Abstract
In this paper, we give an asymptotic formula for the second moment of Dirichlet twists of an automorphic L-function \(L(s, \pi )\) on the critical line averaged over characters and conductors, where \(\pi \) denotes an irreducible tempered cuspidal automorphic representation of \({\textrm{GL}}_{4}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character. We give some hybrid bound for the error term with respect to the size of conductors of Dirichlet characters and that of the automorphic representation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Estimation of the moments of the Riemann zeta-function or other L-functions has been regarded as a very important problem in analytic number theory. It is related to some fundamental problems in number theory, for example, estimation of the ranks of elliptic curves, zero density estimates for L-functions, the Lindelöf hypothesis and so on. For \(k>0,\) the 2k th moment of the Riemann zeta-function \(\zeta (s)\) on the critical line \(\Re (s)=1/2\) is defined by
for \(T>1.\) In 1918, Hardy and Littlewood [13] proved \(I_{1}(T)\sim T\log T,\) and in 1926 Ingham [14] obtained \(I_{2}(T)\sim (1/2\pi ^{2})T\log ^{4}T.\) It is generally conjectured that \(I_{k}(T)\sim C_{k}T\log ^{k^{2}}T\) for any \(k>0,\) where \(C_{k}\) is some positive constant dependent only on k. The value of \(C_{k}\) has been conjectured by Keating and Snaith [15] using the random matrix theory. Though there are a number of works to compute \(I_{k}(T),\) the main term has been obtained only in the cases \(k=1,2.\) It is widely believed that obtaining an asymptotic formula for \(I_{k}(T)\) with \(k>2\) is out of the reach of our current techniques.
Also, there are a lot of studies on moments of other L-functions. The main problem is to compute the moments of a class of L-functions at the central point \(s=1/2\) of their functional equations. For example, Paley [17] obtained an asymptotic formula for the primitive Dirichlet L-functions
as \(q\rightarrow \infty \) with \(q \not \equiv 2 \; ({\text {mod}}\; 4),\) where \(\varphi (q)\) and \(\varphi ^{*}(q)\) denote the numbers of Dirichlet characters and primitive Dirichlet characters modulo q, respectively. The asterisk in the summation means that the sum is over primitive characters. The asymptotic formula for the fourth moment of Dirichlet L-function was obtained by Heath-Brown [12] when q does not have many prime factors, and Soundararajan [19] improved Heath-Brown’s result. Young [20] obtained a power saving asymptotic formula for the fourth moment. Blomer et al. [2] studied the moment of the product of Dirichlet twists of modular L-functions, and as a corollary they gave a significant improvement on the size of the error term of Young’s formula. Like the case of the Riemann zeta-function, the asymptotic formula of 2k th moment of Dirichlet L-functions at \(s=1/2\) has not been obtained for any \(k\ne 1,2.\)
However, by considering both average over conductors and integration on the critical line in addition to the average over characters of the same moduli, one can obtain some asymptotic formulas for the moments of higher powers of Dirichlet L-functions. For example, Conrey, Iwaniec and Soundararajan [4] obtained
unconditionally, where
and \(\Lambda (s, \chi )\) is the completed L-function defined by
satisfying the functional equation
The sum above is over even primitive characters and \(\varphi ^{\flat }(q)\) denotes the number of even primitive characters modulo q. The leading coefficient \(a_{3}\) above is found in the conjecture of Keating and Snaith [15] for the sixth moment of \(\zeta (1/2+it),\) i.e.,
In the case of eighth moment, it is conjectured in [3] that
as \(q \rightarrow \infty \) with \(q \not \equiv 2 \; ({\text {mod}}\; 4),\) where
Towards this conjecture, Chandee and Li [5] proved
under the assumption of the generalized Riemann hypothesis (GRH). They also studied the fourth moment of Dirichlet twists of a \({\text {GL}}_{2}\)-automorphic L-function. For a holomorphic modular form f of weight k and full level, they obtained the asymptotic formula
under the assumption of the GRH for each \(L(s, f\times \chi ),\) where \(\Psi \) is a smooth function supported in [1, 2], \(\Lambda (s, f\times \chi )\) is the completed L-function of \(L(s, f\times \chi ),\) and \(f_{2},\) \(B_{p}(1/2,f)\) are some constants dependent on f given explicitly in [5]. As researches in a similar direction, they also studied the sixth moment of automorphic L-functions [6], the second moment of \({\textrm{GL}}(4) \times {\textrm{GL}}(2)\) L-functions at special points [7], and the eighth moment of the family of automorphic L-functions of \(\Gamma _{1}(q)\) [8].
