Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 48 references

Weil representation and Arithmetic Fundamental Lemma

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The arithmetic fundamental lemma for unitary groups holds for odd p≥n, on the strongly regular semisimple locus.

desk verdict A genuine proof of the AFL for odd p ≥ n, with one load-bearing modularity input that deserves careful referee scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.02697 v3 pith:C5MDT3DQ submitted 2019-09-06 math.NT math.AGmath.RT

Wei Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NTmath.AGmath.RT MSC 11F2711F6711G4014C2514G35
keywords arithmeticfundamentallemmaJacquet–RallisrelativetraceformulaWeilrepresentationKudla–RapoportdivisorsderivedCMcyclesunitaryShimuravarietiesGan–Gross–Prasad
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves the arithmetic fundamental lemma (AFL) conjecture for unitary groups in $n$ variables over $\mathbb{Q}_p$, for odd $p\ge n$ and strongly regular semisimple elements: the derivative of a normalized orbital integral of the characteristic function of $S_n(\mathcal{O}_{F_0})$ equals the negative of a Kudla–Rapoport intersection number times $\log q$. The same global method proves the Jacquet–Rallis fundamental lemma whenever the residue field has at least $n$ elements. The route is a partially linearized relative trace formula in which the Weil representation of $\mathrm{SL}_2$ makes the relevant sums into holomorphic modular forms of weight $n$; the arithmetic side is matched by the modular generating series of special divisors paired with a derived CM cycle. A sympathetic reader would take the paper as establishing the local identities that the relative trace formula approach to the arithmetic Gan–Gross–Prasad conjecture needs, with the strongly regular restriction harmless because that locus is open dense.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the semi-Lie algebra, or partially linearized, relative trace formula for the diagonal action of $U(V)$ on $U(V)\times V$, matched with $\mathrm{GL}_{n-1}$ acting on $S_{n-1}\times V'_{n-1}$. Because of the linear factor, $\mathrm{SL}_2(\mathbb{A}_0)$ acts through the Weil representation, turning the distributions $I_\alpha(\omega(h)\Phi)$ into automorphic functions; with Gaussian test functions at the archimedean places these become holomorphic modular forms of weight $n$ with finite-dimensional spectrum. On the arithmetic side the same modularity appears in the generating series $\widehat{Z}^B(\tau,\varphi)$ of Kudla–Rapoport special divisors with automorphic Green functions, paired with the derived CM cycle, a thickened fixed-point locus of a Hecke correspondence of virtual dimension one. Equating the two modular forms and comparing Fourier coefficients where the polynomial $\alpha$ is locally maximal isolates the local identities; the archimedean difference between two Green functions, controlled by Theorem 8.4, is subtracted first.

What would settle it

Compute both sides of Conjecture 3.8(b) for a single strongly regular semisimple pair at a place with $p=n$ in which $g$ generates a non-maximal order; this is the case the induction does not check directly and where the modularity argument is doing the work. A mismatch would refute the theorem, while agreement supplies the missing local check.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes Conjecture 3.8: for matching strongly regular semisimple data, $\partial\mathrm{Orb}((\gamma,u'),1_{(S_{n-1}\times V'_{n-1})(\mathcal{O}_{F_0})})=-\mathrm{Int}(g,u)\,\log q$ in the semi-Lie algebra version, together with the corresponding group version; this is Theorem 15.1, valid for odd $p\ge n$. It also establishes the Jacquet–Rallis fundamental lemma, Conjecture 2.3, for residue field size $q\ge n$ (Theorem 13.9). The proof is global and inductive: local matching identities for orbital integrals are recovered from the equality of two holomorphic modular forms, after subtracting archimedean Green-function corrections and using linear independence of logarithms of distinct primes to separate places.

