format: text

text:
# Unobstructed modular deformation problems

## 1. Introduction

Let $`f=a_nq^n`$ be a newform of weight $`k2`$, level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$; let $`S`$ be any finite set of places of $`𝐐`$ containing the infinite place and all primes dividing $`N`$. For every prime $`\lambda `$ of the number field $`K`$ generated by the $`a_n`$, Deligne and Serre have associated to $`f`$ a semisimple two dimensional Galois representation

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }:G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}\mathrm{GL}_2k_\lambda $$

over the residue field $`k_\lambda `$ of $`\lambda `$; here $`G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}`$ is the Galois group of the maximal extension of $`𝐐`$ unramified outside $`S`$ and the characteristic $`\mathrm{}`$ of $`k_\lambda `$. The representation $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible for almost all $`\lambda `$; for such $`\lambda `$ let $`R_{f,\lambda }^S`$ denote the universal deformation ring parameterizing lifts of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ (up to strict equivalence) to two dimensional representations of $`G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}`$ over noetherian local rings with residue field $`k_\lambda `$ (see Section 2.1 for a precise definition). Using recent work of Diamond, Flach, and Guo  on the Bloch–Kato conjectures for adjoint motives of modular forms we prove the following theorem.

###### Theorem 1.

If $`k>2`$, then

(1.1)
$$R_{f,\lambda }^SW(k_\lambda )[[T_1,T_2,T_3]]$$

for all but finitely many primes $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ (depending on $`f`$ and $`S`$); here $`W(k_\lambda )`$ is the ring of Witt vectors of $`k_\lambda `$. If $`k=2`$, then (1.1) holds for all but finitely many primes $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ dividing rational primes $`\mathrm{}`$ such that

(1.2)
$$a_{\mathrm{}}^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda ).$$

The special case of Theorem 1 for elliptic curves was proven by Mazur  using results of Flach  on symmetric square Selmer groups of elliptic curves. For weight $`k3`$, Theorem 1 answers Mazur’s question of \[15, Section 11\] concerning the finiteness of the set of obstructed primes for modular deformation problems; previously this finiteness was not known for a single modular form. We refer to  for a discussion of additional applications of Theorem 1.

Our methods are in principle effective: that is, given enough information about the modular form $`f`$ it is possible to determine a finite set of primes $`\lambda `$ containing all those violating (1.1). As a first example, we combine Theorem 1 with work of Hida and Mazur to prove the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`f`$ be one of the normalized cusp forms of level 1, weight $`k=12,16,18,20,22\text{ or }26`$, and trivial character. Let $`\mathrm{}>k+1`$ be a prime for which $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\mathrm{}}`$ is absolutely irreducible. Then

(1.3)
$$R_{f,\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝐙_{\mathrm{}}[[T_1,T_2,T_3]].$$

For example, for $`f=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, (1.3) holds for $`\mathrm{}17`$, $`\mathrm{}691`$.

By , to prove Theorem 1 it suffices to show that the Galois cohomology group $`H^2(G_𝐐,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$ of the adjoint representation of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ vanishes for almost all $`\lambda `$ (or for almost all $`\lambda `$ satisfying (1.2) when $`k=2`$). In Section 2 we explain how to use Poitou–Tate duality and results on Selmer groups as in  to reduce the proof of Theorem 1 to two statements:

1. For fixed $`p`$, $`H^0(\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{𝐐}_p/𝐐_p),\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0`$ for almost all $`\lambda `$;
2. $`H^0(\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{𝐐}_{\mathrm{}}/𝐐_{\mathrm{}}),\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0`$ for almost all $`\lambda `$ (or for almost all $`\lambda `$ satisfying (1.2) when $`k=2`$), where $`\mathrm{}=\text{char }k_\lambda `$.

In the elliptic curve case, the restriction of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\mathrm{}}`$ to the absolute Galois group $`G_p`$ of $`𝐐_p`$ has a canonical interpretation as the Galois action on the $`\mathrm{}`$-torsion points of the elliptic curve; the proofs of (1) and (2) are then a straightforward exercise using formal groups and the Kodaira–Néron classification of special fibers of Néron models of elliptic curves. Unfortunately, for more general modular forms there is no canonical model of the (often reducible) representation $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$, and the tools from the elliptic curve case are no longer applicable.

Our proof of (1) divides into two cases. Let $`\pi _p`$ be the $`p`$-component of the automorphic representation corresponding to $`f`$. If $`\pi _p`$ is principal series or supercuspidal, then there is no harm in studying the semisimplification of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$. One can then use the local Langlands correspondence for $`\mathrm{GL}_2`$ to deduce (1) for such $`p`$. This is done in Section 3. If $`\pi _p`$ is special, then to prove (1) for $`p`$ it is not sufficient to consider the semisimplification, and the lack of a canonical choice for $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$ prevents one from using a purely local approach. Instead, we use a level-lowering argument suggested to us by Ken Ribet to verify (1) for such $`p`$. We present this argument in Section 5.2.

We use the theory of Fontaine–Laffaille to reduce (2) to a computation with filtered Dieudonné modules; this is presented in Section 4. The proofs of Theorems 1 and 2 are given in Section 5.

It is a pleasure to thank Matthias Flach, Elena Mantovan, Robert Pollack, and Ken Ribet for helpful conversations related to this work.

### Notation

If $`\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_2K`$ is a representation of a group $`G`$ over a field $`K`$, we write $`\mathrm{ad}\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_4K`$ for the adjoint representation of $`G`$ on $`\mathrm{End}(\rho )`$ and $`\mathrm{ad}^0\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_3K`$ for the kernel of the trace map from $`\mathrm{ad}\rho `$ to the trivial representation.

We write $`G_𝐐:=\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{𝐐}/𝐐)`$ for the absolute Galois group of $`𝐐`$. We fix now and forever embeddings $`\overline{𝐐}\overline{𝐐}_p`$ for each $`p`$; these yield injections $`G_pG_𝐐`$ with $`G_p:=\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{𝐐}_p/𝐐_p)`$ the absolute Galois group of $`𝐐_p`$. All Frobenius elements are geometric, although for a character $`\omega `$ unramified at $`\mathrm{}`$ we use the usual normalization $`\omega (\mathrm{}):=\omega (\mathrm{Frob}_{\mathrm{}}^1)`$. We use the phrase “almost all” as a synonym for the phrase “all but finitely many”.

## 2. Deformation theory

### 2.1. Universal deformation rings

Let $`k`$ be a finite field of odd characteristic $`\mathrm{}`$. Let $`S`$ be a finite set of places of $`𝐐`$ containing $`\mathrm{}`$ and the infinite place, and let $`𝐐_S`$ denote the maximal extension of $`𝐐`$ unramified away from $`S`$; set $`G_{𝐐,S}:=\mathrm{Gal}(𝐐_S/𝐐)`$. Consider an absolutely irreducible continuous Galois representation

$$\overline{\rho }:G_{𝐐,S}\mathrm{GL}_2k.$$

We further assume that $`\overline{\rho }`$ is odd in the sense that the image of complex conjugation under $`\overline{\rho }`$ has distinct eigenvalues.

Let $`𝒞`$ denote the category of inverse limits of artinian local rings with residue field $`k`$; morphisms in $`𝒞`$ are assumed to induce the identity map on $`k`$. For a ring $`A`$ in $`𝒞`$, we say that $`\rho :G_{𝐐,S}\mathrm{GL}_2A`$ is a lifting of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$ if the composition

$$G_{𝐐,S}\stackrel{𝜌}{}\mathrm{GL}_2A\mathrm{GL}_2k$$

equals $`\overline{\rho }`$. We say that two liftings $`\rho _1,\rho _2`$ of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$ are strictly conjugate if there is a matrix $`M`$ in the kernel of $`\mathrm{GL}_2A\mathrm{GL}_2k`$ such that $`\rho _1=M\rho _2M^1`$. A deformation of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$ is a strict conjugacy class of liftings of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$. The deformation functor

$$D_{\overline{\rho }}^S:𝒞\mathrm{Sets}$$

sends a ring $`A`$ to the set of deformations of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$. Since $`\overline{\rho }`$ is absolutely irreducible, by \[13, Proposition 1\] the functor $`D_{\overline{\rho }}^S`$ is represented by a ring $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ of $`𝒞`$; that is, there is an isomorphism of functors

$$D_{\overline{\rho }}^S()\mathrm{Hom}_𝒞(R_{\overline{\rho }},).$$

We call $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ the universal deformation ring for the deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }}^S`$.

The deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }}^S`$ is said to be unobstructed if $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=0`$. In this case, \[13, Sections 1.7 and 1.10\] gives the following description of $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

If $`D_{\overline{\rho }}^S`$ is unobstructed, then

$$R_{\overline{\rho }}W(k)[[T_1,T_2,T_3]]$$

with $`W(k)`$ the ring of Witt vectors of $`k`$.

### 2.2. A criterion for unobstructedness

We continue with the notation of the previous section. In this section we recall Flach’s criterion of \[8, Section 3\] for the vanishing of $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$. Let $`𝒪𝒞`$ be a totally ramified integral extension of $`W(k)`$. Let $`𝔪`$ denote the maximal ideal of $`𝒪`$ and fix a lifting

$$\rho :G_{𝐐,S}\mathrm{GL}_2𝒪$$

of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`𝒪`$. Let $`K`$ denote the fraction field of $`𝒪`$ and let $`V_\rho `$ (resp. $`A_\rho `$) denote a three dimensional $`K`$-vector space (resp. $`(K/𝒪)^3`$) endowed with a $`G_{𝐐,S}`$ action via $`\mathrm{ad}^0\rho `$; we write $`V_\rho (1)`$ and $`A_\rho (1)`$ for their Tate twists.

We recall that the Selmer group of any these Galois modules $`M`$ is defined by

$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,M):=\left\{cH^1(G_𝐐,M);c|_{G_p}H_f^1(G_p,M)\text{ for all }p\right\}$$

where $`H_f^1(G_p,M)`$ is as in \[1, Section 3\]. Let $`V`$, $`A`$ denote either of the pairs $`V_\rho `$, $`A_\rho `$ or $`V_\rho (1)`$, $`A_\rho (1)`$. We define $`\text{Sh}(A)`$ via the exact sequence

(2.1)
$$0i_{}H_f^1(G_𝐐,V)H_f^1(G_𝐐,A)\text{Sh}(A)0$$

with $`i:VA`$ the natural map. Finally, for any $`G_{𝐐,S}`$-module $`M`$ we define

$$\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},M):=\{cH^1(G_{𝐐,S},M);c|_{G_p}=0\text{ for all }pS\}.$$

Let $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}:G_𝐐k^\times `$ denote the mod $`\mathrm{}`$ Teichmüller character.

###### Proposition 2.2.

Let $`\overline{\rho }`$ be as above. Suppose that

1. $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=0`$ for all $`pS\{\mathrm{}\}`$;
2. $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,V_\rho (1))=0`$;
3. $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho )=0`$.

Then the deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }}^S`$ is unobstructed.

###### Proof.

The trace pairing on $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$ identifies $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$ with the Cartier dual of $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$. Poitou–Tate duality (see \[16, Proposition 4.10\]) thus yields an exact sequence

(2.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{pS\{\mathrm{}\}}{}H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })\mathrm{Hom}_k(H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }),k)\hfill \\ \hfill \text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }).\end{array}$$

The latter group decomposes as

$$\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}})\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }),$$

and the first summand vanishes by \[19, Lemma 10.6\]. Thus, by (2.2) and hypothesis (1), to prove the proposition it suffices to show that $`\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })=0`$.

Since $`\rho `$ is a lifting of $`\overline{\rho }`$, the $`G_{𝐐,S}`$-module $`A_\rho (1)[𝔪]`$ is a realization of $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }`$. Since $`\overline{\rho }`$ is irreducible, the natural map

$$H^1(G_𝐐,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })=H^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1)[𝔪])H^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))$$

is injective. The image of $`\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })`$ under this map is easily seen to lie in $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))`$, so that to complete the proof it suffices to show that this Selmer group vanishes.

By (2.1) and hypothesis (3) we have $`\text{Sh}(A_\rho )=0`$. Since $`A_\rho (1)`$ is Cartier dual to $`A_\rho `$, by \[7, Theorem 1\] this implies that $`\text{Sh}(A_\rho (1))=0`$. By (2.1) and hypothesis (2), we conclude that $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))=0`$, as desired. ∎

## 3. Local invariants, $`\mathrm{}p`$

### 3.1. Characters

Fix a prime $`p`$ and let $`𝒪𝐂`$ denote the ring of integers of a number field $`K`$. For each prime $`\lambda `$ of $`𝒪`$ not dividing $`p`$, fix an isomorphism $`\iota _\lambda :𝐂\stackrel{}{}\overline{K}_\lambda `$ extending the inclusion $`𝒪𝒪_\lambda `$.

