the pseudorepresentation associated to . Second, in order for the deformation to define a map , the pseudorepresentation must satisfy the local conditions required in the definition of R. This can be resolved by working with Galois cohomology with restricted ramification , and working carefully with the finite-flat condition.
6.2. Computation of the Relevant Massey Products.
The relevant Massey products can be computed explicitly in this case. There are two main reasons for this. First, the restriction maps
for are injective. This is a kind of local-to-global principle: to compute the whether or not the global Massey-product classes vanish, it is enough to consider their restriction to local cohomology at N. Second, (and this is the most crucial difference with ref. 7), the cohomology group is one-dimensional. Since , there is an isomorphism of modules, so and are both nonzero classes in the same one-dimensional space . Up to rescaling, we can assume that .
We will now sketch an argument that uses Massey products to explain why when . From this point on, we work exclusively with cohomology of and drop the from the notation, which is justified by the local-to-global principle. Since , a particularly simple cochain ϕ satisfying is . Similarly, to find a cochain such that
take . To simplify notation, for , let . Then takes the simple form
To deform this, one can take
The obvious pattern continues: If , then there is a deformation defined by
Just as the pseudorepresentation does not require the cochain to be defined, the pseudorepresentation associated to does not require to be defined. In other words, the pseudorepresentation associated to can be defined as long as . This defines a pseudorepresentation . The obstruction to deforming is the 2-cocycle
| [14] |
This is the Massey pth-power of b, defined by Kraines (30, definition 11).§ By a variant of ref. 30, theorem 14 for nontrivial coefficients, is equal to , where ∂ is the connecting map in the exact sequence
where is the unramified -module where acts by . If , then a simple calculation shows that for a nontrivial class . By Tate duality, this implies that . In other words, the 2-cocycle Eq. 14 is not a coboundary, and this gives an obstruction to deforming . If were greater than , there would be a surjective homomorphism , from which one could construct a deformation of , a contradiction.
The inequality goes most of the way to proving Corollary 1.2. Indeed, it is not difficult to show that every cuspform f satisfying Eq. 1 must be supercuspidal at N. Taking the trace of the supercuspidal representation shows that the coefficient ring of f contains , so that . Then and the surjection imply that these containments and inequalities are all equalities. Of course, to complete the above sketch, one would have to deal with the issues mentioned in Remark 6.1.
Acknowledgments
We thank Shaunak Deo, Robert Pollack, Alice Pozzi, and Carl Wang-Erickson for helpful conversations as well as the referees for thoughtful comments that improved this paper. J.L. was supported by NSF grant DMS-2301738 and P.W. was supported by NSF CAREER grant DMS-2337830.
Author contributions
J.L. and P.W. designed research; performed research; and wrote the paper.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interest.
Footnotes
This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.
*See also ref. 4, especially lemma 3.9 and proposition 5.4, for an earlier proof of the same result, in slightly different terms.
†In fact, is conjugate to the matrix in .
‡With coefficients in , , , and , respectively.
§Kraines actually only considers trivial coefficients, but the generalization to nontrivial coefficients is straightforward.
Contributor Information
Jaclyn Lang, Email: jaclyn.lang@temple.edu.
Preston Wake, Email: wakepres@msu.edu.
Data, Materials, and Software Availability
There are no data underlying this work.
References
- 1.Buzzard K., Questions about slopes of modular forms. Astérisque 298, 1–15 (2005). [Google Scholar]
- 2.Lang J., Wake P., A modular construction of unramified p-extensions of . Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 9, 415–431 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 3.Mazur B., Modular curves and the Eisenstein ideal. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. 47, 33–168 (1977). [Google Scholar]
- 4.Calegari F., Emerton M., On the ramification of Hecke algebras at Eisenstein primes. Invent. Math. 160, 97–144 (2005). [Google Scholar]
- 5.Merel L., L’accouplement de Weil entre le sous-groupe de Shimura et le sous-groupe cuspidal de J0(p). J. Reine Angew. Math. 477, 71–115 (1996). [Google Scholar]
- 6.Lecouturier E., Higher Eisenstein elements, higher Eichler formulas and rank of Hecke algebras. Invent. Math. 223, 485–595 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 7.Wake P., Wang-Erickson C., The rank of Mazur’s Eisenstein ideal. Duke Math. J. 169, 31–115 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 8.B. Mazur, “Deforming Galois representations” in Galois Groups Over Q, Y. Ihara, K. Ribet and J.-P. Serre, Eds. (Berkeley, CA, 1987) (Springer, New York, 1989), vol. 16, pp. 385–437.
