An alternative proof of the asymptotic formula for the Fourier coefficients of the elliptic modular $j$-function

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.10598
• Title: An alternative proof of the asymptotic formula for the Fourier coefficients of the elliptic modular $j$-function
• Author: Karin Ikeda (Kyushu University)
• Classification: math.NT (Number Theory)
• Publication Date: October 12, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.10598

Abstract

This paper presents a novel proof of the asymptotic formula for the Fourier coefficients of the elliptic modular $j$-function, based on the probabilistic method proposed by Báez-Duarte in 1997. The method employs various representations of modular functions with simple infinite product expressions and applies probabilistic techniques to establish the classical asymptotic formula $c_n \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{\sqrt{2}n^{3/4}}$.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Core Problem: This paper investigates the asymptotic behavior of Fourier coefficients of the elliptic modular $j$-function. The $j$-function is defined as: $j(\tau) = \frac{E_4(\tau)^3}{\eta(\tau)^{24}} = \frac{1}{q} + 744 + 196884q + 21493760q^2 + \cdots$
2. Problem Significance:
   • The $j$-function is a central object in modular form theory with profound connections to the Monster simple group
   • The asymptotic formula for its Fourier coefficients is a classical problem in analytic number theory
   • This formula has important applications in mathematical physics and algebraic geometry
3. Limitations of Existing Methods:
   • Traditional proofs employ the circle method, completed independently by Petersson and Rademacher
   • Subsequent proofs rely on trace formulas of singular moduli with complex techniques
   • Lack of intuitive probabilistic interpretation
4. Research Motivation: Inspired by Báez-Duarte's probabilistic proof for partition functions, the author seeks a more intuitive and unified proof method.

Core Contributions

1. Proposes a novel probabilistic proof method: Extends Báez-Duarte's probabilistic techniques to the analysis of Fourier coefficients of the $j$-function
2. Establishes multiple modular function representations: Provides multiple independent proofs using different expressions of theta functions and Hauptmoduls
3. Proves strong Gaussian condition: Establishes central limit theorems in probability theory for related infinite product functions
4. Unified framework: Provides a systematic method for asymptotic analysis of general eta quotient functions

Detailed Methodology

Problem Formulation

Prove the asymptotic formula for Fourier coefficients of the $j$-function: $c_n \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{\sqrt{2}n^{3/4}} \quad (n \to \infty)$

Core Methodological Architecture

1. Probabilistic Framework

For a power series $F(t) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} f_n t^n$, define a random variable $X_t$: $P[X_t = n] := \frac{f_n t^n}{F(t)}$

Key quantities:

• Mean: $m(t) = t\frac{d}{dt}\log F(t)$
• Variance: $\sigma^2(t) = t\frac{d}{dt}m(t)$
• Characteristic function: $E[e^{i\theta X_t}] = \frac{F(e^{i\theta}t)}{F(t)}$

2. Strong Gaussian Condition

Define the standardized random variable $Z(t) = \frac{X(t)-m(t)}{\sigma(t)}$. The strong Gaussian condition requires: $\lim_{t \to R} \int_{-\pi\sigma(t)}^{\pi\sigma(t)} |E[e^{i\theta Z(t)}] - e^{-\frac{1}{2}\theta^2}|d\theta = 0$

3. Asymptotic Formula Lemma

Lemma 2.2: If $F(t)$ satisfies the strong Gaussian condition, then: $f_n \sim \frac{F(\tau_n)}{\sqrt{2\pi\tilde{\sigma}(\tau_n)}\tau_n^n}$ where $\tau_n$ is the solution to the equation $\tilde{m}(\tau_n) = n$.

Technical Innovations

1. Theta Function Representation Method

Using Kaneko's identity: $j(\tau) = 27(\theta_0(\tau)^8 + \theta_2(\tau)^8 + \theta_3(\tau)^8)(\theta_0(\tau)^{-8} + \theta_2(\tau)^{-8} + \theta_3(\tau)^{-8})$

Decompose the $j$-function into three components:

• $H_1(\tau) = 27\left(\left(\frac{\theta_0(\tau)}{\theta_2(\tau)}\right)^8 + \left(\frac{\theta_3(\tau)}{\theta_2(\tau)}\right)^8\right)$
• $H_2(\tau) = 27\left(\left(\frac{\theta_0(\tau)}{\theta_3(\tau)}\right)^8 + \left(\frac{\theta_3(\tau)}{\theta_0(\tau)}\right)^8\right)$
• $H_3(\tau) = 27\left(\left(\frac{\theta_2(\tau)}{\theta_3(\tau)}\right)^8 + \left(\frac{\theta_2(\tau)}{\theta_0(\tau)}\right)^8\right)$

2. Infinite Product Analysis

For functions $P_{m,a}(t) = \prod_{n=0}^{\infty}(1-t^{mn+a})^{-1}$ and $Q(t) = \prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1+t^{2n-1})$, establish:

Mean and Variance Estimates:

• $m_{P_{m,a}}(t) = \frac{\pi^2}{6m\rho^2} + O(\frac{1}{\rho})$
• $\sigma^2_{P_{m,a}}(t) = \frac{\pi^2}{3m\rho^3} + O(\frac{1}{\rho^2})$
• $m_Q(t) = \frac{\pi^2}{24\rho^2} + O(\frac{1}{\rho})$
• $\sigma^2_Q(t) = \frac{\pi^2}{12\rho^3} + O(\frac{1}{\rho^2})$

where $\rho = -\log t$.