Let $`F`$ be a finite extension of $`𝐐_p`$; set $`G_F=\mathrm{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)`$. We say that a continuous character $`\chi :F^\times 𝐂^\times `$ is of Galois-type with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$ if the character $`\iota _\lambda \chi :F^\times \overline{K}_\lambda ^\times `$ extends to a continuous character

$$\chi _\lambda :G_F\overline{K}_\lambda ^\times $$

via the dense injection $`F^\times G_F^{\mathrm{ab}}`$ of local class field theory. We then write $`\overline{\chi }_\lambda :G_F\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}^\times `$ for the reduction of $`\chi _\lambda `$. We say that $`\chi `$ is arithmetic if $`\chi (F^\times )\overline{𝐐}^\times `$.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`\chi :F^\times 𝐂^\times `$ be an arithmetic character of Galois-type with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$ for all $`\lambda p`$. If $`\overline{\chi }_\lambda =1`$ for infinitely many $`\lambda `$, then $`\chi =1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\overline{\lambda }`$ be the prime of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ which is the kernel of the composition

$$𝒪_{\overline{𝐐}}\stackrel{\iota _\lambda }{}𝒪_{\overline{K}_\lambda }\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}.$$

If $`\overline{\chi }_\lambda =1`$, then $`\chi (F^\times )1+\overline{\lambda }`$. If this hold for infinitely many $`\lambda `$, then $`\chi (F^\times )1`$ lies in primes of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ of infinitely many distinct residue characteristics and thus is trivial, as claimed. ∎

### 3.2. Computation of local invariants

Let $`\pi `$ be an irreducible admissible complex representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_2𝐐_p`$. (See \[6, Section 11\] and the reference therein for definitions, or see  for a thoroughly enjoyable introduction.) We say that $`\pi `$ is arithmetic if either:

1. $`\pi `$ is a subquotient of an induced representation $`\pi (\chi _1,\chi _2)`$ with each $`\chi _i:𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$ arithmetic; or
2. $`\pi `$ is the base change of an arithmetic character $`\chi :F^\times 𝐂^\times `$ for a quadratic extension $`F/𝐐_p`$; or
3. $`\pi `$ is extraordinary.

We will recall the notion of Langlands correspondence (with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$) between $`\pi `$ and a $`\lambda `$-adic representation $`\rho :G_p\mathrm{GL}_2\overline{K}_\lambda `$ in the course of the proof below. We write $`||:𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$ for the norm character; it is arithmetic and of Galois-type with respect to each $`\iota _\lambda `$, with $`||_\lambda `$ equal to the $`\lambda `$-adic cyclotomic character $`\epsilon _\lambda :G_pK_\lambda ^\times `$.

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`\pi `$ be an arithmetic irreducible admissible complex representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_2𝐐_p`$. Let $`\{\rho _\lambda :G_p\mathrm{GL}_2\overline{K}_\lambda \}_{\lambda p}`$ be a family of continuous representations such that $`\pi `$ and $`\rho _\lambda `$ are in Langlands correspondence with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$ for all $`\lambda p`$. If $`\pi `$ is principal series or supercuspidal, then

$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}})=0$$

for almost all $`\lambda `$.

###### Proof.

For $`\lambda `$ of odd residue characteristic we have

$$\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \left(\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}\right).$$

The first summand is trivial if and only if $`\lambda `$ divides $`p1`$, so that we may restrict our attention to $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}`$.

Assume first that $`\pi =\pi (\chi _1,\chi _2)`$ is arithmetic principal series. In this case, for $`\pi `$ to be in Langlands correspondence with $`\rho _\lambda `$ means that the $`\chi _i:𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$ are of Galois-type with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$ and $`\rho _\lambda \chi _{1,\lambda }\chi _{2,\lambda }`$. Thus

(3.1)
$$\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_{1,\lambda }^{}\overline{\chi }_{2,\lambda }^1\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_{1,\lambda }^1\overline{\chi }_{2,\lambda }^{}.$$

We must show that each of these characters is non-trivial for almost all $`\lambda `$. As above, this is clear for $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda `$. If $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_{1,\lambda }^{}\overline{\chi }_{2,\lambda }^1`$ is trivial for infinitely many $`\lambda `$, then by Lemma 3.1 we must have $`\chi _1^{}\chi _2^1=||^1`$. However, $`\pi `$ would then be special or one dimensional, rather than principal series; thus this can not occur. The same argument deals with the characters $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_{1,\lambda }^1\overline{\chi }_{2,\lambda }^{}`$, settling this case of the proposition.

Next assume that $`\pi `$ is supercuspidal but not extraordinary. Then $`\pi `$ is the base change of an arithmetic character $`\chi :F^\times 𝐂^\times `$ for a quadratic extension $`F`$ of $`𝐐_p`$. The Langlands correspondence in this case implies that $`\chi `$ is of Galois-type with respect to each $`\iota _\lambda `$, and

$$\rho _\lambda \mathrm{Ind}_{G_F}^{G_p}\chi _\lambda .$$

Let $`\chi ^c`$ be the $`\mathrm{Gal}(F/𝐐_p)`$-conjugate character of $`\chi `$ and let $`\omega :F^\times 𝐂^\times `$ denote the character $`\chi (\chi ^c)^1`$. We have

$$\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \chi _F\left(\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{Ind}_{G_F}^{G_p}\overline{\omega }_\lambda \right)$$

with $`\chi _F:\mathrm{Gal}(F/𝐐_p)\{\pm 1\}`$ the non-trivial character for $`F/𝐐_p`$. The first summand is not a problem for $`\mathrm{}>3`$. The second summand is irreducible if and only if $`\overline{\omega }_\lambda \overline{\omega }_\lambda ^\mathrm{c}`$. In particular, if $`\omega \omega ^\mathrm{c}`$, then this case of the proposition follows from Lemma 3.1. If instead $`\omega =\omega ^\mathrm{c}`$, then $`\omega ^2=1`$, $`\omega `$ extends to a character $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }:𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$, and

$$\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \chi _F\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\stackrel{~}{\omega }}_\lambda \overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\stackrel{~}{\omega }}_\lambda ^1.$$

Since $`\omega ^2=1`$, we clearly have $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }||^{\pm 1}`$; this case of the proposition thus again follows from Lemma 3.1.

Finally, if $`\pi `$ is extraordinary, then $`p=2`$, the image $`\mathrm{proj}\rho _\lambda (I_2)`$ of inertia in $`\mathrm{PGL}_2\overline{𝐐}_{\mathrm{}}`$ is isomorphic to $`A_4`$ or $`S_4`$, and the composition

$$\mathrm{proj}\rho _\lambda (I_2)\mathrm{PGL}_2\overline{𝐐}_{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{\mathrm{ad}^0}{}\mathrm{GL}_3\overline{𝐐}_{\mathrm{}}$$

is an irreducible representation of $`\mathrm{proj}\rho _\lambda (I_2)`$. Since $`\mathrm{proj}\rho _\lambda (I_2)`$ has order $`12`$ or $`24`$, it follows that $`\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda =\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}}`$ is an irreducible $`\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}`$-representation of $`I_2`$ for $`\lambda `$ of residue characteristic at least $`5`$. Thus already $`H^0(I_2,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}})=0`$ for such $`\lambda `$; the proposition follows. ∎

###### Remark 3.3.

Note that if $`\overline{\rho }:G_p\mathrm{GL}_2\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}`$ is any reduction of $`\rho `$, then

$$dim_{\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}}H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })dim_{\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}}H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{ss}}).$$

###### Remark 3.4.

Suppose that $`\pi =\pi (\chi _1,\chi _2)`$ is an unramified principal series representation (that is, $`\chi _i(𝐙_p^\times )=1`$ for $`i=1,2`$). Then if $`\pi `$ is in Langlands correspondence with $`\rho _\lambda `$, using (3.1) one finds that:

$$\begin{array}{c}H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_\lambda ^{\mathrm{ss}})0\hfill \\ \hfill p\left(\chi _1(p)+\chi _2(p)\right)^2(p+1)^2\chi _1(p)\chi _2(p)(mod\lambda ).\end{array}$$

In the case of a representation $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$ associated to a newform $`f=a_nq^n`$ of weight $`k`$, level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$ (see Section 5.1), this translates to the condition:

$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }^{\mathrm{ss}})0a_p^2p^{k2}(p+1)^2\omega (p)(mod\lambda )$$

for $`pN\mathrm{}`$.

###### Remark 3.5.

If $`\pi `$ is one dimensional or special, then

$$dim_{\overline{𝐅}_{\mathrm{}}}H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }^{\mathrm{ss}})=1$$

for almost all $`\lambda `$. For $`\pi `$ special, however, one might hope to obtain an analogue of Proposition 3.2 by allowing $`\overline{\rho }`$ to be non-semisimple. Unfortunately, there is no way to formulate such a result purely locally. Instead, for the case of special local components of Galois representations attached to modular forms, in Section 5.2 we will use global considerations to rigidify $`\overline{\rho }`$; we will then be able to obtain the required vanishing in the special case as well.

## 4. Local invariants, $`\mathrm{}=p`$

### 4.1. Filtered Dieudonné modules

We briefly review the theory of Fontaine–Laffaille . Let $`K`$ be a finite extension of $`𝐐_{\mathrm{}}`$ with ring of integers $`𝒪`$. Let $`v:K^\times 𝐐`$ be the valuation on $`K`$, normalized so that $`v(\mathrm{})=1`$; let $`\lambda `$ be a uniformizer of $`𝒪`$ and let $`e=v(\lambda )^1`$ denote the absolute ramification degree of $`K`$.

###### Definition 4.1.

A filtered Dieudonné $`𝒪`$-module (over $`𝐙_{\mathrm{}}`$) is an $`𝒪`$-module $`D`$ of finite type, endowed with a decreasing filtration $`(D^i)_{i𝐙}`$ by $`𝒪`$-module direct summands and a family $`(f_i:D^iD)_{i𝐙}`$ of $`𝒪`$-linear maps satisfying:

1. $`D^i=D`$ (resp. $`D^i=0`$) for $`i0`$ (resp. $`i0`$);
2. $`f_i|_{D^{i+1}}=\mathrm{}f_{i+1}`$ for all $`i`$;
3. $`D=_{i𝐙}f_i(D^i)`$.

For $`a<b`$, let $`^{a,b}(𝒪)`$ denote the category of filtered Dieudonné $`𝒪`$-modules $`D`$ satisfying $`D^a=D`$ and $`D^b=0`$.

We now recall the relation between filtered Dieudonné $`𝒪`$-modules and Galois representations. Let $`V`$ be a finite dimensional $`K`$-vector space with a continuous $`K`$-linear action of $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$. Define a $`K`$-vector space

$$D_{\mathrm{crys}}(V):=(B_{\mathrm{crys}}_𝐐_{\mathrm{}}V)^G_{\mathrm{}}$$

with $`B_{\mathrm{crys}}`$ the crystalline period ring of Fontaine; $`D_{\mathrm{crys}}(V)`$ inherits a decreasing filtration $`(D_{\mathrm{crys}}^i(V))_{i𝐙}`$ from the filtration on $`B_{\mathrm{crys}}`$. We say that $`V`$ is crystalline if $`D_{\mathrm{crys}}(V)`$ and $`V`$ are $`K`$-vector spaces of the same dimension.

For $`a<b`$, let $`𝒢^{a,b}(𝒪)`$ denote the category of finite type $`𝒪`$-module subquotients of crystalline $`K`$-representations $`V`$ with $`D_{\mathrm{crys}}^a(V)=D_{\mathrm{crys}}(V)`$ and $`D_{\mathrm{crys}}^b(V)=0`$. Fontaine–Laffaille define a functor

$$𝒰:^{a,a+\mathrm{}}(𝒪)𝒢^{a,a+\mathrm{}}(𝒪)$$

which is equivalent to the identity functor on the underlying $`𝒪`$-modules and which induces an equivalence of categories between $`^{a,a+\mathrm{}1}(𝒪)`$ and $`𝒢^{a,a+\mathrm{}1}(𝒪)`$. (See \[5, Section 1.1\] for more details; note that we are using Tate twists as in \[1, Section 4\] to extend $`𝒰`$ to the case $`a0`$.)

###### Example 4.2.

Let $`\omega :G_{\mathrm{}}𝒪^\times `$ be an unramified character of finite order and let $`𝒪(\omega )`$ denote a free $`𝒪`$-module of rank $`1`$ with $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$-action via $`\omega `$. Then $`𝒪(\omega )𝒢^{0,1}(𝒪)`$, so that there is $`D_\omega ^{0,1}(𝒪)`$ such that $`𝒰(D_\omega )𝒪(\omega )`$. This $`D_\omega `$ is a free $`𝒪`$-module of rank one with $`D_\omega =D_\omega ^0`$ and $`f_0`$ multiplication by $`\omega ^1(\mathrm{})`$.

###### Example 4.3.

Let $`f=a_nq^n`$ be a newform of weight $`k2`$, level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$. Assuming that $`K`$ contains some completion of the number field generated by the $`a_n`$, there is a Galois representation $`\rho _f:G_𝐐\mathrm{GL}_2K`$ associated to $`f`$ as in Section 5.1. Fix an embedding $`G_{\mathrm{}}G_𝐐`$ and let $`V_f`$ be a two dimensional $`K`$-vector space on which $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ acts via $`\rho _f|_G_{\mathrm{}}`$.

