Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Endoscopy for metaplectic affine Hecke categories

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Every monodromic affine Hecke category coming from a loop-group central extension and a character sheaf is equivalent to a combinatorially defined category of Soergel bimodules, with applications to metaplectic endoscopy and quantum…

desk verdict A major, credible advance in the Soergel description of monodromic affine Hecke categories, with a genuine but well-flagged noncanonical step in the proof that a referee should press. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16667 v1 pith:MZU47H35 submitted 2025-07-22 math.RT math.AG

Gurbir Dhillon , Yau Wing Li , Zhiwei Yun , Xinwen Zhu This is my paper
classification math.RTmath.AG MSC 22E6720G4414F08
keywords affineHeckecategoriesSoergelbimodulesmonodromicsheavesloopgroupsmetaplecticgeometricLanglandsderivedSatakeequivalencecentralextensions
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

Working with a possibly twisted loop group and a central extension, the paper attaches to any character sheaf $\chi$ (a tame rank-one local system with a group-compatible multiplication) on the Iwahori torus a monodromic affine Hecke category: sheaves on the centrally extended loop group whose behaviour under the two torus actions is prescribed by $\chi$. The main claim is that this category, as a monoidal $\infty$-category, is equivalent to a category of Soergel bimodules built purely from the combinatorial datum consisting of the stabilizer of $\chi$ in the extended affine Weyl group, its reflection subgroup, and a formal dual torus. If true, the structural theory of these depth-zero blocks is governed by Coxeter combinatorics, and any two loop groups with isomorphic combinatorial data have equivalent Hecke categories. The authors use this to obtain endoscopic equivalences for metaplectic covers, the derived Satake equivalence for metaplectic groups, and a series of conjectures in quantum geometric Langlands, with mod $\ell$ or integral $\ell$-adic coefficients.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the Soergel functor. It comes from letting $\chi M_{\chi}$ act on an affine Whittaker category: sheaves on the moduli stack of $G$-bundles on $\mathbb{P}^1$ with Iwahori level at $0$ and a generic additive character at infinity. A carefully chosen subgroup $\Sigma$ collapses this Whittaker model to the category $D(\tilde A/(\tilde A,\chi\text{-mon}))$ of $\chi$-monodromic sheaves on the torus $\tilde A$, and the Mellin transform identifies that category with $\mathrm{IndCoh}(f_{\chi})$; the resulting monoidal action is the Soergel functor $\chi V_{\chi}: \chi M_{\chi} \to \mathrm{IndCoh}(f_{\chi} \times f_{\chi})$. On cofree tilting sheaves, which are the monodromic analogues of free-monodromic tiltings and are dualizable with standard and costandard filtrations, the functor lands in coherent sheaves and sends simple-reflection tilting sheaves to Bott–Samelson sheaves $\beta(r)_{\chi}$. The Karoubian monoidal category generated by these images is $\chi S_{\chi}$, and a renormalization theorem reconstructs all of $\chi M_{\chi}$ from the additive category of tiltings by a base change.

What would settle it

For the $\mathrm{PSp}_6$ example treated in Section 3.8.1, where $\Omega_{\chi}$ is nonabelian and torsion-free, compute the associator on minimal tilting sheaves indexed by $\Omega_{\chi}$: the theorem predicts the associated three-cocycle is trivial, so a nonzero class would falsify; equivalently, in characteristic different from two, check whether the endomorphism algebra of $\tau(s)_{\chi}$ equals $\mathrm{Fun}(\Gamma_1 \cup \Gamma_s)$ as Lemma 5.20 predicts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central theorem is stated for a coefficient field $E$ of characteristic not two: there is an equivalence of monoidal $\infty$-categories $\chi M_{\chi} \simeq \chi S_{\chi}$ that sends cofree tilting sheaves to Soergel bimodules. Here $\chi M_{\chi}$ is the bi-$(\tilde I,\chi)$-monodromic sheaf category on the centrally extended loop group, and $\chi S_{\chi}$ is the monoidal category generated by Bott–Samelson objects on the formal scheme $f_{\chi}$, together with the extended Coxeter group data $(\tilde W_{\chi}, \tilde W_{\chi}^{\circ}, S_{\chi}, f_{\chi})$. In particular, the monodromic affine Hecke category is reconstructed from that combinatorial datum. A structural corollary is the decomposition $\chi M_{\chi} \simeq \mathrm{Vect}_{\Omega_{\chi}} \ltimes \chi M_{\chi}^{\circ}$, so all potential three-cocycle twists attached to the component group $\Omega_{\chi}$ are trivializable. The same mechanism yields t-exact monoidal equivalences for quantum geometric Langlands and the metaplectic derived Satake equivalence.

