The Geometric Theta Correspondence for Hilbert Modular Surfaces

Jens Funke* and John Millson** Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Durham, Science Laboratories, South Rd, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
March 2, 2014
* Partially supported by NSF grant DMS-0710228
** Partially supported by NSF grant DMS-0907446, NSF FRG grant DMS-0554254, and the Simons Foundation

1. Introduction

In a series of papers [11, 12, 13, 14] we have been studying the geometric theta correspondence (see below) for non-compact arithmetic quotients of symmetric spaces associated to orthogonal groups. It is our overall goal to develop a general theory of geometric theta liftings in the context of the real differential geometry/topology of non-compact locally symmetric spaces of orthogonal and unitary groups which generalizes the theory of Kudla-Millson in the compact case, see [24].

In this paper we study in detail the geometric theta lift for Hilbert modular surfaces. In particular, we will give a new proof and an extension (to all finite index subgroups of the Hilbert modular group) of the celebrated theorem of Hirzebruch and Zagier [16] that the generating function for the intersection numbers of the Hirzebruch-Zagier cycles is a classical modular form of weight 22.11Eichler, [16] p.104, proposed a proof using “Siegel’s work on indefinite theta functions”. This is what our proof is, though with perhaps more differential geometry than Eichler had in mind. In our approach we replace Hirzebuch’s smooth complex analytic compactification X~\tilde{X} of the Hilbert modular surface XX with the (real) Borel-Serre compactification X¯\overline{X}. The various algebro-geometric quantities that occur in [16] are then replaced by topological quantities associated to 44-manifolds with boundary. In particular, the “boundary contribution” in [16] is replaced by sums of linking numbers of circles (the boundaries of the cycles) in the 33-manifolds of type Sol (torus bundle over a circle) which comprise the Borel-Serre boundary.

The geometric theta correspondence

We first explain the term “geometric theta correspondence”. The Weil (or oscillator) representation gives us a method to construct closed differential forms on locally symmetric spaces associated to groups which belong to dual pairs. Let VV be a rational quadratic space of signature (p,q)(p,q) with for simplicity even dimension. Then the Weil representation induces an action of SL2()×O(V)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R})\times\operatorname{O}(V_{\mathbb{R}}) on 𝒮(V)\mathcal{S}(V_{\mathbb{R}}), the Schwartz functions on VV_{\mathbb{R}}. Let G=SO0(V)G=\operatorname{SO}_{0}(V_{\mathbb{R}}) and let KK be a maximal compact subgroup. We let 𝔤\mathfrak{g} and 𝔨\mathfrak{k} be their respective Lie algebras and let 𝔤=𝔭𝔨\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{p}\oplus\mathfrak{k} be the associated Cartan decomposition. Suppose


is a cocycle in the relative Lie algebra complex for GG with values in 𝒮(V)\mathcal{S}(V). Then φ\varphi corresponds to a closed differential rr-form φ~\tilde{\varphi} on the symmetric space D=G/KD=G/K of dimension pqpq with values in 𝒮(V)\mathcal{S}(V). For a coset of a lattice \mathcal{L} in VV, we define the theta distribution Θ=Θ\Theta=\Theta_{\mathcal{L}} by Θ=δ\Theta=\sum_{\ell\in\mathcal{L}}\delta_{\ell}, where δ\delta_{\ell} is the delta measure concentrated at \ell. It is obvious that Θ\Theta is invariant under Γ=Stab()G\Gamma=\operatorname{Stab}(\mathcal{L})\subset G. There is also a congruence subgroup Γ\Gamma^{\prime} of SL(2,)\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{Z})) such that Θ\Theta is also invariant under Γ\Gamma^{\prime}. Hence we can apply the theta distribution to φ~\tilde{\varphi} to obtain a closed rr-form θφ\theta_{\varphi} on X=Γ\DX=\Gamma\backslash D given by


Assume now in addition that φ\varphi has weight kk under the maximal compact subgroup SO(2)SL2()\operatorname{SO}(2)\subset\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}). Then θφ\theta_{\varphi} also gives rise to a (in general) non-holomorphic function on the upper half place \mathbb{H} which is modular of weight kk for Γ\Gamma^{\prime}. We may then use θφ\theta_{\varphi} as the kernel of a pairing of modular forms ff with (closed) differential (pq-r)(pq-r)-forms η\eta or rr-chains (cycles) CC in XX. The resulting pairing in ff, η\eta (or CC), and φ\varphi as these objects vary, we call the geometric theta correspondence.

The cocycle of Kudla-Millson

The key point of the work of Kudla and Millson [21, 22] is that they found (in greater generality) a family of cocycles φqV\varphi^{V}_{q} in (𝒮(V)q𝔭)K(\mathcal{S}(V)\otimes\wedge^{q}\mathfrak{p}^{\ast})^{K} with weight (p+q)/2(p+q)/2 for SL2\operatorname{SL}_{2}. Moreover, these cocycles give rise to Poincaré dual forms for certain totally geodesic, “special” cycles in XX. Recently, it has now been shown, first [17] for SO(3,2)\operatorname{SO}(3,2), and then [1] for all SO(p,q)\operatorname{SO}(p,q) and p+q>6p+q>6 (with pqp\geq q) in the cocompact (standard arithmetic) case that the geometric theta correspondence specialized to φqV\varphi_{q}^{V} induces on the adelic level an isomorphism from the appropriate space of classical modular forms to Hq(X)H^{q}(X). In particular, for any congruence quotient, the dual homology groups are spanned by special cycles. This gives further justification to the term geometric theta correspondence and highlights the significance of these cocycles. In [12] we generalize φqV\varphi^{V}_{q} to allow suitable non-trivial coefficient systems (and one has an analogous isomorphism in [1]).

The main results

In the present paper, we consider the case when VV has signature (2,2)(2,2) with \mathbb{Q}-rank 11. Then D×D\simeq\mathbb{H}\times\mathbb{H}, and XX is a Hilbert modular surface. We let X¯\overline{X} be the Borel-Serre compactification of XX which is obtained by replacing each isolated cusp associated to a rational parabolic PP with a boundary face e(P)e^{\prime}(P) which turns out to be a torus bundle over a circle, a 33-manifold of type Sol. This makes X¯\overline{X} a 44-manifold with boundary. For simplicity, we assume that XX has only one cusp so that X¯=e(P)\partial\overline{X}=e^{\prime}(P), and we write k:X¯X¯k:\partial\overline{X}\hookrightarrow\overline{X} for the inclusion. The special cycles CnC_{n}22We distinguish the relative cycles CnC_{n} in XX from the Hirzebruch-Zagier cycles TnT_{n} in X~\tilde{X}, see below. in question are now embedded modular and Shimura curves, and are parameterized by nn\in\mathbb{N}. They define relative homology classes in H2(X,X,)H_{2}(X,\partial X,\mathbb{Q}).

The geometric theta correspondence of Kudla-Millson [24] for the cocycle φ2V\varphi^{V}_{2} in this situation takes the following shape. For a compact cycle CC in XX, we have that

(1.1) θφ2V,C=Cθφ2V=n0(CnC)qn\langle\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}},C\rangle=\int_{C}\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}}=\sum% _{n\geq 0}(C_{n}\cdot C)q^{n}

is a holomorphic modular form of weight 22 and is equal to the generating series of the intersection numbers with CnC_{n}. Here q=e2πiτq=e^{2\pi i\tau} with τ\tau\in\mathbb{H}. (There is a similar statement for the pairing of θφ2V\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}} with a closed compactly supported differential 22-form on X{X} representing a class in Hc2(X)H^{2}_{c}(X), see Theorem 7.1). Our first result is

Theorem 1.1.

(Theorem 7.3) The differential form θφ2V\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}} on XX extends to a form on X¯\overline{X}, and the restriction kk^{\ast} of θφ2V\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}} to X¯\partial\overline{X} gives an exact differential form on X¯\partial\overline{X}. Moreover, there exists a theta series θϕ1W\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} for a space WW of signature (1,1)(1,1) of weight 22 with values in the 11-forms on X¯\partial\overline{X} such that θϕ1W\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} is a primitive for kθφ2Vk^{\ast}\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}}:


Considering the mapping cone for the inclusion k:X¯X¯k:\partial\overline{X}\hookrightarrow\overline{X} (see Section 3.3) we then view the pair [θφ2V,θϕ1W][\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}},\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}}] as an element of the compactly supported cohomology Hc2(X)H^{2}_{c}(X). Explictly, let CC be a relative cycle in X¯\overline{X} representing a class in H2(X,X,)H_{2}({X},\partial{X},\mathbb{Z}). Then the Kronecker pairing between [θφ2V,θϕ1W][\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}},\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}}] and CC is given by

(1.2) [θφ2V,θϕ1W],C=Cθφ2V-Cθϕ1W.\langle[\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}},\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}}],C\rangle=\int_{C}% \theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}}-\int_{\partial C}\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}}.

In this way, we obtain an extension of the geometric theta lift which captures the non-compact situation.

To describe the geometric interpretation of this extension, we study the cycle CnC_{n} at the boundary X¯\partial\overline{X} (Section 4). The intersection of CnC_{n} with X¯\partial\overline{X} is a union of circles contained in the torus fibers of Sol. But rationally such circles are homologically trivial. Hence we can find a (suitably normalized) rational 22-chain AnA_{n} in X¯\partial\overline{X} whose boundary is the boundary of CnC_{n} in X¯\partial\overline{X}. “Capping” off CnC_{n} by AnA_{n}, we obtain a closed cycle CncC_{n}^{c} in X¯\overline{X} defining a class in H2(X,)H_{2}({X},\mathbb{Q}). Our main result is the extension of (1.1):

Theorem 1.2.

(Theorem 7.7) Let CC be a relative cycle in X¯\overline{X}. Then

[θφ2V,θϕ1W],C=n0(CncC)qn\langle[\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}},\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}}],C\rangle=\sum_{n\geq 0% }(C_{n}^{c}\cdot C)q^{n}

is a holomorphic modular form of weight 22 and is equal to the generating series of the intersection numbers with the capped cycles CncC^{c}_{n}. (Similarly for the pairing with an arbitrary closed 22-form on X¯\overline{X} representing a class in H2(X)H^{2}(X)).

Note that in view of (1.2) the lift of classes of H2(X,X)H_{2}({X},\partial{X}) or H2(X)H^{2}(X) is the sum of two in general non-holomorphic modular forms (see below).

In [13] we systematically study for O(p,q)\operatorname{O}(p,q) the restriction of the classes θφqV\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{q}} (also with non-trivial coefficients) to the Borel-Serre boundary. Whenever the restriction vanishes cohomologically, we can expect that a similar analysis to the one given in this paper will give analogous extensions of the geometric theta correspondence. In fact, aside from this paper we have at present managed to do this for several other cases, namely for modular curves with non-trivial coefficients [14] generalizing work of Shintani [27] and for Picard modular surfaces [15] generalizing work of Cogdell [6].

Linking numbers in 33-manifolds of type Sol

The theta series θϕ1W\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} at the boundary is of independent interest and has geometric meaning in its own right. Recall that for two disjoint (rationally) homological trivial 11-cycles aa and bb in a 33-manifold MM we can define the linking number of aa and bb as the intersection number

Lk(a,b)=Ab\operatorname{Lk}(a,b)=A\cdot b

of (rational) chains in MM. Here AA is a 22-chain in MM with boundary aa. We show

Theorem 1.3.

(Theorem 6.3) Let cc be homologically trivial 11-cycle in X¯\partial\overline{X} which is disjoint from the torus fibers containing components of Cn\partial C_{n}. Then the holomorphic part of the weight 22 non-holomorphic modular form cθϕ1W\int_{c}\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} is given by the generating series of the linking numbers n>0Lk(Cn,c)qn\sum_{n>0}\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c)q^{n}.

We also give a simple formula in Theorem 4.10 for the linking number of two circles contained in the fiber of a 33-manifold MM of type Sol in terms of the glueing homeomorphism for the bundle.

One can reformulate the previous theorem stating that n>0Lk(Cn,c)qn\sum_{n>0}\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c)q^{n} is a “mixed Mock modular form” of weight 22; it is the product of a Mock modular form of weight 3/23/2 with a unary theta series. Such forms, which originate with the famous Ramanujan Mock theta functions, have recently generated great interest.

Theorem 1.3 (and its analogues for the Borel-Serre boundary of modular curves with non-trivial coefficients and Picard modular surfaces) suggest that there is a more general connection between modular forms and linking numbers of nilmanifold subbundles over special cycles in nilmanifold bundles over locally symmetric spaces.

Relation to the work of Hirzebruch and Zagier

In their seminal paper [16], Hirzebruch-Zagier provided a map from the second homology of the smooth compactification of certain Hilbert modular surfaces j:XX~j:X\hookrightarrow\tilde{X} to modular forms. They introduced the Hirzebruch-Zagier curves TnT_{n} in XX, which are given by the closure of the cycles CnC_{n} in X~\tilde{X}. They then defined “truncated” cycles TncT_{n}^{c} as the projections of TnT_{n} orthogonal to the subspace of H2(X~,)H_{2}(\tilde{X},\mathbb{Q}) spanned by the compactifying divisors of X~\tilde{X}. The principal result of [16] was that n0[Tnc]qn\sum_{n\geq 0}[T_{n}^{c}]q^{n} defines a holomorphic modular form of weight 22 with values in H2(X~,)H_{2}(\tilde{X},\mathbb{Q}). We show jCnc=Tncj_{\ast}C_{n}^{c}=T_{n}^{c} (Proposition 4.7), and hence the Hirzebruch-Zagier theorem follows easily from Theorem 1.2 above, see Theorem 7.9.

The main work in [16] was to show that the generating function

F(τ)=n=0(TncTm)qn\vspace{-.1cm}F(\tau)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(T_{n}^{c}\cdot T_{m})q^{n}\vspace{-.% 1cm}

for the intersection numbers in X~\tilde{X} of TncT^{c}_{n} with a fixed TmT_{m} is a modular form of weight 22. The Hirzebruch-Zagier proof of the modularity of FF was a remarkable synthesis of algebraic geometry, combinatorics, and modular forms. They explicitly computed the intersection numbers TncTmT_{n}^{c}\cdot T_{m} as the sum of two terms, TncTm=(TnTm)X+(TnTm)T_{n}^{c}\cdot T_{m}=(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X}+({T}_{n}\cdot{T}_{m})_{\infty}, where (TnTm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X} is the geometric intersection number of TnT_{n} and TmT_{m} in the interior of XX and (TnTm)({T}_{n}\cdot{T}_{m})_{\infty} which they called the “contribution from infinity”. They then proved both generating functions n=0(TnTm)Xqn\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X}q^{n} and n=0(TnTm)qn\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{\infty}q^{n} are the holomorphic parts of two non-holomorphic forms FXF_{X} and FF_{\infty} with the same non-holomorphic part (with opposite signs). Hence combining these two forms gives F(τ)F(\tau).

We recover this feature of the original Hirzebruch-Zagier proof via (1.2) with C=CmC=C_{m}. The first term on the right hand side of (1.2) was studied in the thesis of the first author of this paper [9] and gives the interior intersections (TnTm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X} encoded in FXF_{X}. So via Theorem 1.2 the second term on the right hand side of (1.2) must match the boundary contribution FF_{\infty} in [16], that is, we obtain

Theorem 1.4.
(TnTm)=Lk(Cn,Cm).({T}_{n}\cdot{T}_{m})_{\infty}=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},\partial C_{m}).

Hence we give an interpretation for the boundary contribution in [16] in terms of linking numbers in X¯\partial\overline{X}. In fact, the construction of θϕ1W\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} owes a great deal to Section 2.3 in [16], where a scalar-valued version of θϕ1W\theta_{\phi_{1}^{W}} is introduced, see also Example 6.4. Using Theorem 4.11 one can also make the connection between our linking numbers and the formulas of the boundary contribution in [16] explicit.

To summarize, we start with the difference of theta integrals (1.2) (which we know a priori is a holomorphic modular form), then by functorial differential topological computations we relate its Fourier coefficients to intersection/linking numbers, and by direct computation of the integrals involved we obtain the explicit formulas of Hirzebruch-Zagier and a “closed form” for their generating function.

Note that Bruinier [4] and Oda [26] use related theta series to consider [16], but their overall approach is different.


One of the key properties of the cocycle φ2V\varphi^{V}_{2} is that the nn-th Fourier coefficients of θφ2V\theta_{\varphi^{V}_{2}} represents the Poincaré dual class for the cycle CnC_{n}. Kudla-Millson establish this by showing that φ2V\varphi^{V}_{2} gives rise to a Thom form for the normal bundle of each of the components of CnC_{n}. To prove our main result, Theorem 1.2, we follow a different approach using currents which is implicit in [5] and is closely related to the Green’s function Ξ(n)\Xi(n) for the divisors CnC_{n} constructed by Kudla [18, 19]. This function plays an important role in the Kudla program (see eg [20]) which considers the analogous generating series for the special cycles in arithmetic geometry. In the non-compact situation however, one needs to modify Ξ(n)\Xi(n) to obtain a Green’s function for the cycle TncT_{n}^{c} in X~\tilde{X}. Discussions with U. Kühn suggest that the constructions in this paper indeed give rise to such a modification of Ξ(n)\Xi(n), see Remark 8.5.

We would like to thank Rolf Berndt, Jan Bruinier, Jose Burgos, Misha Kapovich, and Ulf Kühn for fruitful and extensive discussions on the constructions and results of this paper. As always it is a great pleasure to thank Steve Kudla for his interest and encouragement. Each of us began the work of relating theta lifts and special cycles with him.

We dedicate this paper to the memory of Gretchen Taylor Millson, beloved wife of the second author.

2. The Hilbert modular surface and its Borel-Serre compactification

2.1. The symmetric space and its arithmetic quotient

2.1.1. The orthogonal group and its symmetric space

Let VV be a rational vector space of dimension 44 with a non-degenerate symmetric bilinear form (,)(\,,\,) of signature (2,2)(2,2). We let G¯=SO(V)\underline{G}=\operatorname{SO}(V), viewed as an algebraic group over \mathbb{Q}. We let G=G¯0()SO0(2,2)G=\underline{G}_{0}(\mathbb{R})\simeq\operatorname{SO}_{0}(2,2) be the connected component of the identity of the real points of G¯\underline{G}. It is most convenient to identify the associated symmetric space D=DVD=D_{V} with the space of negative 22-planes in V()V(\mathbb{R}) on which the bilinear form (,)(\,,\,) is negative definite:

D={zV;dimz=2\dim z=2 and (,)|z<0(\,,\,)|_{z}<0}.D=\{z\subset V_{\mathbb{R}};\;\text{$\dim z=2$ and $(\,,\,)|_{z}<0$}\}.