Load-bearing premise

The proof hinges on the arithmetic generating series of special divisors being a holomorphic modular form at the required level structure, a fact imported from [6] and adapted in a single paragraph; if that modularity fails, the comparison of the two modular forms collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every odd prime $p\ge n$, the arithmetic fundamental lemma holds on the strongly regular semisimple locus, so the remaining local input for the RTF approach to arithmetic Gan–Gross–Prasad is the arithmetic transfer conjecture.
  • The Jacquet–Rallis fundamental lemma is now known for all unramified quadratic extensions with residue field $q\ge n$, extending the earlier large-$p$ results to the sharp range.
  • The group and semi-Lie algebra versions of the AFL are equivalent for $q\ge n$ by Proposition 4.12, so the semi-Lie version proved here is not weaker in substance.
  • Since strongly regular semisimple elements form an open dense subset and the intersection numbers are locally constant by Theorem 5.5, the proved identity extends by continuity and is not an isolated equality.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves implicit that the non-maximal-order cases at the bad set $B$ are forced by modularity rather than verified locally; this means the sharp threshold is really the vanishing lemma for Fourier coefficients, and strengthening that lemma would lower the bound $q\ge n$.
  • A testable extension is to compute the unit-index Fourier coefficient at a bad place in the non-maximal case: the equality of modular forms predicts a specific value, giving a finite numerical check of the whole induction.
  • The same two-modular-forms strategy suggests a route to the arithmetic transfer conjecture, provided one can construct an arithmetic generating series for derived cycles under the second Hecke symmetry rather than only for special divisors.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proves the arithmetic fundamental lemma (AFL) conjecture for unitary groups in n variables over Q_p when p is odd and p >= n, on the strongly regular semisimple locus, and also proves the Jacquet--Rallis fundamental lemma (FL) for unramified quadratic extensions with residue field size q >= n. The method is global: the author fixes an irreducible conjugate self-reciprocal polynomial alpha, constructs a partially linearized relative trace formula with an SL_2-symmetry supplied by the Weil representation, and compares its first derivative against a generating series of arithmetic intersections of Kudla--Rapoport special divisors with a newly introduced derived CM cycle. The comparison is performed in a finite-dimensional space of holomorphic modular forms; local FL and AFL identities are extracted by controlling Fourier coefficients away from a finite set of bad places, using local constancy of orbital integrals and of intersection numbers. The main theorems are Theorem 13.9 (FL), Theorem 14.6 (global comparison), and Theorem 15.1 (AFL in the stated range).