- 9.Skinner C. M., Wiles A. J., Ordinary representations and modular forms. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 94, 10520–10527 (1997). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Bellaïche J., Chenevier G., Families of Galois representations and Selmer groups. Astérisque 324, xii+314 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 11.Berger T., Klosin K., On deformation rings of residually reducible Galois representations and R = T theorems. Math. Ann. 355, 481–518 (2013). [Google Scholar]
- 12.G. Chenevier, “The p-adic analytic space of pseudocharacters of a profinite group and pseudorepresentations over arbitrary rings” in Automorphic Forms and Galois Representations. Vol. 1 F. Diamond, P. L. Kassaei, M. Kim, Eds.(Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2014), vol. 414, pp. 221–285.
- 13.Calegari F., Eisenstein deformation rings. Compos. Math. 142, 63–83 (2006). [Google Scholar]
- 14.Wang-Erickson C., Algebraic families of Galois representations and potentially semi-stable pseudodeformation rings. Math. Ann. 371, 1615–1681 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 15.S. V. Deo, Non-optimal levels of some reducible mod p modular representations. Adv. Math. 461, 110074 (2025).
- 16.Wake P., Wang-Erickson C., The Eisenstein ideal with squarefree level. Adv. Math. 380, 107543 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bellaïche J., Pseudodeformations. Math. Z. 270, 1163–1180 (2012). [Google Scholar]
- 18.Wake P., Wang-Erickson C., Deformation conditions for pseudorepresentations. Forum Math. Sigma 7, e20 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 19.Wiles A., On ordinary λ-adic representations associated to modular forms. Invent. Math. 94, 529–573 (1988). [Google Scholar]
- 20.Taylor R., Galois representations associated to Siegel modular forms of low weight. Duke Math. J. 63, 281–332 (1991). [Google Scholar]
- 21.Rouquier R., Caractérisation des caractères et pseudo-caractères. J. Algebra 180, 571–586 (1996). [Google Scholar]
- 22.Roby N., Lois polynomes et lois formelles en théorie des modules. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. 80, 213–348 (1963). [Google Scholar]
- 23.B. Mazur, “An introduction to the deformation theory of Galois representations” in Modular Forms and Fermat’s Last Theorem (Boston, MA, 1995) G. Cornell, J. H. Silverman, G. Stevens, Eds. (Springer, New York, 1997), pp. 243–311.
- 24.C. Wang-Erickson, Presentations of non-commutative deformation rings via A∞-algebras and applications to deformations of Galois representations and pseudorepresentations arXiv [Preprint] (2020). 10.48550/arXiv.1809.02484 (Accessed 11 October 2024). [DOI]
- 25.Ramakrishna R., On a variation of Mazur’s deformation functor. Compos. Math. 87, 269–286 (1993). [Google Scholar]
- 26.S. Bloch, K. Kato, “L-functions and Tamagawa numbers of motives” in The Grothendieck Festschrift, Vol. I (Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 1990), vol. 86, P. Cartier, L. Illusie, N. M. Katz, G. Laumon, Yu. Manin, K. A. Ribet, Eds. pp. 333–400.
- 27.Wiles A., Modular elliptic curves and Fermat’s last theorem. Ann. Math. 141, 443–551 (1995). [Google Scholar]
- 28.H. W. Lenstra Jr., “Complete intersections and Gorenstein rings” in Elliptic Curves, Modular Forms,& Fermat’s Last Theorem (Hong Kong, 1993) J. Coates, S.-T. Yau, Eds. (Int. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995), vol. I, pp. 99–109.
- 29.B. de Smit, K. Rubin, R. Schoof, “Criteria for complete intersections” in Modular Forms and Fermat’s Last Theorem (Boston, MA, 1995) G. Cornell, J. H. Silverman, G. Stevens, Eds. (Springer, New York, 1997), pp. 343–356.
- 30.Kraines D., Massey higher products. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 124, 431–449 (1966). [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
There are no data underlying this work.