We pick an orthogonal basis {e1,e2,e3,e4}\{e_{1},e_{2},e_{3},e_{4}\} of VV_{\mathbb{R}} with (e1,e1)=(e2,e2)=1(e_{1},e_{1})=(e_{2},e_{2})=1 and (e3,e3)=(e4,e4)=-1(e_{3},e_{3})=(e_{4},e_{4})=-1. We denote the coordinates of a vector xx with respect to this basis by xix_{i}. We pick as base point of DD the plane z0=[e3,e4]z_{0}=[e_{3},e_{4}] spanned by e3e_{3} and e4e_{4}, and we let KSO(2)×SO(2)K\simeq\operatorname{SO}(2)\times\operatorname{SO}(2) be the maximal compact subgroup of GG stabilizing z0z_{0}. Thus DG/KD\simeq G/K. Of course, D×D\simeq\mathbb{H}\times\mathbb{H}, the product of two upper half planes.

We let P¯\underline{P} be a rational parabolic subgroup stabilizing a rational isotropic line \ell and define P=P¯0()P=\underline{P}_{0}(\mathbb{R}) as before. We let N¯\underline{N} be its unipotent subgroup and N=N¯()N=\underline{N}(\mathbb{R}). We let u=(e1+e4)/2u=(e_{1}+e_{4})/\sqrt{2} and u=(e1-e4)/2u^{\prime}=(e_{1}-e_{4})/\sqrt{2} be two isotropic vectors so that (u,u)=1(u,u^{\prime})=1. We assume that u,uu,u^{\prime} are defined over \mathbb{Q} and obtain a rational Witt decomposition

V=WV=\ell\oplus W\oplus\ell^{\prime}

with =u\ell=\mathbb{Q}u, =u\ell^{\prime}=\mathbb{Q}u^{\prime}, and a subspace W=W=\ell^{\perp}\cap{\ell^{\prime}}^{\perp} such that W=span(e2,e3)W_{\mathbb{R}}=\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb{R}}(e_{2},e_{3}). The choice of uu^{\prime} gives a Levi splitting of P¯\underline{P}, and we write


for the Langlands decomposition. Here, with respect to the basis u,e2,e3,uu,e_{2},e_{3},u^{\prime}, we have

N\displaystyle{N} ={n(w)=(1(,w)-(w,w)/21W-w1);wW},\displaystyle=\left\{n(w)=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&(\cdot,w)&-(w,w)/2\\ &1_{W}&-w\\ &&1\\ \end{smallmatrix}\right);\;w\in W_{\mathbb{R}}\right\},
A\displaystyle{A} ={a(t)=(t1Wt-1);t+},\displaystyle=\left\{a(t)=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}t&&\\ &1_{W}&\\ &&t^{-1}\\ \end{smallmatrix}\right);\,t\in\mathbb{R}_{+}\right\},
M\displaystyle{M} ={m(s)=(1cosh(s)sinh(s)sinh(s)cosh(s)1);s}.\displaystyle=\left\{m(s)=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&&\\ &\begin{smallmatrix}\cosh(s)&\sinh(s)\\ \sinh(s)&\cosh(s)\end{smallmatrix}&\\ &&1\\ \end{smallmatrix}\right);\;s\in\mathbb{R}\right\}.

Note NWN\simeq W_{\mathbb{R}}. We obtain coordinates for DD by z=z(t,s,w)z=z(t,s,w) where zz is the negative two-plane in VV_{\mathbb{R}} with z=[n(w)a(t)m(s)e3,n(w)a(t)m(s)e4]z=[n(w)a(t)m(s)e_{3},n(w)a(t)m(s)e_{4}].

2.1.2. Arithmetic Quotient

We let LL be an even lattice in VV of level NN, that is LL#L\subseteq L^{\#}, the dual lattice, (x,x)2(x,x)\in 2\mathbb{Z} for xLx\in L, and q(L#)=1Nq(L^{\#})\mathbb{Z}=\tfrac{1}{N}\mathbb{Z}. We fix hL#h\in L^{\#} and let ΓStabL\Gamma\subseteq\operatorname{Stab}{L} be a subgroup of finite index of the stabilizer of :=L+h\mathcal{L}:=L+h in GG. For each isotropic line =u\ell=\mathbb{Q}u, we assume that uu is primitive in the lattice LL in VV. We will throughout assume that the \mathbb{Q}-rank of G¯\underline{G} is 11, that is, VV splits exactly one hyperbolic plane over \mathbb{Q}. Then we define the Hilbert modular surface

X=Γ\D.X=\Gamma\backslash D.
Example 2.1.

An important example is the following. Let d>0d>0 be the discriminant of the real quadratic field K=(d)K=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{d}) over \mathbb{Q}, 𝒪K\mathcal{O}_{K} its ring of integers. We denote by xxx\mapsto x^{\prime} the Galois involution on KK. We let VM2(K)V\subset M_{2}(K) be the space of skew-hermitian matrices in M2(K)M_{2}(K), i.e., which satisfy xt=-x{}^{t}x^{\prime}=-x. Then the determinant on M2(K)M_{2}(K) gives VV the structure of a non-degenerate rational quadratic space of signature (2,2)(2,2) and \mathbb{Q}-rank 11. We define the integral skew-hermitian matrices by

L={x=(adλ-λbd): a,b, λ𝒪K}.L=\left\{x=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}a\sqrt{d}&\lambda\\ -\lambda^{\prime}&b\sqrt{d}\end{smallmatrix}\right)\;:\;a,b\in\mathbb{Z},\;% \lambda\in\mathcal{O}_{K}\right\}.

Then LL is a lattice of level dd. We embed SL2(K)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(K) into SL2×SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}{\mathbb{R}}\times\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) by g(g,g)g\mapsto(g,g^{\prime}) so that SL2(𝒪K)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathcal{O}_{K}) acts on LL by γ.x=γxγt\gamma.x=\gamma x{{}^{t}\gamma^{\prime}} as isometries. Hirzebruch and Zagier actually considered this case for d1(mod4)d\equiv 1\;\;(\mathop{{\rm mod}}4) a prime.

The quotient space XX is in general an oriented uniformizable orbifold with isolated singularities. We will treat XX as a manifold - we will use Stokes’ Theorem and Poincaré duality over \mathbb{Q} on XX. This is justified because in each instance we can pass to a finite normal cover YY of XX with YY a manifold. Hence, the formulas we want hold on YY. We then then go back to the quotient by taking invariants or summing over the group Φ\Phi of covering transformations. The point is that the de Rham complex of XX is the algebra of Φ\Phi-invariants in the one of YY and the rational homology (cohomology) groups of XX are the groups of Φ\Phi-coinvariants (invariants) of those of YY.

2.2. Compactifications

2.2.1. Admissible Levi decompositions of PP

We let ΓP=ΓP\Gamma_{P}=\Gamma\cap P and ΓN=ΓPN\Gamma_{N}=\Gamma_{P}\cap N. Then the quotient ΓP/ΓN\Gamma_{P}/\Gamma_{N} is a non-trivial arithmetic subgroup of P¯/N¯\underline{P}/\underline{N} and lies inside the connected component of the identity of the real points of P¯/N¯\underline{P}/\underline{N}. Furthermore, ΓP/ΓN\Gamma_{P}/\Gamma_{N} acts as isometries of spinor norm 11 on the anisotropic quadratic space /\ell^{\perp}/\ell of signature (1,1)(1,1). Hence ΓP/ΓN\Gamma_{P}/\Gamma_{N}\simeq\mathbb{Z} is infinite cyclic. Therefore the exact sequence

1ΓNΓPΓP/ΓN11\to\Gamma_{N}\to\Gamma_{P}\to\Gamma_{P}/\Gamma_{N}\to 1

splits. We fix gΓPg\in\Gamma_{P} such that its image g¯\bar{g} generates ΓP/ΓN\Gamma_{P}/\Gamma_{N}. Then gg defines a Levi subgroup MM. In fact, the element gg generates ΓM:=ΓPM\Gamma_{M}:=\Gamma_{P}\cap M. Hence


We will say a Levi decomposition P=NAMP=NAM is admissible if ΓP=(MΓP)ΓN\Gamma_{P}=(M\cap\Gamma_{P})\ltimes\Gamma_{N}. In the following we assume that we have picked an admissible Levi decomposition for each rational parabolic.

2.2.2. Borel-Serre compactification

We let D¯\overline{D} be the (rational) Borel-Serre enlargement of DD, see [3] or [2], III.9. For any parabolic P¯\underline{P} as before with admissible Levi decomposition P=NAMP=NAM, we define the boundary component

e(P)=MNDW×W.e({P})=MN\simeq D_{W}\times W.

Here DWMD_{W}\simeq M\simeq\mathbb{R} is the symmetric space associated to the orthogonal group of WW. Then D¯\overline{D} is given by


where P¯\underline{P} varies over all rational parabolics. The action of Γ\Gamma on DD extends to D¯\overline{D} in a natural way, and we let


be the Borel-Serre compactification of X=Γ\DX=\Gamma\backslash D. This makes X¯\overline{X} a manifold with boundary such that


where for each cusp, the corresponding boundary component is given by

e(P)=ΓP\e(P).e^{\prime}(P)=\Gamma_{P}\backslash e(P).

Here [P¯][\underline{P}] runs over all Γ\Gamma-conjugacy classes. The space XW:=ΓM\DWX_{W}:=\Gamma_{M}\backslash D_{W} is a circle. Hence e(P)e^{\prime}(P) is a torus bundle over the circle, where the torus T2T^{2} is given by ΓN\N\Gamma_{N}\backslash N. That is, e(P)=XW×T2e^{\prime}(P)=X_{W}\times T^{2}, and we have the natural map κ:e(P)XW\kappa:e^{\prime}(P)\to X_{W}. We have a natural product neighborhood of e(P)e(P) in D¯\overline{D} and hence for e(P)e^{\prime}(P) in X¯\overline{X} given by [(T,]×e(P)][(T,\infty]\times e^{\prime}(P)] for TT sufficiently large given by z(t,s,w)z(t,s,w) with t>Tt>T. We let i:XX¯i:X\hookrightarrow\overline{X} and iP:e(P)X¯i_{P}:e^{\prime}(P)\hookrightarrow\overline{X} be the natural inclusions.

It is one of the fundamental properties of the Borel-Serre compactification X¯\overline{X} that it is homotopic equivalent to XX itself. Hence their (co)homology groups coincide.

2.2.3. Hirzebruch’s smooth compactification

We let XX^{\prime} be the Baily-Borel compactifciation of XX, which is obtained by collapsing in X¯\overline{X} each boundary component e(P)e^{\prime}(P) to a single point or topologically by taking a cone on each component of the Borel-Serre boundary. It is well known that XX^{\prime} is a projective algebraic variety. We let X~\tilde{X} be Hirzebruch’s smooth resolution of the cusp singularities and π:X~X\pi:\tilde{X}\to X^{\prime} be the natural map collapsing the compactifying divisors for each cusp. We let j:XX~j:X\hookrightarrow\tilde{X} be the natural embedding. Note that the Borel-Serre boundary separates X~\tilde{X} into two pieces, the (connected) inside XinX^{in}, which is isomorphic to XX and the (disconnected) outside XoutX^{out}, which for each cusp is a neighborhood of the compactifying divisors. Note that we can view e(P)e^{\prime}(P) as lying in both XinX^{in} and XoutX^{out} since the intersection XinXoutX^{in}\cap X^{out} is equal to P¯e(P)\coprod_{\underline{P}}e({P}).

3. (Co)homology

In this section we describe the relationship between the (co)homology of the various compactifications.

3.1. The homology of the boundary components

Every element of ΓN=π1(T2)\Gamma_{N}=\pi_{1}(T^{2}) is a rational multiple of a commutator in ΓP\Gamma_{P} and accordingly the image of H1(T2,)H_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}) in H1(e(P),)H_{1}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Q}) is trivial. Let aPH1(e(P),)a_{P}\in H_{1}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Z}) be the class of the identity section of κ:e(P)XW\kappa:e^{\prime}(P)\to X_{W} and bPH2(e(P),)b_{P}\in H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Z}) be the class of the torus fiber of κ\kappa. It is clear that the intersection number of aPa_{P} and bPb_{P} is 11 (up to sign) whence aPa_{P} and bPb_{P} are nontrivial primitive classes. Furthermore, aPa_{P} generates H1(e(P),)H_{1}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Q}) and H2(e(P),)H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Z})\cong\mathbb{Z}, generated by bPb_{P}. So

Lemma 3.1.
  1. (i)

    The first rational homology group of e(P)e^{\prime}(P) is generated by aPa_{P}.

  2. (ii)

    The second homology group of e(P)e^{\prime}(P) is generated by bPb_{P}.

Remark 3.2.

To compute the homology over \mathbb{Z} one has only to use the Wang sequence for a fiber bundle over a circle, see [25], page 67.

Let ΩP\Omega_{P} be the unique PP-invariant 22-form on e(P)e^{\prime}(P) such that

(3.1) bPΩP=1.\int_{b_{P}}\Omega_{P}=1.

Since bPb_{P} is the image of the fundamental class of T2T^{2} inside H2(e(P),)H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P),\mathbb{Z}), we see that that the restriction of ΩP\Omega_{P} to T2T^{2} lifts to the area form on WNW_{\mathbb{R}}\simeq N normalized such that T2=ΓN\NT^{2}=\Gamma_{N}\backslash N has area 11.

3.2. Homology and cohomology of XX and X~\tilde{X}

Accordingly to the discussion in Section 2.2.3 we have the Mayer-Vietoris sequence

0PH2(e(P))H2(X)(PSP)H2(X~)0.0\to\oplus_{P}H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P))\to H_{2}(X)\oplus(\oplus_{P}S_{P})\to H_{2}% (\tilde{X})\to 0.

Here SPS_{P} denotes the span of the classes defined by compactifying divisors at the cusp associated to PP. The zero on the left comes from H3(X~)=0H_{3}(\tilde{X})=0 and the zero on the right comes from the fact that for each PP the class aPa_{P} injects into H1(Xout)H_{1}(X^{out}), see [28], II.3. Since the generator bPb_{P} has trivial intersection with each of the compactifying divisors, bPb_{P} bounds on the outside so a fortiori it bounds in X~\tilde{X}. Thus the above short exact sequence is the sum of the two short exact sequences PH2(e(P))H2(X)jH2(X)\oplus_{P}H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P))\to H_{2}(X)\to j_{\ast}H_{2}(X) and 0PSPPSP0\to\oplus_{P}S_{P}\to\oplus_{P}S_{P}. By adding the third terms of the two sequences and equating them to H2(X~)H_{2}(\tilde{X}) we obtain the orthogonal splittings (for the intersection pairing) - see also [28], p.123,

H2(X~)=jH2(X)([P]SP),    H2(X~)=j#Hc2(X)([P]SP).\displaystyle H_{2}(\tilde{X})=j_{\ast}H_{2}(X)\oplus\left(\oplus_{[P]}S_{P}% \right),\qquad\qquad H^{2}(\tilde{X})=j_{\#}H_{c}^{2}(X)\oplus\left(\oplus_{[P% ]}S^{\vee}_{P}\right).

Here j#j_{\#} is the push-forward map. Furthermore, the pairings on each summand are non-degenerate. Considering PH2(e(P))H2(X)jH2(X)\oplus_{P}H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P))\to H_{2}(X)\to j_{\ast}H_{2}(X) we also obtain

Proposition 3.3.

H2(X¯)H_{2}(\partial\overline{X}) is the kernel of jj_{\ast} so that

jH2(X)H2(X)/[P]H2(e(P)).j_{\ast}H_{2}(X)\simeq H_{2}(X)/\sum_{[P]}H_{2}(e^{\prime}(P)).

3.3. Compactly supported cohomology and the cohomology of the mapping cone

We briefly review the mapping-cone-complex realization of the cohomology of compact supports of XX. For a more detailed discussion, see [14], section 5.

We let Ac(X)A_{c}^{\bullet}(X) be the complex of compactly supported differential forms on XX which gives rise to Hc(X)H_{c}^{\bullet}(X), the cohomology of compact supports. We now represent the compactly-supported cohomology of XX by the cohomology of the mapping cone CC^{\bullet} of i*i^{*}, see [29], p.19, where as before i:XX¯i:X\hookrightarrow\overline{X}. However, we will change the sign of the differential on CC^{\bullet} and shift the grading down by one. Thus we have

Ci={(a,b),aAi(X¯),bAi-1(X¯)}C^{i}=\{(a,b),a\in A^{i}(\overline{X}),b\in A^{i-1}(\partial\overline{X})\}

with d(a,b)=(da,i*a-db)d(a,b)=(da,i^{*}a-db). If (a,b)(a,b) is a cocycle in CC^{\bullet} we will use [[a,b]][[a,b]] to denote its cohomology class. We have

Proposition 3.4.

The cochain map Ac(X)CA_{c}^{\bullet}(X)\to C^{\bullet} given by c(c,0)c\mapsto(c,0) is a quasi-isomorphism.

We now give a cochain map from CC^{\bullet} to Ac(X)A_{c}^{\bullet}(X) which induces the inverse to the above isomorphism. We let VV be a product neighborhood of X¯\partial\overline{X} as in Section 2.2.2, and we let π:VX¯\pi:V\to\partial\overline{X} be the projection. If bb is a form on X¯\partial\overline{X} we obtain a form πb\pi^{\ast}b on V. Let ff be a smooth function of the geodesic flow coordinate tt which is 11 near t=t=\infty and zero for tTt\leq T for some sufficiently large TT. We may regard ff as a function on VV by making it constant on the X¯\partial\overline{X} factor. We extend ff to all of X¯\overline{X} by making it zero off of VV. Let (a,b)(a,b) be a cocycle in CiC^{i}. Then there exist a compactly supported closed form α\alpha and a form μ\mu which vanishes on X¯\partial\overline{X} such that


We define the cohomology class [a,b][a,b] in the compactly supported cohomology Hci(X)H^{i}_{c}(X) to be the class of α\alpha, and the assignment [[a,b]][a,b][[a,b]]\mapsto[a,b] gives the desired inverse. From this we obtain the following integral formulas for the Kronecker pairings with [a,b][a,b].

Lemma 3.5.

Let η\eta be a closed form on X¯\overline{X} and CC a relative cycle in X¯\overline{X} of appropriate degree. Then

[a,b],[η]=X¯aη-X¯bi*η, 𝑎𝑛𝑑  [a,b],C=Ca-Cb.\langle[a,b],[\eta]\rangle=\int_{\overline{X}}a\wedge\eta-\int_{\partial% \overline{X}}b\wedge i^{*}\eta,\ \text{and}\ \ \langle[a,b],C\rangle=\int_{C}a% -\int_{\partial C}b.

4. Capped special cycles and linking numbers in Sol

For xVx\in V such that (x,x)>0(x,x)>0, we define

Dx={zD;zx}.D_{x}=\{z\in D;\,z\perp x\}.