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends on being able to cut down a larger space of sheaves, by imposing an extra symmetry, until it becomes exactly the prescribed family of sheaves on a torus; if that cutting-down step fails for some loop group and character, the advertised equivalence to the combinatorial bimodule category is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every monodromic affine Hecke category decomposes as $\mathrm{Vect}_{\Omega_{\chi}} \ltimes \chi M_{\chi}^{\circ}$, so the a priori possible three-cocycle twist on the component group is always trivializable.
  • Two monodromic affine Hecke categories whose quadruples $(\tilde W_{\chi}, \tilde W_{\chi}^{\circ}, S_{\chi}, f_{\chi})$ are isomorphic admit canonical t-exact monoidal equivalences, giving categorical endoscopic equivalences.
  • The quantum geometric Langlands equivalences hold at Iwahori and spherical levels: the level-$\kappa$ Hecke category of $G$ is equivalent to the level-$-\check\kappa$ Hecke category of the dual group, with a parahoric 2-category version.
  • The metaplectic derived Satake equivalence holds: the metaplectic Satake category is equivalent to $\mathrm{IndCoh}_{\mathrm{nilp}}$ of the derived stack built from the metaplectic dual group, recovering the abelian Satake equivalence at the level of hearts.
  • These results work for mod $\ell$ and integral $\ell$-adic coefficients in characteristic not two, and are t-exact, not merely equivalences at the level of Grothendieck groups.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the reconstruction suggests that every monodromic block is governed by its quadruple alone, so one may expect a general construction of an endoscopic loop group realizing any prescribed quadruple, not just the split case treated here.
  • Because the proof's collapse uses a choice of $\Sigma$ when the base field is not an algebraic closure of a finite field, the paper's equivalence may depend on that choice; comparing choices would determine whether endoscopy is genuinely canonical over arbitrary fields.
  • A concrete testable extension is to pass to Frobenius-twisted cocenters of the equivalent categories; this should produce triviality of the cocycles in depth-zero metaplectic Hecke algebras and a metaplectic Casselman–Shalika formula, consequences the paper reserves for a sequel.
  • The characteristic-two caveat points to a modified Bott–Samelson definition (the dualizing sheaf of $\Gamma_1 \cup_{\ker \check\alpha_s^\vee} \Gamma_s$ rather than the closed union); checking Theorem 7.17 with that definition would test whether the theorem extends to all characteristics.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves that, for a possibly twisted loop group LG with a Kac–Moody central extension and any character sheaf χ on the Iwahori quotient torus, the resulting monodromic affine Hecke category is monoidally equivalent, in characteristic not two, to a purely combinatorial category of Soergel bimodules associated to the quadruple (fWχ, fWχ°, Sχ, fχ). The proof constructs a Soergel functor from an affine Whittaker model, collapses the model to a single copy of D(eA/(eA,χ-mon)) using a subgroup Σ of fMφ (Construction 3.24), proves that cofree tilting sheaves go to Soergel bimodules (Theorems 7.17 and 7.26), and reconstructs the full Hecke category from tiltings (Theorem 5.28). Applications include endoscopic equivalences between Hecke categories and the metaplectic derived Satake equivalence.