The aim of this paper is to establish an asymptotic formula for the Dirichlet twists of a \({\text {GL}}_{4}\) automorphic L-function in a similar situation. Let \(\pi \) be an irreducible cuspidal automorphic representation of \({\textrm{GL}}_{4}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character. For \(\Re (s)>1,\) let
be the automorphic L-function associated to \(\pi ,\) as defined by Godement and Jacquet in [11]. \(L(s,\pi )\) is continued holomorphically to the whole complex plane, and satisfies the functional equation
where \(|\varepsilon _{\pi }|=1,\) \(\overline{\Phi }(s,\pi ):=\overline{\Phi (\overline{s}, \pi )}\) and \(N_{\pi }\) is a positive integer called the conductor of \(\pi .\) The function \(\gamma (s,\pi )\) is called the gamma factor, given by
for some \(\mu _{j}\in {\mathbb {C}},\) where \(\Gamma _{{\mathbb {R}}}(s)=\pi ^{-s/2}\Gamma (s/2).\) The temperedness of the automorphic representation \(\pi \) means that the parameters of the Euler product and the functional equation satisfy the following conditions (see [10]):
-
1.
Selberg bound: \(\Re (\mu _{j})\in \{0, 1\}\) for \(j=1, \ldots ,4.\)
-
2.
Ramanujan bound: If \(p\not \mid N_{\pi },\) then \(|\alpha _{j}(p)|=1\) for \(j=1, \ldots ,4.\) If \(p|N_{\pi },\) then for each \(j=1,\ldots ,4\) either \(\alpha _{j}(p)=0\) or \(|\alpha _{j}(p)|=p^{-m_{j}/2}\) (\(m_{j}\in \{0,1,2,\ldots \}\)) holds.
Let \(\chi \) be a primitive Dirichlet character modulo q with \((q, N_{\pi })=1.\) Then the twisted L-function \(L(s, \pi \otimes \chi )\) is defined by
for \(\Re (s)>1.\) The twisted L-function \(L(s,\pi \otimes \chi )\) is also continued holomorphically to the whole complex plane as an entire function of order 1, and satisfies the functional equation
where \(|\varepsilon _{\pi ,\chi }|=1\) and the function \(\gamma _{\chi }(s, \pi )\) is given by
for some \(\mu _{j,\chi }\in {\mathbb {C}}.\) We put
Then the functional equation (1.8) yields
where \(\overline{\pi \otimes \chi }:=\tilde{\pi }\otimes \overline{\chi }.\) Here, \(\tilde{\pi }\) denotes the contragredient representation of \(\pi .\) Let \(\Psi \) be a smooth function compactly supported in [1, 2]. Put \({\mathfrak {m}}:=\sum _{j=1}^{4}\Re (\mu _{j}),\)
Then the main theorem of this paper is as follows.
Theorem 1.1
Let \(\pi =\otimes _{v}\pi _{v}\) be an irreducible cuspidal tempered automorphic representation of \({\textrm{GL}}_{4}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character. Suppose that the L-function \(L(s, \pi )\) is given by (1.5) and satisfies the functional equation (1.6) for some positive integer \(N_{\pi }.\) Furthermore, we assume that there exists an absolute constant \(K>0\) for which
holds for any \(S>0,\) where the integral above is over some line segment parallel to the imaginary axis in \(0\le \Re (s)\le c/\log q\) for some positive constant c. Let \(\Psi (x)\) be a smooth function compactly supported in [1, 2]. Then we have
uniformly for \(Q\ge 2,\) \(N_{\pi }\ll (\log Q)^{N}\) for any fixed N. Here, \(\kappa _{\pi \times \tilde{\pi }}\) is the residue of \(L(s, \pi \times \tilde{\pi })\) at \(s=1,\) G(s, t) is given by (1.11), and A(s), \(B_{q}(s)\) are given by
respectively, where
with \(e(\theta ):=\exp (2\pi i \theta ).\) The implied constant in (1.13) is independent of both Q and \(N_{\pi }.\)
Remark 1.2
-
1.
Since the main term of (1.13) is of order \(Q^{2}\log Q,\) the main term dominates the error term if \(N_{\pi }\ll (\log Q)^{64/47-\delta }\) for any \(\delta >0.\)
-
2.