Then DxD_{x} is an embedded upper half plane in DD. We let ΓxΓ\Gamma_{x}\subset\Gamma be the stabilizer of xx and define the special or Hirzebruch-Zagier cycle by

Cx=Γx\Dx,C_{x}=\Gamma_{x}\backslash D_{x},

and by slight abuse identify CxC_{x} with its image in XX. These are modular or Shimura curves. For positive nn\in\mathbb{Q}, we write n={x;12(x,x)=n}\mathcal{L}_{n}=\{x\in\mathcal{L};\,\tfrac{1}{2}(x,x)=n\}. Then the composite cycles CnC_{n} are given by


Since the divisors define in general relative cycles, we take the sum in H2(X,X,)H_{2}(X,\partial X,\mathbb{Z}).

4.1. The closure of special cycles in the Borel-Serre boundary and the capped cycle CxcC_{x}^{c}

We now study the closure of CxC_{x} in X¯\partial\overline{X}, which is the same as the intersection of C¯x\overline{C}_{x} or Cx\partial C_{x} with the union of the hypersurfaces e(P)e^{\prime}(P). A straightforward calculation gives

Proposition 4.1.

If (x,u)0(x,u)\neq 0 then there exists a neighborhood UU_{\infty} of e(P)e(P) such that

DxU=.D_{x}\cap U_{\infty}=\emptyset.

If (x,u)=0(x,u)=0, then D¯xe(P)\overline{D}_{x}\cap e(P) is contained in the fiber of pp over s(x)s(x), where s(x)s(x) is the unique element of \mathbb{R} satifying


At s(x)s(x) the intersection D¯xe(P)\overline{D}_{x}\cap e(P) is the affine line in WW given by

{wW:(x,w)=(u,x)}.\{w\in W:(x,w)=(u^{\prime},x)\}.

We define cxCxc_{x}\subset\partial C_{x} to be the closed geodesic in the fiber over s(x)s(x) which is the image of D¯xe(P)\overline{D}_{x}\cap e(P) under the covering e(P)e(P)e(P)\to e^{\prime}(P). We have

Proposition 4.2.
  1. (i)

    The 11-cycle Cx\partial C_{x} is a finite union of circles.

  2. (ii)

    At a cusp associated to PP, each circle is contained in a fiber of the map κ:e(P)XW\kappa:e^{\prime}(P)\to X_{W} and hence is a rational boundary (by Lemma 3.1).

  3. (iii)

    Two boundary circles cxc_{x} and cyc_{y} are parallel if they are contained in the same fiber. In particular, cxcycx=cy.c_{x}\cap c_{y}\neq\emptyset\iff c_{x}=c_{y}.

We now describe the intersection of C¯n\overline{C}_{n} or Cn\partial C_{n} with e(P)e^{\prime}(P). For V==L+h\mathcal{L}_{V}=\mathcal{L}=L+h we can write

W=WP=(u)/(u)k(LW,k+hW,k){\mathcal{L}}_{W}={\mathcal{L}}_{W_{P}}=(\mathcal{L}\cap u^{\perp})/(\mathcal{% L}\cap u)\simeq\coprod_{k}\left(L_{W,k}+h_{W,k}\right)

for some lattices LW,kWL_{W,k}\subset W and vectors hW,kLW,k#h_{W,k}\in L^{\#}_{W,k}.

Via the isomorphism WNW\simeq N, we can identify ΓN=NΓ\Gamma_{N}=N\cap\Gamma with a lattice ΛW\Lambda_{W} in WW. Since uu is primitive in LL and n(w)x=x+(w,x)un(w)x=x+(w,x)u for a vector xux\in u^{\perp} we see that W{\mathcal{L}}_{W} is contained in the dual lattice of ΛW\Lambda_{W}.

Lemma 4.3.

The intersection Cne(P)\partial C_{n}\cap e^{\prime}(P) is given by

xΓM\W(x,x)=2n0k<minλΛW|(λ,x)|cx+ku.\coprod_{\substack{x\in\Gamma_{M}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}\coprod_{0\leq k<\min^{\prime}_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}|(\lambda,x)|}% c_{x+ku}.

Here min\min^{\prime} denotes that we take the minimum over all nonzero values of |(λ,x)||(\lambda,x)|.


We will first prove Cn,P:=Cne(P)\partial C_{n,P}:=\partial C_{n}\cap e^{\prime}(P) is a disjoint union

(4.1) Cn,P=yΓP\n,ucy,\partial C_{n,P}=\coprod_{y\in\Gamma_{P}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{n,u}}c_{y},

where n,u={xu;(x,x)=2n}\mathcal{L}_{n,u}=\{x\in\mathcal{L}\cap u^{\perp};\,(x,x)=2n\}. Indeed, first note that by Proposition 4.1 only vectors in n,u\mathcal{L}_{n,u} can contribute to Cn,P\partial C_{n,P}. The action of Γ\Gamma on VV induces an equivalence relation Γ\sim_{\Gamma} on the set Γp\n,uV\Gamma_{p}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{n,u}\subset V which is consequently a union of equivalence classes [xi]=[xi]P,1ik[x_{i}]=[x_{i}]_{P},1\leq i\leq k. We may accordingly organize the union RR on the right-hand side of (4.1) as R=i=1ky[xi]cy.R=\coprod_{i=1}^{k}\coprod_{y\in[x_{i}]}c_{y}. But it is clear that (Cxi)P=y[xi]cy(\partial C_{x_{i}})_{P}=\coprod_{y\in[x_{i}]}c_{y} and hence we have the equality of 11-cycles in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) and X\partial X

(4.2) (Cxi)P=y[xi]Pcy  and  Cxi=[P]y[xi]Pcy,(\partial C_{x_{i}})_{P}=\sum_{y\in[x_{i}]_{P}}c_{y}\qquad\text{and}\qquad% \partial C_{x_{i}}=\sum_{[P]}\sum_{y\in[x_{i}]_{P}}c_{y},

since an element y[xi]y\in[x_{i}] gives rise to the lift DyD_{y} of CxiC_{x_{i}} to DD that intersects e(P)e(P) and this intersection projects to cyc_{y}. Thus we may rewrite the right-hand side of(4.1) as R=Γ\n,uCxi.R=\coprod_{\sim_{\Gamma}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{n,u}}\partial C_{x_{i}}. But it is clear that this latter union is Cn,P\partial C_{n,P} and (4.1) follows. Finally, we easily see that xΓM\W(x,x)=2n0k<minλΛW|(λ,x)|x+ku\coprod_{\substack{x\in\Gamma_{M}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}\coprod_{0\leq k<\min^{\prime}_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}|(\lambda,x)|}% x+ku is a complete set of representatives of ΓP\Gamma_{P}-equivalence classes in n,u\mathcal{L}_{n,u}. These give the circles cx+kuc_{x+ku} above.

Proposition 4.4.

Let xn,ux\in\mathcal{L}_{n,u} with n>0n>0. Then there exists a rational 22-chain axa_{x} in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) such that

  1. (1)

    ax=cx\partial a_{x}=c_{x}

  2. (2)

    axΩP=0\int_{a_{x}}\Omega_{P}=0, here ΩP\Omega_{P} is the area form for the fibers (see (3.1))


Except for the rationality of the cap this follows immediately from Proposition 4.2. The problem is to find a cap axa_{x} such that axΩP\int_{a_{x}}\Omega_{P}\in\mathbb{Q}. We will prove this in Section 4.3 below. ∎

We will define (Ax)P(A_{x})_{P} by (Ax)P=y[x]ax(A_{x})_{P}=\sum_{y\in[x]}a_{x}. Then sum over the components e(P)e^{\prime}(P) to obtain AxA_{x} a rational 22-chain in X\partial X. Then we have (noting that (Cx)P=y[x]cy(\partial C_{x})_{P}=\sum_{y\in[x]}c_{y})

Ax=Cx.\partial A_{x}=\partial C_{x}.
Definition 4.5.

We define the rational absolute 22-cycle in X¯\overline{X} by


with the 22-chain AxA_{x} in X¯\partial\overline{X} as in Proposition 4.4. In particular, CxcC_{x}^{c} defines a class in H2(X¯)=H2(X)H_{2}(\overline{X})=H_{2}(X). In the same way we obtain CncC_{n}^{c}.

4.2. The closure of the special cycles in X~\tilde{X} and the cycle TncT_{n}^{c}

Following Hirzebruch-Zagier we let TnT_{n} be the cycle in X~\tilde{X} given by the closure of the cycle CnC_{n} in X~\tilde{X}. Hence TnT_{n} defines a class in H2(X~)H_{2}(\tilde{X}).

Definition 4.6.

Consider the decomposition H2(X~)=jH2(X)([P]Sp)H_{2}(\tilde{X})=j_{\ast}H_{2}(X)\oplus\left(\oplus_{[P]}S_{p}\right), which is orthogonal with respect to the intersection pairing on X~\tilde{X}. We let TncT_{n}^{c} be the image of TnT_{n} under orthogonal projection onto the summand jH2(X)j_{\ast}H_{2}(X).

Proposition 4.7.

We have


For simplicity, we assume that XX has only one cusp. The 33-manifold e(P)e^{\prime}(P) separates TnT_{n} and we can write Tn=TnXin+TnXoutT_{n}=T_{n}\cap X^{in}+T_{n}\cap X^{out} as (appropriately oriented) 22-chains in X~\tilde{X}. It is obvious that we have jC¯n=TnXinj_{\ast}\overline{C}_{n}=T_{n}\cap X^{in} as 22-chains. We write Bn=TnXoutB_{n}=T_{n}\cap X^{out}. We have Cn=-Bn\partial C_{n}=-\partial B_{n}. Hence we can write Tn=jCnc+BncT_{n}=j_{\ast}C_{n}^{c}+B_{n}^{c}, the sum of two 22-cycles in X~\tilde{X}. Here BncB_{n}^{c} is obtained by ‘capping’ BnB_{n} in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) with the negative of the cap AnA_{n} of CncC_{n}^{c}. Since j*Cncj_{*}C_{n}^{c} is clearly orthogonal to SPS_{P} (since it lies in XinX^{in}) and BncSPB_{n}^{c}\in S_{P} (since it lies in XoutX^{out}) the decomposition Tn=j*Cnc+BncT_{n}=j_{*}C_{n}^{c}+B_{n}^{c} is just the decomposition of TnT_{n} relative to the splitting H2(X~)=j*H2(X)SPH_{2}(\tilde{X})=j_{*}H_{2}(X)\oplus S_{P}. Hence Tnc=j*CncT_{n}^{c}=j_{*}C_{n}^{c}, as claimed. ∎

4.3. Rationality of the cap

We will now prove Proposition 4.4. In fact we will show that it holds for any circle α\alpha contained in a torus fiber of e(P)e(P) and passing through a rational point. We would like to thank Misha Kapovich for simplifying our original argument. The idea is to construct, for each component of Cx\partial C_{x}, a 22-chain AA with that component as boundary so that AA is a sum P+T+(γ0)P+T+\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0}) of three simplicial 22-chains in MM. We then verify that the “parallelogram” PP and the “triangle” TT have rational area and the period of Ω\Omega over the “monodromy chain” (γ0)\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0}) is zero.

In what follows we will pass from pictures in the plane involving directed line segments, triangles and parallelograms to identities in the space of simplicial 11-chains C1(T2)C_{1}(T^{2}) on T2T^{2}. The principal behind this is that any kk-dimensional subcomplex SS of a simplicial complex YY which is the fundamental cycle of an oriented kk-submanifold |S||S| (possibly with boundary) of YY corresponds in a unique way to a sum of oriented kk-simplices in Ck(Y)C_{k}(Y).

In this subsection we will work with a general 33-manifold MM with Sol geometry. Of course this includes all the manifolds e(P)e^{\prime}(P) that occur in this paper. Let fSL(2,)f\in\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{Z}) be a hyperbolic element. We will then consider the 33-manifold MM obtained from ×T2\mathbb{R}\times T^{2} (with the 22-torus T2=W/2T^{2}=W/\mathbb{Z}^{2}) given by the relation

(4.3) (s,w)(s+1,f(w)).(s,w)\sim(s+1,f(w)).

We let π:×T2M\pi:\mathbb{R}\times T^{2}\to M be the resulting infinite cyclic covering.

We now define notation we will use below. We will use Greek letters to denote closed geodesics on T2T^{2}, a subscript cc will indicate that the geodesic starts at the point cc on T2T^{2}. We will use the analogous notation for geodesic arcs on WW. We will use [α][\alpha] to denote the corresponding homology class of a closed geodesic α\alpha on T2T^{2}. If xx and yy are points on WW we will use xy¯\overline{xy} to denote the oriented line segment joining xx to yy and xy\overrightarrow{xy} to denote the corresponding (free) vector i.e. the equivalence class of xy¯\overline{xy} modulo parallel translation.

We first take care of the fact that α\alpha does not necessarily pass through the origin. For convenience we will assume α\alpha is in the fiber over the base-point z(x)z(x) corresponding to s=0s=0. Let α0\alpha_{0} be the parallel translate of α\alpha to the origin. Then we can find a cylinder PP, image of an oriented parallelogram P~\widetilde{P} under the universal cover WT2W\to T^{2} with rational vertices, such that in Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}), the group of rational 11-cycles, we have

(4.4) P=α-α0.\partial P=\alpha-\alpha_{0}.

Since P~\widetilde{P} has rational vertices we find PΩ=P~Ω\int_{P}\Omega=\int_{\widetilde{P}}\Omega\in\mathbb{Q}.

Now we take care of the harder part of finding AA as above. The key is the construction of “monodromy 22-chains”. For any closed geodesic γ0T2\gamma_{0}\subset T^{2} starting at 00 we define the monodromy 22-chain (γ0)\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0}) to be the image of the cylinder γ0×[0,1]T2×\gamma_{0}\times[0,1]\subset T^{2}\times\mathbb{R} in MM. The reader will verify using (4.3) that in Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}) we have

(4.5) (γ0)=f-1(γ0)-γ0.\partial\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0})=f^{-1}(\gamma_{0})-\gamma_{0}.

Since ff preserves the origin, the geodesic f-1(γ0)f^{-1}(\gamma_{0}) is also a closed geodesic starting at the origin. Since f-1f^{-1} is hyperbolic we have |tr(f-1)|>2|\operatorname{tr}(f^{-1})|>2 and hence det(f-1-I)=det(I-f)=tr(f)-20\det(f^{-1}-I)=det(I-f)=\operatorname{tr}(f)-2\neq 0. Put N=det(f-1-I)N=\det(f^{-1}-I) and define [γ0]H1(T2,)[\gamma_{0}]\in H_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Z}) by

(4.6) f-1([γ0])-[γ0]=N[α0].f^{-1}([\gamma_{0}])-[\gamma_{0}]=N[\alpha_{0}].

Note that [γ0]=N{(f-1-I)-1([α0])}[\gamma_{0}]=N\{(f^{-1}-I)^{-1}([\alpha_{0}])\} is necessarily an integer homology class. Also note that is an equation in the first homology, it is not an equation in the group of 11-cycles Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}). Since any homology class contains a unique closed geodesic starting at the origin we obtain a closed geodesic γ0[γ0]\gamma_{0}\in[\gamma_{0}] and a corresponding monodromy 22-chain (γ0)\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0}) whence (4.5) holds in Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}). We now solve

Problem 4.8.

Find an equation in Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Z}) which descends to (4.6).

Let h1h_{1} resp. h2h_{2} denote the covering transformation of π\pi corresponding to the element α0\alpha_{0} resp γ0\gamma_{0} of the fundamental group of T2T^{2}. Define c1c_{1} and c2c_{2} in WW by c1=Nh1(0)c_{1}=Nh_{1}(0) and c2=h2(0)c_{2}=h_{2}(0). Define dWd\in W by d=f-1(c2)d=f^{-1}(c_{2}) in WW. Let T~\widetilde{T} be the oriented triangle with vertices 0,c2,d0,c_{2},d. Then

(i)π(0c1¯)=Nα0  (ii)π(0c2¯)=γ0  (iii)π(0d¯)=π(f-1(0c2¯))=f-1(γ0).(i)\quad\pi(\overline{0c_{1}})=N\alpha_{0}\qquad(ii)\quad\pi(\overline{0c_{2}}% )=\gamma_{0}\qquad(iii)\quad\pi(\overline{0d})=\pi(f^{-1}(\overline{0c_{2}}))=% f^{-1}(\gamma_{0}).

We now leave it to the reader to combine the homology equation (4.6) and the three equations to show the equality of directed line segments

(4.7) h2(0c1¯)=c2d¯.h_{2}(\overline{0c_{1}})=\overline{c_{2}d}.

With this we can solve the problem. We see that if we consider T~\widetilde{T} as an oriented 22-simplex we have the following equality of one chains


Let TT be the image of T~\widetilde{T} under π\pi. Take the direct image of the previous equation under π\pi and use equation (4.7) which implies that the second edge c2d¯\overline{c_{2}d} is equivalent under h2h_{2} in the covering group to the directed line segment 0c1¯\overline{0c_{1}} which maps to Nα0N\alpha_{0}. Hence c2d¯\overline{c_{2}d} also maps to Nα0N\alpha_{0}. We obtain the following equation in Z1(T2,)Z_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Z})

(4.8) T=γ0+Nα0-f-1(γ0),\partial T=\gamma_{0}+N\alpha_{0}-f^{-1}(\gamma_{0}),

and we have solved the above problem. Combining (4.5) and (4.8) we have

((γ0)+T)=f-1(γ0)-γ0+γ0+α0-f-1(γ0)=Nα0.\partial(\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0})+T)=f^{-1}(\gamma_{0})-\gamma_{0}+\gamma_{0}+% \alpha_{0}-f^{-1}(\gamma_{0})=N\alpha_{0}.

Combining this with (4.4) and setting where A0=(γ0)+TA_{0}=\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0})+T we obtain

(4.9) (NP+A0)=Nα,\partial(NP+A_{0})=N\alpha,

in Z1(M,)Z_{1}(M,\mathbb{Z}). Hence if we define AA to be the rational chain A=1N(NP+A0)=P+1NT+1N(γ0)A=\frac{1}{N}(NP+A_{0})=P+\frac{1}{N}T+\frac{1}{N}\mathcal{M}(\gamma_{0}) in MM we have the following equation in Z1(M,)Z_{1}(M,\mathbb{Q}):

A=α.\partial A=\alpha.

Finally, the integral of Ω\Omega over AA is rational. Indeed, the integral over PP is rational. Since all vertices of T~\widetilde{T} are integral the area of T~\widetilde{T} is integral, the integral of Ω\Omega over TT is integral. Thus it suffices to observe that the restriction of Ω\Omega to (c)\mathcal{M}(c) is zero. With this we have completed the proof of Proposition 4.4.

4.4. Linking numbers in Sol

In the introduction we defined the linking number of two two disjoint homologically trivial 11-cycles aa and bb in a closed 33-manifold MM as Lk(a,b)=A,b\operatorname{Lk}(a,b)=\langle A,b\rangle, where AA is any rational 22-chain in MM with boundary aa. Since bb defines a trivial homology class in MM, the link is well-defined, ie, does not depend on the choice of AA.

