Some questions about representations of p-adic groups

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.06438
• Title: Some questions about representations of p-adic groups
• Author: Dipendra Prasad (Indian Institute of Technology Bombay)
• Classification: math.RT (Representation Theory)
• Publication Date: November 11, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.06438
• Paper Type: Problem collection and research directions survey

Abstract

This paper discusses several unresolved problems in the representation theory of p-adic groups. These problems originated from a representation theory workshop held at IISER Bhopal in July 2025. At the request of workshop participants, the author has formulated a collection of accessible yet research-valuable problems that do not require extensive background knowledge.

Research Background and Motivation

Sources of Problems

1. Academic Exchange Needs: Multiple participants at the representation theory workshop at IISER Bhopal sought unresolved problems that are both research-valuable and relatively accessible
2. Current State of the Field: Representation theory of p-adic groups is a core tool in number theory and automorphic forms theory, yet many fundamental questions remain incompletely understood
3. Theoretical Gaps: Despite grand theoretical frameworks such as the Langlands program, many concrete technical problems lack clear answers

Research Significance

1. Foundational Theoretical Importance: p-adic group representation theory forms the foundation of local Langlands correspondence, crucial for understanding symmetries in number theory
2. Technical Challenges: The transition from groups over finite fields to p-adic groups involves an essential leap from discrete to continuous structures
3. Applied Value: Solutions to these problems will advance understanding of automorphic forms, L-functions, and other core number-theoretic objects

Paper Positioning

This paper is not a traditional research paper but rather a problem collection, aimed at:

• Formulating precise, tractable research problems
• Providing necessary background for each problem
• Elucidating connections between problems and expected answers
• Guiding young researchers into the field

Core Contributions

The paper's main contribution lies in systematically proposing eight concrete research problems covering the following topics:

1. Classification of p-adic group representations containing finite field group representations (Questions 1-2)
2. Degenerate Whittaker models on GLn(D) (Questions 3-4)
3. Twisted Jacquet modules of GL2n(Fq) (Questions 5-6)
4. Supercuspidal representations of covering groups (Question 7)
5. Fourier transform on Mn(Fq) (Question 8)

Detailed Methodology

Part One: p-adic group representations containing finite field group representations

Background Setup

Let F be a local field, OF its ring of integers, and Fq the residue field. For split or unramified groups G:

• G(OF) is the maximal compact subgroup of G(F)
• There exists a surjection G(OF) → G(Fq)
• Representations of G(Fq) can be viewed as representations of G(OF) via inflation

Question 1: Lifting of Steinberg representations

Problem Statement: Classify all irreducible representations of G(F) containing the Steinberg representation of G(Fq) as a G(OF)-subrepresentation.

Expected Answer:

1. Twists of the Steinberg representation of G(F)
2. Generic, unramified representations of G(F) (i.e., irreducible unramified principal series representations)

Theoretical Basis:

• These representations have minimal ramification, particularly possessing Iwahori-fixed vectors
• By Borel's theorem, they appear as subquotients of unramified principal series

Question 2: Lifting of generic representations πλ

Let πλ be an irreducible representation of G(Fq) associated with an irreducible representation λ of the Weyl group, appearing in $\text{Ind}_{B(\mathbb{F}_q)}^{G(\mathbb{F}_q)}(\mathbb{C})$

Problem: Characterize G(F) representations containing πλ using enhanced Langlands parameters or Zelevinsky classification.

Special Case: For standard parabolic subgroups P, there exist irreducible representations ΠP. The problem reduces to: for which (P,λ) do we have $\text{Hom}_{GL_n(\mathcal{O}_F)}(\Pi_P, \pi_\lambda) \neq 0?$

Part Two: Degenerate Whittaker models on GLn(D)

Definitions and Background

Let D be a division algebra, ϕ: D → ℂ× a nontrivial additive character.

Degenerate Whittaker Model: A representation Π has a nonzero twisted Jacquet module ΠN,ψ, where $\psi\begin{pmatrix} 1 & X_1 & * & \cdots & * \\ 0 & 1 & X_2 & \ddots & * \\ \vdots & & \ddots & \ddots & \vdots \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 1 & X_{n-1} \\ 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} = \varphi(\text{tr}(X_1 + X_2 + \cdots + X_{n-1}))$

Known Results:

• Moeglin-Waldspurger proved that dim ΠN,ψ < ∞
• For GLn(F) (D=F), this reduces to the usual Whittaker model
• Supercuspidal representations always have nonzero degenerate Whittaker models
• All tempered representations have degenerate Whittaker models

Question 3: Existence classification

Problem: Through Jacquet-Langlands correspondence or Langlands parameters, classify irreducible representations of GLn(D) possessing nonzero degenerate Whittaker models.

Sub-problems:

• Does an analogue of the "standard model conjecture" exist?
• Can one determine the dimension of degenerate Whittaker model spaces using adjoint γ-functions (analogous to the Hiraga-Ichino-Ikeda conjecture)?

