Conjecture 028

Independence of Root Numbers at Common Bianchi Level

Conjecture
RetainedLMFDB tested & reviewed
Field
Modular and Automorphic Forms
Domain
Bianchi modular forms; common level; root numbers; base change
Review
Unresolved
  • Bianchi modular forms
  • common level
  • root numbers
  • base change
  • independence
  • covariance
Added Updated

Photograph: Nick Fewings / Unsplash

Open paper PDF

Summary

Fix an imaginary quadratic field K. We pair genuine rational non-CM Bianchi newforms with exact rational-source base-change newforms having the same level ideal, and weight all ordered pairs equally. We conjecture that the two global root numbers become asymptotically independent. The statement admits an exact reformulation as the vanishing of a level-weighted covariance.

Abstract

Fix an imaginary quadratic field KK. We pair genuine rational non-CM Bianchi newforms with exact rational-source base-change newforms having the same level ideal, and weight all ordered pairs equally. We conjecture that the two global root numbers become asymptotically independent. The statement admits an exact reformulation as the vanishing of a level-weighted covariance.

The common-level pair family

Fix an imaginary quadratic field KK. Let GK(X)\mathcal G_K(X) denote the genuine, rational, non-CM Bianchi newform orbits of parallel weight two and trivial central character with level norm at most XX. Let BK(X)\mathcal B_K(X) denote the exact base changes of rational classical weight-two newforms, again counted once as Bianchi orbits. Define

PK(X)={(F,G)GK(X)×BK(X):NF=NG}.\mathcal P_K(X)=\left\{(F,G)\in\mathcal G_K(X)\times\mathcal B_K(X): \mathfrak N_F=\mathfrak N_G\right\}.

Every ordered pair is assigned equal weight. For ε,δ{±1}\varepsilon,\delta\in\{\pm1\}, put

uε(X)=PrPK(X)(w(F)=ε),vδ(X)=PrPK(X)(w(G)=δ),bε,δ(X)=PrPK(X)(w(F)=ε, w(G)=δ).\begin{aligned} u_\varepsilon(X)&=\Pr_{\mathcal P_K(X)}\bigl(w(F)=\varepsilon\bigr),\\ v_\delta(X)&=\Pr_{\mathcal P_K(X)}\bigl(w(G)=\delta\bigr),\\ b_{\varepsilon,\delta}(X)&= \Pr_{\mathcal P_K(X)}\bigl(w(F)=\varepsilon,\ w(G)=\delta\bigr). \end{aligned}

Conjecture 1. Assume that #PK(X)\#\mathcal P_K(X)\to\infty and that every marginal sign probability has positive lower limit. Then, for every ε,δ{±1}\varepsilon,\delta\in\{\pm1\},

limXbε,δ(X)uε(X)vδ(X)=1.\lim_{X\to\infty} \frac{b_{\varepsilon,\delta}(X)} {u_\varepsilon(X)v_\delta(X)}=1.

The exact common-level condition creates local arithmetic dependence. The conjecture asserts that, after this conditioning and after using the pair-weighted marginals, no residual correlation remains between the genuine and base-change origins.

Numerical evidence

For the five deepest fields, the positive-positive independence ratio is:

DKD_Knumber of ordered pairsfull rangenorm >104>10^4
3-31,8481{,}8480.90370.90370.90000.9000
4-41,0121{,}0120.95790.95790.95060.9506
7-71,1301{,}1301.00041.00041.00641.0064
8-81,2041{,}2040.98420.98420.98850.9885
11-111,3881{,}3881.00611.00611.02261.0226

Values of b+,+/(u+v+)b_{+,+}/(u_+v_+) in the current data.

Four fields are already close to independence, while DK=3D_K=-3 exhibits a persistent finite-range negative correlation.