Fix a $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$-stable $`𝒪`$-lattice $`T_fV_f`$. If $`\mathrm{}N`$, then $`V_f`$ is crystalline and $`T_f𝒢^{0,k}(𝒪)`$. Thus for $`\mathrm{}>k`$ there exists $`D_f^{0,k}(𝒪)`$ with $`𝒰(D_f)T_f`$. Using \[1, Theorem 4.3\] and standard properties of modular representations, one obtains the following description of $`D_f`$. The filtration satisfies:

$$\mathrm{rank}_𝒪D_f^i=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\hfill & i0;\hfill \\ 1\hfill & 1ik1;\hfill \\ 0\hfill & ki.\hfill \end{array}$$

Choose an $`𝒪`$-basis $`x,y`$ of $`D_f`$ with $`x`$ an $`𝒪`$-generator of $`D_f^1`$. Let $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\delta 𝒪`$ be such that

$$f_0x=\alpha x+\beta y;f_0y=\gamma x+\delta y.$$

Then $`\alpha +\delta =a_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\alpha \delta \beta \gamma =\mathrm{}^{k1}\omega (\mathrm{})`$. By (2) of Definition 4.1 we have $`v(\alpha ),v(\beta )k1`$.

### 4.2. Computation of local invariants

Let $`f`$ and $`T_f`$ be as in Example 4.3. Let

$$\overline{\rho }_f:G_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{GL}_2(𝒪/\lambda )$$

be the Galois representation on $`T_f/\lambda T_f`$.

###### Proposition 4.4.

Assume $`\mathrm{}N`$ and $`\mathrm{}>2k`$. Then

$$H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_f)=0$$

unless $`k=2`$ and $`a_{\mathrm{}}^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda )`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`det\rho _f=\epsilon _\lambda ^{1k}\omega ^1`$, we have

(4.1)
$$\mathrm{ad}T_f(1)\left(T_f_𝒪T_f_𝒪𝒪(\omega )\right)(k)$$

(where $`()(k)`$ denotes the $`k`$-fold Tate twist). It follows that $`\mathrm{ad}T_f(1)𝒢^{k,k1}(𝒪)`$. Since $`\mathrm{}>2k`$, there thus exists $`D^{k,k1}(𝒪)`$ with $`𝒰(D)\mathrm{ad}T_f(1)`$. In fact, by (4.1) and \[10, Proposition 1.7\] we can take

$$D=\left(D_f_𝒪D_f_𝒪D_\omega \right)(k)$$

with notation as in Examples 4.2 and 4.3. Further, since $`\mathrm{ad}T_f(1)/\lambda `$ is a realization of $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_f`$, by \[1, Lemma 4.5\] we have

(4.2)
$$H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_f)\mathrm{ker}(1f_0:D^0/\lambda D^0D/\lambda D).$$

Thus to prove the proposition it suffices to compute the latter group.

By the definition of Tate twists and tensor products of filtered Dieudonné $`𝒪`$-modules, we have

$`D^0`$ $`=(D_fD_fD_\omega )^k`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{i_1+i_2+i_3=k}{}}D_f^{i_1}D_f^{i_2}D_\omega ^{i_3}`$
$`=D_f^1D_f^{k1}D_\omega ^0`$
$`=𝒪(xxw)`$
where $`x`$ is as in Example 4.3 and $`w`$ is an $`𝒪`$-generator of $`D_\omega `$. Using (2) of Definition 4.1, we compute:

$`f_0(xxw)`$ $`:=f_1xf_{k1}xf_0w`$
(4.3) $`={\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^1(\mathrm{})}{\mathrm{}^k}}(\alpha x+\beta y)(\alpha x+\beta y)w.`$
Suppose now that (4.2) is non-zero. Then by (4.3) we must have

(4.4)
$$\omega ^1(\mathrm{})\alpha ^2\mathrm{}^k(mod\lambda ^{ek+1});$$

(4.5)
$$\alpha \beta 0(mod\lambda ^{ek+1}).$$

In particular, we must have $`v(\alpha )=k/2`$. Since also $`v(\alpha )k1`$, this implies that $`k=2`$ and $`v(\alpha )=1`$. Thus (4.5) implies that $`v(\beta )>1`$. As $`\alpha \delta \beta \gamma =\mathrm{}\omega (\mathrm{})`$, we conclude that $`v(\delta )=0`$ and

$$\alpha \delta \mathrm{}\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda ^{e+1}).$$

Using this and (4.4) one deduces easily that

$$a_{\mathrm{}}^2=(\alpha +\delta )^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda )$$

as claimed. ∎

## 5. Unobstructed deformation problems

### 5.1. Modular representations

Let $`f=a_nq^n`$ be a newform of weight $`k2`$, level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$. Fix a finite set of primes $`S`$ containing all primes dividing $`N`$. Let $`K`$ be the number field generated by the $`a_n`$. Then for any prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ (say with residue field $`k_\lambda `$ of characteristic $`\mathrm{}`$) there is a continuous Galois representation

$$\rho _{f,\lambda }:G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}\mathrm{GL}_2K_\lambda ,$$

unramified with $`\mathrm{tr}\rho _{f,\lambda }(\mathrm{Frob}_p)=a_p`$ for $`pN\mathrm{}`$; the determinant of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$ is $`\epsilon _\lambda ^{1k}\omega ^1`$. (We find it more convenient to work with this geometric normalization of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$, which is dual to the more common arithmetic normalization.) Let

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }:G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}\mathrm{GL}_2k_\lambda .$$

be the semisimple reduction of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$. Then $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible for almost all primes $`\lambda `$ by \[5, Lemma 7.13\].

Let $`\pi `$ be the automorphic representation corresponding to $`f`$ as in \[6, Section 11.1\] and let $`\pi =^{}\pi _p`$ be the decomposition of $`\pi `$ into admissible complex representations $`\pi _p`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_2𝐐_p`$. Fix isomorphisms $`\iota _\lambda :𝐂\stackrel{}{}\overline{K}_\lambda `$ (extending the inclusion $`KK_\lambda `$) for all $`\lambda `$. By \[3, Théorème B\] and \[12, Proposition 9.3\] each $`\pi _p`$ is arithmetic and infinite dimensional and is in Langlands correspondence (with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$) with $`\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$ for each $`\lambda p`$.

### 5.2. Special primes

We continue with the notation of the previous section. Let $`p`$ be a prime such that $`\pi _p`$ is special; that is, $`\pi `$ is the unique infinite dimensional subquotient of $`\pi (\chi ||,\chi )`$ for an arithmetic character $`\chi :𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$. Then $`\chi `$ is of Galois-type with respect to $`\iota _\lambda `$ for each $`\lambda p`$, and

$$\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\epsilon _\lambda \chi _\lambda & \\ 0& \chi _\lambda \end{array}\right)$$

with the upper right-hand corner non-zero and ramified.

###### Lemma 5.1.

If $`p^21(mod\lambda )`$, then

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda \left(\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda & \\ 0& \overline{\chi }_\lambda \end{array}\right).$$

###### Proof.

Since the semisimplfication of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda `$ is $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda `$, the only way the lemma can fail is if

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda \left(\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\chi }_\lambda & \nu \\ 0& \overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda \end{array}\right)$$

with $`\nu `$ non-trivial. One checks directly that $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda ^1\overline{\chi }_\lambda ^1\nu `$ is naturally an element of $`H^1(G_p,\overline{k}_\lambda (1))`$; since this cohomology group is trivial unless $`p^21(mod\lambda )`$, the lemma follows. ∎

Using Lemma 5.1, the proof of the next lemma is a straightforward matrix computation; we omit the details.

###### Lemma 5.2.

Let $`p`$ be a prime for which $`\pi _p`$ is special. Let $`\lambda `$ be a prime not dividing $`2p(p^21)`$. Then

$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0$$

if and only if $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda `$ is semisimple.

The level-lowering approach of the next proposition was suggested to the author by Ken Ribet.

###### Proposition 5.3.

Let $`p`$ be a prime for which $`\pi _p`$ is special. Then

$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0$$

for almost all primes $`\lambda `$.

###### Proof.

As always it suffices to prove the proposition for $`\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$. Let $`\chi `$ be as above. Since the automorphic representation $`\pi `$ has central quasi-character $`||^{1k}\omega ^1`$, we must have $`\chi ^2=||^k\omega _p^1`$, where $`\omega _p:𝐐_p^\times 𝐂^\times `$ is the $`p`$-component of $`\omega `$. In particular, $`\chi _p^{}:=\chi ^1||^{k/2}`$ has finite order. Extend $`\chi _p^{}`$ to a Dirichlet character $`\chi ^{}`$ and let $`f^{}`$ denote the newform of weight $`k`$ and some level $`M`$ associated to the eigenform $`f\chi ^{}`$. The $`p`$-component $`\pi _p^{}`$ of the automorphic representation associated to $`f^{}`$ is a subquotient of $`\pi (\chi _p^{}\chi ||,\chi _p^{}\chi )`$; since $`\chi _p^{}\chi `$ is unramified at $`p`$ by construction, we conclude that $`p`$ divides $`M`$ exactly once.

Suppose now that $`\lambda 2p(p^21)`$ is such $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is irreducible and

(5.1)
$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0.$$

Then $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda `$ is semisimple by Lemma 5.2, so that

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{k}_\lambda \overline{\epsilon }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda \overline{\chi }_\lambda $$

by Lemma 5.1. Thus

$$\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\chi _p^{}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda ^{1\frac{k}{2}}\overline{\epsilon }_\lambda ^{\frac{k}{2}}.$$

In particular $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\lambda }`$ is unramified at $`p`$. By \[4, Theorem 1.1\] applied to $`f^{}`$ there is then a newform $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ of weight $`k`$ and level dividing $`M/p`$ with $`f^{}`$ congruent to $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ modulo some prime of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ above $`\lambda `$. However, there are only finitely many newforms $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ of weight $`k`$ and level dividing $`M/p`$, and for each such $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ there are only finitely many $`\lambda `$ with $`f^{}`$ congruent to $`f^{\prime \prime }`$ modulo some prime of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ above $`\lambda `$. Thus (5.1) can only hold for finitely many $`\lambda `$; the proposition follows. ∎

### 5.3. Proof of Theorem 1

Let $`f`$ and $`S`$ be as above. For any $`\lambda `$ at which $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible, we write $`R_{f,\lambda }^S`$ for the universal deformation ring for the deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }}^{S\{\mathrm{}\}}`$ as in Section 2.1.

###### Theorem 5.4.

Suppose $`k>2`$. Then

$$R_{f,\lambda }^SW(k_\lambda )[[T_1,T_2,T_3]]$$

for almost all primes $`\lambda `$.

###### Proof.

We apply Proposition 2.2 to the lifting $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$ of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$. Hypothesis (1) holds for almost all $`\lambda `$ by Proposition 3.2 and Remark 3.3 (for $`pS`$ for which $`\pi _p`$ is not special), Proposition 5.3 (for $`pS`$ at which $`\pi _p`$ is special), and Proposition 4.4 (for $`p=\mathrm{}`$). Hypotheses (2) and (3) hold for almost all $`\lambda `$ by \[5, Theorems 8.2 and 7.15\] and the fact that (in the notation of )

$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho _{f,\lambda }})H_\mathrm{\Sigma }^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho _{f,\lambda }})$$

for any finite set of primes $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Thus the deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }}^{S\{\mathrm{}\}}`$ is unobstructed for almost all $`\lambda `$; Proposition 2.1 completes the proof. ∎

###### Theorem 5.5.

Suppose $`k=2`$. Then

(5.2)
$$R_{f,\lambda }^SW(k_\lambda )[[T_1,T_2,T_3]]$$

for almost all primes $`\lambda `$ dividing $`\mathrm{}`$ with $`a_{\mathrm{}}^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda ).`$ In particular, (5.2) holds for a set of $`\lambda `$ of density one.

###### Proof.

The proof of the first statement is the same as the proof of Theorem 5.4, taking into account the modifications for $`k=2`$ in Proposition 4.4. The density statement follows from \[18, Theorem 20\] and the Ramanujan–Petersson conjecture (proven by Deligne). ∎

Note that by \[13, Section 1.3\], the analogue of these results for the arithmetic normalization of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ hold as well.

### 5.4. Modular forms of level one

Let $`f`$ be the unique normalized cusp form of level $`1`$, weight $`k=12,16,18,20,22\text{ or }26`$, and trivial character. Then $`f`$ has rational coefficients, so that for every prime $`\mathrm{}`$ we obtain a representation

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\mathrm{}}:G_{𝐐,\{\mathrm{}\}}\mathrm{GL}_2𝐅_{\mathrm{}}.$$

We recall the set of primes $`\mathrm{}`$ for which $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\mathrm{}}`$ is not absolutely irreducible (see ):

| $`k`$ | $`\mathrm{}`$ | $`k`$ | $`\mathrm{}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 12 | 2,3,5,7,691 | 20 | 2,3,5,7,11,13,283,617 |
| 16 | 2,3,5,7,11,3617 | 22 | 2,3,5,7,13,17,131,593 |
| 18 | 2,3,5,7,11,13,43867 | 26 | 2,3,5,7,11,17,19,657931 |

###### Theorem 5.6.

Let $`f`$ be as above and let $`\mathrm{}>k+1`$ be a prime for which $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\mathrm{}}`$ is absolutely irreducible. Then

(5.3)
$$R_{f,\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝐙_{\mathrm{}}[[T_1,T_2,T_3]].$$

We leave it to the reader to use Remark 3.4 to derive the generalization of Theorem 5.6 to the case $`S\mathrm{}`$.

