The Chevalley-Weil Formula for Orbifold Curves

ee, e.g., [FurutaSteer, Theorem 1.5] for the case of line bundles. The general case follows from the splitting principle.

y Serre duality (?) there is a canonical isomorphism H^1\big(X,\Omega^1_X\big) \simeq H^0(X,\mathcal{O}_X)^*, commuting with the linear G-action on both sides. Since H^0(X,\mathcal{O}_X)\simeq \mathbb{C} consists of constant functions, the action of G on this vector space is trivial. Therefore its contragradient action on H^1\big(X,\Omega^1_X\big) is trivial as well.

he proof given in [Naeff] for algebraic curves goes through unchanged, since the question is localized at the ramification locus (and disjoint from the orbifold locus).

he vector bundle f_*\mathcal{O}_{X} is a finite étale sheaf of rank d away from the ramification points, and the same holds for f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i}. At a point P\in Y, P\notin \{Q_1, \ldots, Q_r\}, the fiber of f_*\mathcal{O}_{X} is the right regular G-representation. As is well-known, the representation \rho_i occurs inside the regular representation \dim \rho_i times. Therefore the fiber at P of f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i} has dimension (\dim \rho_i)^2 and that is also the rank of f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i} as a vector bundle over Y. Since \Omega^1_Y has rank one, the rank of \mathcal{V} is also of rank (\dim \rho_i)^2.

he vector bundle f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i} is a direct sum of \dim \rho_i-copies of the parabolic bundle canonically associated to the unitary representation \rho_i, viewed as a representation of \pi_1(Y\backslash \{Q_1,\ldots, Q_r\};b) factoring through the finite quotient G [Mehta-Seshadri]. The parabolic structure is supported at the ramification points Q_1, \ldots, Q_r and for each j it is determined by the local monodromy \gamma_{R_j}, as follows. Since \rho_i(R_j) is a matrix of order e_j, its eigenvalues are of the form e^{2\pi i k_w/e_j}, k_w\in \{0,\ldots, e_j-1\}. The parabolic structure at Q_j is given by the decreasing filtration of eigenspaces of \gamma_{R_j}, the weights are the rational numbers k_w/e_j, 0\leq k_w/e_j <1, and each weight k_w has multiplicity \dim \rho_i N_{k_w}(\rho_i;\gamma_{R_j}). The formula for the degree of f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i} then just follows from the well-known formula for the degree of a parabolic bundle [Mehta-Seshadri, Corollary 1.10].

ote that the action of \gamma_{P_j} on the fiber of \mathcal{V}=\Omega^1_Y\otimes f_*\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\rho_i} over the orbifold point P_j is given by e^{-2\pi i/p_j}\rho_i. The identity then follows from Definition 2.1.

sing the notation of Theorem 3.1, note first that \epsilon = 0 always since we are assuming \rho \neq 1. We also have that g_{X(1)}=0, n=2, p_1 = 2, p_2 = 3, which gives a contribution of \dim \rho/6 in Theorem 4.1. As stated above, there is only one ramification point \infty \in X(1) of index e and with local monodromy given by the image of T in G, which gives the second term. As for the remaining terms, since the order of \rho(S) and \rho(R^{-1}) is low it is more convenient computationally to express the eigenvalue multiplicities in terms of traces. In particular, note that

and similarly

yielding the simplified formula.

or any representation \rho of G, let P(\rho;T) be the characteristic polynomial of \rho(T). Since \rho(T)^p = I_{\dim \rho}, we know that the roots of P(\rho;T) are necessarily p-th roots of unity. The polynomial itself can be computed from Table ? by first computing the traces of \rho(T^k), k=0,\ldots, p-1 and then compute from these traces the coefficients of P(\rho;T) using Newton’s identities. Now the subgroup \big\{T^k\big\} breaks up into two conjugacy classes:

therefore the coefficients of P(\rho;T) are polynomials in the last two columns of Table ?. For \rho = \lambda, \mu_s and \theta_t, it follows that P(\rho;T) has coefficients in \mathbb{Q}, and therefore

where \Phi_p is the p-th cyclotomic polynomial, which is irreducible over \mathbb{Q}. Suppose first \rho=\lambda. If \gcd(P(\lambda;T),x^p-1) = (x-1) then necessarily \lambda(T)= I_p, which is impossible since Table ? gives \operatorname{Tr}\lambda(T) = 0 \neq p. If \gcd(P(\lambda;T),x^p-1) = \Phi_p, then P(\lambda;T) factors over \mathbb{Q} as \Phi_p \cdot(x - \zeta_p), for some p-th root of unity \zeta_p. But since p\geq 5, the only such polynomial (x - \zeta_p) defined over \mathbb{Q} is (x-1), therefore P(\lambda;T) = x^p-1 necessarily, which gives the formula