Question 4: Uniqueness

Problem: Classify irreducible representations of GLn(D) with unique degenerate Whittaker models, particularly which supercuspidal representations possess this property.

Conjecture: Possibly only depth-zero supercuspidal representations have one-dimensional degenerate Whittaker model spaces (based on uniqueness of Whittaker models on finite fields).

Part Three: Twisted Jacquet modules of GL2n(Fq)

Theoretical Framework

For supercuspidal representations π of GL2n(Fq), the principal series π × π has an exact sequence: $0 \to \text{St}_2(\pi) \to \pi \times \pi \to \text{Sp}_2(\pi) \to 0$

where:

• St2(π): generalized Steinberg representation (generic component)
• Sp2(π): generalized trivial representation
• dim St2(π) = qⁿ dim Sp2(π)

Computation of twisted Jacquet modules

Let ψ: N = M(n,Fq) → ℂ× be the character x ↦ ϕ(tr(X)).

For Deligne-Lusztig representations R(T,θ) (T = 𝔽×q2n), we have: $R(T,\theta) = \text{St}_2(\pi) - \text{Sp}_2(\pi)$

Results in reference Pr give: $\text{Ind}_{F^*_{q^n}}^{GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)} \theta^2 = \text{St}_2(\pi)_{N,\psi} - \text{Sp}_2(\pi)_{N,\psi}$

Combined with $(\pi \times \pi)_{N,\psi} = \text{St}_2(\pi)_{N,\psi} + \text{Sp}_2(\pi)_{N,\psi}$, we obtain: $\text{Sp}_2(\pi)_{N,\psi} = \frac{1}{2}\left((\pi \times \pi)_{N,\psi} - \text{Ind}_{F^*_{q^n}}^{GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)} \theta^2\right)$

Question 5: Explicit computation

Problem: For supercuspidal representations π of GLn(Fq), compute:

1. The twisted Jacquet modules (π × π)N,ψ of the principal series
2. The twisted Jacquet modules Sp2(π)N,ψ of the "generalized trivial" representation

Known Special Case: For n=2, Sp2(π)N,ψ is a one-dimensional representation ωπ of GL2(Fq).

Question 6: p-adic analogue

For supercuspidal representations π = R(T,θ) of GL2n(Fq), we have: $\pi_{N,\psi} = \text{Ind}_{F^*_{q^n}}^{GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)} (\theta|_{F^*_{q^n}}) \quad (1)$

Problem: What is the analogue of equation (1) for GL2n(F) over p-adic fields F?

Challenges:

• The finite field proof relies on character theory
• The number of irreducible components in πN,ψ is a polynomial in q with positive degree, making character-theoretic proofs of the p-adic case impossible
• A "geometric" proof rather than character-theoretic proof is needed

Possible Formulation: Both sides have finite filtrations whose successive quotients are identical or related.

Part Four: Covering groups

Setup

Let G̃ → G be a finite covering of p-adic groups, a central extension with cyclic kernel Z, and ϵ: Z → ℂ× a fixed faithful character. Let K be a mod-center compact subgroup on which the covering splits.

Question 7: Lifting of supercuspidal representations

Let Π = IndᴳK(ρ) be an irreducible supercuspidal representation of G, with ρ an irreducible representation of K. Define:

• ρ̃ as a representation of K̃ = Z·s(K): equal to ρ on s(K) and to ϵ on Z
• Π̃ = IndG̃K̃(ρ̃)

To Prove:

1. Π̃ is an irreducible supercuspidal representation
2. If the covering splits on all mod-center maximal compact subgroups, then all supercuspidal representations of G̃ with central character ϵ have this form
3. Π̃ is generic if and only if Π is generic
4. dim HomN(Π̃,ψ) = dim HomN(Π,ψ), particularly these covering group representations satisfy the multiplicity-one property for Whittaker models

Significance: Contrasts with the high multiplicities in principal series representations GGK.

Part Five: Fourier transform on Mn(Fq)

Background

There is a rich Fourier transform theory on Mn(F), which plays a foundational role in GLn(F) representation theory (Howe's pioneering work). However, the finite field case appears to lack similar investigations.

Question 8: Explicit computations

Given a function f on Mn(Fq), its Fourier transform f̂ is also a function on Mn(Fq).