Significance. If the proof is complete, the paper is a major advance: it establishes a central conjecture in the arithmetic Gan--Gross--Prasad program and provides a new global induction mechanism that also yields the Jacquet--Rallis FL. The paper contains substantial original constructions, including the semi-Lie algebra version of the relative trace formula, partial Gaussian test functions, the derived fat big CM cycle, and a local constancy theorem for Rapoport--Zink intersection numbers via the Vollaard--Wedhorn stratification. The author is admirably explicit about the strongly regular semisimple restriction and about the dependence of the proof on imported modularity results. The main unresolved point is whether the imported modularity statements, especially Theorem 8.6, are valid with the non-maximal level structure used in Definition 6.1; this is load-bearing and needs to be addressed before the central claim can be regarded as fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§8.4, Theorem 8.6] Theorem 8.6 is load-bearing for the global comparison: it is what places the arithmetic intersection generating series Int(tau, Phi) in the same finite-dimensional space A^hol(Gamma(N), n)_Q tensor R_{S,Q} as the analytic object 2 dJ^hol, after which Lemma 13.6 upgrades equality of almost all Fourier coefficients into equality of modular forms. Its proof, however, is only a one-paragraph appeal to [6] that does not address the level structure introduced in Definition 6.1. In the present paper the compact open subgroup K_{\tilde G}=K_{Z_Q} times K_G is allowed to be non-maximal at all primes v dividing d, and the moduli functor imposes an Eisenstein condition and a non-maximal rational Tate-module level structure; the computations in [6] are made for a maximal-level moduli problem over the full ring of integers. Passing to O_E[1/d] removes the fibers over the finite set S, but it does not automatically transfer the divisor and Borcherds-product computations to the level-d components. The coefficients of q^xi whose prime factors lie in S are precisely the ones needed in the 'almost all coefficients' argument of Lemma 13.6, so a failure of Theorem 8.6 at the level-d components would break Theorem 14.6 and hence Theorem 15.1. The authors should either prove Theorem 8.6 for the level structure of Definition 6.1 or cite a statement that literally covers it.
  2. [§2.4, Proposition 2.7] Proposition 2.7 is used in the induction in Theorem 13.9: part (i) is the equivalence between the group FL for S_n and the semi-Lie algebra FL for S_{n-1} times V'_{n-1}, and part (ii) derives the semi-Lie version from the group version. The proof of Proposition 2.7 is explicitly omitted, with the text saying only that the proof of the analogous Proposition 4.12 will be given and that 'the proof also works here.' This is not a routine reversal: Proposition 4.12 concerns derivatives of orbital integrals and intersection numbers in the AFL setting, whereas Proposition 2.7 concerns plain orbital integrals of characteristic functions in the FL setting. The reduction requires the same orbit maps r_xi, r^natural_xi and the Cayley-transform lemmas of §4.3 to be adapted to the FL case, including the transfer-factor bookkeeping of Lemma 4.11. Since the FL induction depends on this statement, it should be proved in the text or supplied with a precise reference that covers the semi-Lie algebra FL case.
  3. [§8.3 and §14.2] The archimedean correction input is also imported: Theorem 8.4 is stated to follow from Ehlen--Sankaran [8] by an embedding trick, but the generating function Z_{v0,corr} in (8.14) uses Schwartz functions of the form phi = 1_{Lambda^d} tensor phi_d with arbitrary level at primes dividing d, and Proposition 14.5 then uses this to cancel the non-holomorphic terms in 2 dJ(h, Phi') + Int^{K-B}(h, Phi). The one-sentence proof of Theorem 8.4 does not verify that the level structure of the unitary Shimura variety or the non-maximal components at primes dividing d are compatible with the arguments in [8]. As in the case of Theorem 8.6, this is a load-bearing step for the holomorphic projection in Proposition 14.5. The authors should at least state the precise form of the Ehlen--Sankaran theorem they need and indicate where in [8] the non-maximal-level unitary case is covered.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§1.2] The displayed definition of phi^flat_{h_f} contains corrupted tokens ('/d47/d47') that make the Iwasawa decomposition and the formula illegible; this rendering should be cleaned.
  2. [§12.6] There is a parenthesis typo in the second summand: Orb((gamma, 0-, Phi', s) should read Orb((gamma, 0-), Phi', s).
  3. [§2.3] The proof of Proposition 2.6 refers to [46, Lem. 2.5.5] for the Lie algebra version and says the argument is the same for the semi-Lie version; a short explanation of how the linear V-component is handled would improve readability.
  4. [§7.4--7.6] The terms 'naive fat big CM cycle' and 'derived CM cycle' are introduced rapidly; the reader would benefit from a short summary of the relationship to Bruinier--Kudla--Yang and Howard and of why the derived structure repairs the expected dimension, since this construction is advertised as the main novel geometric input.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central global comparison is built from independent external modularity theorems and an internal SL2-relative-trace-formula computation, with self-citations confined to background and conjecture formulation.

full rationale

The claimed derivation is not circular. The central global identity (Theorem 14.6) is obtained by comparing two objects in the same finite-dimensional space of modular forms: the arithmetic generating series Int(tau, Phi), whose modularity is imported from Theorem 8.6 (Bruinier-Howard-Kudla-Rapoport-Yang [6]) and Theorem 8.4 (Ehlen-Sankaran [8]), and the analytic derivative 2 dJ^hol, whose modularity is established internally from the SL2-relative trace formula. These are independent external and internal inputs, not restatements of the AFL identity being proved. The final local identities are extracted by comparing Fourier coefficients and isolating primes via linear independence of logarithms; the induction for FL (Theorem 13.9) starts from the n=1 case and uses Proposition 2.7 to convert the induction hypothesis into the assumption of Theorem 13.4, and the AFL argument is the same with Proposition 4.12 in place of Proposition 2.7. The author's self-citations ([47], [42], [48]) concern the formulation of the conjectures, earlier low-rank/minuscule cases, and smooth transfer; they are not the source of the modularity or the comparison. The single-paragraph adaptation of Theorem 8.6 to level structure at primes dividing d is a potential correctness risk, but it is a reduction to an external theorem, not an identity that is true by construction; no equation in the paper defines the target quantity as the imported modular form. Under the hard rule that circularity must be exhibited as a specific reduction, no such reduction can be exhibited here.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 3 invented entities