###### Proof.

Fix $`\mathrm{}>2k`$. Then by \[5, Corollary 7.2 and Section 7.4\] we have

(5.4)
$$\mathrm{\#}H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho _{f,\mathrm{}}})=\mathrm{\#}H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho _{f,\mathrm{}}})=\mathrm{\#}𝐙_{\mathrm{}}/\eta _f^{\mathrm{}}𝐙_{\mathrm{}}$$

where $`\eta _f^{\mathrm{}}𝐙`$ is the congruence ideal of \[5, Section 6.4\]. By definition, $`\eta _f^{\mathrm{}}`$ is generated by the element $`d(f)`$ of \[11, Theorem 1\]. Using \[11, Theorem 1 and Theorem 2\] and the fact that $`f`$ is the unique normalized cusp form of its weight, level, and character, we see that $`d(f)`$ is divisible only by primes $`k2`$. In particular, $`d(f)`$ is not divisible by $`\mathrm{}`$, so that (5.4) implies that

(5.5)
$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho _{f,\mathrm{}}})=0.$$

Since $`S=\mathrm{}`$, Propositions 2.2 and 4.4 now imply that (5.3) holds for $`\mathrm{}>2k`$. The fact that it holds for $`k+1<\mathrm{}<2k`$ follows on checking the criterion of \[14, Section 7\] for each such $`\mathrm{}`$. ∎


text:
# Euclidean simplices and invariants of three-manifolds: a modification of the invariant for lens spaces

## Introduction

It is well known that any two triangulations of a piecewise-linear three-manifold can be transformed into each other using the Pachner moves . If we construct an algebraic expression depending on some values ascribed to a manifold triangulation and invariant under these moves, we get a value that is independent of the choice of triangulation. It is natural way to construct a PL-manifold invariant. For example, Euler characteristic and Turaev-Viro type invariants can be proved to be invariant using exactly this method.

In this paper we present a new invariant of 3-dimensional PL-manifold based on Pachner’s theorem. Its construction is naturally divided into three main parts. First, on a given representation of the fundamental group we build a covering of a 3-manifold corresponding to the kernel of this representation. Then, we map the covering space into 3-dimensional Euclidean space. In the last, algebraic part, we build an acyclic complex of Euclidean geometric origin. The invariant of all the Pachner moves is expressed in terms of the torsion of that complex.

Such invariant was first constructed by I.G. Korepanov in papers  and calculated for some 3-manifolds, in particular, for a lens space $`L(p,q)`$. Recall that at the end of paper  we proposed a general formula for our invariant for $`L(p,q)`$ \[4, formula (4.1)\]. This formula gives, essentially, the squared Reidemeister torsion of $`L(p,q)`$. The main result of this paper is a proof of this formula (theorem 3.2).

The paper is organized as follows. In section 1 we prove an auxiliary theorem that will be used to prove the acyclicity of our complex (theorem 1.1). In section 2 we define an acyclic complex (theorem 2.4) and prove that its torsion, divided by some value, is a topological invariant, i.e., it is independent of the Pachner moves and some details of its construction (theorem 2.6). In section 3 we calculate our invariant for lens space $`L(p,q)`$ (theorem 3.2) and show that for this case our invariant is related to the Reidemeister torsion (remark 3.2). Finally, in section 4 we define and calculate a modified version of our invariant for lens spaces (theorem 4.1). The modification uses a nontrivial action of the fundamental group on the acyclic complex.

Acknowledgements. I am grateful to I.G. Korepanov for proposing me this problem and numerous helpful discussions.

## 1. Admissible colorings and the map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$

Let $`M`$ be a connected closed orientable 3-dimensional manifold. Let $`T`$ be its triangulation, i.e. a set $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of pairwise disjoint tetrahedra, together with a family of homeomorphisms, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, mapping the set of tetrahedra faces to itself, so that the identification space $`\mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is homeomorphic to $`M`$. Note that this definition allows us to consider non-combinatorial manifold triangulations, that is, a 3-simplex in it may not be determined uniquely by the set of its vertices. Moreover, simplex of any dimension is allowed to enter several times into the boundary of higher dimensional simplex.

As is well known, for each subgroup $`H`$ of the fundamental group $`\pi _1(M)`$, there exists such a covering $`p:\stackrel{~}{M}M`$ that the induced homomorphism $`p_{}:\pi _1(\stackrel{~}{M})H`$ is isomorphism. A covering corresponding to the trivial subgroup is called universal. The universal covering space $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ is a simply connected orientable 3-manifold. The fundamental group $`\pi _1(M)`$ acts on $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ freely and transitively and $`\stackrel{~}{M}/\pi _1(M)M`$.

Simplicial structure $`T`$ of manifold $`M`$ naturally induces a simplicial structure $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$: every simplex from $`T`$ can be lifted to $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ (in general, in many different ways according to the action of $`\pi _1(M)`$).

Let us ascribe a real number $`\lambda _{ij}>0`$ to every edge $`e_{ij}T`$, connecting vertices $`i`$ and $`j`$, so that the following inequality holds for every tetrahedron of complex $`T`$ with edges $`(e_{ij},e_{ik},e_{il},e_{jk},e_{jl},e_{kl})`$:

$$\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 1& 1& 1& 1\\ 1& 0& \lambda _{ij}^2& \lambda _{ik}^2& \lambda _{il}^2\\ 1& \lambda _{ij}^2& 0& \lambda _{jk}^2& \lambda _{jl}^2\\ 1& \lambda _{ik}^2& \lambda _{jk}^2& 0& \lambda _{kl}^2\\ 1& \lambda _{il}^2& \lambda _{jl}^2& \lambda _{kl}^2& 0\end{array}\right|>0.$$
(1)
Recall that this condition guarantees an existence of non-degenerate Euclidean tetrahedron with edge lengths $`(\lambda _{ij},\lambda _{ik},\lambda _{il},\lambda _{jk},\lambda _{jl},\lambda _{kl})`$ and this tetrahedron is unique up to isometries, cf. .

Further, let us ascribe a sign $`+`$ or $``$ to every tetrahedron $`\tau T`$. For each edge $`a`$, belonging to $`i`$th tetrahedron of complex $`T`$, we denote by $`\phi _a^{(i)}`$ its inner dihedral angle at this edge, taken with the sign ascribed to $`i`$th tetrahedron. This angle is a function of $`\lambda _{\mathrm{}}`$.

###### Definition 1.1.

Defect angle $`\omega _a`$ at an edge $`a`$ is a quantity

$$\omega _a=\underset{i}{}\phi _a^{(i)}mod2\pi ,$$

where the sum is taken over all tetrahedra sharing the edge $`a`$.

Let us say that we are given an admissible coloring on $`T`$, if to every edge $`e_{ij}T`$ a number $`\lambda _{ij}`$ is ascribed so that the condition (1) holds, and to every tetrahedron from $`T`$ a sign is ascribed so that the defect angle at every edge vanishes.

Note that an admissible coloring on $`T`$ induces an admissible coloring on $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ in a natural way: to every edge from the preimage of some $`e_{ij}T`$ we ascribe the same number $`\lambda _{ij}`$, and to every tetrahedron from the preimage of some $`\tau T`$ we ascribe the same sign as to $`\tau `$.

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ be a simplicial complex for the universal covering space $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. Let an admissible coloring be given on $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$. Then, there exists a continuous map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$ such that $`l_{ij}=\lambda _{ij}`$, $`i,j`$, where $`l_{ij}`$ is the length of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(e_{ij})`$. Any other map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}:\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$ for the same admissible coloring can be obtained from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by an orientation preserving isometry of $`^3`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\tau _1`$ be a certain tetrahedron of $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ and let $`(\lambda _{12},\lambda _{13},\lambda _{14},\lambda _{23},\lambda _{24},\lambda _{34})`$ be an admissible coloring of its edges. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1:\tau _1^3`$ an arbitrary embedding of this tetrahedron in $`^3`$ such that $`l_{ij}=\lambda _{ij}`$. Let $`\tau _2`$ be an adjacent tetrahedron, i.e. $`\tau _1\tau _2`$ is 2-dimensional simplex. Then, there exists an embedding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2:\tau _2^3`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ on $`\tau _2\tau _1`$. This embedding is unique: the tetrahedra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\tau _1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(\tau _2)`$ are on the same side or on the different sides from their common 2-face, if the signs of $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$ are the same or different respectively. We say that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ continue $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ by means of $`\tau _2`$.

Let us take an arbitrary tetrahedron $`\tau _i\stackrel{~}{T}`$ and consider a sequence of pairwise adjacent tetrahedra starting from $`\tau _1`$, that is, a sequence $`s_i=(\tau _1,\mathrm{},\tau _i)`$, where $`\tau _j\tau _{j+1}`$ is a 2-simplex for each consecutive pair $`(\tau _j,\tau _{j+1})`$ and for all $`j\{1,\mathrm{},i\}`$. Finally, define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{s_i}:\tau _i^3`$ as a continuation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ by means of the sequence $`s_i`$.

###### Lemma 1.2.

The map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{s_i}`$ is independent of a sequence $`s_i`$, i.e., if $`s_i^{}`$ is any other sequence of adjacent tetrahedra joining $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _i`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{s_i}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{s_i^{}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$.

###### Proof.

We have a sequence $`s_i`$ connecting $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _i`$. It can be geometrically imagined as a broken line whose every straight segment connects the barycenters of two adjacent tetrahedra. We must show that if $`s_i^{}`$ is any other sequence connecting $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _i`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{}:\tau _1_3`$ is a continuation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ by means of a closed path $`s_i(s_i^{})^1`$.

Recall that we are given an admissible coloring on $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$. It follows that all the defect angles are zeros. Let $`n`$ tetrahedra $`\tau _{k_1},\mathrm{},\tau _{k_n}`$ share an only edge $`e`$, where $`\tau _{k_i}`$ and $`\tau _{k_{i+1}}`$ share a face for all $`i`$. Denote by $`\alpha `$ a closed path $`(\tau _{k_1},\mathrm{},\tau _{k_n},\tau _{k_1})`$. Since the defect angle at $`e`$ is zero, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{k_1}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{k_1}^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{k_1}^{}:\tau _{k_1}_3`$ is a continuation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{k_1}`$ by means of $`\alpha `$.

Using Seifert-Van Kampen theorem, one can show that a closed path $`s_i(s_i^{})^1`$ may be represented as a finite product of paths like $`\alpha `$. Hence lemma 1.2 follows. ∎

Thus, for each tetrahedron $`\tau _i\stackrel{~}{T}`$ we have an embedding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i:\tau _i^3`$ so that two embeddings $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_j`$ agree on $`\tau _i\tau _j,i,j`$. Now we define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_i(x)x\tau _i,i.$$

In order to complete the proof of theorem 1.1, we need the following well-known result from general topology.

###### Lemma 1.3.

Let $`X=AB`$, where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are the closed subspaces of $`X`$. Let $`f:AY`$ and $`g:BY`$ be continuous. If $`f=g`$ on $`AB`$, then a function $`h`$ defined by

$$h(x)=\{\begin{array}{cc}f(x),\hfill & xA,\hfill \\ g(x),\hfill & xB,\hfill \end{array}$$

is continuous.

Lemma 1.3 and definition of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ imply that it is continuous.

The last statement of the theorem concerns the arbitrariness in the choice of embedding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{}`$ be another embedding of $`\tau _1`$ in $`^3`$. Denote by $`E(3)`$ the group of orientation preserving motions of 3-dimensional Euclidean space $`^3`$. Then, there is an element $`hE(3)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^{}(\tau _1)=h\mathrm{\Gamma }_1(\tau _1)`$. It follows from the construction of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(\stackrel{~}{T})=h\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{T})`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is independent of a choice of the first tetrahedron $`\tau _1`$ up to multiplying by an element of $`E(3)`$. This completes the proof of theorem 1.1. ∎

Let $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^{}`$ be preimages of an only tetrahedron $`\tau T`$ with respect to the covering projection. Then, there is an element $`g\pi _1(M)`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^{}=g\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$. Since the edge lengths of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^{}`$ are the same, there exists an element $`hE(3)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\tau }^{})=h\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\tau })`$. Thus we have a mapping $`\rho :gh`$. Obviously, $`\rho (g_1g_2)=\rho (g_1)\rho (g_2)`$, hence $`\rho :\pi _1(M)E(3)`$ is a homomorphism.

Denote $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=h\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`hE(3)`$. Then, $`\rho ^{}=h^1\rho h`$, where $`\rho ^{}`$ is a representation corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. Recall that the representations $`\rho ,\rho ^{}:\pi _1(M)E(3)`$ are called equivalent in this case. So, the following proposition holds.