To Compute:

1. Fourier transforms of characteristic functions of nilpotent orbits
2. Fourier transforms of characteristic functions of semisimple orbits
3. Fourier transform of the characteristic function of the nilpotent cone
4. Connect the above results with character theory of GLn(Fq)
5. Do the same for more general semisimple Lie algebras g (defined over Fq)

Technical Innovations

Characteristics of Problem Design

1. Accessibility: Problems are explicit and concrete, requiring minimal background knowledge
2. Coherence: Problems are interconnected, reflecting the unity of representation theory
3. Hierarchical Structure: Progression from finite fields to p-adic fields, from special to general cases

Theoretical Insights

1. Finite-Infinite Correspondence: Multiple problems explore correspondences between finite fields and p-adic fields
2. Geometrization: Emphasis on "geometric" proofs rather than character-theoretic proofs
3. Unified Framework: Unification of different problems through the Langlands program

Related Work

Key Referenced Literature

1. Bo Borel (1976): Admissible representations with Iwahori-fixed vectors
2. Li Jian-Shu Li (1992): Results on unramified principal series
3. MW Moeglin-Waldspurger (1987): Finite dimensionality of degenerate Whittaker models
4. HII Hiraga-Ichino-Ikeda (2008): Formal degrees and adjoint γ-factors
5. Ho Howe (1974): Fourier transform and character germs
6. Pr Prasad (2000): Degenerate Whittaker model spaces for general linear groups over finite fields
7. NS Nadimpalli-Sheth (2025): Twisted Jacquet modules
8. GGK Gao-Gurevich-Karasiewicz (2024): Gelfand-Graev representations of covering groups

Research Context

• Langlands Program: Provides the global theoretical framework
• Deligne-Lusztig Theory: Geometric construction of finite group representations
• Jacquet-Langlands Correspondence: Correspondence between GLn(D) and GLmn(F)
• Bernstein-Zelevinsky Theory: Derivative theory and classification

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Clear Research Directions: Eight concrete, researchable problems are formulated
2. Significant Theoretical Importance: These problems touch core techniques in representation theory
3. Methodological Insights: Emphasis on research paths from finite to infinite, from special to general

Value of Open Problems

1. Research Guidance: Provides concrete research topics for young researchers
2. Promotes Communication: Clear formulation facilitates academic discussion
3. Advances Progress: Even partial solutions have significant value

Future Directions

1. Finite Field Theory: Refine foundational theory over finite fields (e.g., Question 8)
2. p-adic Generalization: Extend finite field results to p-adic settings
3. Geometrization: Seek geometric interpretations of more problems
4. Unified Theory: Unify different phenomena through Langlands correspondence

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. High Problem Quality
   • Each problem has precise mathematical formulation
   • Problems are research-valuable yet relatively accessible
   • Expected answers and research directions are provided
2. Sufficient Background Material
   • Necessary definitions and known results provided for each problem
   • Appropriate literature citations
   • Connections between problems clarified
3. Clear Writing
   • Accurate mathematical exposition
   • Clear logical structure
   • Remarks provide additional insights
4. Academic Value
   • Fills a gap in problem collections for the field
   • Promotes cross-disciplinary research
   • Aids in training young researchers

Limitations

1. Limited Literature Review
   • Review of existing work on each problem is relatively brief
   • Could provide more detailed discussion of partial results
2. Technical Details
   • Specific difficulties of problems could be more explicit
   • Could provide more technical approaches to attacking problems
3. Limited Scope
   • Author acknowledges selecting problems from a "very narrow perspective"
   • Primarily focuses on GLn and related groups
4. Lack of Examples
   • Concrete examples would help with abstract problems
   • Explicit computations for GL2 or GL3 would be helpful

Impact

1. Contribution to the Field
   • Provides clear direction for representation theory research
   • Connects theory over finite fields with p-adic theory
   • Advances covering group representation theory
2. Practical Value
   • Suitable as dissertation topics for graduate students
   • Can be used to organize seminars
   • Promotes international collaboration
3. Reproducibility
   • Problems are clearly stated and easy to understand
   • Sufficient starting references provided
   • Some problems amenable to computational investigation

Applicable Contexts

1. Researchers
   • Graduate students seeking dissertation topics
   • Researchers entering new areas
   • Instructors organizing seminars
2. Research Topics
   • p-adic group representation theory
   • Finite group representation theory
   • Langlands program
   • Automorphic forms theory
3. Technical Background
   • Basic group representation theory knowledge
   • Familiarity with p-adic field properties
   • Understanding of induced representations and Jacquet modules

References

Key literature cited in this paper includes:

1. Foundational Theory: Borel's work on Iwahori-fixed vectors
2. Classification Theory: Bernstein-Zelevinsky classification, Lusztig's finite group representation classification
3. Functional Equations: Hiraga-Ichino-Ikeda work on formal degrees
4. Fourier Analysis: Howe's classical papers on Fourier transforms
5. Recent Advances: Nadimpalli-Sheth (2025), Gao-Gurevich-Karasiewicz (2024)

Summary

This is a high-quality problem collection paper providing eight explicit, research-valuable unresolved problems in p-adic group representation theory. The paper's main value lies in:

1. Clarity: Each problem has clear mathematical formulation and expected answers
2. Accessibility: Problems require minimal background, suitable for young researchers
3. Coherence: Problems are interconnected, reflecting theoretical unity
4. Inspirational Value: Provides research directions and methodological guidance

Although not a traditional research paper (lacking new theorems or proofs), it has unique academic value: it systematically organizes important open problems in the field and provides direction for future research. For researchers entering p-adic group representation theory or seeking research topics, this is an invaluable reference.