No numbers are fitted to data: the only free parameter listed is the auxiliary polynomial alpha, which drops out of the final identities. The main axioms are the modularity of the arithmetic generating series ([6]), the Green-function modularity ([8]), the RZ uniformization [40], the maximal-order special case of AFL (Mihatsch and Howard), the partial Gaussian test function substitution, and standard tools (weak approximation, Baker's theorem). The paper's own inventions (derived CM cycle, semi-Lie RTF slice) carry explicit proofs or careful scope flags; Definition 12.1 admits that full archimedean Gaussian test functions are not constructed.

free parameters (1)
  • Auxiliary polynomial alpha in A_n(F_0)
    The proof fixes an irreducible conjugate self-reciprocal monic polynomial alpha of degree n to define the slice of the RTF and the CM cycle CM(alpha,g); the final identities are independent of alpha, so it is an auxiliary choice, not a fitted number.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The generating series of KR special divisors with automorphic Green functions is a weight-n holomorphic modular form over the integral model (Theorem 8.6, from Bruinier-Howard-Kudla-Rapoport-Yang [6], adapted to the level at primes dividing d).
    Load-bearing in Section 14: it makes Int(tau, Phi) a holomorphic modular form so the density lemma (13.6) pins down all Fourier coefficients.
  • domain assumption The generating function of the difference of Kudla and automorphic Green functions lies in A^exp(H(A_0), K, n) (Theorem 8.4, from Ehlen-Sankaran [8]).
    Used in Section 14.2 to cancel the non-holomorphic archimedean terms in the holomorphic projection argument.
  • domain assumption Rapoport-Zink uniformization of the basic locus of the unitary Shimura variety (equation (7.3), citing [40, Th. 8.15]).
    Bridges global intersections to local intersections on the RZ space in Theorem 9.4.
  • domain assumption The special case of the semi-Lie algebra AFL for elements with O_F[g] a maximal order and p > n (Proposition 3.9, citing Mihatsch [33] and Howard [18]).
    Provides the known special values that seed the induction in Sections 14 and 15.
  • ad hoc to paper Full archimedean Gaussian test functions are expected but not constructed; the proof substitutes explicit partial Gaussian test functions (Section 12.2, Lemma 12.6).
    The author flags that full Gaussian test functions are difficult to exhibit and that a weaker partial matching suffices; the comparison then works only for orbitals fixed by the auxiliary alpha.
  • standard math Weak approximation for number fields and local-global existence of hermitian spaces with prescribed local types (used in Section 13.5 and Section 15).
    Standard in the F0 = Q setting in which the proof is written.
  • standard math Baker's linear independence of logarithms of primes (Section 9.1, equation (9.2)).
    Separates the local contributions from different primes after the global identity is obtained.
invented entities (3)
  • Derived CM cycle (fat big CM cycle) LCM(alpha, g) independent evidence
    purpose: Thickens the naive big CM cycle with a derived structure so intersections with KR divisors have the expected virtual dimension and match the analytic RTF side.
    Well-defined in K'-theory (7.14), lies in the first step of the filtration (7.15), and its local intersections are computed against the analytic side (Theorems 9.4 and 10.1), yielding independently checkable identities.
  • Naive fat big CM cycle CM(alpha, g) independent evidence
    purpose: Global moduli of fixed points of Hecke correspondences with characteristic polynomial alpha; the paper notes its positive-characteristic geometry can be complicated.
    Representable as a finite unramified and generically etale scheme (Proposition 7.9); its structure in bad characteristic is not fully understood, as the author states.
  • Semi-Lie algebra (partially linearized) RTF slice with SL_2-action by the Weil representation independent evidence
    purpose: Gives recursive relations among orbital integrals that allow induction; the SL_2-modularity supplies the global symmetry replacing the local Fourier transform.
    The modularity follows from Poisson summation (Theorems 12.9 and 12.14) and the final local identities are independently checkable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Weil representation and Arithmetic Fundamental Lemma." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C5MDT3DQ