If \(N_{\pi }=1,\) then \(B_{p}(1/2)\) is expressed by the Dirichlet coefficients of \(L(s, \pi )\) by the following formula. Define the polynomials \(f_{i}=f_{i}(s_{1},s_{2},s_{3},s_{4})\) \((i=0, \ldots ,9)\) and \(g_{i}=g_{i}(s_{1},s_{2},s_{3},s_{4})\) \((i=0, \ldots ,12)\) by
$$\begin{aligned} f_{0}= & {} s_{4}^{2}, \quad f_{1}=3s_{4}^{2}, \quad f_{2}=-s_{2}^{2}s_{4}+6s_{4}^{2}, \quad f_{3}=s_{2}s_{3}^{2}+s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}-3s_{2}^{2}s_{4}-2s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}+10s_{4}^{2},\\ f_{4}= & {} -s_{1}^{2}s_{3}^{2}+2s_{2}s_{3}^{2}+2s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4} -4s_{2}^{2}s_{4}-2s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}+12s_{4}^{2},\\ f_{i}= & {} f_{9-i} \quad (i=5, \ldots ,9),\\ g_{0}= & {} s_{4}^{3}, \quad g_{1}=-s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+4s_{4}^{3}, \quad g_{2}=s_{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}+s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}^{2}-2s_{2}^{2}s_{4}^{2}-4s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+10s_{4}^{3},\\ g_{3}= & {} -s_{3}^{4}-s_{1}s_{2}^{2}s_{3}s_{4}+7s_{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}-s_{1}^{4}s_{4}^{2}+7s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}^{2} -8s_{2}^{2}s_{4}^{2}-13s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+20s_{4}^{3},\\ g_{4}= & {} s_{1}s_{2}s_{3}^{3}-3s_{3}^{4}+s_{2}^{2}s_{4}+s_{1}^{3}s_{2}s_{3}s_{4}-8s_{1}s_{2}^{2}s_{3}s_{4}-s_{1}^{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}+18s_{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4} \\{} & {} -3s_{1}^{4}s_{4}^{2}+18s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}^{2}-16s_{2}^{2}s_{4}^{2}-24s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+31s_{4}^{3},\\ g_{5}= & {} -s_{2}^{3}s_{3}^{2}-s_{1}^{3}s_{3}^{3}+5s_{1}s_{2}s_{3}^{3}-6s_{3}^{4}-s_{1}^{2}s_{2}^{3}s_{4}+4s_{2}^{4}s_{4}+5s_{1}^{3}s_{2}s_{3}s_{4}-19s_{1}s_{2}^{2}s_{3}s_{4} \\{} & {} -2s_{1}^{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}+29s_{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}-6s_{1}^{4}s_{4}^{2}+29s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}^{2}-24s_{2}^{2}s_{4}^{2}-34s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+40s_{4}^{3},\\ g_{6}= & {} s_{1}^{2}s_{2}^{2}s_{3}^{2}-2s_{2}^{3}s_{3}^{2}-21s_{1}^{3}s_{3}^{3}+6s_{1}s_{2}s_{3}^{3}-7s_{3}^{4}-2s_{1}^{2}s_{2}^{3}s_{4}+6s_{2}^{4}s_{4}+6s_{1}^{3}s_{2}s_{3}s_{4} \\{} & {} -24s_{1}s_{2}^{2}s_{3}s_{4}+34s_{2}s_{3}^{2}s_{4}-7s_{1}^{4}s_{4}^{2}+34s_{1}^{2}s_{2}s_{4}^{2}-28s_{2}^{2}s_{4}^{2}-40s_{1}s_{3}s_{4}^{2}+44s_{4}^{3},\\ g_{i}= & {} g_{12-i} \quad (i=7, \ldots ,12) \end{aligned}$$and put
$$\begin{aligned} N_{\pi }(p)= & {} \sum _{i=0}^{9}f_{i}(a_{\pi }(p), a_{\pi }(p)^{2}-a_{\pi }(p^{2}),a_{\pi }(p)^{3}-2a_{\pi }(p)a_{\pi }(p^{2})+a_{\pi }(p^{3}),\nonumber \\{} & {} \quad a_{\pi }(p)^{4}-3a_{\pi }(p)^{2}a_{\pi }(p^{2})+a_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+2a_{\pi }(p)a_{\pi }(p^{3})-a_{\pi }(p^{4}))p^{i}, \end{aligned}$$(1.14)$$\begin{aligned} D_{\pi }(p)= & {} \sum _{i=0}^{12}g_{i}(a_{\pi }(p), a_{\pi }(p)^{2}-a_{\pi }(p^{2}),a_{\pi }(p)^{3}-2a_{\pi }(p)a_{\pi }(p^{2})+a_{\pi }(p^{3}),\nonumber \\{} & {} \quad a_{\pi }(p)^{4}-3a_{\pi }(p)^{2}a_{\pi }(p^{2})+a_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+2a_{\pi }(p)a_{\pi }(p^{3})-a_{\pi }(p^{4}))p^{i}.\nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$(1.15)Then
$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} B_{p}(1/2)\nonumber \\{} & {} \quad =\frac{p^{4}(a_{\pi }(p)^{4}-3a_{\pi }(p)^{2}a_{\pi }(p^{2})+a_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+2a_{\pi }(p)a_{\pi }(p^{3})-a_{\pi }(p^{4}))}{p-1}\frac{N_{\pi }(p)}{D_{\pi }(p)}.\nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$(1.16)In addition, \(B_{p}(1/2)\) can be expressed by the Dirichlet coefficients of the logarithmic derivative of \(L(s, \pi ).\) Write
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{L^{\prime }(s, \pi )}{L(s, \pi )}=-\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }\frac{\tilde{a}_{\pi }(n)\Lambda (n)}{n^{s}}, \end{aligned}$$where \(\Lambda \) is the von Mangoldt function. Then \(N_{\pi }(p)\) and \(D_{\pi }(p)\) above are expressed by
$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} N_{\pi }(p)=\sum _{i=0}^{9}f_{i}\left( \tilde{a}_{\pi } (p), \frac{1}{2}(\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{2}-\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})), \frac{1}{3}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{3})+\frac{1}{6}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{3} -\frac{1}{2}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2}), \right. \nonumber \\{} & {} \quad \left. \frac{1}{24}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{4}-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{2}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})+\frac{1}{8}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{3})-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{4}) \right) p^{i}, \end{aligned}$$(1.17)$$\begin{aligned}{} & {} D_{\pi }(p)=\sum _{i=0}^{12}g_{i}\left( \tilde{a}_{\pi } (p), \frac{1}{2}(\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{2}-\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})), \frac{1}{3}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{3})+\frac{1}{6}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{3}-\frac{1}{2}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2}), \right. \nonumber \\{} & {} \quad \left. \frac{1}{24}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{4}-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{2}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})+\frac{1}{8}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{3})-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{4}) \right) p^{i} \end{aligned}$$(1.18)and we have
$$\begin{aligned} B_{p}(1/2)= & {} \frac{p^{4} (\frac{1}{24}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{4}-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)^{2}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})+\frac{1}{8}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{2})^{2}+\frac{1}{3}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p)\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{3})-\frac{1}{4}\tilde{a}_{\pi }(p^{4}) ) }{p-1}\nonumber \\{} & {} \times \frac{N_{\pi }(p)}{D_{\pi }(p)}. \end{aligned}$$(1.19)We chose parameters \(s_{j}\) (\(j=1,\ldots ,4\)) to be symmetric polynomials of \(\alpha _{1}(p), \ldots ,\alpha _{4}(p)\) of degree j. These formulas will be proved in Sect. 3.