Significance. If correct, this is a major result in geometric representation theory: it gives a combinatorial reconstruction of monodromic affine Hecke categories in the presence of central extensions and character twists, proves triviality of the potential 3-cocycle on the block group, and settles conjectures of Gaitsgory as well as giving a derived Satake equivalence for metaplectic groups. The paper is honest about its main caveat: Theorem 1.4 excludes characteristic two, and Remark 7.14 explains the needed modification. The proof is a long but coherent sequence of reductions rather than a black box, and the applications are concrete and falsifiable. The main weakness is that the crucial 'collapse' of the Whittaker category in Theorem 6.9 is not proved in sufficient detail; this is the point on which the whole Soergel functor depends.

major comments (2)
  1. [§6.2, Theorem 6.9, Step 2 (esp. (6.10)–(6.12))] The action of χMχ on D(eA/(eA,χ-mon)) is the load-bearing step of the paper, and it is obtained by the equivalence Mod_E ⊗_{D(BΣ1)} D(Σ1\eA/(eA,χ-mon)) ≃ D(eA/(eA,χ-mon)). The proof of essential surjectivity of the fully faithful embedding (6.12) is not supplied: the text notes that the composite with the localization from D(Σ1\eA/(...)) to the relative tensor product is pullback, and that the right adjoint of that composite is !-pushforward, which is conservative; but conservativity of the composite right adjoint does not by itself imply conservativity of the right adjoint of (6.12). Since Σ1 can have order non-invertible in E, this step is not a formality. The authors should either give a complete argument or cite a precise statement in [56] that covers exactly this relative tensor product, including the χ-monodromic and modular-coefficient case. Without this, Theorem 6.9—and hence Theorem 1.4—is not established as written.
  2. [§3.7, Construction 3.24; §1.2.12] The construction of the Soergel functor depends on a choice of lift eτ of τ and on the subgroup Σ built from it; §1.2.12 explicitly admits a 'mild choice' in the construction of (1.5) when k is not an algebraic closure of a finite field. This is in tension with the word 'canonical' in Theorem 6.9(1) and with the introduction's claim that χMχ may be reconstructed from the combinatorial datum (fWχ, fWχ°, Sχ, fχ). The paper should state precisely which statements are independent of the choice and which are only proved for a fixed choice, and it should explain whether Theorem 7.29's equivalences require compatible choices of Vχ1 and Vχ2. This does not destroy the existence claim, but it is essential for the advertised reconstruction and for the applications.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract; Remark 1.6(5)] The abstract states that the results work for mod ℓ or integral ℓ-adic coefficients without mentioning the characteristic-two assumption of Theorem 1.4; please add the caveat there as well.
  2. [§3.4.3 and §6.1.2] The symbol M is reused: it is first defined as NLpolG(I,A)_red and then redefined as NLpolG(I∞,A)_red in §6.1.2. A different symbol, such as M∞, would avoid confusion.
  3. [§1.2.12 and Theorem 6.9] To match the acknowledged caveat, Theorem 6.9(1) should say 'canonical after fixing the choices in Construction 3.24' rather than simply 'canonical', unless choice-independence is proved.
  4. [§7.2.8–7.2.10] The construction of the monoidal functor ■ in Proposition 7.24 uses choices of Whittaker-normalized tilting objects; the paper should explicitly record that the resulting equivalence in Theorem 7.26 is relative to those choices and to the chosen Soergel functor Vχ.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typographical and OCR artifacts in the arXiv version (e.g., 'MET APLECTIC' in the title) and occasional inconsistencies in the use of 'eI' and 'I +' in the early sections; a careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main equivalence is derived from an independently constructed Soergel functor; the flagged noncanonical choice is a robustness caveat, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central claim (Theorem 1.4) is a monoidal equivalence between the monodromic affine Hecke category and a combinatorially defined Soergel-bimodule category. The derivation chain is: define χMχ and the combinatorial datum (fWχ, fWχ°, Sχ, fχ); construct χSχ purely from that datum; construct an action of χMχ on D(eA/(eA,χ-mon)) in Theorem 6.9 via the affine Whittaker model and the subgroup Σ of Construction 3.24; prove on cofree tiltings this action identifies with Bott-Samelson sheaves (Theorems 7.17 and 7.26); then lift to the full categories via the renormalization theorem 5.28. None of these steps defines its output in terms of its input: the affine Whittaker collapse is a geometric statement with a proof sketch, and the category χSχ is defined before the equivalence is asserted. The only caveat in the paper is in Section 1.2.12 and Construction 3.24: the subgroup Σ involves the choice of a lifting eτ, so the construction of the equivalence (1.5) has a mild choice when k is not an algebraic closure of a finite field. This is acknowledged noncanonicity or a potential robustness gap, not circularity: if the collapse failed or the action genuinely depended on eτ, the proof would be incomplete, but the theorem is not assumed as its own input. Previous results cited, such as [12], [13], [41], and [56], are used as proven structural facts or tools; there is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' own prior work is invoked to force the conclusion. Accordingly no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a mature sheaf-theoretic formalism, the characteristic-not-two assumption, Coxeter combinatorics, and the affine Whittaker collapse. No data-fitting parameters are introduced, and no new physical or external entities are posited.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The sheaf-theoretic formalism: D is a lax symmetric monoidal functor from correspondences of prestacks to presentable stable E-linear ∞-categories, satisfying the six-functor adjunctions used throughout Section 2.2.
    This framework is cited to [56, Section 10] and underlies the definition of all monoidal Hecke categories and module categories in this paper.
  • domain assumption The coefficient field E has characteristic not two in the main theorems.
    Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 7.26 state this hypothesis; Remark 7.14 explains that the definitions of Bott-Samelson sheaves must be modified in characteristic two.
  • standard math For the stabilizer fWχ, the subgroup generated by integral coroot reflections forms a Coxeter system with simple set Sχ, and the minimal length section gives a splitting fWχ ≃ Ωχ ⋉ fWχ°.
    This combinatorial structure, from Section 3.8 and Lemma 3.43, is the input for the Soergel bimodule category χSχ and for the block decomposition of Section 4.3.
  • domain assumption The affine Whittaker model can be collapsed to D(eA/(eA, χ-mon)) using the subgroup Σ of Construction 3.24.
    Theorem 6.9 depends on this collapse; it is a load-bearing technical premise for constructing the Soergel functor. The paper proves it, and flags a mild choice when k is not the algebraic closure of a finite field.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Endoscopy for metaplectic affine Hecke categories." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MZU47H35