###### Proposition 1.4.

For any admissible coloring of $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$, there is a unique class $`[\rho ]`$ of equivalent representations $`\pi _1(M)`$ in $`E(3)`$.

Conversely, given a representation

$$\rho :\pi _1(M)E(3),$$
(2)
one can construct a continuous map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho :\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$ as follows.

First of all, note that all the tetrahedra in the triangulation of orientable space $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ can be oriented consistently, i.e., for every tetrahedron, we can order its vertices up to even permutations. For example, we suppose the vertex orderings $`ABCD`$ and $`EABC`$ of two adjacent tetrahedra to be consistent.

###### Definition 1.2.

A fundamental family of simplices in $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ is such a family $``$ of simplices of $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ that over each simplex of $`T`$ lies exactly one simplex of this family.

Let us fix a consistent orientation on the set of all tetrahedra from $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ and also the fundamental family $``$ for $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$.

Let $`v`$ be a vertex belonging to $`T`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$ be its preimage in the fundamental family. Then we place the orbit of $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$, i.e. the set $`\{g\stackrel{~}{v}g\pi _1(M)\}`$, in $`^3`$ so that if $`\stackrel{~}{v}_2=g\stackrel{~}{v}_1`$, where $`g\pi _1(M)`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (\stackrel{~}{v}_2)=\rho (g)\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (\stackrel{~}{v}_1)`$. Thus, to each vertex of $`T`$ we assign a set of points in $`^3`$ whose coordinates are related by the motions of $`^3`$.

###### Remark 1.1.

The vertices from $``$ are mapped in $`^3`$ in arbitrary way. However, we require the configuration of these vertices in $`^3`$ to obey the following conditions of general position:

* the volumes of all tetrahedra from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }()`$ are nonzero;
* the rank of $`\left(\frac{\omega _i}{l_j}\right)`$ possesses the maximal value at the point $`\omega _i=0`$, $`i`$; here, $`\omega _i`$ is the defect angle at $`i`$th edge, $`l_j`$ is the length of $`j`$th edge, $`i`$ and $`j`$ run over all the edges from $``$.

Under $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho `$, each simplex $`\sigma ^k\stackrel{~}{T}`$ of nonzero dimension $`k`$ is mapped into the convex linear shell of its vertex images in $`^3`$. That is, if $`v_0`$, …, $`v_k`$ are the vertices of $`\sigma ^k`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (\sigma ^k)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}m_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (v_i)`$, where $`m_0+\mathrm{}+m_k=1`$ and $`m_i0,i`$.

Hence, every edge $`e\stackrel{~}{T}`$ is assigned the length of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (e)^3`$, and every 3-simplex $`\tau \stackrel{~}{T}`$ is assigned the oriented volume of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho (\tau )`$. Similarly, we can also speak about dihedral angles between 2-simplices in the triangulation.

Under $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\rho `$, the orientation of a tetrahedron either coincides with the orientation of $`^3`$ or does not. In the first case we take the volume of the tetrahedron and all its dihedral angles with the sign $`+`$, in the second case with the sign $``$.

Thus, given representation $`\rho `$, we have found an admissible coloring on $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$: for every edge we ascribe the length of its image in $`^3`$, for every tetrahedron we ascribe the sign of its volume in $`^3`$.

Before constructing the invariant, we need to recall some formulas of Euclidean geometry.

### 1.1. Formulas of Euclidean geometry

We are going to write out some formulas for derivatives $`\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}`$, taken under condition that the lengths of all edges, except $`b`$, are fixed. These formulas can be easily proved by direct calculation using definitions and elementary geometric relations like cosine rule, see  for details.

Clearly, we obtain nonzero derivatives only if $`a`$ and $`b`$ lie in a single tetrahedron. Consider several cases.

Edges $`a=AB`$ and $`b=CD`$ are skew in a tetrahedron $`ABCD`$ and there is no other tetrahedron in the triangulation containing both edges $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$\frac{\omega _{AB}}{l_{CD}}=\frac{l_{AB}l_{CD}}{V_{ABCD}},$$
(3)
where $`V_{ABCD}`$ is the volume of $`ABCD`$ multiplied by 6.

Edges $`a=AB`$ $`b=BC`$ belong to the common face of two adjacent tetrahedra and, again, there is no other tetrahedron in the triangulation containing both edges $`a`$ and $`b`$:

$$\frac{\omega _{AB}}{l_{BC}}=l_{AB}l_{BC}\frac{V_{CAED}}{V_{ABCD}V_{EABC}}.$$
(4)
Edge $`a=b=DE`$ is common for exactly three tetrahedra $`ABED`$, $`BCED`$ and $`CAED`$, and no one of these tetrahedra contain this edge more than one time:

$$\frac{\omega _{DE}}{l_{DE}}=l_{DE}^2\frac{V_{ABCD}V_{EABC}}{V_{ABED}V_{BCED}V_{CAED}}.$$
(5)
Edge $`a=b=DE`$ is common for $`>3`$ tetrahedra, and again no one of these tetrahedra contain this edge more than one time.

We write out this formula only for the case of four tetrahedra (the generalization for greater number of tetrahedra is obvious):

$$\frac{\omega _{DE}}{l_{DE}}=\frac{l_{DE}^2}{6}\left(\frac{V_{ABCD}V_{EABC}}{V_{ABED}V_{BCED}V_{CAED}}+\frac{V_{AFBD}V_{EAFB}}{V_{AFED}V_{FBED}V_{BAED}}\right).$$
(6)
Here, the right-hand side consists of two terms: the first one is the same as in (5), and the second one is obtained by replacing $`BF`$ and $`CB`$.

Actually, our definition of triangulation admits such gluings between faces of tetrahedra where different combinations of above mentioned cases appear. Namely, the edge $`b`$ may

* lie opposite to edge $`a`$ (1st case) in more than one tetrahedron;
* belong to the same 2-dimensional face as $`a`$ (2nd case), and again there may be more than one such faces;
* coincide with $`a`$ (as in the 3rd and 4th case),

and these possibilities (as examples show) do not exclude one another. Thus, there may be several “ways of influence” of $`dl_b`$ on $`d\omega _a`$. Clearly, the terms corresponding to these ways sum together.

## 2. Acyclic complex and invariant of 3-manifold

### 2.1. Generalities on acyclic complexes and their torsions

We shortly remind basic definitions from the theory of algebraic complexes, see  for details.

Let $`C_0`$, $`C_1`$, …, $`C_n`$ be finite-dimensional $``$-vector spaces. We suppose that each $`C_i`$ is based, that is has distinguished basis. Then, linear mapping $`f_i:C_{i+1}C_i`$ can be identified with matrix.

###### Definition 2.1.

The sequence of vector spaces and linear mappings

$$C=(0\stackrel{}{}C_n\stackrel{f_{n1}}{}C_{n1}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{}C_1\stackrel{f_0}{}C_0\stackrel{}{}0)$$
(7)
is called a complex if $`\mathrm{Im}f_i\mathrm{Ker}f_{i1}`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$. This condition is equivalent to $`f_{i1}f_i=0`$ for all $`i`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

The space $`H_i(C)=\mathrm{Ker}f_{i1}/\mathrm{Im}f_i`$ is called the $`i`$th homology of the complex $`C`$.

###### Definition 2.3.

The complex $`C`$ is said to be acyclic if $`H_i(C)=0`$ for all $`i`$. This condition is equivalent to $`\mathrm{rank}f_{i1}=dimC_i\mathrm{rank}f_i`$ for all $`i`$.

Suppose that the sequence (7) is an acyclic complex. Let $`𝒞_i`$ be an ordered set of basis vectors in $`C_i`$ and let $`_i𝒞_i`$ be a subset of basis vectors belonging to the space $`\mathrm{Im}f_i`$.

Denote by $`{}_{_i}{}^{}f_{i}^{}`$ a nondegenerate transition matrix from the basis in space $`\mathrm{Coker}f_{i+1}=C_{i+1}/\mathrm{Im}f_{i+1}`$ to the basis in space $`\mathrm{Im}f_i`$. By acyclicity, such a matrix really exists. Hence, $`{}_{_i}{}^{}f_{i}^{}`$ is a principal minor of the matrix $`f_i`$ obtained by striking out the rows corresponding to vectors of $`_{i+1}`$ and the columns corresponding to vectors of $`𝒞_i_i`$.

###### Definition 2.4.

A quantity

$$\tau (C)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(det{}_{_i}{}^{}f_{i}^{})^{(1)^{i+1}}$$
(8)
is called the torsion of acyclic complex $`C`$.

###### Theorem 2.1 ().

Up to a sign, $`\tau (C)`$ does not depend on the choice of subsets $`_i`$.

###### Remark 2.1.

The torsion $`\tau (C)`$ does depend on the distinguished basis of $`C_i`$. If one performs change-of-basis transformation in every space $`C_i`$ with nondegenerate matrix $`A_i`$, then the torsion $`\tau (C)`$ is multiplied by

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}(detA_i)^{(1)^{i+1}}.$$

From now on we suppose the fundamental group $`\pi _1(M)`$ to be finite. Since any real representation of a finite group is equivalent to the orthogonal one, then $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$ is actually a subgroup in $`\mathrm{SO}(3)`$.

###### Definition 2.5.

For a given representation $`\rho :\pi _1(M)E(3)`$, the centralizer of the subgroup $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$ is a set of elements $`gE(3)`$ so that $`g\rho (h)g^1=\rho (h)`$ for all $`h\pi _1(M)`$. The centralizer is a subgroup in $`E(3)`$, and we will denote it by $`E(3)_\rho `$. We denote by $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ the Lie algebra of $`E(3)_\rho `$. So,

$$𝔢(3)_\rho =\{u𝔢(3)\mathrm{Ad}_{\rho (h)}u=u,h\pi _1(M)\},$$

where $`\mathrm{Ad}_\rho =\mathrm{Ad}\rho :\pi _1(M)\mathrm{Aut}(𝔢(3))`$ and $`\mathrm{Ad}:g\mathrm{Ad}_g`$ is the adjoint representation.

Let us take a geometrically natural basis of the whole Lie algebra $`𝔢(3)`$ of $`E(3)`$. This basis consists of three translations $`dx`$, $`dy`$ and $`dz`$ along the Cartesian axes and three rotations $`d\phi _x`$, $`d\phi _y`$ and $`d\phi _z`$ around these axes. Then, we also have a basis in $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ induced by restriction.

###### Definition 2.6.

A representation $`\rho :\pi _1(M)E(3)`$ is called abelian (resp. trivial) if its image is abelian (resp. trivial) subgroup of $`E(3)`$.

###### Proposition 2.2.

Let $`𝔢(3)_2`$ be a 2-dimensional subalgebra of $`𝔢(3)`$ generated by the differential of screw motion along a fixed axis in $`^3`$ and let $`𝔬`$ be the trivial algebra Lie. Then,

$$𝔢(3)_\rho =\{\begin{array}{cc}𝔢(3),\hfill & \text{if }\mathrm{\rho }\text{ is trivial}\text{;}\hfill \\ 𝔢(3)_2,\hfill & \text{if }\mathrm{\rho }\text{ is abelian}\text{;}\hfill \\ 𝔬,\hfill & \text{if }\mathrm{\rho }\text{ is non abelian}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(9)
###### Proof.

If $`\rho `$ is trivial, then the centralizer of $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$ is $`E(3)`$, and hence, $`𝔢(3)_\rho =𝔢(3)`$.

Let $`\rho `$ be abelian. Then, $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$ consists of rotations around the only axis $`z`$ in $`^3`$. There exist two types of motions in $`E(3)`$ which commute with every element of $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$: a rotation around $`z`$ and translation along this axis. Hence, $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ is generated by the differential of a screw motion along $`z`$.

Let $`\rho `$ be non abelian. In this case, $`\mathrm{Im}\rho `$ consists of rotations around at least two nonparallel axes. The existence of such axes fixes the coordinate system in $`^3`$. Therefore, $`E(3)_\rho =1`$ and $`𝔢(3)_\rho =𝔬`$. ∎

Denote by $`N_i`$ the full amount of $`i`$-dimensional simplices in $``$.

We define a $`3N_0`$-dimensional vector space $`_x^{3N_0}`$ as a space of all mappings of the vertices from $``$ to $`^3`$. Denote by $`(dx)=T_\mathrm{\Gamma }_x^{3N_0}`$ the tangent space to $`_x^{3N_0}`$ at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The basis in $`(dx)`$ is generated by a choice of coordinate system in $`^3`$. For convenience, we choose the Cartesian coordinates.

A linear mapping $`f_1:𝔢(3)_\rho (dx)`$ is defined as follows. Under $`f_1`$, the six generators $`dx`$, $`dy`$, $`dz`$, $`d\phi _x`$, $`d\phi _y`$ and $`d\phi _z`$ of $`𝔢(3)`$ are mapped into the differentials of a vertex $`A`$ according to the evident formula:

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}dx_A\\ dy_A\\ dz_A\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& d\phi _z& d\phi _y\\ d\phi _z& 0& d\phi _x\\ d\phi _y& d\phi _x& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}x_A\\ y_A\\ z_A\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}dx\\ dy\\ dz\end{array}\right),$$
(10)
where $`x_A`$, $`y_A`$ and $`z_A`$ are the coordinates of $`A`$.