-
3.
Very recently, Chandee et al. obtained some unconditional proof of the asymptotic formula for eighth moment of Dirichlet L-functions (see [9]), and their method seems to be applicable to our situation.
2 The approximation and decomposition of the moment
Let \(\pi \) be an irreducible tempered cuspidal automorphic representation of \({\textrm{GL}}_{4}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character and conductor \(N_{\pi },\) and \(\chi \) be an even primitive Dirichlet character modulo q, where \((q, N_{\pi })=1.\) Put
Then we have the following formulas.
Lemma 1.3
We have
and
where \({\mathfrak {m}}_{\chi }:=\sum _{j=1}^{4}\Re (\mu _{j, \chi }),\)
(Throughout this paper, by abuse of notation, we use the same symbol \(\pi \) to denote both circle ratio \(\approx 3.14\) and irreducible cuspidal representation, since this will not cause any serious misunderstanding.)
Proof
Put
We move the line of integration to \(\Re (s)=-1.\) Then we cross a single pole at \(s=0\) of order 1 and the residue is \(\Lambda (1/2, \pi \otimes \chi ;t).\) By the functional equation (1.10), we see that the new integral equals \(-P(\pi \otimes \chi ,t).\) Hence we have
Expanding L-functions as Dirichlet series, we have
Thus we get (2.3). The identity (2.4) is obtained by integrating both sides of (2.3) by t. \(\square \)
It is known that if \((q, N_{\pi })=1,\) even primitive Dirichlet characters \(\chi \) modulo q satisfy \(\{\mu _{j, \chi }\}_{j=1}^{4}= \{\mu _{j}\}_{j=1}^{4}\) (see [18], for example), so the parameter \({\mathfrak {m}}_{\chi }\) and the function \(G_{\chi }\) (hence \(W_{\chi },\) \(V_{\chi }\)) are all independent of \(\chi .\) Hence from here we denote these parameter and functions by \({\mathfrak {m}},\) G, W and V respectively. Then it follows from the above lemma that
To handle the sum over even primitive characters, we use the following lemma.
Lemma 1.4
[19, (2.1)] If \((mn,q)=1,\) then
where we sum over both choices of sign.
By this lemma, the right hand side of (2.7) becomes
We put
Then
We approximate \(\Delta _{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\) by
where \(\alpha >0\) is a proper constant which will be chosen precisely later. To estimate the difference between \(\Delta _{\pi }\) and \(\tilde{\Delta }_{\pi },\) we adapt the following large sieve inequality.