3. Application of Lyapunov Central Limit Theorem

Theorem 2.4: Establish the strong Gaussian condition by verifying the Lyapunov condition: $\lim_{n \to \infty} \sum_{k=1}^{r_n} \frac{1}{s_n^{2+\delta}} E[|X_{n,k}|^{2+\delta}] = 0$

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Verification Methods

This is a pure theoretical research paper, verified through:

1. Multiple representation verification: Using both theta function and Hauptmodul representations
2. Component analysis: Computing contributions of $H_1, H_2, H_3$ separately to verify the source of the main term
3. Numerical consistency: Ensuring different methods yield the same asymptotic formula

Computational Complexity Analysis

• Application of Euler-Maclaurin formula requires $O(\log(1/\lambda))$ precision
• Truncation error of infinite products is $O(e^{-c/\lambda})$
• Overall computational complexity is polynomial level

Main Results

Core Theorem

Theorem 3.2: The Fourier coefficients of the $j$-function satisfy: $c_n \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{\sqrt{2}n^{3/4}} \quad (n \to \infty)$

Component Contribution Analysis

1. Contribution of $H_1$: $h_{1,n}^* \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{\sqrt{2}n^{27/4}}$
2. Contribution of $H_2$: $h_{2,n} \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{2\sqrt{2}n^{3/4}}$
3. Contribution of $H_3$: $h_{3,n} \sim \frac{e^{4\pi\sqrt{n}}}{2\sqrt{2}n^{3/4}}$

Key Finding: $H_2$ and $H_3$ provide the dominant contributions, while the contribution of $H_1$ is negligible in the asymptotic sense.

Hauptmodul Method Verification

The same asymptotic formula is verified through 9 different Hauptmodul representations ($N = 2,3,4,5,7,9,13,25$):

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Petersson-Rademacher (1932-1938): First proof using the circle method
2. Murty-Sampath (2016): Proof based on trace formulas of singular moduli
3. Báez-Duarte (1997): Probabilistic proof for partition functions
4. Present work: Extension of probabilistic methods to modular functions

Technical Comparison

• Circle method: Technically complex, requires deep knowledge of analytic number theory
• Singular moduli method: Relies on algebraic geometry theory
• Probabilistic method: Intuitive, unified, and highly generalizable

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Successfully extends Báez-Duarte's probabilistic method to the elliptic modular $j$-function
2. Provides multiple independent proof paths, enhancing reliability of results
3. Establishes a systematic framework for handling general eta quotient functions

Limitations

1. The method applies only to modular functions with "good" infinite product representations
2. Verification of the strong Gaussian condition remains technically demanding in certain cases
3. For some Hauptmoduls, suitable positive coefficient representations have not yet been found

Future Directions

1. Generalization to other modular functions and L-functions
2. Investigation of more general families of eta quotient functions
3. Exploration of connections with partition functions in physics

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Methodological Innovation: First systematic application of probabilistic methods to modular function coefficient analysis
2. Proof Completeness: Provides multiple independent verification paths
3. Technical Depth: Skillfully combines modular form theory, probability theory, and analytic number theory
4. Clear Presentation: Well-structured with sufficient technical details

Weaknesses

1. Limited Scope: Method restricted to specific types of modular functions
2. Computational Complexity: Certain estimates still require refined asymptotic analysis
3. Generalization Level: Lacks methods for functions not satisfying the strong Gaussian condition

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Provides new tools for modular function coefficient analysis
2. Methodological Value: Successful application of probabilistic methods in number theory
3. Reproducibility: Clear methodology, easily verifiable and generalizable

Applicable Scenarios

• Modular functions with good infinite product representations
• Asymptotic analysis of eta quotient functions
• Research on related L-functions and generating functions

References

This paper cites 20 important references, covering:

• Classical literature on modular form theory (Bruinier, et al.)
• Probabilistic foundations (Billingsley)
• Related number theory work (Murty, Kaneko, et al.)
• Hauptmodul theory (Conway-Norton, Fricke)

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical number theory paper that successfully introduces probabilistic methods into modular function theory, providing new perspectives and tools for classical problems. The method is innovative and generalizable, with significant implications for the development of related fields.