Let $`e`$ be any edge of the fundamental family. Let $`L_e=\frac{1}{2}l_e^2`$, where $`l_e`$ is the Euclidean length of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(e)^3`$. Define $`N_1`$-dimensional vector space $`_L^{N_1}`$ as a space of all mappings of the edges from $``$ to $``$. The subscript $`L`$ stresses that the basis of this space consists of the vectors $`(L_1,\mathrm{},L_{N_1})`$. Denote by $`(dL)=T_\mathrm{\Gamma }_L^{N_1}`$ the tangent space to $`_L^{N_1}`$ at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Consider a linear mapping $`f_2:(dx)(dL)`$. By definition, $`f_2`$ sends the given differentials of two vertices $`A`$ and $`B`$ to

$$dL_{AB}=(x_Bx_A)(dx_Bdx_A)+(y_By_A)(dy_Bdy_A)+(z_Bz_A)(dz_Bdz_A).$$
(11)
Since the bases of $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$, $`(dx)`$ and $`(dL)`$ are distinguished, then the mappings $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are uniquely determined by their matrices which we denote by the same letters.

Put $`\mathrm{\Omega }_e=\frac{\omega _e}{l_e}`$, where $`\omega _e`$ is the defect angle at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(e)`$ (definition 1.1). Similarly as we have defined the space $`(dL)`$, let us define the vector space $`(d\mathrm{\Omega })=T_\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{\Omega }^{N_1}`$: its basis consists of the vectors $`(d\mathrm{\Omega }_1,\mathrm{},d\mathrm{\Omega }_{N_1})`$.

Let us number the edges of $``$ in a certain order and consider the matrix $`f_3=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_a}{L_b}\right)`$, where $`a`$ and $`b`$ run over the edges of $``$ and the partial derivatives are taken at $`\omega _1=\mathrm{}=\omega _{N_1}=0`$. The matrix elements of $`f_3`$ are defined by formulas (3), (4), (5) and (6). In particular, these formulas imply that $`f_3`$ is symmetric. We can obtain the same result directly.

###### Lemma 2.3.

The matrix $`f_3`$ is symmetric, i.e. $`f_3^T=f_3`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`f_3=\left(\frac{1}{l_al_b}\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}\right)`$, it suffices to prove the symmetric form of matrix $`\left(\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}\right)`$. Let us find the Hessian of the function $`H(l_1,\mathrm{},l_{N_1})=\underset{k}{}l_k\omega _k`$ at the point $`\omega _1=\mathrm{}=\omega _{N_1}=0`$:

$$\frac{}{l_b}\left(\frac{H}{l_a}\right)=\frac{}{l_b}\left(\omega _a+\underset{k=1}{\overset{N_1}{}}l_k\frac{\omega _k}{l_a}\right)=\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}.$$

The second equality holds since $`\underset{k=1}{\overset{N_1}{}}l_kd\omega _k=0`$ (it is a consequence of well-known Schläfli’s differential identity \[5, p. 281–295\]). Hence, the claim follows. ∎

Denote by $`𝔢(3)_\rho ^{}`$ and $`(dx)^{}`$ vector spaces whose distinguished bases are dual to the ones of $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ and $`(dx)`$ respectively. This means that if, say, $`d=(d_1,\mathrm{},d_k)`$ is a basis of $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$, then a basis $`d^{}=(d_1^{},\mathrm{},d_k^{})`$ of $`𝔢(3)_\rho ^{}`$ is defined by

$$d_i^{}(d_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\hfill & i=j,\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & ij.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Theorem 2.4.

The sequence of vector spaces and linear mappings

$$0\stackrel{}{}𝔢(3)_\rho \stackrel{f_1}{}(dx)\stackrel{f_2}{}(dL)\stackrel{f_3=f_3^T}{}(d\mathrm{\Omega })\stackrel{f_2^T}{}(dx)^{}\stackrel{f_1^T}{}𝔢(3)_\rho ^{}\stackrel{}{}0$$
(12)
is an acyclic complex (definition 2.3).

###### Remark 2.2.

Recall that we restrict ourselves to the case of finite fundamental group. An example of space $`S^2\times S^1`$ shows that for manifolds with an infinite fundamental group there can exist a representation $`\rho `$ such that (12) is not acyclic. However, it turns out that for this case one can define an acyclic complex like (12) as well (see ).

Proof of theorem 2.4.

Acyclicity at $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ (= injectivity of $`f_1`$) holds because the vertices of the fundamental family are in general position (remark 1.1).

Acyclicity at $`(dx)`$. The elements of $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ generate global infinitesimal translations of the vertices from $``$ which do not change the lengths, according to (10). It follows that $`\mathrm{Im}f_1\mathrm{Ker}f_2`$. Conversely, if the vertex coordinates take arbitrary infinitesimal increments so that the differentials of all the lengths remain zero, then this corresponds to an element of the algebra $`𝔢(3)`$. It can be shown by direct calculation that if $`h`$ is such an element of $`\pi _1(M)`$ that $`u\mathrm{Ad}_{\rho (h)}u`$, then any nonzero element $`u𝔢(3)/𝔢(3)_\rho `$ generates infinitesimal increments of the vertices for which $`dL_{A,hA}0`$, where $`A`$ is a vertex from $``$. Clearly, it is impossible if $`dL_e=0`$ for every $`e`$ in $``$. Hence, $`\mathrm{Ker}f_2\mathrm{Im}f_1`$ and the acyclicity at $`(dx)`$ follows.

Acyclicity at $`(dL)`$. The elements of factor-space $`(dx)/𝔢(3)_\rho `$ generate infinitesimal increments of the edge lengths, but all the defect angles remain zero, i.e. $`\mathrm{Im}f_2\mathrm{Ker}f_3`$. To prove the converse, we must show that if all $`L_j`$ take infinitesimal increments $`dL_j`$ so that all $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_i=0`$, then $`dL_j`$’s are generated by some elements of $`(dx)`$. Let us first prove the “finite” version of this statement.

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let the lengths of the edges from $``$ take small but finite increments $`\mathrm{\Delta }l_j`$ so that all $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _i=0`$. Then, there are such points in $`^3`$ with coordinates $`(x_k^{},y_k^{},z_k^{})`$ that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }L_j=l_j\mathrm{\Delta }l_j=(x_kx_s)(\mathrm{\Delta }x_k\mathrm{\Delta }x_s)+(y_ky_s)(\mathrm{\Delta }y_k\mathrm{\Delta }y_s)+(z_kz_s)(\mathrm{\Delta }z_k\mathrm{\Delta }z_s),$$
(13)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_k=x_k^{}x_k`$.

###### Proof.

If $`\mathrm{\Delta }l_j`$ are small enough, then all the determinants from (1) remain positive. With a condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _i=0,i`$ this means that $`l_j+\mathrm{\Delta }l_j`$ give an admissible coloring on $`T`$ and induced admissible coloring on $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$. By theorem 1.1, there exists a continuous map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}:\stackrel{~}{T}^3`$ such that $`l_j^{}=l_j+\mathrm{\Delta }l_j`$, $`j`$, where $`l_j^{}`$ is the length of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(e_j)`$ of some edge $`e_j`$. Then, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ maps all the vertices from the fundamental family to points in $`^3`$ which are the ones we looked for. ∎

This lemma implies that for the sequence

$$_x^{3N_0}\stackrel{F_2}{}_L^{N_1}\stackrel{F_3}{}_\mathrm{\Omega }^{N_1},$$
(14)
the inclusion $`\mathrm{Ker}F_3\mathrm{Im}F_2`$ holds. Note that $`f_2=dF_2`$ and $`f_3=dF_3`$. Therefore, taking the differential of this sequence and taking into account the conditions of general position from remark 1.1, we get $`\mathrm{Ker}f_3\mathrm{Im}f_2`$, hence the acyclicity at $`(dL)`$ follows.

Acyclicity at other spaces. Recall that $`\mathrm{Ker}f_3=\mathrm{Im}f_2`$ is equivalent to

$$\mathrm{rank}f_3=dim(dL)\mathrm{rank}f_2.$$

Taking into account that $`dim(dL)=dim(d\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`\mathrm{rank}(f_2^T)=\mathrm{rank}f_2`$, we get

$$\mathrm{rank}(f_2^T)=dim(d\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{rank}f_3,$$

that means the acyclicity at $`(d\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Likewise, the acyclicity at $`(dx)^{}`$ and $`𝔢(3)_\rho ^{}`$ follows from the acyclicity at $`(dx)`$ and $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ respectively. Theorem 2.4 is proven. ∎

Denote by $`𝒞_0`$, $`𝒞_1`$ and $`𝒞_2`$ arbitrary ordered sets of basis vectors in the spaces $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$, $`(dx)`$ and $`(dL)`$ respectively. Let $`_i𝒞_i`$ be a subset of basis vectors belonging to $`\mathrm{Im}f_i`$. Denote by $`{}_{_i}{}^{}f_{i}^{}`$ such a principal minor of the matrix $`f_i`$ that its rows correspond to the vectors from $`𝒞_{i1}_{i1}`$ and its columns correspond to the vectors from $`_i`$. Let $`_3=𝒞_2_2`$. Then, according to definition 2.4, the torsion of the complex (12) looks like

$$\tau =\frac{(det{}_{_2}{}^{}f_{2}^{})^2(1)^{\mathrm{rank}f_2}}{det{}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}(det{}_{_1}{}^{}f_{1}^{})^2}.$$

By the acyclicity,

$$(1)^{\mathrm{rank}f_2}=(1)^{dim(dx)dim𝔢(3)_\rho }=(1)^{3N_0}=(1)^{N_0},$$

where the second equality is due to proposition 2.2. It follows that

$$\tau =\frac{(det{}_{_2}{}^{}f_{2}^{})^2(1)^{N_0}}{det{}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}(det{}_{_1}{}^{}f_{1}^{})^2}.$$
(15)
Besides, the form of (12) implies that the torsion $`\tau `$ is independent of the ordering on $`𝒞_i,i`$.

Put

$$I_\rho (M)=\frac{\tau }{(V)},$$
(16)
where $`V`$ is the volume of tetrahedron multiplied by 6, and the product is taken over all tetrahedra of $``$.

###### Theorem 2.6.

For a given representation $`\rho `$, the quantity $`I_\rho (M)`$ is an invariant of the manifold $`M`$.

Proof is by a series of lemmas. We have to show that $`I_\rho (M)`$ is independent of various details of its construction. First, it does not depend on the choice of the fundamental family $``$. Second, using formula (5) and Pachner’s theorem, one can show that $`I_\rho (M)`$ does not depend on the choice of the triangulation of $`M`$ (see  for details of proof). Finally, $`I_\rho (M)`$ is independent of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e. it does not matter in which points of Euclidean space we place the vertices from the fundamental family (see remark 1.1).

###### Lemma 2.7.

$`I_\rho (M)`$ does not depend on the choice of the fundamental family $``$.

###### Proof.

First, note that the corresponding simplices from the different fundamental families can be obtained from each other by an action of a certain element of $`\pi _1(M)`$. It follows that the lengths, dihedral angles and tetrahedron volumes do not change under replacing the fundamental family with another one. Therefore, the bases in $`(dx)`$ and $`(dx)^{}`$ can only change and they must stay dual to each other.

Denote by $`A,B\mathrm{SO}(3N_0)`$ the change-of-basis matrices in the spaces $`(dx)`$ and $`(dx)^{}`$ respectively. Then, $`\stackrel{~}{f_2}=f_2A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{f_2^T}=B^1f_2^T=\stackrel{~}{f_2}^T=A^Tf_2^T`$. Hence, $`B=(A^T)^1`$. That is, the torsion of (12) is divided by $`(detA)^2=1`$ (see remark 2.1) and the claim follows. ∎

###### Lemma 2.8 ().

$`I_\rho (M)`$ does not depend on the triangulation of $`M`$.

###### Lemma 2.9.

$`I_\rho (M)`$ is independent of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e., it does not matter in which points of Euclidean space we place the vertices from $``$.

###### Proof.

Let $`v`$ be an arbitrary vertex of $`T`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$. We are going to show that using the Pachner moves one can move $`O=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{v})`$ in any other point of $`^3`$ in such a way that all the remaining vertices from $`\mathrm{\Gamma }()`$ do not change their positions. Then, the claim will follow from lemma 2.8.

Recall that a union of all simplices containing $`O`$ as a vertex is called the star and is denoted by $`\mathrm{St}(O)`$. A union of all simplices of $`\mathrm{St}(O)`$ which do not contain $`O`$ is called the link of the vertex $`O`$ and is denoted by $`\mathrm{lk}(O)`$.

First of all, let us make a barycentric subdivision (which can be represented as a finite sequence of the Pachner moves) of the initial triangulation $`T`$ so as to reach a combinatorial triangulation where the link of every vertex is a triangulated 2-sphere.

