1. Introduction
The study of moments of -functions is of much interest to researchers in number theory due to its fruitful applications.
One example is that Bump-Friedberg-Hoffstein [5] and Murty-Murty [14] independently proved for infinitely many fundamental discriminants with , where is a modular elliptic curve with root number over and denotes the Kronecker symbol. The method of their works is to investigate moments of the derivative of quadratic twists of modular -functions. Their celebrated results successfully verify the assumption in Kolyvagin’s
theorem [11] on the Birch-Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture, where it was proven that if the Hasse-Weil -function does not vanish at the central point , then the group of rational points of is finite, provided that there exists a quadratic character with such that has a simple zero at the central point and such that for every that divides the conductor of .
In particular, Murty-Murty [14] proved an asymptotic formula for the first moment of the derivative of quadratic twists of modular -functions with an error term , where is an explicit positive real number. It was later improved by Iwaniec [9] to a power savings for a smoothed version. In [4] Bump-Friedberg-Hoffstein
claimed the error term without proof.
Note that in [9, 14] they considered quadratic twists of elliptic curve -functions, but it is no doubt that the methods there will extend to all modular newforms. The goal of this paper is to obtain an error term of the size for a smoothed version. The improvement is mainly due to a recursive method developed by Heath-Brown [8] and Young [21, 22]. The argument of this paper also allows us to obtain an error term of the same size for the first moment of quadratic twists of modular -functions, which improves the error term of Stefanicki [20, Theorem 3] and Luo-Ramakrishnan [13, Proposition 3.6] and of Radziwiłł-Soundararajan [16, Proposition 2]. Also, with slightly more effort, one can obtain similar results for the first moment of higher derivatives of twisted modular -functions.
To precisely state our result, we shall introduce some notation. Let be a modular form of weight for the full modular group . (Our argument may extend to congruent subgroups.) We assume is an eigenfunction of all Hecke operators. The Fourier expansion of at infinity is
|
|
|
where and for . Here , and is the number of divisors of . The twisted modular -function is defined by
|
|
|
|
for ,
and it extends to the entire complex plane. The completed -function is defined by
|
|
|
It satisfies the functional equation
(1.1) |
|
|
|
where if is positive, and if is negative. In this paper, we consider the case , so . The case can be done similarly.
We prove the following assertions.
Theorem 1.1.
Let and . Let be a smooth, compactly supported function. We have
|
|
|
Here denotes the summation over square-free integers, is defined in (1.4) and (1.8), and is the Mellin transform of defined by
|
|
|
Theorem 1.2.
Let . Let be a smooth, compactly supported function. We have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the above, the symmetric square -function is defined by
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where , and . We see that the main term in Theorem 1.2 coincides with [15, Theorem 2.3]. Note that in [15, Theorem 2.3] the form of the moment and the definition of is slightly different from ours.
It is worth mentioning that recently Bui–Florea–Keating–Roditty-Gershon [3] obtained the error term of the same size for the function field analogue. The second moment, expected to be much more difficult, was computed asymptotically by Soundararajan and Young [19] under the generalized Riemann hypothesis. Their method was also used by Petrow [15] for studying moments of derivatives of twisted modular -functions. The computation of asymptotic formulas for higher moments is believed beyond current techniques, whereas we do have beautiful conjectures due to Keating-Snaith [10] and Conrey-Farmer-Keating-Rubinstein-Snaith [6].
The moments of quadratic twists of modular -functions are comparable to the moments of quadratic Dirichlet -functions. An iterative method, pioneered by Heath-Brown [8] to study mean values of real characters, was further developed by Young [21] to obtain an error term in an asymptotic formula for the first moment of quadratic Dirichlet -functions. The error term was also essentially implicit in Goldfeld-Hoffstein’s work [7]. In addition, by using the recursive method, the third moment of quadratic Dirichlet -functions was improved to by Young [22], and recently the second moment was improved to by Sono [17]. The moment in Theorem 1.1 is analogous to the second moment of quadratic Dirichlet -functions, so it should not be a coincidence that Sono’s work [17] and Theorem 1.1 have the same error term . The conjectured error term for the second moment of quadratic Dirichlet -functions is (see Alderson-Rubinstein [2]), so it may be hard to improve Theorems 1.1 and 1.2. On a more fundamental level, it is because we do not know how to obtain an error term better than unconditionally in the problem of counting square-free integers with a smooth weight.