Lemma 1.5
For any complex numbers \(a_{n}\) \((M\le n <M+N),\) we have
The following lemma gives a bound for the second moment of \(a_{\pi }(n).\)
Lemma 1.6
Let \(m\ge 2\) be a positive integer and \(\pi \) be a cuspidal automorphic representation of \({\text {GL}}_{m}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character. Let \(a_{\pi }(n)\) be the nth Dirichlet coefficient of \(L(s, \pi )\) and \({\mathcal {Q}}\) be its analytic conductor. Then we have
Proof
The proof of this lemma relies deeply on the results in [1]. Let \({\mathcal {A}}(d)\) be the set of cuspidal automorphic representations of \({\text {GL}}_{d}({\mathbb {A}}_{\mathbb {Q}})\) with unitary central character and put \({\mathcal {A}}=\cup _{d\ge 1}{\mathcal {A}}(d).\) For \(\pi \in {\mathcal {A}},\) we denote by \({\mathcal {Q}}(\pi )\) the analytic conductor of \(\pi .\) For \({\mathcal {Q}}>0,\) put
(In [1], a bit more general set \(\mathcal{F}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}})\) is defined instead of \({\mathcal {A}}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}}).\) The set \(\mathcal{F}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}})\) is made from a subset \(\mathcal{F}\subset {\mathcal {A}},\) and \({\mathcal {A}}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}})\) is obtained by taking \(\mathcal{F}={\mathcal {A}}.\)) Let \(\phi \) be a smooth function compactly supported in \((-2,2).\) Then by Lemma 5.5 (with \(d=T=1,\) \(\pi ^{\prime }=\pi \)) of [1], for \(\pi \in {\mathcal {A}}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}}),\) we have
where the coefficients in the main term satisfy
(See Lemma 5.3, Lemma 5.2 and page 20 of [1] respectively.) Hence we have an upper bound
We choose a nonnegative function \(\phi \) satisfying \(\phi (t) \ge 1\) for \(0\le t \le \log 2.\) Then the above estimate yields
for \(\pi \in {\mathcal {A}}_{m}({\mathcal {Q}}).\) We need to remove the condition \((n, N_{\pi })=1.\) Let \(N_{\pi }=p_{1}^{e_{1}}\cdots p_{k}^{e_{k}}\) be the prime factorization of \(N_{\pi }.\) Put
Then, for any \(n\in [x,2x),\) we have a unique decomposition \(n=ln^{\prime },\) where \(l \in P(N_{\pi })\) and \((n^{\prime },N_{\pi })=1.\) Furthermore, \((l, n^{\prime })=1.\) Therefore,
By the above estimation, it follows that
Therefore,
Put \(\delta (m):=(m^{2}-1)/(m^{2}(m^{2}+1)).\) By Luo–Rudnick–Sarnak bound \(a_{\pi }(l)\ll l^{1/2-1/(m^{2}+1)+\varepsilon }\) (see [16]), we have
Since \(k=\omega (N_{\pi })=(\log N_{\pi }/\log \log N_{\pi })(1+o(1)),\) we have
Hence we also have
Combining these estimates with (2.13), we obtain (2.12). \(\square \)
We shall use Lemma 2.4 with \({\mathcal {Q}}\) replaced by \(N_{\pi },\) since we do not take the size of \(\mu _{j}\) in the functional equation into account. By our definitions,
and
Changing the parameters by \(s=(v+z)/2,\) \(t=(v-z)/(2i),\) the right hand side of (2.15) becomes
Substituting (2.15), (2.16) into (2.14), we have
Let \(\sum ^{d}\) be the dyadic sum and \(F_{M}\) be a positive smooth function supported in [M/2, 3M] satisfying \(F_{M}^{(j)}(x)\ll _{j}M^{-j}\) \((j \ge 0),\) \(1=\sum _{M}^{d}F_{M}(x).\) Then
By Lemmas 2.3–2.4 with Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we have
We use this to estimate the integral in (2.18). It might be helpful to keep in mind that the function \(G((1+v+z)/2, (v-z)/2i)\) in (2.18) does not have any pole in the domain
We consider the following cases.
Case I. \(M>Q^{2}.\) (By symmetry, the case \(N>Q^{2}\) is the same.) We do not shift the integral over v. The integration over z is shifted to \(\Re (z)=l,\) where \(l=-1/4\) if \(N\le Q^{2}\) and otherwise \(l=15/32 +\varepsilon .\) We do not encounter the poles of G. The integral in (2.18) is bounded by
Hence the contribution of this to (2.18) is at most
Case II. \(Q^{2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha }<M\le Q^{2},\) \(N\le Q^{2}.\) (By symmetry, the case \(M\le Q^{2},\) \(Q^{2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha }<N\le Q^{2}\) is the same.)
We shift the lines of integration to \(\Re (v)=0,\) \(\Re (z)=l,\) where \(l=0\) if \(Q^{2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha }<N\le Q^{2}\) and otherwise \(l=-1/4.\) Then we do not encounter the poles of the integrand. The integral in (2.18) is at most
Hence the contribution of this to (2.18) is at most
Case III. \(M \le Q^{2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha },\) \(N\le Q^{2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha }.\) We shift the paths of integration in (2.18) to \(\Re (v)=\Re (z)=-1/4.\) Then we do not cross the poles of the integrand. The new integral is at most
Hence the contribution of this part to (2.18) is at most
Summing up, we have the following conclusion.
Proposition 1.7
We have
We estimate
For some constant \(\delta >0,\) put
We decompose \(\tilde{\Delta }_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\) by
where \({\mathcal {D}}_{\pi }\) denotes the terms with \(m=n,\) \({\mathcal {S}}_{\pi }\) denotes the terms with \(m\ne n,\) \(d> D\) and \({\mathcal {G}}_{\pi }\) denotes the remaining terms.
3 The computation of \({\mathcal {D}}_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\)
In this section, we prove the following result.