Further, let vertices $`A,B,C`$ and $`P`$ belong to the link of $`O`$ such as depicted in figure 1.

We do a move $`23`$ in the cluster of two tetrahedra $`AOPC`$ and $`BAOP`$ adding a new edge $`BC`$. Doing so several times for other clusters from $`\mathrm{St}(O)`$, we can decrease to three the number of edges starting from $`A`$ and belonging to $`\mathrm{lk}(O)`$. After that, doing the move $`32`$, we remove the edge $`OA`$ from $`\mathrm{St}(O)`$ and the vertex $`A`$ from $`\mathrm{lk}(O)`$. Continuing this way, we decrease to four the number of vertices in $`\mathrm{lk}(O)`$.

Now the link of $`O`$ is a tetrahedron and we do the move $`41`$ to remove the vertex $`O`$ from the triangulation. After that, doing the move $`14`$, we return it back, but in another point of $`^3`$, which is required to be in general position with other points (see remark 1.1). Finally, inverting the whole sequence of the Pachner moves, we return to the initial simplicial complex. It remains only to note that, by lemma 2.8, $`I_\rho (M)`$ does not change its value at every step. ∎

Theorem 2.6 is proven. ∎

## 3. Calculation of the invariant for $`L(p,q)`$

### 3.1. Generalities on lens spaces and their triangulations

Let $`p>q>0`$ be two coprime integers. We identify $`S^3`$ with the subset $`\{(z_1,z_2)^2||z_1|^2+|z_2|^2=1\}`$ of $`^2`$. The lens space $`L(p,q)`$ is defined as the quotient manifold $`S^3/`$, where $``$ denotes the action of the cyclic group $`_p`$ on $`S^3`$ given by:

$$\zeta (z_1,z_2)=(\zeta z_1,\zeta ^qz_2),\zeta =e^{2\pi i/p}.$$
(17)
As a consequence the universal cover of a lens space is the three-dimensional sphere $`S^3`$ and

$$\pi _1\left(L(p,q)\right)H_1\left(L(p,q)\right)_p.$$
(18)
###### Remark 3.1.

In formula (17), the group $`_p`$ is understood as a multiplicative group of roots of unity of degree $`p`$. Below, it will be more convenient for us to consider it as an additive group consisting of integers between 0 and $`p1`$ whose addition is understood modulo $`p`$.

The full classification of lens spaces is due to Reidemeister and is given in the following theorem.

###### Theorem 3.1 ().

Lens spaces $`L(p,q)`$ and $`L(p^{},q^{})`$ are homeomorphic if and only if $`p^{}=p`$ and $`q^{}=\pm q^{\pm 1}modp`$.

Now we describe a triangulation of $`L(p,q)`$ which will be used in our computations. Consider $`p`$-gonal bipyramid, i.e. a union of two cones over a regular polygon of $`p`$ sides. Denote by $`B_0`$, $`B_1`$, …, $`B_{p1}`$ the vertices of the polygon and by $`D_0`$, $`D_q`$ the cone apexes. For each $`i`$, we glue together the faces $`B_iD_0B_{i+1}`$ and $`B_{i+q}D_qB_{i+q+1}`$ (all indices are taken modulo $`p`$). It is easy to see that the result is homeomorphic to the lens space $`L(p,q)`$ (fig. 2).

Let $`g`$ be a generator of $`_p`$. Given a Cartesian coordinate system $`(x,y,z)`$, we define a representation

$$\rho _k:g\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{cos}\frac{2\pi k}{p}& \mathrm{sin}\frac{2\pi k}{p}& 0\\ \mathrm{sin}\frac{2\pi k}{p}& \mathrm{cos}\frac{2\pi k}{p}& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right),k=1,\mathrm{},p1,$$
(19)
which sends $`g`$ in a rotation around the axis $`z`$ in $`^3`$ through the angle $`\frac{2\pi k}{p}`$, where $`k0`$.

We are going to calculate $`I_k(L(p,q))`$ for the lens space $`L(p,q)`$ and the representation $`\rho _k`$ defined by (19).

Let us put the vertices of the fundamental family to points $`B_0(1,0,0)`$ and $`D_0(\mathrm{cos}\alpha ,\mathrm{sin}\alpha ,1)`$, where $`\alpha =\frac{\pi }{2}+\frac{\pi k(q1)}{p}`$. Then, one can find the volumes (multiplied by 6) of all consistently oriented tetrahedra, entering in the triangulation:

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill V_iV_{B_iB_{i+1}D_0D_q}=\left|\begin{array}{ccc}x_{D_0}x_{D_q}& y_{D_0}y_{D_q}& z_{D_0}z_{D_q}\\ x_{D_0}x_{B_i}& y_{D_0}y_{B_i}& z_{D_0}z_{B_i}\\ x_{D_0}x_{B_{i+1}}& y_{D_0}y_{B_{i+1}}& z_{D_0}z_{B_{i+1}}\end{array}\right|=\\ \hfill \left|\begin{array}{ccc}x_{D_0}x_{D_q}& y_{D_0}y_{D_q}& 0\\ x_{B_i}& y_{B_i}& z_{D_0}\\ x_{B_{i+1}}& y_{B_{i+1}}& z_{D_0}\end{array}\right|=\\ \hfill z_{D_0}(x_{D_0}x_{D_q})(y_{B_{i+1}}y_{B_i})z_{D_0}(y_{D_0}y_{D_q})(x_{B_{i+1}}x_{B_i})=\\ \hfill 4\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi qk}{p}\mathrm{cos}\frac{2\pi ki}{p},\end{array}$$
(20)
where $`i`$ runs from 0 to $`p1`$ and $`B_p=B_0`$.

By proposition 2.2, the space $`𝔢(3)_\rho `$ is generated by the differential of a screw motion. Let $`d\phi _z`$ and $`dz`$ be an infinitesimal rotation around the axis $`z`$ and infinitesimal translation along this axis respectively. Then, $`𝒞_0=_0=\{d\phi _z,dz\}`$.

The basis vectors of the space $`(dx)`$ are the differentials of Euclidean coordinates of $`B_0`$ and $`D_0`$. Choose

$$_1=\{dz_{B_0},dx_{D_0}\}.$$

Then, by direct calculation, we obtain

$$det{}_{_1}{}^{}f_{1}^{}=\left|\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ y_{D_0}& 0\end{array}\right|=\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi k(q1)}{p}.$$
(21)
The space $`(dL)`$ has dimension $`p+2`$ and the set of its basis vectors looks like

$$𝒞_2=\{dL_{B_0B_1},dL_{D_0B_0},\mathrm{},dL_{D_0B_{p1}},dL_{D_0D_q}\},$$

Choose

$$_2=\{dL_{B_0B_1},dL_{D_0B_{q1}},dL_{D_0B_{p1}},dL_{D_0D_q}\}.$$

Then,

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill det{}_{_2}{}^{}f_{2}^{}=\left|\begin{array}{cccc}\frac{L_{B_0B_1}}{x_{B_0}}& 0& 0& 0\\ \frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{x_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{y_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{y_{D_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{z_{D_0}}\\ \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{x_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{y_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{y_{D_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{z_{D_0}}\\ 0& 0& \frac{L_{D_0D_q}}{y_{D_0}}& 0\end{array}\right|=\\ \hfill \frac{L_{B_0B_1}}{x_{B_0}}\frac{L_{D_0D_q}}{y_{D_0}}\left|\begin{array}{cc}\frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{y_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{q1}}}{z_{D_0}}\\ \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{y_{B_0}}& \frac{L_{D_0B_{p1}}}{z_{D_0}}\end{array}\right|=\frac{L_{B_0B_1}}{x_{B_0}}\frac{L_{D_0D_q}}{y_{D_0}}\frac{(L_{D_0B_{p1}}L_{D_0B_{q1}})}{y_{B_0}}z_{D_0}=\\ \hfill 32x_{B_0}y_{D_0}z_{D_0}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k}{p}\mathrm{sin}^3\frac{\pi kq}{p}(x_{D_0}\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi k(q2)}{p}y_{D_0}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k(q2)}{p})=\\ \hfill 32\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k}{p}\mathrm{sin}^3\frac{\pi kq}{p}\mathrm{cos}\frac{\pi k(q1)}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k(2q3)}{p}.\end{array}$$
(22)
###### Theorem 3.2.

The invariant $`I_k(L(p,q))`$ for the lens space $`L(p,q)`$ and representation $`\rho _k`$ defined in (19) looks as follows

$$I_k(L(p,q))=\frac{1}{p^2}\left(4\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi kq}{p}\right)^4.$$
(23)
###### Proof.

Recall that $`_3=𝒞_2_2`$. In order to find $`det{}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}`$, we define a submatrix $`f_3^{}={}_{𝒞_2^{}}{}^{}f_{3}^{}`$ as a restriction of matrix $`f_3`$ to the subset

$$𝒞_2^{}=\{dL_{D_0B_i}i=0,\mathrm{},p1\}.$$

Let us write out all the nonzero elements of $`f_3^{}`$. Since $`f_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{T}=f_3^{}`$, we have to write $`(f_3^{})_{i,j}`$ for $`ji`$ only.

We begin from the diagonal elements. Note that four tetrahedra $`B_{i1}B_iD_0D_q`$, $`B_iB_{i+1}D_0D_q`$, $`B_{i+q1}B_{i+q}D_0D_q`$ and $`B_{i+q}B_{i+q+1}D_0D_q`$ share the edge $`D_0B_i`$. So, one can use formula (6) to find $`(f_3^{})_{i,i}=\frac{1}{l_{D_0B_i}^2}\frac{\omega _{D_0B_i}}{l_{D_0B_i}}`$:

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i}=\left(\frac{V_{D_qB_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}}V_{B_{i+1}B_{i1}D_0D_q}}{V_{i1}V_iV_{B_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}D_0}}+\frac{V_{D_qB_{i+q1}B_{i+q}B_{i+q+1}}V_{B_{i+q+1}B_{i+q1}D_0D_q}}{V_{i+q1}V_{i+q}V_{B_{i+q1}B_{i+q}B_{i+q+1}D_0}}\right).$$

We can simplify this expression using the following obvious equalities:

$$V_{D_qB_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}}=V_{B_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}D_0},V_{D_qB_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}}=V_{B_{i1}B_iB_{i+1}D_0}$$

and

$$V_{B_{i+1}B_{i1}D_0D_q}=V_{i1}+V_i,V_{B_{i+q+1}B_{i+q1}D_0D_q}=V_{i+q1}+V_{i+q}.$$

Then, we obtain

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i}=\frac{1}{V_{i1}}\frac{1}{V_i}\frac{1}{V_{i+q1}}\frac{1}{V_{i+q}}.$$

Likewise, using (3)–(6), one can find the remaining nonzero entries of $`f_3^{}`$:

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i+1}=\frac{1}{V_i}+\frac{1}{V_{i+q}},$$

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i+q1}=\frac{1}{V_{i+q1}},$$

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i+q}=\frac{1}{V_{i+q1}}\frac{1}{V_{i+q}},$$

$$(f_3^{})_{i,i+q+1}=\frac{1}{V_{i+q}}.$$

Let us define an auxiliary matrix $`\mathrm{\Phi }_3=\mathrm{\Phi }_3^T`$ with the following nonzero elements

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_3)_{i,i}=\frac{1}{V_{i1}}\frac{1}{V_i},$$

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_3)_{i,i+1}=\frac{1}{V_i},$$

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_3)_{i,i1}=\frac{1}{V_{i1}}.$$

Then, the matrix $`f_3^{}`$ can be represented as

$$f_3^{}=\mathrm{\Phi }_3+E^q\mathrm{\Phi }_3E^qE^q\mathrm{\Phi }_3\mathrm{\Phi }_3E^q=(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE^q)\mathrm{\Phi }_3(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE^q),$$
(24)
where

$$E=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 1& & \\ & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ & & 0& 1\\ 1& & & 0\end{array}\right),$$
(25)
$`\mathrm{𝟏}_p`$ is the identity matrix of size $`p\times p`$. Units in $`E`$ form a cyclic diagonal upper the main one.

Also, taking into account that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_3=(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE^1)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{V_0}& & \\ & \mathrm{}& \\ & & \frac{1}{V_{p1}}\end{array}\right)(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE),$$

we finally get

$$f_3^{}=S_qS_1RS_1S_q,$$
(26)
where we have denoted

$$S_i=\mathrm{𝟏}_pE^i,R=\mathrm{diag}(V_0^1,V_1^1,\mathrm{}V_{p1}^1).$$
(27)
We are going to use the factorization (26) of matrix $`f_3^{}`$ in order to simplify the matrix $`{}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}`$ by means of elementary transformations. The subset $`_3`$ is chosen in such a way that the matrix $`S_q`$ in (26) loses its $`q`$th and last rows. Hence, the $`q`$th column of this matrix becomes zero. So, we can take away this column and also the $`q`$th row in $`S_1`$.

