3
$\begingroup$

I recently saw a conjecture that a modular form is a congruence modular form if and only if it has bounded denominators. I wonder if one direction or the other is already known to be true?

EDIT: For completeness, here is the answer I received at Math Overflow when I asked a while back.

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/59498/bounded-denominators-for-modular-forms

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I am familiar with this conjecture, specifically for cusp forms.

It is known that every cusp form of a congruence subgroup of $SL_2(\mathbb{Z})$ with algebraic Fourier coefficients has bounded denominators. This is because we can decompose the space of weight $k$ cuspforms of a congruence subgroup into eigenforms (newforms and pushups of newforms), which have algebraically integral Fourier coefficients. Then any form with algebraic Fourier coefficients is just a linear combination of these eigenforms over algebraic numbers, and so must have bounded denominators.

There are several examples of noncongruence cusp forms which are $n$th roots of congruence cusp forms, which means their expansions have arbitrarily large powers of $n$ in the denominator. But there is no general method yet for showing that every genuinely noncongruence cusp form has unbounded denominators.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the help, once again. $\endgroup$ – Graphth Apr 17 '11 at 0:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.