Proposition 1.8
We have
where A(s), \(B_{q}(s)\) are defined by
with
By the definition of \(V(\xi , \eta ; \mu ),\) we have
The sum over n in (3.5) can be computed by using the recipe in [3], p. 53–60. Define the sequence \((a_{n})\) by \(a_{n}:=a_{\pi }(n)\) if \((n, q)=1\) and otherwise \(a_{n}:=0.\) Then the function \({\mathcal {L}}_{p}(x)=\sum _{n=0}^{\infty }a_{p^{n}}x^{n}\) in [3] is given by
where \(\alpha _{j}(p)\) is the Satake parameter in the Euler product of \(L(s, \pi ).\) By the argument in [3], we obtain the following formula.
Lemma 1.9
[Theorem 2.4.1]CFKRSLet \(\delta \) be an arbitrarily fixed positive number. For \(\Re (s)>-1/4+\delta ,\) we have
Substituting (3.6) into (3.5), we obtain
We shift the contour of the s-integral to \(\Re (s)=-1/4+\delta \) \((\delta >0).\) Then we cross the pole at \(s=0\) of order 2. The residue at \(s=0\) is
for \(q \asymp Q.\) The new integral is small enough. By (3.7) and (3.8) we obtain the conclusion of Proposition 3.1.
We assume \(|\alpha _{j}(p)|=1\) for \(j=1, \ldots ,4\) and compute
Put \(z=e(\theta )=e^{2\pi i \theta }.\) Then z moves on the unit circle \(C=\{z=e^{2\pi i \theta }|0\le \theta \le 2\pi \}\) and
To compute the integration above, we temporarily assume that \(\alpha _{i}(p)\ne \alpha _{j}(p)\) whenever \(i\ne j.\) (Due to the continuity, we may forget this assumption after the residual computation.) Since the integrand has totally 4 poles of order 1 at \(z=\overline{\alpha _{k}(p)}p^{-1/2}\) \((k=1, \ldots ,4),\) we have
We write this by
where
Let
be the basic symmetric polynomials of \(\alpha _{1}(p), \ldots ,\alpha _{4}(p).\) Then by numerical computation, we see that \(N_{\pi }(p)\) and \(D_{\pi }(p)\) have the expressions
where \(f_{i}\) and \(g_{i}\) are given in Remark 1.2. Put
Then \(s_{1}, \ldots ,s_{4}\) are expressed by
Hence we obtain (1.16). On the other hand, put
Then
Hence we obtain (1.19).
4 Estimation of \({\mathcal {S}}_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\)
The term \({\mathcal {S}}_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\) is defined by
We prove the following estimation.
Proposition 1.10
We have
where A is some positive constant dependent only on K in (1.12) and the implied constant is dependent only on \(\varepsilon >0.\)
We reintroduce the terms \(m=n.\) This process gives an error term
By the computation of \({\mathcal {D}}_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q),\) we see that
for \(dr \asymp Q.\) Hence the error term is at most
For simplicity we skip to write the error term bounded by (4.2). Now we have
We replace the condition \(r|(m\pm n)\) with the sum over even Dirichlet characters modulo r. Then
By the definition of \(V(\xi ,\eta ;\mu ),\) we have
Writing the sum over m, n as a product of L-functions, we have
where
For \(\Re (s)>1/2,\)
We shift the line of integration to \(\Re (s)=1/\log Q.\) Put \(s=1/\log Q +iv,\) \(t_{1}=v+t,\) \(t_{2}=v-t.\) Furthermore, we decompose the sum over even characters by \(\sum _{\chi ({\text {mod}}\; r)}=\sum _{l|r}\sum _{\chi ^{\prime }({\text {mod}}\; l)}^{\flat }.\) If a Dirichlet character \(\chi \) (\({\textrm{mod}}\; r\)) is induced by a primitive character \(\chi ^{\prime }\) (\({\textrm{mod}}\; l\)), then
Furthermore, we have
for some constant \(c>0.\) Combining these estimates with \(|ab|\le a^{2}+b^{2},\) we have
Our assumption (1.12) in Theorem 1.1 yields
Hence by (4.4), we have
where \(A^{\prime }>0\) is some absolute constant. The right hand side is larger than that of (4.2). Thus we obtain the conclusion of Proposition 4.1.
5 Estimation of \({\mathcal {G}}_{\pi }(\Psi ,Q)\)
In this section, we estimate
and prove the following result.
Proposition 1.11
We have
where \(\beta >0\) is some constant which is independent of \(\alpha .\)
Write \(g=(m,n),\) \(m=gM,\) \(n=gN\) with \((M,N)=1.\) Moreover, we replace \(\varphi (r)\) with \(\sum _{al=r}\mu (a)l.\) Since \(r|m\pm n,\) \((r,mn)=1\) is equivalent to \((r,g)=1.\) Hence the sum over d, r in (5.1) becomes
Write \(|M\pm N|=alh.\) Then l is replaced with \(|M\pm N|/ah.\) The condition \((l,g)=1\) is removed by multiplying \(\sum _{b|(l,g)}\mu (b).\) Write \(l=bk.\) Then the sum (5.3) becomes
Substituting \(k=|M\pm N|/abh\) and writing the sum above as the sum over d, a, b, h, then (5.3) equals
For \(u, x, y \in {\mathbb {R}}_{\ge 0},\) put
Since \(V(\xi ,\eta ;\mu )\) satisfies
for any \(c>0,\) by taking \(c=Q^{2}N_{\pi }^{1/2}/(\log Q)^{2\alpha },\) we have
Hence
Therefore, (5.4) is rewritten as
Substituting this into (5.1), we obtain
Suppose \(a>2Q.\) Since \(M\ne N,\) \(M\equiv \mp N ({\text {mod}}\; abh),\) it follows that \(|M\pm N|\ge abh.\) Hence
Since \(\Psi (x)\) is supported in [1, 2], in this case we have
Therefore, we may restrict the sum to \(a\le 2Q.\) Thus we have
To estimate (5.7), we apply the following lemma.