We let MM be the Sol manifold as before realized as in Section 4.3 via (4.3) and consider the case when aa and bb are two contained in two torus fibers. Then by the previous section they are homologically trivial. If aa and bb are contained in the same fiber we move bb to the right (i.e. in the direction of positive ss) to a nearby fiber. We take a,bH1(T2,)a,b\in H_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Z}), and in this section we are allowed to confuse aa and bb with their representatives in the lattice 2\mathbb{Z}^{2} and the unique closed geodesic in T2T^{2} passing through the origin that represents them. We will write for the image of aa and bb in ×T2\mathbb{R}\times T^{2} and MM a=a(0)=0×aa=a(0)=0\times a and b=b(ε)=ε×bb=b(\varepsilon)=\varepsilon\times b. Our goal is to compute the linking number Lk(a,b(ϵ))Lk(a,b(\epsilon)). By the explicit construction of the cap AA in Section 4.3 we obtain

Lemma 4.9.
Lk(a,b(ϵ))=M(c)b(ϵ)=c(ϵ)b(ϵ)=cb.Lk(a,b(\epsilon))=M(c)\cdot b(\epsilon)=c(\epsilon)\cdot b(\epsilon)=c\cdot b.

Here cc is the rational one cycle obtained by solving (f-1-I)(c)=a(f^{-1}-I)(c)=a and M(c)M(c) is the (rational) monodromy 22-chain associated to cc (see above) with boundary M(c)=(f-1-I)(c)=a\partial M(c)=(f^{-1}-I)(c)=a. Here the first \cdot is the intersection of chains in MM, the next \cdot is the intersection number of 11-cycles in the fiber ϵ×T2\epsilon\times T^{2} and the last \cdot is the intersection number of 11-cycles in 0×T20\times T^{2}.

Noting that this last intersection number coincides with the intersection number of the underlying homology classes which in term coincides with the symplectic form ,\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle on H1(T2,)H_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Q}) we have found our desired formula for the linking number.

Theorem 4.10.


It is a remarkable fact that there is a simple formula involving only the action of the glueing homeomorphism fSL(2,)f\in\operatorname{SL}(2,\mathbb{Z}) on H1(T2,)H_{1}(T^{2},\mathbb{Z}) for linking numbers for 11-cycles contained in fiber tori T2T^{2} of in Sol (unlike the case of linking numbers in 3\mathbb{R}^{3}).

This immediately leads to an explicit formula for the numbers Lk(Cn,Cm)Lk(\partial C_{n},\partial C_{m}). Using Lemma 4.3 we obtain

Theorem 4.11.

Let g=(f-1-I)-1g=(f^{-1}-I)^{-1}. Then

Lk((Cn)P,(Cm)P)=xΓM\W(x,x)=2nxΓM\W(x,x)=2m(minλΛW|(λ,x)|)(minμΛW|(μ,x)|)g(Jx),Jx.Lk((\partial C_{n})_{P},(\partial C_{m})_{P})=\sum_{\substack{x\in\Gamma_{M}% \backslash\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}\sum_{\substack{x^{\prime}\in\Gamma_{M}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2m}}(\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}{\hskip{-5.0pt}{}^{\prime}}|(\lambda,x)% |)(\min_{\mu\in\Lambda_{W}}{\hskip{-5.0pt}{}^{\prime}}|(\mu,x^{\prime})|)% \langle g(Jx),Jx^{\prime}\rangle.

Here JxJx is properly oriented primitive vector in ΛW\Lambda_{W} such that (Jx,x)=0(Jx,x)=0.

Example 4.12.

We consider the integral skew Hermitian matrices in Example 2.1. Let u=(p000)u=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}\sqrt{p}&0\\ 0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right), so that W={(0λ-λ0);λK}KW=\{\left(\begin{smallmatrix}0&\lambda\\ -\lambda^{\prime}&0\end{smallmatrix}\right);\;\lambda\in K\}\simeq K. The symplectic form on KK is given by λ,μ=1p(λμ-λμ)\langle\lambda,\mu\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}(\lambda\mu^{\prime}-\lambda^{% \prime}\mu). The action of the unipotent radical N={n(λ)=(1λ01)}N=\left\{n(\lambda)=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&\lambda\\ 0&1\end{smallmatrix}\right)\right\} on a vector μK\mu\in K is now slightly different, namely, n(λ)μ=μ+λ,μun(\lambda)\mu=\mu+\langle\lambda,\mu\rangle u. Hence in these coordinates, Cμ\partial C_{\mu} is given by the image of the line μ={λK;λ,μ=0}\mathbb{R}\mu=\{\lambda\in K_{\mathbb{R}};\;\langle\lambda,\mu\rangle=0\}, and (minλ𝒪K|λ,μ|)μ(\min^{\prime}_{\lambda\in\mathcal{O}_{K}}|\langle\lambda,\mu\rangle|)\mu is a primitive generator in 𝒪K\mathcal{O}_{K} for that line. We let ε\varepsilon be a generator of U+U_{+}, the totally positive units in 𝒪K\mathcal{O}_{K}, and we assume that the glueing map ff is realized by multiplication with ε\varepsilon^{\prime}. For d1(mod4)d\equiv 1\;\;(\mathop{{\rm mod}}4) a prime and m=1m=1, C1C_{1} has only component arising from x=1Kx=1\in K and C1SL2()\C_{1}\simeq\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z})\backslash\mathbb{H}. Then Theorem 4.11 becomes (the min\min^{\prime}-term is now wrt ,\langle\,,\,\rangle)

Lk((Cn)P,(C1)P)=2μU+\𝒪Kμμ=n,μ0με-1,1=2μU+\𝒪Kμμ=n,μ0=2pμ+μεε-1.Lk((\partial C_{n})_{P},(\partial C_{1})_{P})=2\sum_{\substack{\mu\in U_{+}% \backslash\mathcal{O}_{K}\\ \mu\mu^{\prime}=n,\mu\gg 0}}\left\langle\tfrac{\mu}{\varepsilon-1},1\right% \rangle=2\sum_{\substack{\mu\in U_{+}\backslash\mathcal{O}_{K}\\ \mu\mu^{\prime}=n,\mu\gg 0}}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{p}}\frac{\mu+\mu^{\prime}% \varepsilon}{\varepsilon-1}.

This is (twice) the “boundary contribution” in [16], Section 1.4, see also Section 7.5.

5. Schwartz functions and forms

Let UU be a non-degenerate rational quadratic space of signature (p,q)(p,q) and even dimension mm. We will later apply the following to U=VU=V and U=WU=W. Changing notation from before, we let G=SO0(U)G=\operatorname{SO}_{0}(U_{\mathbb{R}}) with maximal compact subgroup KK and write D=G/KD=G/K for the associated symmetric space. We let 𝒮(U)\mathcal{S}(U_{\mathbb{R}}) be the space of Schwartz functions on UU_{\mathbb{R}} on which SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) acts via the Weil representation ω\omega.

5.1. Extending certain Schwartz functions to functions of τ\tau\in\mathbb{H} and zDz\in D

Let φ𝒮(U)\varphi\in\mathcal{S}(U_{\mathbb{R}}) be an eigenfunction under the maximal compact SO(2)\operatorname{SO}(2) of SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) of weight rr. Define gτSL2()g^{\prime}_{\tau}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) by gτ=(1u01)(v1/200v-1/2)g^{\prime}_{\tau}=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&u\\ 0&1\end{smallmatrix}\right)\left(\begin{smallmatrix}v^{1/2}&0\\ 0&v^{-1/2}\end{smallmatrix}\right). Then we have ω(gτ)φ(x)=vm/4φ(vx)eπi(x,x)u\omega(g^{\prime}_{\tau})\varphi(x)=v^{m/4}\varphi(\sqrt{v}x)e^{\pi i(x,x)u}. Accordingly we define

(5.1) φ(x,τ)=v-r/2ω(gτ)φ(x)=v-r/2+m/4φ0(vx)eπi(x,x)τ.\varphi(x,\tau)=v^{-r/2}\omega(g^{\prime}_{\tau})\varphi(x)=v^{-r/2+m/4}% \varphi^{0}(\sqrt{v}x)e^{\pi i(x,x)\tau}.

Here we have also defined φ0(x)=φ(x)eπ(x,x)\varphi^{0}(x)=\varphi(x)e^{\pi(x,x)}. Let EE be a GG-module and let gzGg_{z}\in G be any element that carries the basepoint z0z_{0} in DD to zDz\in D. Then define for φ[𝒮(U)E]K\varphi\in[\mathcal{S}(U_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes E]^{K}, the EE-valued KK-invariant Schwartz functions on UU_{\mathbb{R}}, the functions φ(x,z)\varphi(x,z) and φ(x,τ,z)\varphi(x,\tau,z) for xU,zD,τx\in U,z\in D,\tau\in\mathbb{H} by

φ(x,z)=gzφ(gz-1x)  and  φ(x,τ,z)=gzφ(gz-1x,τ).\varphi(x,z)=g_{z}\varphi(g_{z}^{-1}x)\qquad\text{and}\qquad\varphi(x,\tau,z)=% g_{z}\varphi(g_{z}^{-1}x,\tau).

We will continue to use these notational conventions for other (not necessarily Schwartz) functions that arise in this paper.

5.2. Schwartz forms for VV

Let 𝔤\mathfrak{g} be the Lie algebra of GG and 𝔤=𝔨𝔭\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{k}\oplus\mathfrak{p} be the Cartan decomposition of 𝔤\mathfrak{g} associated to KK. We identify 𝔤2V\mathfrak{g}\simeq\sideset{}{{}^{2}}{\bigwedge}V_{\mathbb{R}} as usual via (v1v2)(v)=(v1,v)v2-(v2,v)v1(v_{1}\wedge v_{2})(v)=(v_{1},v)v_{2}-(v_{2},v)v_{1}. We write Xij=eiej𝔤X_{ij}=e_{i}\wedge e_{j}\in\mathfrak{g} and note that 𝔭\mathfrak{p} is spanned by XijX_{ij} with 1i21\leq i\leq 2 and 3j43\leq j\leq 4. We write ωij\omega_{ij} for their dual. We orient DD such that ω13ω14ω23ω24\omega_{13}\wedge\omega_{14}\wedge\omega_{23}\wedge\omega_{24} gives rise to the GG-invariant volume element on DD.

5.2.1. Special forms for VV

The Kudla-Millson form φ2\varphi_{2} is an element in

[𝒮(V)𝒜2(D)]G[𝒮(V)2𝔭]K,[\mathcal{S}(V_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathcal{A}^{2}(D)]^{G}\simeq[\mathcal{S}(V% _{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\sideset{}{{}^{2}}{\bigwedge}\mathfrak{p}^{\ast}]^{K},

where the isomorphism is given by evaluation at the base point. Here 𝒜2(D)\mathcal{A}^{2}(D) denotes the differential 22-forms on DD. Note that GG acts diagonally in the natural fashion. At the base point φ2\varphi_{2} is given by

φ2=12μ=34α=12(xα-12πxα)φ0ωαμ.\varphi_{2}=\frac{1}{2}\prod_{\mu=3}^{4}\sum_{\alpha=1}^{2}\left(x_{\alpha}-% \frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\alpha}}\right)\varphi_{0}\otimes% \omega_{\alpha\mu}.

Here φ0(x):=e-π(x,x)0\varphi_{0}(x):=e^{-\pi(x,x)_{0}}, where (x,x)0=i=14xi2(x,x)_{0}=\sum_{i=1}^{4}x_{i}^{2} is the minimal majorant associated to the base point in DD. Note that φ2\varphi_{2} has weight 22, see [21]. There is another Schwartz form ψ1\psi_{1} of weight 00 which lies in [𝒮(V)𝒜1(D)]G[𝒮(V)𝔭]K[\mathcal{S}(V_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathcal{A}^{1}(D)]^{G}\simeq[\mathcal{S}(V% _{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathfrak{p}^{\ast}]^{K} and is given by

(5.2) ψ1=-x1x3φ0(x)ω14+x1x4φ0(x)ω13-x2x3φ0(x)ω24+x2x4φ0(x)ω23.\psi_{1}=-x_{1}x_{3}\varphi_{0}(x)\otimes\omega_{14}+x_{1}x_{4}\varphi_{0}(x)% \otimes\omega_{13}-x_{2}x_{3}\varphi_{0}(x)\otimes\omega_{24}+x_{2}x_{4}% \varphi_{0}(x)\otimes\omega_{23}.

The key relationship is (see [24], §8)

Theorem 5.1.

Here ω(L)\omega(L) is the Weil representation action of the SL2\operatorname{SL}_{2}-lowering operator L=12(1-i-i-1)𝔰𝔩2()L=\tfrac{1}{2}\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&-i\\ -i&-1\end{smallmatrix}\right)\in\mathfrak{sl}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) on 𝒮(V)\mathcal{S}(V_{\mathbb{R}}), while dd denotes the exterior differentiation on DD.

On the upper half plane \mathbb{H}, the action of LL corresponds to the action of the classical Maass lowering operator which we also denote by LL. For a function ff on \mathbb{H}, we have


When made explicit using (5.1) Theorem 5.1 translates to

(5.3) vvφ20(vx)=d(ψ10(vx)).v\frac{\partial}{\partial v}\varphi_{2}^{0}(\sqrt{v}x)=d\left(\psi_{1}^{0}(% \sqrt{v}x)\right).

5.2.2. The singular form ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1}

We define the singular form ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} by

(5.4) ψ~1(x)\displaystyle\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x) =-(1ψ10(rx)drr)e-π(x,x)=-12π(x32+x42)ψ1(x).\displaystyle=-\left(\int_{1}^{\infty}\psi_{1}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x)\frac{dr}{r}% \right)e^{-\pi(x,x)}=-\frac{1}{2\pi(x_{3}^{2}+x_{4}^{2})}\psi_{1}(x).

for x0x\neq 0, and as before ψ~2,00(x)=ψ~1(x)eπ(x,x)\tilde{\psi}^{0}_{2,0}(x)=\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x)e^{\pi(x,x)} and ψ~1(x,z)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x,z). We see that ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} is defined for xspan[e3,e4]x\notin\operatorname{span}[e_{3},e_{4}]^{\perp}. Formulated differently, ψ~1(x,z)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x,z) for fixed xx is defined for zDxz\notin D_{x}. Furthermore, as if ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} was a Schwartz function of weight 22, we define

(5.5) ψ~1(x,τ,z)\displaystyle\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x,\tau,z) =ψ~10(vx,z)eπi(x,x)τ=-(vψ10(rx,z)drr)eπi(x,x)τ.\displaystyle=\tilde{\psi}_{1}^{0}(\sqrt{v}x,z)e^{\pi i(x,x)\tau}=-\left(\int_% {v}^{\infty}\psi_{1}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x,z)\frac{dr}{r}\right)e^{\pi i(x,x)\tau}.
Proposition 5.2.

ψ~1(x,z)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x,z) is a differential 11-form with singularities along DxD_{x}. Outside DxD_{x}, we have


Here dd denotes the exterior differentiation on DD. In particular, for (x,x)0(x,x)\leq 0, we see that φ2(x)\varphi_{2}(x) is exact. Furthermore,


Using (5.4) and (5.3), we see

dψ~10(x,z)\displaystyle d\tilde{\psi}_{1}^{0}(x,z) =-1d(ψ10(rx,z))drr=-1r(φ20(rx,z))drr=φ20(x,z),\displaystyle=-\int_{1}^{\infty}d\left(\psi_{1}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x,z)\right)\frac{% dr}{r}=-\int_{1}^{\infty}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\left(\varphi_{2}^{0}(% \sqrt{r}x,z)\right)\frac{dr}{r}=\varphi_{2}^{0}(x,z),

as claimed. The formula Lψ~1(x,τ)=ψ1(x,τ)L\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x,\tau)=\psi_{1}(x,\tau) follows easily from (5.5). ∎

Remark 5.3.

The construction of the singular form ψ~\tilde{\psi} works in much greater generality for O(p,q)\operatorname{O}(p,q) whenever we have two Schwartz forms ψ\psi and φ\varphi (of weight r-2r-2 and rr resp.) such that


Then the analogous construction of ψ~\tilde{\psi} then immediately yields dψ~=φd\tilde{\psi}=\varphi outside a singular set. The main example for this are the general Kudla-Millson forms φq\varphi_{q} and ψq-1\psi_{q-1}, see [24]. For these forms, this construction is already implicit in [5]. In particular, the proof of Theorem 7.2 in [5] shows that ψ~\tilde{\psi} gives rise to a differential character for the analogous cycle CxC_{x}, see also Section 8 of this paper. The unitary case will be considered in [10].

5.3. Schwartz forms for WW

Let WVW\subset V be the rational quadratic space of signature (1,1)(1,1) obtained from the Witt decomposition of VV. We will refer to the nullcone of WW as the light-cone. We write 𝔪\mathfrak{m}\simeq\mathbb{R} for the Lie algebra of M=SO0(W)M=\operatorname{SO}_{0}(W_{\mathbb{R}}). Then X23=e2e3X_{23}=e_{2}\wedge e_{3} is its natural generator with dual ω23\omega_{23}. We identify the associated symmetric space DWD_{W} to MM with the space of lines in WW_{\mathbb{R}} on which the bilinear form (,)(\,,\,) is negative definite:

DW={𝐬W;dim𝐬=1\dim{\bf s}=1 and (,)|𝐬<0(\,,\,)|_{\bf s}<0}.D_{W}=\{{\bf s}\subset W_{\mathbb{R}};\;\text{$\dim{\bf s}=1$ and $(\,,\,)|_{% \bf s}<0$}\}.

We pick as base point of DWD_{W} the line 𝐬0{\bf s}_{0} spanned by e3e_{3}. We set x(s):=m(s)e3=sinh(s)e2+cosh(s)e3x(s):=m(s)e_{3}=\sinh(s)e_{2}+\cosh(s)e_{3}. This realizes the isomorphism DWD_{W}\simeq\mathbb{R}. Namely, 𝐬=spanx(s){\bf s}=\operatorname{span}x(s). Accordingly, we frequently write ss for 𝐬{\bf s} and vice versa. A vector xWx\in W of positive length defines a point DW,xD_{W,x} in DD via DW,x={𝐬D;𝐬x}D_{W,x}=\{{\bf s}\in D;\;{\bf s}\perp x\}. So 𝐬=DW,x{\bf s}=D_{W,x} if and only if (x,x(𝐬))=0(x,x({\bf s}))=0. We also write 𝐬(x)=DW,x{\bf s}(x)=D_{W,x}.