@misc{pith2026190902697,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Weil representation and Arithmetic Fundamental Lemma},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C5MDT3DQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.02697}
}
abstract

By a global approach, we prove the arithmetic fundamental lemma conjecture for unitary groups in $n$ variables over $\mathbb{Q}_p$ when $p\geq n$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [6]

    Modularity of generating series of divisors on unitary Shimura varieties

    J.H. Bruinier, B. Howard, S. Kudla, M. Rapoport, and T. Ya ng, Modularity of generating series of divisors on unitary Shimura varieties , To appear in Ast´ erisque, arXiv:1702.07812 [math.NT] . 3, 27, 29, 31, 41, 42

    work page Pith review arXiv

  2. [8]

    Ehlen, S

    S. Ehlen, S. Sankaran, On two arithmetic theta lifts. Compos. Math. 154 (2018), no. 10, 2090–2149. 7, 41 78 W. ZHANG

    work page 2018

  3. [1]

    Beuzart-Plessis, Comparison of local spherical characters and the Ichino-Ik eda conjecture for unitary groups, arXiv:1602.06538

    R. Beuzart-Plessis, Comparison of local spherical characters and the Ichino-Ik eda conjecture for unitary groups, arXiv:1602.06538. 50, 51

    arXiv

  4. [2]

    , A new proof of Jacquet-Rallis’s fundamental lemma , arXiv:1901.02653. 4

    arXiv 1901

  5. [3]

    J.-B. Bost, H. Gillet, and C. Soul´ e, Heights of projective varieties and positive Green forms. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 7 (1994), no. 4, 903–1027. 43

    work page 1994

  6. [4]

    Burgos, J

    J. Burgos, J. Kramer, and U. K¨ uhn, Cohomological arithmetic Chow groups. J. Inst. Math. Jussieu. 6, 1–178 (2007) 42

    work page 2007

  7. [5]

    Bruinier, Regularized theta lifts for orthogonal groups over totally real fields , J

    J.H. Bruinier, Regularized theta lifts for orthogonal groups over totally real fields , J. Reine Angew. Math. 672 (2012), 177–222. 39, 41

    work page 2012

  8. [7]

    J. H. Bruinier, S. Kudla, and T. Yang, Special values of Green functions at big CM points, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2012), no. 9, 1917–1967. 4, 30, 33

    work page 2012

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    W. T. Gan, B. Gross, and D. Prasad, Symplectic local root numbers, central critical L-values, and restriction problems in the representation theory of classical groups , Ast´ erisque346 (2012), 1–109. 1, 8, 28

    2012

  2. [10]

    Gillet, Arithmetic intersection theory on Deligne–Mumford stacks

    H. Gillet, Arithmetic intersection theory on Deligne–Mumford stacks . In Motives and algebraic cycles , Fields Inst. Commun., vol. 56, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2009, pp. 93–109. 42

    2009

  3. [11]

    Gillet and C

    H. Gillet and C. Soul´ e, Intersection theory using Adams operations. Invent. Math. 90 (1987), no. 2, 243–277 13, 43, 74, 75

    1987

  4. [12]

    Hautes Etudes Sci

    , Arithmetic intersection theory , Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 72 (1990), 93–174. 42, 44

    1990

  5. [13]

    Gordon, Transfer to characteristic zero , appendix to [46]

    J. Gordon, Transfer to characteristic zero , appendix to [46]. 2, 11

  6. [14]

    Gross and D

    B. Gross and D. Zagier, Heegner points and derivatives of L-series, Invent. Math. 84 (1986), no. 2, 225–320. 1

    1986

  7. [15]