Lemma 1.12
[5, Lemma 6.2] For \(s_{1},s_{2}\in {\mathbb {C}},\) \(u>0,\) put
Then the functions \(\tilde{\mathcal {W}}^{\pm }(s_{1},s_{2};u)\) are analytic in the domain \(\Re (s_{1}), \Re (s_{2})>0\) and the inversion formula
holds for any \(c_{1},c_{2}>0.\) Moreover, for any positive integer k, there exists a constant \(c=c_{k}>0\) such that
holds.
We use (5.8) to replace \({\mathcal {W}}^{\pm }\) with the integral of \(\tilde{\mathcal {W}}^{\pm }.\) We also replace the condition \(M \equiv \mp N ({\text {mod}}\; abh)\) with the sum over Dirichlet characters modulo abh. (Unlike the case of the computation of the eighth moment of Dirichlet L-functions in [5], we need not exclude the principal character \(\chi _{0},\) because the twisted L-function \(L(s, \pi \otimes \chi _{0})\) is entire.) Then we have
We estimate the series
Lemma 1.13
For \(\Re (s_{1}), \Re (s_{2})>1/2,\) we have
where the functions \(\lambda (s_{1},s_{2};d,g;\chi ),\) \(\theta (s_{1},s_{2};d,g;\chi )\) are continued holomorphically to the domain \(\Re (s_{1}), \Re (s_{2})>0\) and satisfy the bounds
uniformly on the lines \(\Re (s_{i})=1/\log Q\) \((i=1,2),\) where \(c_{1}, c_{2}\) are some absolute constants.
Proof
Since \((M,N)=1,\) the condition \(M=N\) implies \(M=N=1.\) Hence
say. We write
and decompose \({\mathcal {L}}_{2}\) by
Since \(\pi _{p}\) is tempered for any p, the Satake parameters satisfy the Ramanujan bound \(|\alpha _{j}(p)|\le 1\) for \(j=1, \ldots ,4.\) Hence the Dirichlet coefficient
satisfies
We denote the p-factor of \(L(s, \pi \otimes \chi )\) by \(L_{p}(s, \pi \otimes \chi ).\)
Case I. Suppose \(p\not \mid dg.\) Then
Put
Then by the above computation, \(\lambda (s_{1},s_{2};d,g;\chi )\) is holomorphic in the domain \(\Re (s_{1}), \Re (s_{2})>0\) and on the set \(\Re (s_{1})=\Re (s_{2})=100/\log Q,\) we have
Case II. Suppose p|d. Then
Therefore, \(\prod _{p|d}{\mathcal {M}}_{p}(s_{1},s_{2};d,g;\chi )\) is entire and on the set \(\Re (s_{1})=\Re (s_{2})=100/\log Q,\) we have
where c is some positive constant and \(c_{1}=2\log (3+c)/\log 2.\)
Case III. Suppose p|g. Write \(g_{p}=p^{\nu },\) where \(\nu =\nu _{p,g}\) satisfies \(p^{\nu }||g.\) Then
Due to the computation in Case II, on the set \(\Re (s_{1})=\Re (s_{2})=100/\log Q,\) we have
Furthermore,
where \(c^{\prime }\) is some absolute positive constant and \(c_{3}=2\log (3+2c^{\prime })/\log 2.\) By (5.17) and (5.18),
By (5.15) and (5.20), we obtain the conclusion of the lemma. \(\square \)
We move the lines of integration in (5.10) to \(\Re (s_{1})=\Re (s_{2})=100/\log Q.\) We do not cross the poles of the integrand and by Lemma 5.3 we have
By (5.9), for any positive integer k, we have
Therefore, the sum over g and d in (5.21) is
where \(c_{3}\) and \(\beta \) above are some positive number, independent of \(\alpha ,\) which might be replaced with larger value later. We estimate the integrals and summations with \(S_{1}\le |s_{1}| \le 2S_{1},\) \(S_{2}\le |s_{2}| \le 2S_{2},\) \(A\le a <2A,\) \(B\le b <2B,\) \(H\le h <2H\) in (5.21). Since \(\varphi (abh)^{-1}\ll (abh)^{-1}\log ^{\varepsilon }(abh),\) the contribution of this part to (5.21) is bounded by
Put \(l=abh.\) Then the above is at most
By our assumption (1.12),
where
Thus (5.22) is bounded by
By (5.23), (5.21) is bounded by
We take \(k=1\) if \(S\le 1+QN_{\pi }^{1/2}D/BH(\log Q)^{2\alpha },\) and otherwise take \(k=4.\) Hence the contribution of the part with \(S\le 1+QN_{\pi }^{1/2}D/BH(\log Q)^{2\alpha }\) is at most
Also, the contribution of the part with \(S>1+QN_{\pi }^{1/2}D/BH(\log Q)^{2\alpha }\) has the same upper bound. Therefore, we arrive at the conclusion of Proposition 5.1.