5.3.1. Special forms for WW

We carry over the conventions from section 5.1. We first consider the Schwartz form φ1,1\varphi_{1,1} on WW_{\mathbb{R}} constructed in [12] (in much greater generality) with values in 𝒜1(DW)W\mathcal{A}^{1}(D_{W})\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}. More precisely,

φ1,1[𝒮(W)𝒜1(DW)W]M[𝒮(W)𝔪W],\varphi_{1,1}\in[\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathcal{A}^{1}(D_{W})% \otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}]^{M}\simeq[\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathfrak{% m}^{\ast}\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}],

Here MM acts diagonally on all three factors. Explicitly at the base point, we have

φ1,1(x)=123/2(4x22-1π)e-π(x22+x32)ω23e2.\varphi_{1,1}(x)=\frac{1}{2^{3/2}}\left(4x_{2}^{2}-\frac{1}{\pi}\right)e^{-\pi% (x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2})}\otimes\omega_{23}\otimes e_{2}.

Note that φ1,1\varphi_{1,1} has weight 22, see [12], Theorem 6.2. We define φ1,1(x,s)\varphi_{1,1}(x,s) and φ1,10\varphi_{1,1}^{0} as before. There is another Schwartz function ψ0,1\psi_{0,1} of weight 00 given by

ψ0,1(x)=-12x2x3e-π(x22+x32)1e2+142πe-π(x22+x32)1e3[𝒮(W)0𝔪W],\psi_{0,1}(x)=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}x_{2}x_{3}e^{-\pi(x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2})}% \otimes 1\otimes e_{2}+\frac{1}{4\sqrt{2}\pi}e^{-\pi(x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2})}% \otimes 1\otimes e_{3}\\ \in[\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\sideset{}{{}^{0}}{\bigwedge}\mathfrak{m% }^{\ast}\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}],

and also ψ0,1(x,s)\psi_{0,1}(x,s) and ψ0,10\psi_{0,1}^{0}. Note that the notation differs from [12], section 6.5. The function ψ0,1\psi_{0,1} defined here is the term -ψ1,1-12Λ1,1-\psi_{1,1}-\tfrac{1}{2}\Lambda_{1,1} given in Theorem 6.11 in [12]. The key relation between φ1,1\varphi_{1,1} and ψ0,1\psi_{0,1} (correcting a sign mistake in [12]) is given by

Theorem 5.4.

([12], Theorem 6.2)


When made explicit, we have, again using (5.1),

(5.6) v3/2v(v-1/2φ1,10(vx,s))=d(ψ0,10(vx,s)).v^{3/2}\frac{\partial}{\partial v}\left(v^{-1/2}\varphi_{1,1}^{0}(\sqrt{v}x,s)% \right)=d\left(\psi_{0,1}^{0}(\sqrt{v}x,s)\right).

5.3.2. The singular Schwartz function ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}

In the same way as for VV we define

(5.7) ψ~0,1(x)\displaystyle\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x) =-(1ψ0,10(rx)r-3/2dr)e-π(x,x)\displaystyle=-\left(\int_{1}^{\infty}\psi_{0,1}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x)r^{-3/2}dr% \right)e^{-\pi(x,x)}

for all xWx\in W, including x=0x=0. Define ψ~0,10(x)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{0}(x), ψ~0,10(x,s)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{0}(x,s) as before and also

ψ~0,1(x,τ,s)\displaystyle\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x,\tau,s) =v-1/2ψ~0,10(vx,s)eπi(x,x)τ=-(vψ0,10(rx,s)r-3/2dr)eπi(x,x)τ.\displaystyle=v^{-1/2}\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{0}(\sqrt{v}x,s)e^{\pi i(x,x)\tau}=-% \left(\int_{v}^{\infty}\psi_{0,1}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x,s)r^{-3/2}dr\right)e^{\pi i(x,% x)\tau}.

Note that ψ~0,1(x,s)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x,s) has a singularity at Dw,xD_{w,x}. Define functions AA and BB by

ψ~0,1(x)=A(x)1e2+B(x)1e3\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x)=A(x)\otimes 1\otimes e_{2}+B(x)\otimes 1\otimes e_{3}

and note

(5.8) -X23B(x)=A(x).-X_{23}B(x)=A(x).

We extend these functions to DWD_{W} as before. We see by integrating by parts

Lemma 5.5.
A(x)\displaystyle A(x) =12πx2x3|x3|Γ(12,2πx32)e-π(x,x)\displaystyle=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{\pi}}x_{2}\frac{x_{3}}{|x_{3}|}\Gamma(\tfrac{1}{% 2},2\pi x_{3}^{2})e^{-\pi(x,x)}
B(x)\displaystyle B(x) =-122πe-π(x22+x32)+12π|x3|Γ(12,2πx32)e-π(x,x).\displaystyle=-\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}e^{-\pi(x_{2}^{2}+x_{3}^{2})}+\frac{1}{2% \sqrt{\pi}}|x_{3}|\Gamma(\tfrac{1}{2},2\pi x_{3}^{2})e^{-\pi(x,x)}.

Here Γ(12,a)=ae-uu-1/2du\Gamma(\tfrac{1}{2},a)=\int_{a}^{\infty}e^{-u}u^{-1/2}du is the incomplete Γ\Gamma-funtion at s=1/2s=1/2.

It is now immediate that BB is continuous and bounded on DWD_{W}. Since AA is clearly bounded we find that AA and BB are locally integrable on DWD_{W} and integrable and square-integrable on WW. The singularities of AA and BB are given as follows.

Lemma 5.6.
  1. (i)

    B(x)-(1/2)|x3|e-π(x,x)B(x)-(1/2)|x_{3}|e^{-\pi(x,x)} is C2C^{2} on the Minkowski plane WW.

  2. (ii)

    A(x)-(1/2)x2x3|x3|e-π(x,x)A(x)-(1/2)x_{2}\frac{x_{3}}{|x_{3}|}e^{-\pi(x,x)} is C1C^{1} on the Minkowski plane WW.


Use Lemma 5.5, expand the incomplete gamma function around x3=0x_{3}=0, and observe that |x|xn|x|x^{n} is CnC^{n} for n>0n>0. ∎

The key properties of ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1} analogous to Lemma 5.2 are given by

Lemma 5.7.

Outside DW,xD_{W,x},

dψ~0,1(x,s)=φ1,1(x,s)  𝑎𝑛𝑑  Lψ~0,1(x,τ)=ψ0,1(x,τ).d\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x,s)=\varphi_{1,1}(x,s)\qquad\text{and}\qquad L\tilde{\psi% }_{0,1}(x,\tau)=\psi_{0,1}(x,\tau).

5.3.3. The singular function ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}

Inspired by [16], section 2.3, we define a functions A(x)A^{\prime}(x) and B(x)B^{\prime}(x) on WW by

(5.9) B(x)\displaystyle B^{\prime}(x) ={12min(|x2-x3|,|x2+x3|)e-π(x,x)ifx22-x32>0,0otherwise,\displaystyle=\begin{cases}\frac{1}{2}\min(|x_{2}-x_{3}|,|x_{2}+x_{3}|)e^{-\pi% (x,x)}&\text{if}\,x_{2}^{2}-x_{3}^{2}>0,\\ 0&\text{otherwise},\end{cases}
A(x)\displaystyle A^{\prime}(x) =-X23B(x)=-sgn(x2x3)B(x).\displaystyle=-X_{23}B^{\prime}(x)=-\operatorname{sgn}(x_{2}x_{3})B^{\prime}(x).
Lemma 5.8.
  1. (i)

    B(x)+12|x3|e-π(x,x)B^{\prime}(x)+\tfrac{1}{2}|x_{3}|e^{-\pi(x,x)} is C2C^{2} on the complement of the light-cone in WW and C2C^{2} on nonzero MM-orbits.

  2. (ii)

    A(x)+12x2x3|x3|e-π(x,x)A^{\prime}(x)+\tfrac{1}{2}x_{2}\frac{x_{3}}{|x_{3}|}e^{-\pi(x,x)} is C1C^{1} on the complement of the light-cone in WW and C1C^{1} on nonzero MM-orbits.

We define ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1} by

ψ~0,1(x)=A(x)1e2+B(x)1e3\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x)=A^{\prime}(x)\otimes 1\otimes e_{2}+B^{\prime}(% x)\otimes 1\otimes e_{3}

and ψ~0,1(x,τ,s)=v-1/2m(s)ψ~0,1(m-1(s)vx)eπi(x,x)τ\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x,\tau,s)=v^{-1/2}m(s)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(% m^{-1}(s)\sqrt{v}x)e^{\pi i(x,x)\tau}. A little calculation shows that ψ~0,1(x)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x) is locally constant on DWD_{W} with a singularity at DW,xD_{W,x} and holomorphic in τ\tau:

Lemma 5.9.

Outside DW,xD_{W,x} we have

dψ~0,1(x)=0    𝑎𝑛𝑑    Lψ~0,1(x,τ)=0.d\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x)=0\qquad\qquad\text{and}\qquad\qquad L\tilde{% \psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x,\tau)=0.
Remark 5.10.

The functions ψ~0,1(x)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x) and ψ~0,1(x)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime}(x) define currents on DWD_{W}. One can show, similarly to Section 6.5, that for (x,x)>0(x,x)>0 we have

d[ψ~0,1(x)]=δDW,xx+[φ1,1(x)],    d[ψ~0,1(x)]=-δDW,xx,\displaystyle d[\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x)]=\delta_{D_{W,x}\otimes x}+[\varphi_{1,1% }(x)],\qquad\qquad d[\tilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(x)]=-\delta_{D_{W,x}\otimes x},

where DW,xxD_{W,x}\otimes x is the 00-cycle DW,xD_{W,x} ‘with coefficient xWx\in W’ defined in [12].

5.3.4. The form ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1} on WW

We now combine ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1} and ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{\prime} to obtain an integrable and also square-integrable WW-valued function

ϕ0,1[L2(W)0𝔪W]\phi_{0,1}\in[L^{2}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\sideset{}{{}^{0}}{\bigwedge}% \mathfrak{m}^{\ast}\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}]



and then also ϕ0,1(x,s)\phi_{0,1}(x,s). Combining Lemmas 5.6, 5.8 and (5.8), (5.9) we obtain

Proposition 5.11.
  • (i)

    B(x)+B(x)B(x)+B^{\prime}(x) is C2C^{2} on the complement of the light-cone in WW and C2C^{2} on nonzero MM-orbits.

  • (ii)

    A(x)+A(x)A(x)+A^{\prime}(x) is C1C^{1} on the complement of the light-cone in WW and C1C^{1} on nonzero MM orbits.

  • (iii)

    X23(B+B)=-(A+A)X_{23}(B+B^{\prime})=-(A+A^{\prime}) on all of WW.

So for given xx, the function ϕ0,1(x,s)\phi_{0,1}(x,s) is a C1C^{1}-function on DWD_{W} with values in WW_{\mathbb{C}}.

The following theorem is fundamental for us. It is an immediate consequence of the Lemmas 5.7 and 5.9.

Theorem 5.12.

The form φ1,1\varphi_{1,1} on DWD_{W} is exact. Namely,



Proposition 5.13.

The function ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1} is an eigenfunction of K=SO(2)K^{\prime}=\operatorname{SO}(2) of weight 22 under the Weil representation. More precisely,


where χ\chi is the standard character of SO(2)U(1)\operatorname{SO}(2)\simeq U(1).


It suffices to show this for one component of ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1}, that is, the function B(x)+B(x)B(x)+B^{\prime}(x). Then the assertion has been already proved in §2.3 by showing that B(x)+B(x)B(x)+B^{\prime}(x) is an eigenfunction under the Fourier transform. We give here an infinitesimal proof. Since ω(k)\omega(k^{\prime}) acts essentially as Fourier transform and B+BB+B^{\prime} is L1L^{1}, we see that ω(k)(B+B)\omega(k^{\prime})(B+B^{\prime}) is continuous. Hence it suffices to establish the corresponding current equality [ω(k)(B+B)]=χ2(k)[B+B][\omega(k^{\prime})(B+B^{\prime})]=\chi^{2}(k^{\prime})[B+B^{\prime}], since continuous functions coincide when they induce the same current. The infinitesimal generator of KK^{\prime} acts by H:=-i4π(2x22-2x32)+πi(x22-x32)H:=\frac{-i}{4\pi}\left(\tfrac{\partial^{2}}{\partial{x_{2}^{2}}}-\tfrac{% \partial^{2}}{\partial{x_{3}^{2}}}\right)+\pi i(x_{2}^{2}-x_{3}^{2}), and a straightforward calculation immediately shows

HB=2iB  and  HB=2iB,HB^{\prime}=2iB^{\prime}\qquad\text{and}\qquad H{B}=2i{B},

outside the singularity x22-x32=0x_{2}^{2}-x_{3}^{2}=0. Now we consider the currents H[B]H[B] and H[B]H[B^{\prime}]. An easy calculation using that BB and BB^{\prime} are C2C^{2} up to |x3|e-π(x22-x32)|x_{3}|e^{-\pi(x_{2}^{2}-x_{3}^{2})} shows that for a test function ff on WW we have

H[B](f)\displaystyle H[B](f) =[HB](f)+0e-πx22f(x2,0)dx2,\displaystyle=[HB](f)+\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-\pi x_{2}^{2}}f(x_{2},0)dx_{2},
H[B](f)\displaystyle H[B^{\prime}](f) =[HB](f)-0e-πx22f(x2,0)dx2.\displaystyle=[HB^{\prime}](f)-\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-\pi x_{2}^{2}}f(x_{2},0)dx% _{2}.

Thus H[B+B]=[H(B+B)]=2i[B+B]H[B+B^{\prime}]=[H(B+B^{\prime})]=2i[B+B^{\prime}] as claimed. ∎

5.3.5. The map ιP\iota_{P}

We define a map

ιP:𝒮(W)i𝔪W𝒮(W)i+1(𝔪𝔫)\iota_{P}:\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\sideset{}{{}^{i}}{\bigwedge}% \mathfrak{m}^{\ast}\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}}\to\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes% \sideset{}{{}^{i+1}}{\bigwedge}\left(\mathfrak{m}^{\ast}\oplus\mathfrak{n}^{% \ast}\right)


ιP(φωw)=φ(ω(wu)).\iota_{P}(\varphi\otimes\omega\otimes w)=\varphi\otimes\left(\omega\wedge(w% \wedge u^{\prime})\right).

Here we used the isomorphism 𝔫Wu2V𝔤\mathfrak{n}\simeq W\wedge\mathbb{R}u\in\bigwedge^{2}V_{\mathbb{R}}\simeq% \mathfrak{g} and identify WW with its dual via the bilinear form (,)(\,,\,) so that 𝔫Wu\mathfrak{n}^{\ast}\simeq W\wedge\mathbb{R}u^{\prime}. In [13], Section  6.2 we explain that ιP\iota_{P} is a map of Lie algebra complexes. Hence we obtain a map of complexes

[𝒮(W)𝒜i(DW)W]M[𝒮(W)𝒜i+1(e(P))]NM,[\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathcal{A}^{i}(D_{W})\otimes W_{\mathbb{C}% }]^{M}\to[\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}})\otimes\mathcal{A}^{i+1}(e(P))]^{NM},

which we also denote by ιP\iota_{P}. Here NN acts trivially on 𝒮(W)\mathcal{S}(W_{\mathbb{R}}). Explicitly, the vectors e2e_{2} and e3e_{3} in WW map under ιP\iota_{P} to the left-invariant 11-forms

e2cosh(s)dw2-sinh(s)dw3  e3sinh(s)dw2-cosh(s)dw3e_{2}\mapsto\cosh(s)dw_{2}-\sinh(s)dw_{3}\qquad e_{3}\mapsto\sinh(s)dw_{2}-% \cosh(s)dw_{3}

with the coordinate functions w2,w3w_{2},w_{3} on WW defined by w=w2e2+w3e3w=w_{2}e_{2}+w_{3}e_{3}. We apply ιP\iota_{P} to the forms on WW of this section, and we obtain φ1,1P\varphi_{1,1}^{P}, ϕ0,1P\phi_{0,1}^{P}, ψ0,1P\psi_{0,1}^{P}, and ψ0,1P{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}^{P}.

6. The boundary theta lift and linking numbers in Sol

6.1. Global theta functions for WW

We let W\mathcal{L}_{W} be a ΓP\Gamma_{P}-invariant (coset of a) lattice in WW, where ΓN\Gamma_{N} acts trivially on WW. For φ1,1\varphi_{1,1}, we define its theta function by

θφ1,1(τ,W)=xWφ1,1(x,τ)\theta_{\varphi_{1,1}}(\tau,{\mathcal{L}_{W}})=\sum_{x\in\mathcal{L}_{W}}% \varphi_{1,1}(x,\tau)

and similarly for ψ0,1\psi_{0,1}, and ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1}. Then the usual theta machinery gives that θφ1,1(τ,W)\theta_{\varphi_{1,1}}(\tau,{\mathcal{L}_{W}}) and θϕ0,1(W)\theta_{\phi_{0,1}}(\mathcal{L}_{W}) both transform like (non)-holomorphic modular forms of weight 22 for some congruence subgroup of SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

Remark 6.1.

The claim is not obvious for θϕ0,1\theta_{\phi_{0,1}}, since ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1} is not a Schwartz function. In that case, we use Proposition 5.11. The component B+BB+B^{\prime} of ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1} is C2C^{2} outside the light cone. Since WW is anisotropic we can then apply Possion summation, and this component transforms like a modular form. Then apply the differential operator X23X_{23} to obtain the same for the other component A+AA+A^{\prime} of ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1}.

In fact, if WW is isotropic and W\mathcal{L}_{W} intersects non-trivially with the light cone, then θϕ0,1\theta_{\phi_{0,1}} is not quite a modular form. The case, when the \mathbb{Q}-rank of VV is 22 is interesting in its own right. We will discuss this elsewhere.

Via the map ιP\iota_{P} from Section 5.3.5 we can view all theta functions for WW as functions resp. differential forms on e(P)e^{\prime}(P). We set θφ1,1P=θφ1,1P\theta^{P}_{\varphi_{1,1}}=\theta_{\varphi_{1,1}^{P}}, and similarly θψ0,1P\theta^{P}_{\psi_{0,1}} and θϕ0,1P\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}. Since ιP\iota_{P} is a map of complexes we immediately see by Theorem 5.4 and Theorem 5.12

Proposition 6.2.
Lθφ1,1P=dθψ0,1P  𝑎𝑛𝑑  Lθϕ0,1P=θψ0,1P.L\theta^{P}_{\varphi_{1,1}}=d\theta^{P}_{\psi_{0,1}}\qquad\text{and}\qquad L% \theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}=\theta^{P}_{\psi_{0,1}}.

We now interpret the (holomorphic) Fourier coefficients of the boundary theta lift associated to θϕP(τ,WP)\theta^{P}_{\phi}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}}). They are given by linking numbers. We have

Theorem 6.3.