@misc{pith2026250716667,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Endoscopy for metaplectic affine Hecke categories},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MZU47H35}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16667}
}
abstract

For a possibly twisted loop group $LG$, and any character sheaf of its Iwahori subgroup, we identify the associated affine Hecke category with a combinatorial category of Soergel bimodules. In fact, we prove such results for affine Hecke categories arising from central extensions of the loop group $LG$. Our results work for mod $\ell$ or integral $\ell$-adic coefficients. As applications, we obtain endoscopic equivalences between affine Hecke categories, including the derived Satake equivalence for metaplectic groups, and a series of conjectures by Gaitsgory in quantum geometric Langlands.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. On the excursion algebra

    math.AG 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The excursion algebra of a scheme over a finite field is canonically isomorphic to the ring of functions on the geometrically semisimple locus, yielding reduced/normal components, finite generation, GL_n surjectivity,...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [56]

    , Tame categorical local Langlands correspondence, arXiv:2504.07482 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  2. [1]

    J. D. Adler, J. Fintzen, M. Mishra, and K. Ohara, Reduction to depth zero for tame p-adic groups via Hecke algebra isomorphisms , arXiv.2408.07805 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  3. [2]

    Arinkin and D

    D. Arinkin and D. Gaitsgory, Singular support of coherent sheaves and the geometric Lang- lands conjecture, Selecta Mathematica 21 (2015), no. 1, 1–199

    work page 2015

  4. [3]

    Arinkin, D

    D. Arinkin, D. Gaitsgory, D. Kazhdan, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum, and Y. Varshavsky, The stack of local systems with restricted variation and geometric Langlands theory with nilpotent singular support, arXiv:2010.01906 (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  5. [4]