The proof for Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 is similar to [17, 21, 22]. To adapt to the recursive method, we consider the shifted first moment twisted by a quadratic character as follows:
(1.2) |
|
|
|
where is a positive, odd integer. Write , where is square-free. We may make the following conjecture.
Conjecture 1.3.
Let . Let be a smooth, compactly supported function.
Assume and . Then for any , we have
(1.3) |
|
|
|
Here the big is depending on and . The symbol is defined in (3.1). For ,
(1.4) |
|
|
|
where for ,
(1.5) |
|
|
|
for ,
(1.6) |
|
|
|
and for ,
(1.7) |
|
|
|
The function is analytic and absolutely convergent in the region .
The main term in (1.3) can be conjectured by heuristically following this paper’s argument or using the recipe method in [6].
To obtain Theorems 1.1 and 1.2, it suffices to prove the following theorem.
Theorem 1.4.
If Conjecture 1.3 is true for some , then it is true for replacing .
Proof of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
We see Conjecture 1.3 is true for by Lemma 2.5 in the next section. By Theorem 1.4 we can reduce it to , which tends to . Set and write
(1.8) |
|
|
|
Then Theorem 1.1 follows by letting in (1.3). We can differentiate both sides of (1.3) in terms of . Note that the error term in (1.3) is holomorphic on the disc centred at with radius . Hence the size of the derivative of the error term is still by Cauchy’s integral formula. This gives Theorem 1.2 by letting . Note that we can compute asymptotic formulas for the first moment of higher derivatives of twisted modular -functions in a similar way.
∎
The rest of the paper will focus on proving Theorem 1.4. The idea is as follows. We first apply the approximate functional equation in the twisted -function in (1.2). Then the Möbius inversion is used to remove the square-free condition where the new parameter is introduced. We split the summation over into two pieces. For large , the Poisson summation formula is employed to separate the summation into diagonal terms and non-diagonal terms (see their definitions below (3.3)). On the other hand, for small , we convert the summation back to that with the square-free condition, where we will use the induction hypothesis (1.3). We obtain partial main terms and error terms there. These partial main terms can be perfectly combined with the diagonal terms after some simplification, finally leading to the main term in (1.3). We remark that there is perfect cancellation between various subsidiary terms in the moments of quadratic Dirichlet -functions (see [21, 22, 17]). Note that it is hard to estimate these terms individually with an error better than . In our paper, we do not find this cancellation. Fortunately, the subsidiary terms in this paper can be bounded by , which is small enough for our purpose.
3. Setup of the problem
By (1.2) and Lemma 2.1, we get
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The square-free condition in can be removed by using Möbius inversion. This gives
(3.2) |
|
|
|
where and denote the sums over and , respectively. Here is a parameter chosen later.
We use the Poisson summation formula to split . Using Lemma 2.3 on the summation over in , we derive
(3.3) |
|
|
|
Let denote the term above, and let denote the remaining terms. We call diagonal terms and off-diagonal terms.
On the other hand, we convert in (3.2) back to the summation over square-free integers, and then appeal to the induction hypothesis (1.3). To see this, recall that
|
|
|
Write , where is square-free and is positive. Group terms according to . It follows that
(3.4) |
|
|
|
where
.
Here is given by the Euler product of with omitting all
prime factors of . In the first equation above, the condition is due to when . We use the following lemma to change back to the form of . It is similar to [12, Lemma 9] of Kowalski and Michel.
Lemma 3.2.
Let be a fundamental discriminant. Then
(3.5) |
|
|
|
Proof.
Note that the summand on the right-hand side of (3.5) is jointly multiplicative. Thus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as desired.
∎
It follows from (3.4) and Lemma 3.2 that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can truncate the above integral for with an error by the rapid decay of as . For , we are allowed to employ the inductive hypothesis (1.3). Hence we have
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.8) |
|
|
|
|
Note that in (3.6) and (3.7) we have extended the range of integrals from to the vertical line with an error .
Now we have separated into several parts. In summary, we have obtained
(3.9) |
|
|
|
and
(3.10) |
|
|
|
We can also split similarly using Remark 3.1. We will evaluate , , respectively, in Sections 4 and 5.
The analysis for , and will be done in Section 6. We complete the proof of Theorem 1.4 in Section 7.
5. Upper bound for
We shall prove an upper bound for in this section.
Recall in (3.3) that
(5.1) |
|
|
|
Lemma 5.1.
Let be a smooth function on . Suppose decays rapidly as , and converges as for every .
Then we have
(5.2) |
|
|
|
In addition, the equation (5.2) is also valid when is replaced by .