    Grothendieck, ´El´ ements de g´ eom´ etrie alg´ ebrique

    A. Grothendieck, ´El´ ements de g´ eom´ etrie alg´ ebrique. I. Le langage des sch´ emas. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math., No. 4, 1960, 228 pp. 75

    1960

  8. [16]

    , ´El´ ements de g´ eom´ etrie alg´ ebrique. III. ´Etude cohomologique des faisceaux coh´ erents, Premi´ ere partie. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math., No. 11, 1961. 76

    1961

  9. [17]

    Sigma, 7 (2019), e47

    Xuhua He, Chao Li, Yihang Zhu, Fine Deligne-Lusztig varieties and arithmetic fundamenta l lemmas , Forum Math. Sigma, 7 (2019), e47. 4

    2019

  10. [18]

    Howard, Complex multiplication cycles and Kudla–Rapoport divisor s, Ann

    B. Howard, Complex multiplication cycles and Kudla–Rapoport divisor s, Ann. of Math. (2) 176 (2012), no. 2, 1097–1171. 4, 14, 28, 30, 33, 34

    2012

  11. [19]

    Jacquet, R

    H. Jacquet, R. P. Langlands, Automorphic forms on GL(2) . Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 114. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1970. vii+548 pp. 74

    1970

  12. [20]

    Jacquet, S

    H. Jacquet, S. Rallis, On the Gross-Prasad conjecture for unitary groups , in On Certain L-Functions, Clay Math. Proc. 13, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2011, pp. 2 05–264. 1, 11

    2011

  13. [21]

    Jacquet, Sur un r´ esultat de Waldspurger

    H. Jacquet, Sur un r´ esultat de Waldspurger. Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) 19 (1986), no. 2, 185–229 70

    1986

  14. [22]

    Kudla, Algebraic cycles on Shimura varieties of orthogonal type , Duke Math

    S. Kudla, Algebraic cycles on Shimura varieties of orthogonal type , Duke Math. J. 86 (1997), 39–78. 39

    1997

  15. [23]

    , Central derivatives of Eisenstein series and height pairin gs, Ann. of Math. (2) 146 (1997), no. 3, 545–646. 41

    1997

  16. [24]

    Kudla and M

    S. Kudla and M. Rapoport, Special cycles on unitary Shimura varieties I. Unramified lo cal theory , Invent. Math. 184 (2011), no. 3, 629–682. 3, 13, 23, 27

    2011

  17. [25]

    Reine Angew

    , Special cycles on unitary Shimura varieties II: Global theo ry, J. Reine Angew. Math. 697 (2014), 91–157. 29, 30, 31, 33, 40

    2014

  18. [26]

    1908.01701

    Chao Li and W ei Zhang, Kudla–Rapoport cycles and derivatives of local densities , arXiv. 1908.01701. 24, 25

    1908 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Algebra Number Theory, 11 (2017), No

    Chao Li and Yihang Zhu, Remarks on the arithmetic fundamental lemma . Algebra Number Theory, 11 (2017), No. 10, 2425–2445 4, 65

    2017

  20. [28]

    Algebra Number Theory 5 (2011), no

    Yifeng Liu, Arithmetic theta lifting and L-derivatives for unitary gro ups, I. Algebra Number Theory 5 (2011), no. 7, 849–921. 39, 41

    2011

  21. [29]

    2, 8, 11

    , Relative trace formulae toward Bessel and Fourier-Jacobi p eriods of unitary groups , Manuscripta Mathematica, 145 (2014) 1–69. 2, 8, 11

    2014

  22. [30]

    2, 3, 13, 14, 28, 31, 33

    , Fourier-Jacobi cycles and arithmetic relative trace formu la, preprint. 2, 3, 13, 14, 28, 31, 33

  23. [31]

    Lusztig, Coxeter orbits and eigenspaces of Frobenius

    G. Lusztig, Coxeter orbits and eigenspaces of Frobenius. Invent. Math. 38 (1976/77), no. 2, 101–159

    1976

  24. [32]

    Mihatsch, On the arithmetic fundamental lemma conjecture through Lie algebras, Math

