2009
DOI: 10.1215/00127094-2009-002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A sieve method for shifted convolution sums

Abstract: We study the average size of shifted convolution summation terms related to the problem of Quantum Unique Ergodicity on SL2( )\À. Establishing an upper-bound sieve method for handling such sums, we achieve an unconditional result which suggests that the average size of the summation terms should be sufficient in application to Quantum Unique Ergodicity. In other words, cancellations among the summation terms, although welcomed, may not be required. Furthermore, the sieve method may be applied to shifted sums o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our job now is to get a nontrivial estimate for (13), beyond square-root cancellation in the character sum S(m 1 , m 2 , n, h; q). For h = 0, the zero shift, the character sum S(m 1 , m 2 , n, 0; q) can be evaluated precisely, and then one can use the large sieve inequality of Duke, Friedlander and Iwaniec [8] for Kloosterman fractions to get extra cancellation on the sum over n and m. Alternatively one can use reciprocity and then Voronoi yet again on the sum over m 2 , to get a much better result.…”
Section: Now We Apply Cauchy and Lemma 4 To Concludementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our job now is to get a nontrivial estimate for (13), beyond square-root cancellation in the character sum S(m 1 , m 2 , n, h; q). For h = 0, the zero shift, the character sum S(m 1 , m 2 , n, 0; q) can be evaluated precisely, and then one can use the large sieve inequality of Duke, Friedlander and Iwaniec [8] for Kloosterman fractions to get extra cancellation on the sum over n and m. Alternatively one can use reciprocity and then Voronoi yet again on the sum over m 2 , to get a much better result.…”
Section: Now We Apply Cauchy and Lemma 4 To Concludementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Non-trivial bound of this sum often has deep implications, e.g. subconvexity and equidistribution (QUE) (see [2], [6], [7], [11], [12], [13], [14], [16], [17], [18], [20], [24]). In this paper we will consider a higher rank analogue -…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…λ F (n) n (k−1)/2 . By the above proposition, (16) and (17), for any primitive Maass cusp form f , whether or not it is induced from a holomorphic form, we have that…”
Section: Hecke Operatorsmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…However, under certain natural assumptions about the distribution of λ f (p) it may be shown that M k (f ) is small; more precisely, in [14], Holowinsky shows that if neither…”
Section: If E(ψ| · ) Is An Incomplete Eisenstein Series We Havementioning
confidence: 99%