By Lemma 5.1, the integral in (5.1) is
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move the contour of the above integral to , and change the variable . This implies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Together with (5.1), it follows that
(5.3) |
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
Lemma 5.2.
Write , where is a fundamental discriminant (possibly ) and is positive. Then
for , we have
(5.4) |
|
|
|
Here
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moreover, is analytic in the region and is uniformly bounded by
in the region .
Proof.
The proof is similar to [18, Lemma 5.3]. Note that is multiplicative. Hence
|
|
|
Then the identity (5.4) follows directly from a comparison of both sides.
When , by the definition of and Lemma 2.4, we know
(5.5) |
|
|
|
Hence is analytic in the region .
It remains to prove the upper bound of . For
, by (5.5) and the fact , we get
(5.6) |
|
|
|
For , we have
(5.7) |
|
|
|
For , we let . We can assume since otherwise (by Lemma 2.4). We claim . In fact, the trivial bound gives , which proves the case . The remaining cases include: even and , or odd and , or odd and . For even and , by Lemma 2.4, we know . The other two cases can be done similarly.
This combined with (5.6) and (5.7) gives the upper bound for .
∎
By (5.3) and Lemma 5.2, we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move the lines of the integral to , without encountering any poles. Together with Lemma 2.5 and Lemma 5.2, it follows that
Lemma 5.3.
We have
|
|
|
6. Evaluation of
In this section we shall simplify , and derive upper bounds for by proving the follow lemma.
Lemma 6.1.
We have
|
|
|
|
(6.1) |
|
|
|
|
(6.2) |
|
|
|
|
(6.3) |
|
|
|
|
We give a proof for the above lemma in the rest of the section. Recall in (3.6). By interchanging summations and integrals, we know
(6.4) |
|
|
|
Lemma 6.2.
For ,
(6.5) |
|
|
|
Proof.
The left-hand side of (6.5) is
(6.6) |
|
|
|
Note
(6.7) |
|
|
|
We also see that
(6.8) |
|
|
|
Inserting (6.7) and (6.8) into (6.6), the expression (6.6) now is
(6.9) |
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clearly is joint multiplicative. Then
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It follows that
(6.10) |
|
|
|
The last identity above is obtained by grouping terms involving .
Note that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus, (6.10) can be simplified to
(6.11) |
|
|
|
Substituting (6.11) in (6.9) completes the proof of Lemma 6.2.
∎
We then can complete the proof for (6.1) by using (6.4) and Lemma 6.2.
Next recall in (3.7), which is of the form
|
|
|
We extend the sum over to that over all positive integers. Then
(6.12) |
|
|
|
We know when , and is zero otherwise. Thus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move the line of the above integral from to . We encounter no poles due to Lemma 2.6 and Remark 2.2. It follows that
(6.13) |
|
|
|
For the second term of (6.12), we move the contour of the integral in to without encountering any poles. We have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treat as in (6.7). The above is
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move the contour of the integral above to without encountering any poles by Lemma 2.6 and Remark 2.2. In particular, the pole of is canceled by the factor in . By the fact
|
|
|
we obtain
(6.14) |
|
|
|
Combining (6.12), (6.13) and (6.14) gives (6.2).
Finally, recall in (3.8). Note . Then
|
|
|
which gives (6.3).
7. Proof of Theorem 1.4
By Lemmas 4.2 and 6.1,
(7.1) |
|
|
|
where is defined in (4.2). It can be deduced that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The second last equation is due to the multiplicity of the function .
This combined with (7.1) gives
(7.2) |
|
|
|
Move the integration to the line with encountering one simple pole at by Lemma 2.6 and Remark 2.2. This gives
(7.3) |
|
|
|
By Remark 3.1, we know
(7.4) |
|
|
|
Similarly we can derive same upper bounds for , and as those for , and in Lemmas 5.3 and 6.1. Therefore it follows from (3.9), (3.10), (7.3), (7.4), and Lemmas 5.3 and 6.1 that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taking completes the proof of Theorem 1.4.
Acknowledgements
This paper is part of my Ph.D. thesis at the University of Lethbridge. I would like to thank my supervisors Habiba Kadiri and Nathan Ng for their constant encouragement and many discussions on this article. I am grateful to Amir Akbary, Andrew Fiori and Caroline Turnage-Butterbaugh for helpful suggestions, and to the referee for their valuable comments. This work was supported by the NSERC Discovery grants RGPIN-2020-06731 of Habiba Kadiri and RGPIN-2020-06032 of Nathan Ng.