    Arkhipov, R

    S. Arkhipov, R. Bezrukavnikov, and V. Ginzburg, Quantum groups, the loop Grassmannian, and the Springer resolution , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 17 (2004), no. 3, 595–678. MR 2053952

    work page 2004

  6. [5]

    Ben-Zvi and D

    D. Ben-Zvi and D. Nadler, The character theory of a complex group , arXiv:0904.1247 (2009)

    arXiv 2009

  7. [6]

    , Betti geometric Langlands , Algebraic geometry: Salt Lake City 2015, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., vol. 97.2, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2018, pp. 3–41. MR 3821166

    work page 2015

  8. [7]

    Bezrukavnikov, On two geometric realizations of an affine Hecke algebra , Publications Math´ ematiques de l’Institut des Hautes Sciences123 (2016), 1–67

    R. Bezrukavnikov, On two geometric realizations of an affine Hecke algebra , Publications Math´ ematiques de l’Institut des Hautes Sciences123 (2016), 1–67

    work page 2016

Show all 56 references
  1. [8]

    Bezrukavnikov and M

    R. Bezrukavnikov and M. Finkelberg, Equivariant Satake category and Kostant–Whittaker reduction, Moscow Mathematical Journal 8 (2008), no. 1, 39–72

    2008

  2. [9]

    Bezrukavnikov, M

    R. Bezrukavnikov, M. Finkelberg, and V. Ostrik, Character D-modules via Drinfeld center of Harish-Chandra bimodules, Inventiones Mathematicae 188 (2012), 589–620

    2012

  3. [10]

    Bezrukavnikov and I

    R. Bezrukavnikov and I. Losev, Dimensions of modular irreducible representations of semisim- ple Lie algebras , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 36 (2023), no. 4, 1235–1304. MR 4618958

    2023

  4. [11]

    Bezrukavnikov and S

    R. Bezrukavnikov and S. Riche, A topological approach to Soergel theory , Representation Theory and Algebraic Geometry: A Conference Celebrating the Birthdays of Sasha Beilinson and Victor Ginzburg, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2021, pp. 267–343

    2021

  5. [12]

    Bezrukavnikov and Z

    R. Bezrukavnikov and Z. Yun, On Koszul duality for Kac-Moody groups , Representation Theory of the American Mathematical Society 17 (2013), no. 1, 1–98

    2013

  6. [13]

    Bourbaki, Groupes et alg` ebres de Lie

    N. Bourbaki, Groupes et alg` ebres de Lie. Chapitres 4, 5 et 6, Hermann, Paris, 1968

    1968

  7. [14]

    Braverman, G

    A. Braverman, G. Dhillon, M. Finkelberg, S. Raskin, and R. Travkin, Coulomb branches of noncotangent type (with appendices by Gurbir Dhillon and Theo Johnson-Freyd) , arXiv:2201.09475 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  8. [15]

    D. Bump, S. Friedberg, and D. Ginzburg, On the cubic Shimura lift for PGL3, Israel J. Math. 126 (2001), 289–307. MR 1882041

    2001

  9. [16]

    , Small representations for odd orthogonal groups , Int. Math. Res. Not. (2003), no. 25, 1363–1393. MR 1968295

    2003

  10. [17]

    , Lifting automorphic representations on the double covers of orthogonal groups , Duke Math. J. 131 (2006), no. 2, 363–396. MR 2219245

    2006

  11. [18]

    Chen and G

    H. Chen and G. Dhillon, A Langlands dual realization of coherent sheaves on the nilpotent cone, arXiv:2310.10539 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Deligne, Sommes de Gauss cubiques et revˆ etements de SL(2) [d’apr` es S

    P. Deligne, Sommes de Gauss cubiques et revˆ etements de SL(2) [d’apr` es S. J. Patterson], S´ eminaire Bourbaki (1978/79), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 770, Springer, Berlin, 1980, pp. Exp. No. 539, pp. 244–277. MR 572428

    1978

  13. [20]