For \rho=\mu_s, again we cannot have \gcd(P(\mu_s;T),x^p-1) = (x-1) since none of the \mu_s(T) is the identity, the trace being 1\neq 0. If \gcd(P(\mu_s;T),x^p-1) = \Phi_p then P(\mu_s;T) factors as \Phi_p\cdot q(x), for some quadratic polynomial q(x). The only \mathbb{Q}-rational quadratic polynomials having only p-th roots as their solutions are (x-1)^2 and \Phi_3. Since p\geq 5, the latter cannot occur and P(\mu_s;T) = \Phi_p\cdot(x-1)^2. A similar reasoning shows that P(\theta_t;T) = \Phi_p, so the first row of Proposition 5.1 is proved. It remains to compute P(\rho;T) for \rho=\chi_1,\chi_2. Note that for these two representations the last two columns of Table ? have coefficients in \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p}) and therefore P(\rho;T) is \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p})-rational. Now the p-th cyclotomic polynomial factors over \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p}) as

where \Phi^{(r)}_p (resp. \Phi^{(n)}_p) is the irreducible monic polynomial of degree (p-1)/2 over \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p}) whose roots are the p-th roots of unity of the form e^{2\pi i r/p} (resp. e^{2\pi i n/p}), with r (resp. n) a quadratic residue mod p (resp. quadratic non-residue mod p). Let now \rho=\chi_1. Then \gcd(P(\chi_1;T), x^p-1) is a non-constant \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{p})-rational polynomial and it cannot be (x-1) for otherwise \chi(T) would be the identity, which is impossible since \operatorname{Tr}(\chi_1(T)) \neq p. Since \deg P(\chi_1;T) = (p+1)/2, the only other possibilities are that \gcd(P(\chi_1;T), x^p-1) = \Phi^{(r)}_p or \Phi^{(n)}_p, so that P(\chi_1;T) = (x-1)\Phi^{(r)}_p or (x-1)\Phi^{(n)}_p. To determine which one it is, note that the sum of the roots of (x-1)\Phi^{(r)}_p can be computed by a Gauss sum and it is equal to 1/2(-1-\sqrt{p}). This must coincide with the negative of \operatorname{Tr}(\chi_1(T)), so by Table ? we see that this is indeed the correct factorization. Similarly we may deduce that P(\chi_2;T) = (x-1)\Phi^{(n)}_p, which concludes the proof.

he formulas follow from a straightforward insertion of the data of Table ? into (?). Note that for the multiplicities of \chi_1 and \chi_2 we have used the formulas

which are valid for p\equiv 1\, (4).

nly the formulas for d(\gamma_1), d(\gamma_2) require justification. Note that since p\equiv 3\,(4)

and clearly \sum\limits_{\substack{k=1\\ \left(\frac{k}{p}\right)_L = -1}}^{p-1} \frac{k}{p} + \sum\limits_{\substack{k=1\\ \left(\frac{k}{p}\right)_L = 1}}^{p-1} \frac{k}{p} = (p-1)/2. Using the functional equation for the L-function and the analytic class number formula, we get

which gives the formulas for d(\gamma_1), d(\gamma_2).

y definition, \Phi(N) = \varphi^{\rm{ab},-1}(N\mathbb{Z}\times N\mathbb{Z}). For any \gamma\in \mathrm{PSL}_2(\mathbb{Z}), the conjugate subgroup g^{-1} \Phi(N)g is the kernel of a surjective homomorphism \Gamma(2)\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}. This map must factor through a map \Gamma(2)^{\rm{ab}} = \mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}, by the universal property of abelianizations. Any such map must have kernel equal to N\mathbb{Z} \times N\mathbb{Z}, therefore g^{-1} \Phi(N)g = \varphi^{\rm{ab},-1}(N\mathbb{Z}\times N\mathbb{Z}) = \Phi(N).