Let cc a homological trivial 11-cycle in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) which is disjoint from the torus fibers containing components of Cn\partial C_{n} or for c=Cyc=\partial C_{y} for CyC_{y} one of the components of CnC_{n}, we have

cθϕ0,1P(τ,WP)=n=1Lk((Cn)P,c)qn+ncψ~0,1P(n)(τ).\int_{c}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}})=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}% \operatorname{Lk}((\partial C_{n})_{P},c)q^{n}\;+\;\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Q}}\int_{% c}{\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{P}}(n)(\tau).

So the Fourier coefficients of the holomorphic part of cθϕP(τ,WP)\int_{c}\theta^{P}_{\phi}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}}) are the linking numbers of the cycles cc and Cn\partial C_{n} at the boundary component e(P)e^{\prime}(P).

Theorem 6.3 follows from ϕ0,1=ψ~0,1+ψ~0,1\phi_{0,1}=\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}+\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1} combined with Theorem 6.7 below.

Example 6.4.

In the situation of Examples 2.1 and 4.12, we obtain

C1θϕ0,1P(τ,WP)=12dλ𝒪Kλλ>0min(|λ|,|λ|)e-2πλλτ-2dvλ𝒪Kβ(πv(λ-λ)2)e-2πλλτ,\int_{\partial C_{1}}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}})=\frac{1% }{\sqrt{2d}}\sum_{\substack{\lambda\in\mathcal{O}_{K}\\ \lambda\lambda^{\prime}>0}}\min(|\lambda|,|\lambda^{\prime}|)e^{-2\pi\lambda% \lambda^{\prime}\tau}-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\sqrt{dv}}\sum_{\lambda\in\mathcal{O}_{K% }}\beta(\pi v(\lambda-\lambda^{\prime})^{2})e^{-2\pi\lambda\lambda^{\prime}% \tau},

where β(s)=116π1e-stt-3/2dt\beta(s)=\tfrac{1}{16\pi}\int_{1}^{\infty}e^{-st}t^{-3/2}dt. This is (up to a constant) exactly Zagier’s function 𝒲(τ)\mathcal{W}(\tau) in [16], §2.3.

6.2. Linking numbers, de Rham cohomology and linking duals

We begin with a general discussion of integral formulas for linking numbers. Such formulas go back to the classical Gauss-Ampère formula for 3\mathbb{R}^{3}, see [8], p.79-81, and [7] for its generalization to S3S^{3} and H3H^{3}. Suppose now that cc is a 11-cycle in an oriented compact 33-manifold M that is a rational boundary and UU is a tubular neighborhood of cc.

Definition 6.5.

We will say any closed form β\beta in M-UM-U is a linking dual (relative to UU) of the bounding 11-cycle cc if for any 11-cycle aa in M-UM-U which is a rational boundary in MM we have


We will prove that given a cycle cc that bounds rationally then linking duals for cc exist for all tubular neighborhoods UU of cc. Let η\eta be a Thom form for cc compactly supported in UU. This means that η\eta is closed and has integral 11 over any normal disk to cc. Let ηM\eta_{M} be the extension of η\eta to MM by zero. It is standard in topology (the extension of the Thom class by zero is the Poincaré dual of the zero section of the normal bundle) that the form ηM\eta_{M} represents the 22-dimensional cohomology class on MM which is Poincaré dual to cc. Since cc is a rational boundary there exists a 11-form β\beta on MM such that dβ=ηMd\beta=\eta_{M}. We will now see that β\beta is a linking dual of cc. To this end, suppose aa is a 11-cycle in M-UM-U which is a rational boundary in MM, hence there exists a rational chain AA with A=a\partial A=a. We may suppose ηM\eta_{M} vanishes in a neighborhood VV of aa which is disjoint from UU . Then the restriction ηM-V\eta_{M-V} of ηM\eta_{M} to M-VM-V represents the (relative) Poincaré dual of the absolute cycle cc in (M-V,(M-V))(M-V,\partial(M-V)). Using this the reader will show that

AηM=A(M-V)ηM-V=Ac=Lk(a,c).\int_{A}\eta_{M}=\int_{A\cap(M-V)}\eta_{M-V}=A\cdot c=\operatorname{Lk}(a,c).

Note that restriction of β\beta to M-UM-U is closed. Then


Hence we have

Proposition 6.6.

β\beta is a linking dual of cc.

6.3. The 11-form e2πnψ~0,1(n)e^{2\pi n}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n) is a linking dual of (Cn)P(\partial C_{n})_{P}

We now return to the case in hand. In what follows, we drop subscript and superscript PP’s since we are fixing a boundary component e(P)e(P). We let FnF_{n} be the union of the fibers containing components of Cn\partial C_{n}, and we let FxF_{x} be the fiber containing cxc_{x}. Recall that cxc_{x} is the image of Dxe(P)D_{x}\cap e(P) in e(P)e^{\prime}(P).

Theorem 6.7.

Let n>0n>0. The 11-form e2πnψ~0,1(n)e^{2\pi n}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n) is a linking dual for Cn\partial C_{n} in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) relative to any neighborhood UU of FnF_{n}. Hence, for cc a rational 11-boundary in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) which is disjoint from FnF_{n} we have

(6.1) cψ~0,1(n)=Lk(Cn,c)e-2πn.\int_{c}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c)e^{-% 2\pi n}.

Furthermore, (6.1) holds when c=cyc=c_{y} contained in one fiber FxF_{x} of Cn\partial C_{n}.

We will first deal with the case in which cc is disjoint from FnF_{n} (which we will refer to in what follows as case (i)), then at the end of this section we will reduce the case in which c=cyc=c_{y} (which we will refer to as case (ii)) to case (i) by a Stokes’ Theorem argument. Thus we will now assume we are in case (i).

The key step is

Proposition 6.8.

Let n>0n>0 and let η\eta be an exact 22-form in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) which is compactly supported in the complement of FnF_{n}. Then

(6.2) e(P)ηψ~0,1(n)=(Anη)e-2πn.\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\left(\int_{A_{n}% }\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n}.
Remark 6.9.

Note that (6.2) also holds in case η=ΩP\eta=\Omega_{P}. In this case the right-hand side is zero by the normalization of the cap AnA_{n} and the left-hand side is zero because Ωψ~0,1(n)=0\Omega\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=0 since Ω\Omega has bidegree (0,2)(0,2) and ψ~0,1(n)\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n) has bidegree (0,1)(0,1) (here we use the obvious base/fiber bigrading on the de Rham algebra of e(P)e^{\prime}(P)).

6.4. Proof of Proposition 6.8

Lemma 6.10.

Under the hypothesis on η\eta in Proposition 6.8 we have

Anη=xΓM\W(x,x)=2nminλΛW|(λ,x)|axη\int_{A_{n}}\eta=\sum_{\substack{x\in\Gamma_{M}\backslash\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}{\hskip{-5.0pt}{}^{\prime}}|(\lambda,x)|% \int_{a_{x}}\eta

We use Lemma 4.3. Write η=dω\eta=d\omega for some 11-form ω\omega which by the support condition on η\eta is closed in FnF_{n}. Since cx+kuc_{x+ku} and cxc_{x} are parallel hence homologous circles in FxF_{x}, we see ax+kuη=cx+kuω=cxω=axη\int_{a_{x+ku}}\eta=\int_{c_{x+ku}}\omega=\int_{c_{x}}\omega=\int_{a_{x}}\eta. ∎


ψ~0,1(n)=xΓM\W(x,x)=2nγΓMγψ~0,1(x),\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\sum_{\substack{x\in\Gamma_{M}\backslash% \mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(x),

Proposition 6.8 will now follow from

Proposition 6.11.

Under the hypothesis on η\eta in Proposition 6.8, we have for any positive length vector xWx\in\mathcal{L}_{W}

e(P)ηγΓMγψ~0,1(x)=(minλΛW|(λ,x)|)(axη)e-π(x,x).\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta\wedge\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{% \psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(x)=(\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}{\hskip{-2.0pt}{}^{\prime% }}|(\lambda,x)|)\left(\int_{a_{x}}\eta\right)e^{-\pi(x,x)}.

By choosing appropriate coordinates we can assume that x=μe2x=\mu e_{2} with μ=±2n\mu=\pm\sqrt{2n}, so that the singularity of γΓMγψ~0,1(x)\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(x) in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) occurs at s=0s=0. We pick a tubular neighborhood Uε=(-ε,ε)×T2U_{\varepsilon}=(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)\times T^{2} in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) around FxF_{x}. Then we have first

e(P)ηγΓMγψ~0,1P(x)=limϵ0e(P)-UεηγΓMγψ~0,1P(x).\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta\wedge\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{% \psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}^{P}(x)=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{e^{\prime}(P)-U_{% \varepsilon}}\eta\wedge\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{% \prime}}_{0,1}^{P}(x).

Since ηψ~0,1(x)=d(ωψ~0,1(x))\eta\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(x)=d(\omega\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{% 0,1}(x)) outside UεU_{\varepsilon} and (e(P)-Uε)=-Uε\partial(e^{\prime}(P)-U_{\varepsilon})=-\partial U_{\varepsilon} we see by Stokes’ theorem

(6.3) e(P)-UεηγΓMγψ~0,1(x)=-UεωγΓMγψ~0,1(x)\displaystyle\int_{e^{\prime}(P)-U_{\varepsilon}}\eta\wedge\sum_{\gamma\in% \Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(x)=-\int_{\partial U_{% \varepsilon}}\omega\wedge\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{% \prime}}_{0,1}(x)
=γΓMT2[ω(-ε,w)ψ0,1~(γ-1x,-ϵ,w)-ω(ε,w)ψ~0,1(γ-1x,ϵ,w)].\displaystyle\quad=\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\int_{T^{2}}\left[\omega(-% \varepsilon,w)\wedge\tilde{{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}}(\gamma^{-1}x,-\epsilon,w)-% \omega(\varepsilon,w)\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(\gamma^{-1}x,\epsilon,w% )\right].

For γ1\gamma\neq 1 we note that ω(s,w)ψ~0,1(γ-1x,s,w)\omega(s,w)\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(\gamma^{-1}x,s,w) is continuous at s=0s=0, while for γ=1\gamma=1, we have

(6.4) ψ~0,1(μe2,s,w)=12|μ|(sgn(s)dw2-dw3)e-πμ2.\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(\mu e_{2},s,w)=\frac{1}{2}|\mu|(\operatorname{sgn}% (s)dw_{2}-dw_{3})e^{-\pi\mu^{2}}.

Hence taking the limit in the last term of (6.3) we obtain

|μ|e-πμ2T2ω3(0,w)dw2dw3=|μ|e-πμ2T2/ce2(ce2ω(0,w2,w3))dw2.|\mu|e^{-\pi\mu^{2}}\int_{T^{2}}\omega_{3}(0,w)dw_{2}dw_{3}=|\mu|e^{-\pi\mu^{2% }}\int_{T^{2}/c_{e_{2}}}\left(\int_{c_{e_{2}}}\omega(0,w_{2},w_{3})\right)dw_{% 2}.

In the expression T2/ce2T^{2}/c_{e_{2}} (and for the rest of this proof) we have abused notation and identified the cycle ce2c_{e_{2}} with the subgroup 0×S10\times S^{1} of T2T^{2}.

Here ω3\omega_{3} is the dw3dw_{3} component of ω\omega and we used that Dx\partial D_{x} is the w3w_{3}-line in WW. Note that the inner integral on the right is the period of ω\omega over (homologous) horizontal translates of the cycle ce2c_{e_{2}}. But the restriction of ω\omega to FxF_{x} is closed so ce2ω(0,w2,w3)\int_{c_{e_{2}}}\omega(0,w_{2},w_{3}) is independent of w2w_{2} and the last integral becomes (T2/ce2dw2)(ce2ω)e-πμ2\left(\int_{T^{2}/c_{e_{2}}}dw_{2}\right)\left(\int_{c_{e_{2}}}\omega\right)e^% {-\pi\mu^{2}}. But ce2ω=Ae2η\int_{c_{e_{2}}}\omega=\int_{A_{e_{2}}}\eta. The proposition is then a consequence of

|μ|T2/ce2dw2=|μ|minλΛW|(λ,e2)|=minλΛW|(λ,x)|,|\mu|\int_{T^{2}/\partial c_{e_{2}}}dw_{2}=|\mu|\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}{% \hskip{-2.0pt}{}^{\prime}}|(\lambda,e_{2})|=\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}{% \hskip{-2.0pt}{}^{\prime}}|(\lambda,x)|,

which follows from the fact that the map WW\to\mathbb{R} given by w(w,e2)w\mapsto(w,e_{2}) induces an isomorphism T2/Ce2/(minλΛW|(λ,e2)|)T^{2}/\partial C_{e_{2}}\simeq\mathbb{R}/(\min_{\lambda\in\Lambda_{W}}^{\prime% }|(\lambda,e_{2})|)\mathbb{Z}.

6.5. Proof of Theorem 6.7

We now prove Theorem 6.7. First we will assume that we are in case(i). We need to show

cψ~0,1(n)=Lk(Cn,c)e-2πn=(Anc)e-2πn.\int_{c}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c)e^{-% 2\pi n}=(A_{n}\cdot c)e^{-2\pi n}.

The theorem will be a consequence of the following discussion. We may assume that cc is an embedded loop in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) (note that since any loop in a manifold of dimension 33 or more is homotopic to an embedded loop by transversality any homology class of degree 11 in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) is represented by an embedded loop).

Choose a tubular neighborhood N(c)N(c) of cc such that N(c)N(c) is disjoint from FnF_{n}. Let ηc\eta_{c} be a closed 22-form which is supported inside N(c)N(c) and has integral 11 on the disk fibers of N(c)N(c) (a Thom class for the normal disk bundle N(c)N(c)). Then we have proved in Subsection 6.2

Lemma 6.12.
(6.5) Anηc=Anc=Lk(Cn,c).\int_{A_{n}}\eta_{c}=A_{n}\cdot c=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c).

We then have

Lemma 6.13.
cψ~0,1(n)=(Anηc)e-2πn.\int_{c}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\left(\int_{A_{n}}\eta_{c}\right)e^{-2% \pi n}.

To prove the Lemma we compute e(P)ηcψ~0,1(n)=e(P)ψ~0,1(n)ηc\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta_{c}\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\int_{e^{% \prime}(P)}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)\wedge\eta_{c} in two different ways. First we apply Proposition 6.8 with η=ηc\eta=\eta_{c}. We deduce

e(P)ηcψ~0,1(n)=(Anηc)e-2πn.\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta_{c}\wedge\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=\left(\int_{A% _{n}}\eta_{c}\right)e^{-2\pi n}.

Next choose a tubular neighborhood VnV_{n} of the fibers FnF_{n} such that e(P)-Vne^{\prime}(P)-V_{n} contains N(c)N(c). Then ψ~0,1(n)\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n) is smooth on e(P)-Vnsupp(ηc)e^{\prime}(P)-V_{n}\supset\operatorname{supp}(\eta_{c}). Also, since ηc\eta_{c} is the extension of a Thom class by zero, the restriction of ηc\eta_{c} to e(P)-Vne^{\prime}(P)-V_{n} represents the Poincaré dual PD(c)PD(c) of the absolute cycle cc in e(P)-Vne^{\prime}(P)-V_{n}. The lemma now follows from

e(P)ψ~0,1(n)ηc=e(P)-Vnψ~0,1(n)ηc=e(P)-Vnψ~0,1(n)PD(c)=cψ~0,1(n).\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)\wedge\eta_{c}=\int_{e^{% \prime}(P)-V_{n}}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)\wedge\eta_{c}=\int_{e^{\prime}% (P)-V_{n}}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)\wedge PD(c)=\int_{c}\tilde{\psi^{% \prime}}_{0,1}(n).

By Lemma 6.12 this concludes the proof of Theorem 6.7 in the case when cc is disjoint from the fibers FnF_{n}.

It remains to treat case (ii). Thus we now assume that c=cyc=c_{y} which is contained in a fiber FxF_{x} containing a component of Cn\partial C_{n}. We first prove

Lemma 6.14.
cψ~0,1(x)=c(ϵ)ψ~0,1(x).\int_{c}\widetilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(x)=\int_{c(\epsilon)}\widetilde{\psi}^% {\prime}_{0,1}(x).

We can take x=μe2x=\mu e_{2} and hence cc is contained in the fiber over the image of e3We_{3}\in W. Hence, by Proposition 4.1, cc is the circle in the torus fiber at s(x)=0s(x)=0 in the e3e_{3}-direction, i.e., parallel to the image of (0,e3)(0,\mathbb{R}e_{3}) in e(P)e^{\prime}(P). We note that by (6.4) even though ψ~0,1(x)\widetilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(x) is not defined on the whole fiber over s=0s=0 its restriction to cc is smooth. Hence the left hand side is well-defined since all the other terms in the sum are defined on the whole fiber and in fact in a neighborhood of that fiber. Hence the locally constant form γΓMγ*ψ~0,1(x)\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{M}}\gamma^{*}\widetilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(x) is closed on the cylinder [0,ϵ]×c[0,\epsilon]\times c, and its integrals over the circles s×cs\times c all coincide. But ε×c=c(ϵ)\varepsilon\times c=c(\epsilon). The lemma follows. ∎

Summing over xx and using case (i) we obtain

cψ~0,1(n)=c(ϵ)ψ~0,1(n)=Lk(Cn,c(ϵ)),\int_{c}\widetilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(n)=\int_{c(\epsilon)}\widetilde{\psi}^% {\prime}_{0,1}(n)=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c(\epsilon)),

since c(ϵ)c(\epsilon) is disjoint from all the components of FnF_{n}. Thus it suffices to prove

(6.6) Lk(Cn,c)=Lk(Cn,c(ϵ)).\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c)=\operatorname{Lk}(\partial C_{n},c(% \epsilon)).

To this end suppose that cFxFnc\subset F_{x}\subset F_{n} and c1,,ckc_{1},\cdots,c_{k} are the components of Cn\partial C_{n} contained in FxF_{x}. Hence cc and ci,1ikc_{i},1\leq i\leq k, are all parallel. Since the fibers containing all other components of Cn\partial C_{n} are disjoint from cc, (6.6) will follow from

Lk(ci,c)=Lk(ci,c(ϵ)),1ik.\operatorname{Lk}(c_{i},c)=\operatorname{Lk}(c_{i},c(\epsilon)),1\leq i\leq k.

If ci=cc_{i}=c then the previous equation is the definition of Lk(c,c)Lk(c,c). Thus we may assume cic_{i} is parallel to and disjoint from cc. In this case their linking number is already topologically defined. But since cc is disjoint from cic_{i} the circles cc and c(ε)c(\varepsilon) are homologous in the complement of cic_{i} (by the product homology c×[0,ε]c\times[0,\varepsilon]) and since the linking number with cic_{i} is a homological invariant of the complement of cic_{i} in e(P)e^{\prime}(P) we have Lk(ci,c(ε))=Lk(ci,c)\operatorname{Lk}(c_{i},c(\varepsilon))=\ Lk(c_{i},c).