    J. N. Eberhardt and A. Eteve, Universal Koszul Duality for Kac-Moody Groups , arXiv:2408.14716 (2024). 10We thank Arakawa for emphasizing this latter connection. 130 GURBIR DHILLON, YAU WING LI, ZHIWEI YUN, AND XINWEN ZHU

    2024 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Finkelberg and S

    M. Finkelberg and S. Lysenko, Twisted geometric Satake equivalence, Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu 9 (2010), no. 4, 719–739

    2010

  15. [22]

    Friedberg and D

    S. Friedberg and D. Ginzburg, Theta functions on covers of symplectic groups , Bull. Iranian Math. Soc. 43 (2017), no. 4, 89–116. MR 3711824

    2017

  16. [23]

    , Descent and theta functions for metaplectic groups , J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 20 (2018), no. 8, 1913–1957. MR 3854895

    2018

  17. [24]

    , Classical theta lifts for higher metaplectic covering groups , Geom. Funct. Anal. 30 (2020), no. 6, 1531–1582. MR 4182832

    2020

  18. [25]

    Gaitsgory, Quantum Langlands Correspondence, arXiv:1601.05279 (2007)

    D. Gaitsgory, Quantum Langlands Correspondence, arXiv:1601.05279 (2007)

    2007 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Gao, Distinguished theta representations for certain covering groups , Pacific J

    F. Gao, Distinguished theta representations for certain covering groups , Pacific J. Math. 290 (2017), no. 2, 333–379. MR 3681111

    2017

  20. [27]

    Gouttard, Perverse Monodromic sheaves , Ph.D

    V. Gouttard, Perverse Monodromic sheaves , Ph.D. thesis, Universit´ e Clermont Auvergne, 2021

    2021

  21. [28]

    Heinloth, B.C

    J. Heinloth, B.C. Ngˆ o, and Z. Yun, Kloosterman sheaves for reductive groups , Annals of Mathematics (2013), 241–310

    2013

  22. [29]

    Ionov and Z

    A. Ionov and Z. Yun, Tilting sheaves for real groups and Koszul duality , arXiv:2301.05409 (2023)

    2023

  23. [30]

    Iwahori and H

    N. Iwahori and H. Matsumoto, On some Bruhat decomposition and the structure of the Hecke rings of p-adic Chevalley groups , Publications Math´ ematiques de l’Institut des Hautes Scien- tifiques 25 (1965), 5–48

    1965

  24. [31]

    Kazhdan and G

    D. Kazhdan and G. Lusztig, Schubert varieties and Poincar´ e duality, Geometry of the Laplace operator (1980), 185–203

    1980

  25. [32]

    , Proof of the Deligne-Langlands conjecture for Hecke algebras , Inventiones Mathe- maticae 87 (1987), 153–215

    1987

  26. [33]

    D. A. Kazhdan and S. J. Patterson, Metaplectic forms, Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. (1984), no. 59, 35–142. MR 743816

    1984

  27. [34]

    Kubota, On automorphic functions and the reciprocity law in a number field , Lectures in Mathematics, Department of Mathematics, Kyoto University, vol

    T. Kubota, On automorphic functions and the reciprocity law in a number field , Lectures in Mathematics, Department of Mathematics, Kyoto University, vol. No. 2, Kinokuniya Book Store Co., Ltd., Tokyo, 1969. MR 255490

    1969

  28. [35]

    Lafforgue and S

    V. Lafforgue and S. Lysenko, Geometric Weil representation: local field case , Compos. Math. 145 (2009), no. 1, 56–88. MR 2480495

    2009

  29. [36]

    Leslie, A generalized theta lifting, CAP representations, and Arthur parameters , Trans

    S. Leslie, A generalized theta lifting, CAP representations, and Arthur parameters , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 372 (2019), no. 7, 5069–5121. MR 4009400

    2019

  30. [37]

    Y. W. Li, Endoscopy for affine Hecke categories, Selecta Mathematica, New Series 30 (2024), 93

    2024

  31. [38]

    Lusztig, Classification of unipotent representations of simple p-adic groups, International Mathematics Research Notices (1995), no

