Table of Contents
Fetching ...

On the Artin formalism for triple product $p$-adic $L$-functions

Kâzım Büyükboduk, Ryotaro Sakamoto

TL;DR

The paper addresses irregular factorization phenomena for triple product $p$-adic $L$-functions, formulating a $p$-adic Artin formalism that predicts a decomposition into products of auxiliary $p$-adic $L$-functions and Beilinson–Kato data even when interpolation ranges vanish. The authors develop a comprehensive framework based on Hida families, Greenberg Selmer complexes, and Perrin-Riou logarithms, introducing modules of leading terms as algebraic avatars of $p$-adic $L$-functions and proving an algebraic factorization theorem (Theorem 8.4.4) that ties ${\delta}(T_2^{\dagger},\Delta_{\mathbf g})$ to ${\delta}(M_2^{\dagger},\mathrm{tr}^{*}\Delta_{\mathbf g})$ and ${\rm Log}_{\omega_{\mathbf f}}({\rm BK}_{\mathbf f}^{\dagger})$. The work draws a bridge between diagonal (Gross–Kudla) cycles and Heegner cycles, guided by ETNC-like philosophy, and provides a strategic plan to prove the conjectural factorization via a comparison of conjectural Gross–Kudla and Gross–Zagier–Zhang formulae. It also clarifies the algebraic counterpart through determinants and leading-term modules, with a companion paper offering further evidence in the CM-analytic regime. Overall, the article lays a rigorous foundation for an irregular factorization picture of triple product $p$-adic $L$-functions and their algebraic avatars, with explicit structural and computational components.

Abstract

Our main objective in the present article is to study the factorization problem for triple-product $p$-adic $L$-functions, particularly in the scenarios when the defining properties of the $p$-adic $L$-functions involved have no bearing on this problem, although Artin formalism would suggest such a factorization. Our analysis, which is guided by the ETNC philosophy, recasts this problem as a comparison of diagonal cycles, Beilinson--Kato elements, and Heegner cycles.

On the Artin formalism for triple product $p$-adic $L$-functions

TL;DR

The paper addresses irregular factorization phenomena for triple product -adic -functions, formulating a -adic Artin formalism that predicts a decomposition into products of auxiliary -adic -functions and Beilinson–Kato data even when interpolation ranges vanish. The authors develop a comprehensive framework based on Hida families, Greenberg Selmer complexes, and Perrin-Riou logarithms, introducing modules of leading terms as algebraic avatars of -adic -functions and proving an algebraic factorization theorem (Theorem 8.4.4) that ties to and . The work draws a bridge between diagonal (Gross–Kudla) cycles and Heegner cycles, guided by ETNC-like philosophy, and provides a strategic plan to prove the conjectural factorization via a comparison of conjectural Gross–Kudla and Gross–Zagier–Zhang formulae. It also clarifies the algebraic counterpart through determinants and leading-term modules, with a companion paper offering further evidence in the CM-analytic regime. Overall, the article lays a rigorous foundation for an irregular factorization picture of triple product -adic -functions and their algebraic avatars, with explicit structural and computational components.

Abstract

Our main objective in the present article is to study the factorization problem for triple-product -adic -functions, particularly in the scenarios when the defining properties of the -adic -functions involved have no bearing on this problem, although Artin formalism would suggest such a factorization. Our analysis, which is guided by the ETNC philosophy, recasts this problem as a comparison of diagonal cycles, Beilinson--Kato elements, and Heegner cycles.
Paper Structure (41 sections, 44 theorems, 262 equations)

This paper contains 41 sections, 44 theorems, 262 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 2.2

Suppose that the module of algebraic $p$-adic $L$-functions $\delta(T_2^\dagger,\Delta_\mathbf{g})$ is non-vanishing. Under the hypotheses recorded in §subsubsec_hypo_section_6, we have

Theorems & Definitions (98)

  • Conjecture 2.1
  • Theorem 2.2: Theorem \ref{['thm_main_8_4_4_factorization']} below
  • Theorem 3.1: Hsieh
  • Theorem 3.2: Hsieh
  • Conjecture 3.3
  • Example 4.1
  • Remark 4.2
  • Definition 4.3
  • Remark 4.4
  • Lemma 4.5
  • ...and 88 more