We this Theorem 6.7 is proved.

7. The generating series of the capped cycles

In this section, we show that the generating series of the ‘capped’ cycles CncC_{n}^{c} gives rise to a modular form, extending Theorem 7.1 to a lift of the full cohomology H2(X)H^{2}(X) of XX. In particular, we give our new proof of the theorem of Hirzebruch and Zagier and show how a remarkable feature of their proof appears from our point of view.

7.1. The theta series associated to φ2\varphi_{2}

We define the theta series

θφ2(τ,)=xφ2(x,τ,z).\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L})=\sum_{x\in\mathcal{L}}\varphi_{2}(x,% \tau,z).

In the following we will often drop the argument =L+h\mathcal{L}=L+h. For nn\in\mathbb{Q}, we also set

φ2(n)=nn,x0φ2(x).\varphi_{2}(n)=\sum_{n\in\mathcal{L}_{n},x\neq 0}\varphi_{2}(x).

Clearly, θφ2(τ,)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}) and φ2(n)\varphi_{2}(n) descend to closed differential 22-forms on XX. Furthermore, θφ2(τ,)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}) is a non-holomorphic modular form in τ\tau of weight 22 for the principal congruence subgroup Γ(N)\Gamma(N). In fact, for =L\mathcal{L}=L as in Example 2.1, θφ2(τ,)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}) transforms like a form for Γ0(d)\Gamma_{0}(d) of nebentypus.

Theorem 7.1 (Kudla-Millson [24]).

We have

[θφ2(τ)]=-12πδh0[ω]+n>0PD[Cn]qnH2(X,)M2(Γ(N)).[\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau)]=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}[\omega]+\sum_{n>0}% \operatorname{PD}[C_{n}]q^{n}\in H^{2}(X,\mathbb{Q})\otimes M_{2}(\Gamma(N)).

That is, for any closed 22-form η\eta on XX with compact support,

Λ(η,τ):=Xηθφ2(τ,)=-12πδh0Xηω+n>0(Cnη)qn.\Lambda(\eta,\tau):=\int_{X}\eta\wedge\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L})=-% \frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}\int_{X}\eta\wedge\omega+\sum_{n>0}\left(\int_{C_{n}}% \eta\right)q^{n}.

Here δh0\delta_{h0} is Kronecker delta, and ω\omega is the Kähler form on DD normalized such that its restriction to the base point is given by ω13ω14+ω23ω24\omega_{13}\wedge\omega_{14}+\omega_{23}\wedge\omega_{24}. We obtain a map

(7.1) Λ:Hc2(X,)M2(Γ(N))\Lambda:H_{c}^{2}(X,\mathbb{C})\to M_{2}(\Gamma(N))

from the cohomology with compact supports to the space of holomorphic modular forms of weight 22 for the principal congruence subgroup Γ(N)SL2()\Gamma(N)\subset\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). Alternatively, for CC an absolute 22-cycle in XX defining a class in H2(X,)H_{2}(X,\mathbb{Z}), the lift Λ(C,τ)\Lambda(C,\tau) is given by (1.1) with C0C_{0} the class given by -12πδh0[ω]-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}[\omega].

The key fact for the proof of the Fourier expansion is that for n>0n>0, the form φ2(n)\varphi_{2}(n) is a Poincaré dual form of CnC_{n}, while φ2(n)\varphi_{2}(n) is exact for n0n\leq 0, see also Section 8.

7.2. The restrictions of the global theta functions

Theorem 7.2.

The differential forms θφ2(V)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}) and θψ1(V)\theta_{\psi_{1}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}) on XX extend to the Borel-Serre compactification X¯\overline{X}. More precisely, for the restriction iPi_{P}^{\ast} to the boundary face e(P)e^{\prime}(P) of X¯\overline{X}, we have

iPθφ2(V)=θφ1,1P(WP)  𝑎𝑛𝑑  iPθψ1(V)=θψ0,1P(WP).i_{P}^{\ast}\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V})=\theta^{P}_{\varphi_{1,1}}(% \mathcal{L}_{W_{P}})\qquad\text{and}\qquad i_{P}^{\ast}\theta_{\psi_{1}}(% \mathcal{L}_{V})=\theta^{P}_{\psi_{0,1}}(\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}}).

The restriction of θφ2(V)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}) is the theme (in much greater generality) of [13]. For θψ1(V)\theta_{\psi_{1}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}) one proceeds in the same way. In short, one detects the boundary behaviour of the theta functions by switching to a mixed model of the Weil representation. For a model calculation see the proof of Theorem 7.4 below. ∎

We conclude by Proposition 6.2

Theorem 7.3.

The restriction of θφ2(V)\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}) to the boundary of X¯\overline{X} is exact and

iPθφ2(V)=d(θϕ0,1P(WP)).i_{P}^{\ast}\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V})=d\left(\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1% }}(\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}})\right).

We also have a crucial restriction result for the singular form ψ~0,1{\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}}. However, one needs to be careful in forming the naive theta series associated to ψ~0,1\tilde{\psi}_{0,1} by summing over all (non-zero) lattice elements. This would give a form on XX with singularities on a dense subset of XX. Instead we define ψ~2,0(n)\tilde{\psi}_{{2,0}}(n) in the same way as for φ2(n)\varphi_{2}(n) by summing over all non-zero xVx\in\mathcal{L}_{V} of length nn\in\mathbb{Q}. This gives a 11-form on XX which for n>0n>0 has singularities along the locally finite cycle CnC_{n}. Similarly, we define

ψ~0,1P(n)=xWP,(x,x)=2nψ~0,1P(x),\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{P}(n)=\sum_{\substack{x\in\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}},(x,x)=2n}}% \tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{P}(x),

which descends to a 11-form on e(P)e^{\prime}(P) with singularities. We also define ψ~0,1(n)\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n) and ϕ0,1P(n)\phi_{0,1}^{P}(n) in the same way. We have

Proposition 7.4.

The restriction of the 11-form ψ~1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{{1}}(n) to e(P)e^{\prime}(P) is given by


We assume that PP is the stabilizer of the isotropic line =u\ell=\mathbb{Q}u. For x=au+xW+bux=au+x_{W}+bu^{\prime}, we have for the majorant at z=(w,t,s)z=(w,t,s) the formula

(x,x)z=1t2(a-(xW,w)-bq(w))2+(xw+bw,xw+bw)s+b2t2.(x,x)_{z}=\frac{1}{t^{2}}(a-(x_{W},w)-bq(w))^{2}+(x_{w}+bw,x_{w}+bw)_{s}+b^{2}% t^{2}.

Here (,)s(\,,\,)_{s} is the majorant associated to WW. Hence by (5.4) and (5.2) we see that the sum of all xVx\in\mathcal{L}_{V} with b0b\neq 0 in ψ~1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n) is uniformly rapidly decreasing as tt\to\infty. Now fix an element xWWx_{W}\in\mathcal{L}_{W}. Then xW+(a+h)uVx_{W}+(a+h)u\in\mathcal{L}_{V} for all aa\in\mathbb{Z} for some h/h\in\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}; in fact all elements in Vu\mathcal{L}_{V}\cap u^{\perp} are of this form. We consider aψ~1(xW+(a+h)u,z)\sum_{a\in\mathbb{Z}}\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x_{W}+(a+h)u,z) as tt\to\infty. By considerations as in [13], sections 4 and 9, we can assume w=0w=0 and s=0s=0. We apply Poisson summation for the sum on aa\in\mathbb{Z} and obtain

aψ~1(xW+au,z)=k(1P(x,t,r)e-2πx32r+t2k2/rdrr)e-2πikhe-π(xW,xW),\displaystyle\sum_{a\in\mathbb{Z}}\tilde{\psi}_{1}(x_{W}+au,z)=\sum_{k\in% \mathbb{Z}}\left(\int_{1}^{\infty}P(x,t,r)e^{-2\pi x_{3}^{2}r+t^{2}k^{2}/r}% \frac{dr}{r}\right)e^{-2\pi ikh}e^{-\pi(x_{W},x_{W})},


P(x,t,r)=x2x3r2dw2+122(12π-t2k2r)dw3-ix3k2dt+ix2kt2ds.P(x,t,r)=\frac{x_{2}x_{3}\sqrt{r}}{\sqrt{2}}dw_{2}+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}\left(% \frac{1}{2\pi}-\frac{t^{2}k^{2}}{r}\right)dw_{3}-\frac{ix_{3}k}{\sqrt{2}}dt+% \frac{ix_{2}kt}{\sqrt{2}}ds.

Now the sum over all k0k\neq 0 is rapidly decreasing while for k=0k=0 we obtain ψ~0,1(xW)\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(x_{W}). If xW=0x_{W}=0, i.e., for n=0n=0 one needs to argue slightly differently. Then we have

a0ψ~1(au,z)=122πa0e-πa2/t2dw3t=122π(ke-πt2k2)dw3-122πdw3t,\sum_{a\neq 0}\tilde{\psi}_{1}(au,z)=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}\sum_{a\neq 0}e^{-% \pi a^{2}/t^{2}}\frac{dw_{3}}{t}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}\left(\sum_{k\in\mathbb% {Z}}e^{-\pi t^{2}k^{2}}\right)dw_{3}-\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}\frac{dw_{3}}{t},

which goes to 122πdw3=ψ~0,1(0)\tfrac{1}{2\sqrt{2}\pi}dw_{3}=\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(0). This proves the proposition. ∎

7.3. Main result

In the previous sections, we constructed a closed 22-form θφ2\theta_{\varphi_{2}} on X¯\overline{X} such that the restriction of θφ2\theta_{\varphi_{2}} to the boundary X¯\partial\overline{X} was exact with primitive [P¯]θϕ0,1P\sum_{[\underline{P}]}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}. From now on we usually write φ\varphi for φ2\varphi_{2} and ϕ\phi for ϕ0,1\phi_{0,1} if it does not cause any confusion. By the definition of the differential for the mapping cone complex CC^{\bullet} we immediately obtain by Theorem 7.2 and Theorem 7.3

Proposition 7.5.

The pair (θφ2(V),[P]θϕ0,1P(WP))(\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\mathcal{L}_{V}),\sum_{[P]}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}(% \mathcal{L}_{W_{P}})) is a 22-cocycle in CC^{\bullet}.

We write for short (θφ,θϕ)(\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}). We obtain a class [[θφ,θϕ]][[\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}]] in H2(C)H^{2}(C^{\bullet}) and hence a class [θφ,θϕ][\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}] in Hc2(X)H^{2}_{c}(X). The pairing with [θφ,θϕ][\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}] then defines a lift Λc\Lambda^{c} on differential 22-forms on X¯\overline{X}, which factors through H2(X¯)=H2(X)H^{2}(\overline{X})=H^{2}(X). By Lemma 3.5 it is given by

Λc(η,τ)=X¯ηθφ2-[P]e(P)i*ηθϕ0,1P.\Lambda^{c}(\eta,\tau)=\int_{\overline{X}}\eta\wedge\theta_{\varphi_{2}}-\sum_% {[P]}\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}i^{*}\eta\wedge\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}.
Theorem 7.6.

The class [[θφ,θϕ]][[\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}]] is holomorphic, that is,


Hence [θφ,θϕ][\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}] is a holomorphic modular form with values in the compactly supported cohomology of XX, so that the lift Λc\Lambda^{c} takes values in the holomorphic modular forms.


By Theorem 7.2 and Theorem 6.2 we calculate

d(θψ1,0)=(dθψ1,iθψ1)=(Lθφ2,[P]θψ0,1P)=L(θφ2,[P]θϕ0,1P).d(\theta_{\psi_{1}},0)=(d\theta_{\psi_{1}},i^{\ast}\theta_{\psi_{1}})=\left(L% \theta_{\varphi_{2}},\sum_{[P]}\theta^{P}_{\psi_{0,1}}\right)=L\left(\theta_{% \varphi_{2}},\sum_{[P]}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}\right).\qed

It remains to compute the Fourier expansion in τ\tau of [θφ,θϕ](τ)[\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}](\tau). We will carry this out in Section 8.

Theorem 7.7.

We have

[θφ,θϕ](τ)=-12πδh0[ω]+n>0PD[Cnc]qnHc2(X,)M2(Γ(N)).[\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}](\tau)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}[\omega]+\sum% _{n>0}\operatorname{PD}[C^{c}_{n}]q^{n}\in H_{c}^{2}(X,\mathbb{Q})\otimes M_{2% }(\Gamma(N)).

That is, for any closed 22-form η\eta on X¯\overline{X}

Λc(η,τ)=-12πδh0Xηω+n>0(Cncη)qn,\Lambda^{c}(\eta,\tau)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}\int_{X}\eta\wedge\omega+\sum% _{n>0}\left(\int_{C^{c}_{n}}\eta\right)q^{n},

In particular, the map takes values in the holomorphic modular forms and factors through cohomology. We obtain a map

(7.2) Λc:H2(X)M2(Γ(N))\Lambda^{c}:H^{2}(X)\to M_{2}(\Gamma(N))

from the cohomology with compact supports to the space of holomorphic modular forms of weight 22 for the principal congruence subgroup Γ(N)SL2()\Gamma(N)\subseteq\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). Alternatively, for CC any relative 22-cycle in XX defining a class in H2(X¯,X¯,)H_{2}(\overline{X},\partial\overline{X},\mathbb{Z}), we have

Λc(C,τ)=-12πδh0vol(C)+n>0(CncC)qnM2(Γ(N)).\Lambda^{c}(C,\tau)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}\operatorname{vol}(C)+\sum_{n>0}% (C^{c}_{n}\cdot C)q^{n}\in M_{2}(\Gamma(N)).
Remark 7.8.

In the theorem we now consider the Kähler form ω\omega representing a class in the compactly supported cohomology. In fact, our mapping cone construction gives an explicit coboundary by which ω\omega is modified to become rapidly decreasing.

7.4. The Hirzebruch-Zagier Theorem

We now view [θφ,θϕ][\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}] as a class in H2(X~)H^{2}(\tilde{X}) via the map j#:Hc2(X)H2(X~)j_{\#}:H_{c}^{2}(X)\to H^{2}(\tilde{X}). We recover the Hirzebruch-Zagier-Theorem.

Theorem 7.9.

We have

j#[θφ,θϕ](τ)=-12πδh0[ω]+n>0[Tnc]qnH2(X~,)M2(Γ(N)).j_{\#}[\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}](\tau)=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}[\omega% ]+\sum_{n>0}[T^{c}_{n}]q^{n}\in H^{2}(\tilde{X},\mathbb{Q})\otimes M_{2}(% \Gamma(N)).

In particular,

-12πδh0vol(Tm)+n>0(TncTm)X~qnM2(Γ(N)).-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}\operatorname{vol}(T_{m})+\sum_{n>0}(T_{n}^{c}\cdot T% _{m})_{\tilde{X}}q^{n}\in M_{2}(\Gamma(N)).

This is the result Hirzebruch-Zagier proved for certain Hilbert modular surfaces (Example 2.1) by explicitly computing the intersection numbers TmTncT_{m}\cdot T^{c}_{n}.


This follows from Theorem 7.7 since jCnc=Tncj_{\ast}C_{n}^{c}=T_{n}^{c} (Proposition 4.7), combined with the following general principle. Suppose ω\omega is a compactly supported form on XX such that the cohomology class of ω\omega is the Poincaré dual of the homology class of a cycle CC: [ω]=PD(C)[\omega]=\operatorname{PD}(C). Then we have j#[ω]=PD(j*C)j_{\#}[\omega]=\operatorname{PD}(j_{*}C). To see this we have only to replace ω\omega by a cohomologous ‘Thom representative’ of PD(C)\operatorname{PD}(C), namely a closed form ω~\tilde{\omega} supported in a tubular neighborhood N(C)N(C) of CC in XX such that the integral of ω~\tilde{\omega} over any disk of N(C)N(C) is one. Then it is a general fact from algebraic topology (extension by zero of a Thom class) that ω~\tilde{\omega} represents the Poincaré dual of CC in any manifold MM containing N(C)N(C), in particular for M=X~M=\tilde{X}. ∎

Remark 7.10.

If one is only interested in recovering the statement of this theorem, then there is also a different way of deriving this from the Kudla-Millson theory. Namely, the lift Λ\Lambda on H2(X)H_{2}(X) (Theorem 7.1) factors through the quotient of H2(X)H_{2}(X) by H2(X)H_{2}(\partial X) since the restriction of θφ2\theta_{\varphi_{2}} is exact (Theorem 7.3). But by Proposition 3.3 we have jH2(X)H2(X)/H2(X)j_{\ast}H_{2}(X)\simeq H_{2}(X)/H_{2}(\partial X), and the Hirzebruch-Zagier result exactly stipulates the modularity of the lift of classes in jH2(X)j_{\ast}H_{2}(X). However, in that way one misses the remarkable extra structure coming from X\partial X as we will explain in the next subsection.

7.5. The lift of special cycles

We now consider the lift of a special cycle CyC_{y}. By Theorem 7.7 and Lemma 3.5 we see

(7.3) Λc(Cy,τ,V)\displaystyle\Lambda^{c}(C_{y},\tau,\mathcal{L}_{V}) =-12πδh0vol(Cy)+n>0(CncCy)qn\displaystyle=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{h0}\operatorname{vol}(C_{y})+\sum_{n>0}(C% ^{c}_{n}\cdot C_{y})q^{n}
=Cyθφ2(τ,V)-[P](Cy)Pθϕ0,1P(τ,WP).\displaystyle=\int_{C_{y}}\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{V})-\sum_{[P]% }\int_{(\partial C_{y})_{P}}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}}).

The two terms on the right, the integrals over CyC_{y} and Cy{\partial C_{y}}, are both non-holomorphic modular forms (see below) whose difference is holomorphic (by Theorem 7.6). So the generating series series of (CncCy)(C^{c}_{n}\cdot C_{y}) is the sum of two non-holomorphic modular forms. We now give geometric interpretations for the two individual non-holomorphic forms.

Following [16] we define the interior intersection number of two special cycles by

(CnCy)X=(CnCy)tr+vol(CnCy),(C_{n}\cdot C_{y})_{X}=(C_{n}\cdot C_{y})^{tr}+\operatorname{vol}(C_{n}\cap C_% {y}),

the sum of the transversal intersections and the volume of the 11-dimensional (complex) intersection of CnC_{n} and CyC_{y} which occur if one of the components of CnC_{n} is equal to CyC_{y}.

Theorem 7.11.

We have

Cyθφ2(τ,V)=-12πδh0vol(Cy)+n=1(CnCy)Xqn+n[P](Cy)Pψ~0,1P(n)(τ).\int_{C_{y}}\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{V})=-\frac{1}{2\pi}\delta_{% h0}\operatorname{vol}(C_{y})\>+\;\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}(C_{n}\cdot C_{y})_{X}q^{n% }\;+\;\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Q}}\sum_{[P]}\int_{(\partial C_{y})_{P}}{\tilde{\psi}_% {0,1}^{P}}(n)(\tau).