    G. Lusztig, Classification of unipotent representations of simple p-adic groups, International Mathematics Research Notices (1995), no. 11, 517–589

    1995

  32. [39]

    , Truncated convolution of character sheaves, Bulletin of the Institute of Mathematics, Academia Sinica 10 (2015), no. 1, 1–72

    2015

  33. [40]

    9, 211–235

    , Unipotent representations as a categorical centre , Representation Theory of the American Mathematical Society 19 (2015), no. 9, 211–235

    2015

  34. [41]

    Lusztig and Z

    G. Lusztig and Z. Yun, Endoscopy for Hecke categories, character sheaves and representa- tions, Forum of Mathematics, Pi 8 (2020), e12

    2020

  35. [42]

    Lysenko, Moduli of metaplectic bundles on curves and theta-sheaves , Ann

    S. Lysenko, Moduli of metaplectic bundles on curves and theta-sheaves , Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) 39 (2006), no. 3, 415–466. MR 2265675

    2006

  36. [43]

    , Geometric theta-lifting for the dual pair SO2m, Sp2n, Ann. Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er. (4) 44 (2011), no. 3, 427–493. MR 2839456

    2011

  37. [44]

    Morris, Tamely ramified intertwining algebras, Inventiones Mathematicae114 (1993), no

    L. Morris, Tamely ramified intertwining algebras, Inventiones Mathematicae114 (1993), no. 1, 1–54

    1993

  38. [45]

    Pappas and M

    G. Pappas and M. Rapoport, Twisted loop groups and their affine flag varieties , Advances in Mathematics 219 (2008), no. 1, 118–198

    2008

  39. [46]

    S. J. Patterson, A cubic analogue of the theta series , J. Reine Angew. Math. 296 (1977), 125–161. MR 563068

    1977

  40. [47]

    , A cubic analogue of the theta series. II , J. Reine Angew. Math. 296 (1977), 217–220. MR 563069

    1977

  41. [48]

    Roche, Types and Hecke algebras for principal series representations of split reductive p-adic groups, Annales Scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure31 (1998), no

    A. Roche, Types and Hecke algebras for principal series representations of split reductive p-adic groups, Annales Scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure31 (1998), no. 3

    1998

  42. [49]

    Savin, Local shimura correspondence, Mathematische Annalen 280 (1988), 185–190

    G. Savin, Local shimura correspondence, Mathematische Annalen 280 (1988), 185–190. ENDOSCOPY FOR METAPLECTIC AFFINE HECKE CATEGORIES 131

    1988

  43. [50]

    Reine Angew

    , An analogue of the Weil representation for G2, J. Reine Angew. Math. 434 (1993), 115–126. MR 1195692

    1993

  44. [51]

    Soergel, Kategorie O, perverse Garben und Moduln ¨ uber den Koinvarianten zur Weyl- gruppe, Journal of the American Mathematical Society 3 (1990), no

    W. Soergel, Kategorie O, perverse Garben und Moduln ¨ uber den Koinvarianten zur Weyl- gruppe, Journal of the American Mathematical Society 3 (1990), no. 2, 421–445

    1990

  45. [52]

    Weissman, L-groups and parameters for covering groups , Ast´ erisque398 (2018), 33–186

    M. Weissman, L-groups and parameters for covering groups , Ast´ erisque398 (2018), 33–186

    2018

  46. [53]

    Xia, Equivalence of hecke categories with deeper level structures, Harvard PhD thesis (2024)

    J. Xia, Equivalence of hecke categories with deeper level structures, Harvard PhD thesis (2024)

    2024

  47. [54]

    Yang, A filtration on the moduli stack of local systems on the punctured disc, in preparation

    D. Yang, A filtration on the moduli stack of local systems on the punctured disc, in preparation

  48. [55]

    Zhu, Coherent sheaves on the stack of Langlands parameters , arXiv:2008.02998 (2020)

    X. Zhu, Coherent sheaves on the stack of Langlands parameters , arXiv:2008.02998 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.