Isotypic modularity conjecture for CM cycles

Let A\mathcal A be the set of cuspidal automorphic representations defined above. For πA\pi\in\mathcal A, let

CM(π):=limSLπ~SCM[πS]CM(Ω),\overline{CM}(\pi):=\varinjlim_S L_{\widetilde\pi^S}\otimes\overline{CM}[\pi^S]\subset\overline{CM}(\Omega),

where SS ranges over the relevant finite sets and Lπ~SL_{\widetilde\pi^S} is the Hecke character on the corresponding invariant space. Define CM(π~)CM(Ω1)\overline{CM}(\widetilde\pi)\subset\overline{CM}(\Omega^{-1}) similarly. Isotypic modularity conjecture. For every πA\pi\in\mathcal A,

CM(π)=π~CM[π],\overline{CM}(\pi)=\widetilde\pi^\infty\otimes\overline{CM}[\pi],

and the corresponding equality holds for CM(π~)\overline{CM}(\widetilde\pi). This is stated as equivalent to the preceding full modularity conjecture and refines it representation by representation; the supplied source gives no resolution status.

Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Congling Qiu, “Modularity and Heights of CM cycles on Kuga-Sato varieties”, arXiv:2105.12561 (2024).

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.