So the Fourier coefficients of the holomorphic part of the non-holomorphic modular form Cyθφ2\int_{C_{y}}\theta_{\varphi_{2}} are the interior intersection numbers of the cycles CyC_{y} and CnC_{n}.


This is essentially [9], section 5, where more generally O(p,2)\operatorname{O}(p,2) is considered. There the interpretation of the holomorphic Fourier coefficients as interior intersection number is given. (For more details of an analogous calculation see [14], section 8). A little calculation using the formulas in [9] gives the non-holomorphic contribution. A more conceptual proof would use the relationship between φ2\varphi_{2} and ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} (see Proposition 5.2 and Section 8) and the restriction formula for ψ~1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n) (Theorem 7.4). ∎

By slight abuse of notation we write Lk(Cn,Cy)=[P]Lk((Cn)P,(Cy)P)\operatorname{Lk}(C_{n},C_{y})=\sum_{[P]}\operatorname{Lk}((\partial C_{n})_{P% },(\partial C_{y})_{P}) for the total linking number of Cn\partial C_{n} and Cy\partial C_{y}. Then by Theorem 6.3 we obtain

Theorem 7.12.
[P](Cy)Pθϕ0,1P(τ,WP)=n>0Lk(Cn,Cy)qn+n[P](Cy)Pψ~0,1P(n)(τ).\sum_{[P]}\int_{(\partial C_{y})_{P}}\theta^{P}_{\phi_{0,1}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_% {W_{P}})=\sum_{n>0}\operatorname{Lk}(C_{n},C_{y})q^{n}\;+\;\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Q% }}\sum_{[P]}\int_{(\partial C_{y})_{P}}{\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}^{P}}(n)(\tau).

So the Fourier coefficients of the holomorphic part of (Cy)PθϕP(τ,WP)\int_{(\partial C_{y})_{P}}\theta^{P}_{\phi}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{W_{P}}) are the linking numbers of the cycles Cy\partial C_{y} and Cn\partial C_{n} at the boundary component e(P)e^{\prime}(P).

Remark 7.13.

There is also another “global” proof for Theorem 7.12. The cycle CyC_{y} intersects e(P)e^{\prime}(P) transversally (when pushed inside) and hence also the cap AnA_{n}. From this it is not hard to see that we can split the intersection number CncCyC_{n}^{c}\cdot C_{y} as

CncCy=(CnCy)X-Lk(Cn,Cy).C^{c}_{n}\cdot C_{y}=(C_{n}\cdot C_{y})_{X}-\operatorname{Lk}(C_{n},C_{y}).

Hence Theorem 7.12 also follows from combining (7.3) and Theorem 7.11.

Hirzebruch-Zagier also obtain the modularity of the functions given in Theorems 7.11 and 7.12, but by quite different methods. In particular, they explicitly calculate the intersection number TncTmT^{c}_{n}\cdot T_{m}. They split the intersection number into the interior part (TnTm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X} and a ‘boundary contribution’ (TnTm)(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{\infty} given by

(TnTm)=(TnTm)X~-X-(Tm-Tmc)(Tn-Tnc).(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{\infty}=(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{\tilde{X}-X}-({T}_{m}-T_{m}^{c% })\cdot({T}_{n}-T_{n}^{c}).

Now by Theorem 7.9 and its proof we have

TncTm=CncCm.T^{c}_{n}\cdot T_{m}=C^{c}_{n}\cdot C_{m}.

We have (per definition) (TnTm)X=(CnCm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X}=(C_{n}\cdot C_{m})_{X}, so Theorem 7.11 gives the generating series for (TnTm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X}. Note that Theorem 5.4 in [9] also compares the explicit formulas in [16] for (TnTm)X(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{X} with the ones obtained via Cyθφ2(τ,V)\int_{C_{y}}\theta_{\varphi_{2}}(\tau,\mathcal{L}_{V}). All this implies

(TnTm)=Lk(CnCm).(T_{n}\cdot T_{m})_{\infty}=\operatorname{Lk}(C_{n}\cdot C_{m}).

Independently, we also obtain this from comparing the explicit formulas for the boundary contribution in [16], Section 1.4 with our formulas for the linking numbers, Theorem 4.11 and Example 4.12.

8. A current approach for the special cycles

In this section we prove Theorem 7.7, the crucial Fourier coefficient formula for our lift Λc\Lambda^{c}. As a consequence of our approach we will also obtain Theorem 6.7, the linking number interpretation for the lift at the boundary.

8.1. A differential character for CncC_{n}^{c}

The key step for the entire Kudla-Millson theory is that for n>0n>0 the form φ2(n)\varphi_{2}(n) is a Poincaré dual form for the cycle CnC_{n}, i.e.,

Theorem 8.1 ([22, 23]).

Let η\eta be a closed rapidly decreasing 22-form. Then

Xηφ2(n)=(Cnη)e-2πn.\int_{X}\eta\wedge\varphi_{2}(n)=\left(\int_{C_{n}}\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n}.

To show this they employ at some point a homotopy argument which requires η\eta to be rapidly decaying. Since we require η\eta to be any closed 22-form on the compactification X¯\overline{X}, their approach is not applicable in our case. Instead, we use a differential character argument for φ2\varphi_{2} which implicitly already occurred in [5], Section 7 for general signature (p,q)(p,q). Namely, we have

Theorem 8.2.

([5], Section 7) Let n>0n>0. The singular form ψ~1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n) is a differential character in the sense of Cheeger-Simons for the cycle CnC_{n}. More precisely, ψ~1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n) is a locally integrable 11-form on XX, and for any compactly supported 22-form η\eta we have

Xηφ2(n)=(Cnη)e-2πn-Xdηψ~1(n).\int_{X}\eta\wedge\varphi_{2}(n)=\left(\int_{C_{n}}\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n}-\int% _{X}d\eta\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n).

This is the content of the proofs of Theorem 7.1 and Theorem 7.2 in [5]. There the analogous properties for a singular theta lift associated to ψ\psi is established. However, the proofs boil down to establish the claims for ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1}. The form ψ~\tilde{\psi} there is indeed the form ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} of this paper. ∎

Remark 8.3.

The form ψ~1\tilde{\psi}_{1} is closely related to Kudla’s Green function ξ\xi [18, 19] (more generally for O(p,2)\operatorname{O}(p,2)) which is given by

ξ(x)=(1φ00(rx)drr)e-π(x,x).\xi(x)=\left(\int_{1}^{\infty}\varphi_{0}^{0}(\sqrt{r}x)\frac{dr}{r}\right)e^{% -\pi(x,x)}.

Then Ξ(n)=xnξ(x)\Xi(n)=\sum_{x\in\mathcal{L}_{n}}\xi(x) gives rise to a Green’s function for the divisor CnC_{n} and moreover ddcξ=φ2dd^{c}\xi=\varphi_{2}. Here dc=14πi(-¯)d^{c}=\tfrac{1}{4\pi i}(\partial-\overline{\partial}). This suggests dcξ=ψ~1d^{c}\xi=\tilde{\psi}_{1}, which indeed follows from dcφ0=-ψ1d^{c}\varphi_{0}=-\psi_{1}, see [5], Remark 4.5.

For nn\in\mathbb{Q} we define


and follow the current approach to show that for n>0n>0 the form φ2c(n)\varphi_{2}^{c}(n) is a Poincaré dual form for the cycle CncC_{n}^{c}. Here we follow the notation of subsection 3.3. That is, πϕ0,1P(n)\pi^{\ast}\phi^{P}_{0,1}(n) is the pullback to a product neighborhood VV of X¯\partial\overline{X}, and ff is a smooth function on VV of the geodesic flow coordinate tt which is 11 near t=t=\infty and zero else. Note that φ2c(n)\varphi_{2}^{c}(n) is exactly the nn-th Fourier coefficient of the mapping cone element [θφ,θϕ][\theta_{\varphi},\theta_{\phi}], when realized as a rapidly decreasing form on XX. We also define


We call a differential form η\eta on X¯\overline{X} special if in a neighborhood of each boundary component e(P)e^{\prime}(P) it is the pullback of a form ηP\eta_{P} on e(P)e^{\prime}(P) under the geodesic retraction and if the pullback of the form ηP\eta_{P} to the universal cover e(P)e(P) is NN-left-invariant. The significance of the forms lies in the fact that the complex of special forms also computes the cohomology of X¯\overline{X}. Note that the proof of Theorem 7.2 shows that θφ2\theta_{\varphi_{2}} is ‘almost’ special; it only differs from a special form by a rapidly decreasing form.

Theorem 8.4.

Let n>0n>0. The form ψ~1c(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}^{c}(n) is a differential character for the cycle CncC^{c}_{n}. More precisely, ψ~1c(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}^{c}(n) is a locally integrable 11-form on XX and satisfies the following current equation on special 22 forms on X¯\overline{X}:

d[ψ~1c(n)]+δCne-2πn=[φ2c(n)].d[\tilde{\psi}_{1}^{c}(n)]+\delta_{C_{n}}e^{-2\pi n}=[\varphi_{2}^{c}(n)].

That is, for any special 22-form η\eta on X¯\overline{X} we have

Xηφ2c(n)=(Cncη)e-2πn-Xdηψ~2c(n).\int_{X}\eta\wedge\varphi^{c}_{2}(n)=\left(\int_{C^{c}_{n}}\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n% }-\int_{X}d\eta\wedge\tilde{\psi}^{c}_{2}(n).

This implies Theorem 7.7 for the positive Fourier coefficients. For n0n\leq 0, the form φ2c(n)\varphi^{c}_{2}(n) is exact with primitive ψ~2c(n)\tilde{\psi}^{c}_{2}(n) which by Theorem 7.4 is decaying. So Theorem 8.4 holds also for n0n\leq 0 with Cnc=C_{n}^{c}=\emptyset. Hence for the these coefficients only the term x=0x=0 contributes, which gives the integral of η\eta against the Kähler form.

Remark 8.5.

In view of Remark 8.3 it is very natural question to ask how one can modify Kudla’s Green’s function Ξ(n)\Xi(n) to obtain a Green’s function for the cycle TncT_{n}^{c} in X~\tilde{X}. Extensive discussions with Kühn suggest that (if XX has only one cusp)

Ξ(n)-txW(x,x)=2nfπ(B(x)+B(x))\Xi(n)-t\sum_{\substack{x\in\mathcal{L}_{W}\\ (x,x)=2n}}f\pi^{\ast}(B(x)+B^{\prime}(x))

is such a Green’s function, but we have not checked all details.

8.2. Proof of Theorem 8.4

For simplicity assume that XX has only one cusp and continue the drop the superscript PP. We let ρT\rho_{T} be a family of smooth functions on a standard fundamental domain \mathcal{F} of Γ\Gamma in DD only depending on tt which is 11 for tTt\leq T and 00 for T+1T+1. We then have

Xηφ2c(n)\displaystyle\int_{X}\eta\wedge\varphi^{c}_{2}(n) =limTXρTη(φ2(n)-d(fπϕ0,1(n))).\displaystyle=\lim_{T\to\infty}\int_{X}\rho_{T}\eta\wedge\left(\varphi_{2}(n)-% d(f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0,1}(n))\right).

We apply Theorem 8.2 for the compactly supported form ρTη\rho_{T}\eta and obtain

(8.1) Xηφ2c(n)\displaystyle\int_{X}\eta\wedge\varphi^{c}_{2}(n) =limT[(CnρTη)e-2πn-Xd(ρTη)ψ~1(n).\displaystyle=\lim_{T\to\infty}\Biggl[\left(\int_{C_{n}}\rho_{T}\eta\right)e^{% -2\pi n}-\int_{X}d(\rho_{T}\eta)\wedge\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n)\Biggr.
.-Xd(ρTη(fπϕ0,1(n)))-d(ρTη)fπϕ0,1(n)]\displaystyle\Biggl.\quad-\int_{X}d\left(\rho_{T}\eta\wedge(f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0% ,1}(n))\right)-d(\rho_{T}\eta)\wedge f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0,1}(n)\Biggr]

The first term on the right hand side of (8.1) goes to (Cnη)e-2πn\left(\int_{C_{n}}\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n} as TT\to\infty, while the third vanishes for any TT by Stokes’ theorem. For the two remaining terms of (8.1) we first note d(ρTη)=ρT(t)dtη+ρTdηd(\rho_{T}\eta)=\rho_{T}^{\prime}(t)dt\wedge\eta+\rho_{T}d\eta and ρT(t)=0\rho_{T}^{\prime}(t)=0 outside [T,T+1][T,T+1]. We obtain for these two terms

(8.2) -X(dη)(ψ~1(n)-fπϕ0,1(n))-limTTT+1e(P)ρT(t)dtη(ψ~1(n)-fπϕ0,1(n)).-\int_{X}(d\eta)\wedge\left(\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n)-f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0,1}(n)\right% )\\ -\lim_{T\to\infty}\int_{T}^{T+1}\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\rho_{T}^{\prime}(t)dt% \wedge\eta\wedge\left(\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n)-f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0,1}(n)\right).

It remains to compute the second term in the previous equation. For TT sufficiently large we have f1f\equiv 1. Furthermore by Theorem 7.4 and its proof we have ψ~1(n)=πψ~0,1(n)+O(e-Ct)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n)=\pi^{\ast}\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(n)+O(e^{-Ct}). As ϕ0,1(n)=ψ~0,1(n)+ψ~0,1(n)\phi_{0,1}(n)=\tilde{\psi}_{0,1}(n)+\tilde{\psi}^{\prime}_{0,1}(n), we can replace ψ~1(n)-fπϕ0,1(n)\tilde{\psi}_{1}(n)-f\pi^{\ast}\phi_{0,1}(n) by -πψ~0,1(n)-\pi^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n). Since η\eta is special it does not depend on the tt-variable near the boundary. For the last term in (8.2)

limTTT+1ρT(t)dte(P)ηπψ~0,1(n)=-e(P)ηψ~0,1(n)=-(Anη)e-2πn.\lim_{T\to\infty}\int_{T}^{T+1}\rho_{T}^{\prime}(t)dt\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta% \wedge\pi^{\ast}\tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=-\int_{e^{\prime}(P)}\eta\wedge% \tilde{\psi^{\prime}}_{0,1}(n)=-\left(\int_{A_{n}}\eta\right)e^{-2\pi n}.

Indeed, for η=Ω\eta=\Omega this is Remark 6.9. Otherwise, η\eta is exact with special primitive ω\omega, and it is not hard to see that the proof of Proposition 6.8 carries over to this situation. Since Cnc=Cn(-An)C_{n}^{c}=C_{n}\coprod(-A_{n}) collecting all terms completes the proof of Theorem 8.4.


  • 1 N. Bergeron, J. Millson, and C. Moeglin, Hodge type theorems for arithmetic manifolds associated to orthogonal groups, preprint.
  • 2 A. Borel and L. Ji, Compactifications of symmetric and locally symmetric spaces, Birkhäuser, 2006.
  • 3 A. Borel and J.-P. Serre, Corners and arithmetic groups, Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici 48 (1973), 436-491.
  • 4 J. Bruinier, Hilbert modular forms and their applications, in: The 1-2-3 of Modular Forms, Springer-Verlag (2008).
  • 5 J. Bruinier and J. Funke, On two geometric theta lifts, Duke Math J. 125 (2004), 45-90.
  • 6 J. Cogdell. Arithmetic cycles on Picard modular surfaces and modular forms of Nebentypus, J. Reine u. Angew. Math. 357 (1985), 115-137.
  • 7 D. DeTurck and H. Gluck, Electrodynamics and the Gauss linking integral on the 3-sphere and in hyperbolic 3-space, J. Math. Phys. 49, (2008)
  • 8 H. Flanders, Differential forms with applications to the physical sciences, Mathematics in Science and Engineering 11 (1963), Academic Press.
  • 9 J. Funke, Heegner divisors and nonholomorphic modular forms, Compositio Math. 133 (2002), 289-321.
  • 10 J. Funke, Singular theta liftings for unitary groups and the construction of Green currents for special cycles, in preparation.
  • 11 J. Funke and J. Millson, Cycles in hyperbolic manifolds of non-compact type and Fourier coefficients of Siegel modular forms, Manuscripta Math. 107 (2002), 409-449.
  • 12 J. Funke and J. Millson, Cycles with local coefficients for orthogonal groups and vector-valued Siegel modular forms, American J. Math. 128, 899-948 (2006)
  • 13 J. Funke and J. Millson, Boundary behavior of special cohomology classes arising from the Weil representation, preprint.
  • 14 J. Funke and J. Millson, Spectacle cycles with coefficients and modular forms of half-integral weight, to appear in: Arithmetic Geometry and Automorphic forms, Volume in honor of the 60th birthday of Stephen S. Kudla, Advanced Lectures in Mathematics series. International Press and the Higher Education Press of China (2011).
  • 15 J. Funke and J. Millson, in preparation.
  • 16 F. Hirzebruch and D. Zagier, Intersection numbers of curves on Hilbert modular surfaces and modular forms of Nebentypus, Inv. Math. 36 (1976), 57-113.
  • 17 W. Hoffman and H. He, Picard groups of Siegel modular threefolds and theta lifting, preprint.
  • 18 S. Kudla, Central derivatives of Eisenstein series and height pairings, Ann. of Math. 146 (1997), 545-646.
  • 19 S. Kudla, Integrals of Borcherds forms, Compositio Math. 137 (2003), 293-349.
  • 20 S. Kudla, Special cycles and derivatives of Eisenstein series, in: Heegner points and Rankin LL-series, 243-270, Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., 49, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004.
  • 21 S. Kudla and J. Millson, The theta correspondence and harmonic forms I, Math. Ann. 274 (1986), 353-378.
  • 22 S. Kudla and J. Millson, The Theta Correspondence and Harmonic Forms II, Math. Ann. 277 (1987), 267-314.
  • 23 S. Kudla and J. Millson, Tubes, cohomology with growth conditions and application to the theta correspondence, Canad. J. Math. 40 (1988), 1-37.
  • 24 S. Kudla and J. Millson, Intersection numbers of cycles on locally symmetric spaces and Fourier coefficients of holomorphic modular forms in several complex variables, IHES Pub. 71 (1990), 121-172.
  • 25 J. Milnor, Singularities of Complex Hypersurfaces, Annals of Math. Studies 61, Princeton University Press, 1968.
  • 26 T. Oda, On modular forms associated with indefinite quadratic forms of signature (2,n-2)(2,n-2), Math. Annalen 231 (1977), 97-144.
  • 27 T. Shintani, On the construction of holomorphic cusp forms of half integral weight, Nagoya Math. J. 58 (1975), 83-126.
  • 28 G. van der Geer, Hilbert modular surfaces, Ergebnisse der Math. und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3), vol. 16, Springer, 1988.
  • 29 C. A.  Weibel, An introduction to homological algebra, Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics, vol. 38, Cambridge University Press, 1994.