6 Completion of the proof
We let
where N is an arbitrarily fixed positive number. Then by (5.2) we have
Recall that D is given by \(D=(\log Q)^{\delta }.\) We take \(\delta \) and \(\alpha \) so that the inequalities \(\delta >A+1\) and \(2\alpha -\beta -N/2-\delta -\varepsilon N \ge 1\) hold simultaneously, where A is the constant in (4.1). Then we have
Summing up, we obtain the following result.
Proposition 1.14
Suppose the conductor \(N_{\pi }\) of the automorphic representation \(\pi \) is bounded by \(N_{\pi }\ll (\log Q)^{N}\) for some positive constant N. Then under the assumption of Theorem 1.1, we have
The implied constant might be dependent on N, but is independent of \(N_{\pi }\) and Q.
Combining these results we obtain (1.13). \(\square \)
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Brumley, F., Thorner, J., Zaman, A.: Zeros of Rankin–Selberg \(L\)-functions at the edge of the critical strip. arXiv:1804.06402
Blomer, V., Fouvry, E., Kowalski, E., Michel, Ph., Milićević, D.: On moments of twisted \(L\)-functions. Am. J. Math. 137(3), 707–768 (2017)
Conrey, J.B., Farmer, D., Keating, J., Rubinstein, M., Snaith, N.: Integral moments of \(L\)-functions. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 91(1), 33–104 (2005)
Conrey, J.B., Iwaniec, H., Soundararajan, K.: The sixth power moment of Dirichlet \(L\)-functions. Geom. Funct. Anal. 22(5), 1257–1288 (2012)
Chandee, V., Li, X.: The eighth moment of Dirichlet \(L\)-functions. Adv. Math. 259, 339–375 (2014)
Chandee, V., Li, X.: The sixth moment of automorphic \(L\)-functions. Algebra Number Theory 11(3), 583–633 (2017)
Chandee, V., Li, X.: The second moment of \({{\rm GL}}(4){\times }{{\rm GL}}(2)\)\(L\)-functions at special points. Adv. Math. 365, 107060 (2020)
Chandee, V., Li, X.: The 8th moment of the family of \(\Gamma _{1}(q)\) automorphic \(L\)-functions. Int. Math. Res. Not. 22, 8443–8485 (2020)
Chandee, V., Li, X., Matomäki, K., Radziwiłł, M.: The eighth moment of Dirichlet \(L\)-functions II. arXiv:2307:13194
Farmer, D.W., Pitale, A., Ryan, N.C., Schmidt, R.: Analytic \(L\)-functions: definitions, theorems, and connections. arXiv:1711.10375
Godement, R., Jacquet, H.: Zeta Functions of Simple Algebras. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 260. Springer, Berlin (1972)
Heath-Brown, D.R.: The fourth power mean of Dirichlet’s \(L\)-functions. Analysis 1(1), 25–32 (1981)
Hardy, G.H., Littlewood, J.E.: Contributions to the theory of the Riemann zeta-function and the theory of the distribution of primes. Acta Math. 41, 119–196 (1918)
Ingham, A.E.: Mean-value theorems in the theory of the Riemann zeta-function. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 27, 273–300 (1926)
Keating, J.P., Snaith, N.C.: Random matrix theory and \(L\)-functions at \(s = 1/2\). Commun. Math. Phys. 214(1), 91–100 (2000)
Luo, W., Rudnick, Z., Sarnak, P.: On Selberg’s eigenvalue conjecture. Geom. Funct. Anal. 5(2), 387–401 (1995)
Paley, R.E.A.C.: On \(k\)-analogues of some theorems in the theory of the Riemann zeta-function. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 32, 273–311 (1931)
Rudnich, Z., Sarnak, P.: Zeros of principal \(L\)-functions and random matrix theory. Duke Math. J. 81(2), 269–322 (1996)
Soundararajan, K.: The fourth moment of Dirichlet \(L\)-functions. Clay Math. Proc. 7, 239–246 (2007)
Young, M.P.: The fourth moment of Dirichlet L-functions. Ann. Math. (2) 173(1), 1–50 (2011)
Acknowledgements
This work is partially supported by the JSPS, KAKENHI Grant Number 21K03204. The author would like to thank Professors E. Fouvry, M. Tsuzuki and S. Sugiyama for recommending some of the references. Finally, he also would like to thank the reviewer for reading this complicated paper carefully and giving many valuable comments and suggestions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Sono, K. The second moment of Dirichlet twists of a \(\text {GL}_{4}\) automorphic L-function. Math. Z. 305, 37 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-023-03363-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-023-03363-x