An exact covariance reformulation

For an exact level ideal n\mathfrak n, let Aε(n)A_\varepsilon(\mathfrak n) count genuine rational non-CM forms of sign ε\varepsilon, and let Bδ(n)B_\delta(\mathfrak n) count exact rational-source base-change orbits of sign δ\delta. Write

A=A++A,ΔA=A+A,B=B++B,ΔB=B+B.\begin{aligned} A&=A_++A_-, & \Delta A&=A_+-A_-,\\ B&=B_++B_-, & \Delta B&=B_+-B_-. \end{aligned}

Set

TX=NnXA(n)B(n)T_X=\sum_{\mathrm N\mathfrak n\le X}A(\mathfrak n)B(\mathfrak n)

and

μF=1TXNnXΔA(n)B(n),μG=1TXNnXA(n)ΔB(n),μFG=1TXNnXΔA(n)ΔB(n).\begin{aligned} \mu_F&=\frac1{T_X}\sum_{\mathrm N\mathfrak n\le X}\Delta A(\mathfrak n)B(\mathfrak n),\\ \mu_G&=\frac1{T_X}\sum_{\mathrm N\mathfrak n\le X}A(\mathfrak n)\Delta B(\mathfrak n),\\ \mu_{FG}&=\frac1{T_X}\sum_{\mathrm N\mathfrak n\le X}\Delta A(\mathfrak n)\Delta B(\mathfrak n). \end{aligned}

A direct calculation gives, for ε,δ{±1}\varepsilon,\delta\in\{\pm1\},

bε,δ(X)uε(X)vδ(X)=εδ4(μFGμFμG).b_{\varepsilon,\delta}(X)-u_\varepsilon(X)v_\delta(X) =\frac{\varepsilon\delta}{4} \bigl(\mu_{FG}-\mu_F\mu_G\bigr).

Since the marginal probabilities have positive lower limits, Conjecture 1 is equivalent to

μFGμFμG0.\mu_{FG}-\mu_F\mu_G\longrightarrow0.

Equivalently, with

qX(n)=A(n)B(n)TX,α(n)=ΔA(n)A(n),β(n)=ΔB(n)B(n),q_X(\mathfrak n)=\frac{A(\mathfrak n)B(\mathfrak n)}{T_X}, \qquad \alpha(\mathfrak n)=\frac{\Delta A(\mathfrak n)}{A(\mathfrak n)}, \qquad \beta(\mathfrak n)=\frac{\Delta B(\mathfrak n)}{B(\mathfrak n)},

the conjecture is precisely

CovqX(α,β)0.\operatorname{Cov}_{q_X}(\alpha,\beta)\longrightarrow0.

Arithmetic obstruction and open problem

For a rational weight-two newform gg of conductor NN with (N,DK)=1(N,D_K)=1, Artin formalism gives

NBCK/Q(g)=NOK,w(BCK/Q(g))=χK(N).\mathfrak N_{\operatorname{BC}_{K/\mathbf Q}(g)}=N\mathcal O_K, \qquad w(\operatorname{BC}_{K/\mathbf Q}(g))=-\chi_K(N).

Thus the base-change sign is a deterministic quadratic character of the common level on the clean source-conductor stratum. Proving independence therefore requires decorrelation of the levelwise genuine-form sign bias from this fixed character. Primes dividing DKD_K introduce additional conductor-drop and epsilon-factor strata.

The growth and marginal assumptions alone do not imply the covariance estimate. An abstract level array can have balanced marginals but perfect same-sign correlation. The missing input is an arithmetic, product-multiplicity-weighted twisted first-moment estimate for rational genuine Bianchi orbits at the exact ideals supporting rational-source base change. Available trace formulas count full newspaces, usually with vector-space or spectral multiplicity, and do not isolate the rational degree-one slice.

There is also a formulation issue: in the standard literature, “genuine” excludes twists of base change, whereas the database condition “not base change and not CM” is broader. These two conventions define different pair families and should be distinguished explicitly in any final version of the conjecture.

References

Paper edition

Read or download the typeset paper

The PDF contains the same complete journal-style article presented above.

Open paper PDF