The Bessel-period obstruction to first occurrence

Let GnG_n and HmH_m be the groups in the Bessel descent setting, and let Acusp(Gn){\mathcal {A}}_{\mathrm{cusp}}(G_n) and Acusp(Hm){\mathcal {A}}_{\mathrm{cusp}}(H_m) denote their cuspidal automorphic representations. Assume that πAcusp(Gn)\pi\in{\mathcal {A}}_{\mathrm{cusp}}(G_n) has a generic global Arthur parameter ϕn\phi_n as in the source, and that for σAcusp(Hm)\sigma\in{\mathcal {A}}_{\mathrm{cusp}}(H_m) the Bessel period BO(φπ,φσ){\mathcal {B}}^{{\mathcal {O}}_{\ell}}(\varphi_\pi,\varphi_\sigma) is nonzero for suitable cusp forms. Suppose the global Arthur parameter ψm\psi_m of σ\sigma contains (ξ1,2)(ξk,2)(\xi_1,2)\boxplus\cdots\boxplus(\xi_k,2) with k>0k>0, and let rn=r(Gn){\mathfrak {r}}_n={\mathfrak {r}}(G_n).

Bessel-period obstruction conjecture. The integer \ell, with 0rn0\leq\ell\leq {\mathfrak {r}}_n, is not the first occurrence index of π\pi.

This predicts that a nonzero Bessel period against a parameter containing a nontrivial collection of summands of the form (ξi,2)(\xi_i,2) cannot occur at the first occurrence level. The source provides no resolution status.

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Dihua Jiang and Lei Zhang, “Bessel Descents and Branching Problems”, arXiv:1905.02307 (2019).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.