    A. Mihatsch, On the arithmetic fundamental lemma conjecture through Lie algebras, Math. Z. 287 (2017), no. 1–2, 181–197. 4, 14

    2017

  25. [33]

    3, 4, 13, 14, 32

    , Relative unitary RZ-spaces and the arithmetic fundamental lemma, to appear in the Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu. 3, 4, 13, 14, 32

  26. [34]

    , Local Constancy of Intersection Numbers , arXiv:2004.12172. 26

    2004 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Ngˆo, Le lemme fondamental pour les algebres de Lie , Publ

    B.-C. Ngˆo, Le lemme fondamental pour les algebres de Lie , Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. 111 (2010), 1–169. 3

    2010

  28. [36]

    Oberhettinger, On the derivative of Bessel functions with respect to the ord er

    F. Oberhettinger, On the derivative of Bessel functions with respect to the ord er. J. Math. and Phys. 37 (1958), 75–78. 55

    1958

  29. [37]

    Oda and M

    T. Oda and M. Tsuzuki, Automorphic Green functions associated with the secondary spherical functions , Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 39 (2003), 451–533. 41

    2003

  30. [38]

    Rapoport, B

    M. Rapoport, B. Smithling, and W. Zhang, On the arithmetic transfer conjecture for exotic smooth for mal moduli spaces, Duke Math. J. 166 (2017), no. 12, 2183–2336. 2, 23, 77

    2017

  31. [39]

    , Regular formal moduli spaces and arithmetic transfer conje ctures, Math. Ann. 370 (2018), no. 3–4, 1079–1175. 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14

    2018

  32. [40]

    1710.06962, to appear in Compos

    , Arithmetic diagonal cycles on unitary Shimura varieties , arXiv. 1710.06962, to appear in Compos. Math. 1, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 38, 40, 44, 45, 53, 62, 68

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

    , On Shimura varieties for unitary groups , arXiv:1906.12346. 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

    1906 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Rapoport, U

    M. Rapoport, U. Terstiege, and W. Zhang, On the arithmetic fundamental lemma in the minuscule case , Compos. Math. 149 (2013), no. 10, 1631–1666. 4

    2013

  35. [43]

    Vollaard and T

    I. Vollaard and T. W edhorn, The supersingular locus of the Shimura variety for GU(1, n − 1) II, Invent. Math. 184 (2011), no. 3, 591–627. 23

    2011

  36. [44]

    Xue, On the global Gan–Gross–Prasad conjecture for unitary grou ps: approximating smooth transfer of Jacquet–Rallis, J

    H. Xue, On the global Gan–Gross–Prasad conjecture for unitary grou ps: approximating smooth transfer of Jacquet–Rallis, J. Reine Angew. Math., 756 (2019), 65–100. 3, 73, 74

    2019

  37. [45]

    Yuan, S.-W

    X. Yuan, S.-W. Zhang, and W. Zhang, The Gross–Kohnen–Zagier Theorem over Totally Real Fields , Com- pos. Math. 145 (2009), 1147–1162. 39, 40 WEIL REPRESENTATION AND ARITHMETIC FUNDAMENTAL LEMMA 79

    2009

  38. [46]

    Yun, The fundamental lemma of Jacquet–Rallis in positive charac teristics, Duke Math

    Z. Yun, The fundamental lemma of Jacquet–Rallis in positive charac teristics, Duke Math. J. 156 (2011), no. 2, 167–228. 2, 3, 11, 14, 78

    2011

  39. [47]

    Zhang, On arithmetic fundamental lemmas , Invent

    W. Zhang, On arithmetic fundamental lemmas , Invent. Math. 188 (2012), no. 1, 197–252. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 11, 25, 45, 68, 72

    2012

  40. [48]

    , Fourier transform and the global Gan–Gross–Prasad conject ure for unitary groups , Ann. of Math. (2) 180 (2014), no. 3, 971–1049. 2, 3, 9, 63, 73, 74 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Math ematics, 77 Massachusetts A venue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA Email a...

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.