Denote the transformed matrices as $`\stackrel{~}{S}_q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$. Then, adding the rows in $`\stackrel{~}{S}_q`$, we get it in form

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& & & 1\\ & \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ & & 1& 1\end{array}\right).$$

Further, let us multiply the matrices $`\stackrel{~}{S}_q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$ and transform the obtained $`(p2)\times p`$ matrix in such a manner that its first $`p2`$ columns form the identity matrix. That is,

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_q\stackrel{~}{S}_1\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}& 𝐚& 𝐛\end{array}\right).$$

Here, the components of columns $`𝐚`$ and $`𝐛`$ look like

$$𝐚_i=\{\begin{array}{cc}i,\hfill & i=1,\mathrm{},q1,\hfill \\ ip,\hfill & i=q,\mathrm{},p2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(28)
$$𝐛_i=1𝐚_i.$$
(29)
Now, using the symmetric form (26) of the matrix $`f_3^{}`$, we find

$${}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}& 𝐚& 𝐛\end{array}\right)R\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}\\ 𝐚^T\\ 𝐛^T\end{array}\right)=R^{}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}& \frac{𝐚^{}}{V_{p2}}& \frac{𝐛^{}}{V_{p1}}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}\\ 𝐚^T\\ 𝐛^T\end{array}\right),$$
(30)
where $`𝐚^{}=R^1𝐚`$, $`𝐛^{}=R^1𝐛`$ and $`R^{}=\mathrm{diag}(V_0^1,V_1^1,\mathrm{}V_{p3}^1)`$.

Denote

$$P=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}& \frac{𝐚^{}}{V_{p2}}& \frac{𝐛^{}}{V_{p1}}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}\\ 𝐚^T\\ 𝐛^T\end{array}\right)=\mathrm{𝟏}_{p2}+\frac{1}{V_{p2}}𝐚^{}𝐚^T+\frac{1}{V_{p1}}𝐛^{}𝐛^T.$$

It is well known that the eigenvalues of a matrix $`\frac{1}{V_{p2}}𝐚^{}𝐚^T+\frac{1}{V_{p1}}𝐛^{}𝐛^T`$ of rank 2 are

$$0,\mathrm{},0,\lambda _1,\lambda _2,$$

where $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2`$ are the eigenvalues of $`2\times 2`$ matrix:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{V_{p2}}𝐚^T𝐚^{}& \frac{1}{V_{p1}}𝐚^T𝐛^{}\\ \frac{1}{V_{p2}}𝐛^T𝐚^{}& \frac{1}{V_{p1}}𝐛^T𝐛^{}\end{array}\right).$$

This yields

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill detP=\frac{1}{V_{p2}V_{p1}}\left|\begin{array}{cc}V_{p2}+𝐚^T𝐚^{}& 𝐚^T𝐛^{}\\ 𝐛^T𝐚^{}& V_{p1}+𝐛^T𝐛^{}\end{array}\right|=\\ \hfill \frac{1}{V_{p2}V_{p1}}\left|\begin{array}{cc}V_{p2}+𝐚^T𝐚^{}& V_{p2}𝐚_i^{}\\ V_{p2}𝐚_i^{}& 0\end{array}\right|=\frac{(V_{p2}𝐚_i^{})^2}{V_{p2}V_{p1}}=\\ \hfill \frac{1}{V_{p2}V_{p1}}(p\underset{i=q}{\overset{p1}{}}V_{i1}\underset{i=1}{\overset{p1}{}}iV_{i1})^2=\frac{4p^2}{V_{p2}V_{p1}}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi kq}{p}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k(2q3)}{p}.\end{array}$$
(31)
The second equality holds since $`𝐛_i=1𝐚_i`$. We also took into account that $`\underset{i=0}{\overset{p1}{}}V_i=0`$, which is true by (20).

So, we find

$$det{}_{_3}{}^{}f_{3}^{}=\frac{1}{\underset{i=0}{\overset{p3}{}}V_i}detP=\frac{4p^2}{\underset{i=0}{\overset{p1}{}}V_i}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi kq}{p}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\pi k(2q3)}{p}.$$

Combining this with expressions (21) and (22) for $`det{}_{_1}{}^{}f_{1}^{}`$ and $`det{}_{_2}{}^{}f_{2}^{}`$, we find the torsion of the complex (12) and then, by formula (16), the invariant (23). Theorem 3.2 is proven. ∎

###### Remark 3.2.

For coprime $`p`$ and $`q`$, there are two integers $`a`$ and $`b`$ such that $`aq+bp=1`$. Let $`\zeta `$ be a primitive root of unity of degree $`p`$. Then, the Reidemeister torsion of lens space $`L(p,q)`$ is defined by the formula (\[8, theorem 10.6\]):

$$\tau _R(L(p,q))=(1\zeta ^k)^1(1\zeta ^{ka})^1,$$

where $`k=1,\mathrm{},p1`$. Comparing this with (23), we conclude that for a given $`p`$ formula (23) yields $`|\tau _R(L(p,q))|^4`$ up to a constant.

## 4. A modification of the invariant for lens spaces

Let $`M`$ be a lens space $`L(p,q)`$ (see subsection 3.1). In figure 3

we depict another triangulation $`T`$ of $`L(p,q)`$ which is a subdivision of the one depicted in figure 2. Now we present $`L(p,q)`$ as a triangulated regular $`2p`$-gonal bipyramid. Take $`p1`$ more copies of this bipyramid (changing indices cyclically modulo $`p`$) and glue them together by pairs of faces with the same vertices. Thus we obtain a triangulation of the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{L(p,q)}S^3`$. We denote this triangulation by $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$. It consists of $`4p`$ vertices, $`p(4p+4)`$ edges, $`8p^2`$ 2-simplices and $`4p^2`$ tetrahedra.

Consider the acyclic complex (12) for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{T})`$:

$$0\stackrel{}{}𝔢(3)\stackrel{f_1}{}(dx)\stackrel{f_2}{}(dL)\stackrel{f_3}{}(d\mathrm{\Omega })\stackrel{f_2^T}{}(dx)^{}\stackrel{f_1^T}{}𝔢(3)^{}\stackrel{}{}0.$$
(32)
Since $`\pi _1(L(p,q))_p`$, all the spaces in (32) are finite-dimensional.

Define the following unitary matrix:

$$Z=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1& 1& \mathrm{}& 1\\ 1& \zeta & \mathrm{}& \zeta ^{p1}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ 1& \zeta ^{p1}& \mathrm{}& \zeta ^{(p1)^2}\end{array}\right),$$
(33)
where $`\zeta `$ is a primitive root of unity of degree $`p`$.

In the sequence (32), let us change the bases of $`(dx)`$ and $`(dx)^{}`$ by means of $`Z\mathrm{𝟏}_{12}`$ and the bases of $`(dL)`$ and $`(d\mathrm{\Omega })`$ by means of $`Z\mathrm{𝟏}_{4p+4}`$. Then, it is easy to see that the complex (32) decomposes into a direct sum of acyclic complexes:

$$\begin{array}{cc}& 0\stackrel{}{}𝔢(3)\stackrel{f_1^{(0)}}{}(dx)_0\stackrel{f_2^{(0)}}{}(dL)_0\stackrel{f_3^{(0)}}{}(d\mathrm{\Omega })_0\stackrel{(f_2^{(0)})^{}}{}(dx)_0^{}\stackrel{(f_1^{(0)})^{}}{}𝔢(3)\stackrel{}{}0,\hfill \\ & 0\stackrel{}{}(dx)_j\stackrel{f_2^{(j)}}{}(dL)_j\stackrel{f_3^{(j)}}{}(d\mathrm{\Omega })_j\stackrel{(f_2^{(j)})^{}}{}(dx)_j^{}\stackrel{}{}0,j=1,\mathrm{},p1,\hfill \end{array}$$
(34)
where $``$ means the Hermitian conjugation.

Any matrix element of $`f_3^{(j)}`$ is, in general, a polynomial in $`\zeta ^j`$ with partial derivatives $`\frac{1}{l_al_b}\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}`$ as its coefficients. These partial derivatives correspond to the five cases considered above, see formulas (3)–(6). However, in our case the matrix $`f_3^{(j)}`$ has many zero entries. This can be explained in one of two ways: either the corresponding derivative $`\omega _a/l_b`$ vanishes because the edges $`a`$ and $`b`$ do not belong to the same tetrahedron, or if two edges $`a`$ and $`b`$ belong to the same two-dimensional face (this includes, in particular, the case $`a=b`$), then the summands in the derivative

$$\frac{\omega _a}{l_b}=\underset{i}{}\frac{(\phi _a)_i}{l_b},$$

where $`i`$ numbers the tetrahedra around $`a`$, can be grouped in pairs for which the two derivatives $`(\phi _a)_i/l_b`$ are equal in absolute value but differ in signs, because the two corresponding tetrahedra have opposite orientations.

By formula (8), the torsions of the complexes (34) look as follows

$$\tau _j=|det{}_{_1^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{1}^{(j)}|^2|det{}_{_2^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{2}^{(j)}|^2(det{}_{_3^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{3}^{(j)})^1,j=0,\mathrm{},p1,$$
(35)
where, of course, $`f_1^{(j)}=0`$ and $`det{}_{_1^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{1}^{(j)}=1`$ for $`j0`$.

For simplicity, let us put the vertices $`A_i`$, $`B_i`$, $`C_i`$ and $`D_i`$ ($`i=0,\mathrm{},p1`$) to points $`A(0,0,0)`$, $`B(1,0,0)`$, $`C(0,1,0)`$ and $`D(0,0,1)`$ respectively. Then $`V_{ABCD}=1`$ and, by theorem 2.6, the corresponding invariants look like

$$I_j(L(p,q))=\tau _j$$
(36)
for $`j=0,\mathrm{},p1`$.

Let us introduce the following ordering on the set of $`4p+4`$ edges in the triangulation $`T`$ (cf. figure 3):

$$\begin{array}{cc}& A_0B_0,\mathrm{},A_0B_{p1},C_0D_0,\mathrm{},C_{p1}D_0,\hfill \\ & A_0C_0,\mathrm{},A_0C_{p1},B_0D_0,\mathrm{},B_{p1}D_0,\hfill \\ & A_0D_0,A_0D_q,B_0C_0,B_1C_0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(37)
The, we choose

$$_2^{(0)}=\{1,p+1,2p+1,3p+1,4p+1,4p+3\}$$

and

$$_2^{(j)}=\{1,2,p+1,p+2,2p+1,2p+2,3p+1,3p+2,4p+1,\mathrm{},4p+4\}$$

for $`j=1,\mathrm{},p1`$. Here, for example, $`4p+1`$ means $`dL_{A_0D_0}`$ and so on.

Due to the acyclicity of (34), we find

$$\mathrm{rank}f_2^{(0)}=6,\mathrm{rank}f_3^{(0)}=4p2$$

and

$$\mathrm{rank}f_2^{(j)}=12,\mathrm{rank}f_3^{(j)}=4p8$$

for all $`j=1,\mathrm{},p1`$. We see that $`\mathrm{rank}f_2^{(j)}`$ does not depend on $`p`$ for all $`j`$. Therefore, the determinants $`det{}_{_2^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{2}^{(j)}`$ in (35) can be easily found by a direct calculation:

$$det{}_{_2^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{2}^{(j)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{p^3}det{}_{_1^{(0)}}{}^{}f_{1}^{(0)},\hfill & j=0,\hfill \\ (\zeta ^j1)^5(\zeta ^{qj}1),\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},p1,\hfill \end{array}$$
(38)
where $`_1^{(0)}=𝒞_1`$.

###### Theorem 4.1.

The invariants $`I_j(L(p,q))`$ look as follows

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill I_0(L(p,q))& =\frac{1}{p^{12}},\hfill \\ \hfill I_j(L(p,q))& =\left(4\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi j}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi qj}{p}\right)^6.\hfill \end{array}$$
(39)
###### Proof.

Recall that $`_3^{(j)}=𝒞_3_2^{(j)}`$. Let us find $`det{}_{_3^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{3}^{(j)}`$. The ordering (37) gives the following block structure for matrix $`f_3^{(j)}`$ (here and below the empty spaces are of course occupied by zeroes):

$$f_3^{(j)}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟎}_p& S_j\\ S_j^{}& \mathrm{𝟎}_p\end{array}& & & \\ \\ & & \begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{𝟎}_p& R_j\\ R_j^{}& \mathrm{𝟎}_p\end{array}& \\ \\ & & & & \begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& \sigma _j& \sigma _j\\ 0& 0& \sigma _j& \sigma _j\\ \sigma _j& \sigma _j& 0& 0\\ \sigma _j& \sigma _j& 0& 0\end{array}\end{array}\right),$$
(40)
where

$$\sigma _j=\underset{i=0}{\overset{p1}{}}\zeta ^{ij}=\{\begin{array}{cc}p,\hfill & j=0,\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & j0.\hfill \end{array}$$

The matrices $`S_j`$ and $`R_j`$ have size $`p\times p`$ and can be represented as follows:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S_j& =(\mathrm{𝟏}_p\zeta ^{qj}E^q)(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE^1),\hfill \\ \hfill R_j& =(\mathrm{𝟏}_p\zeta ^{qj}E^q)(\mathrm{𝟏}_pE),\hfill \end{array}$$
(41)
where the matrix $`E`$ is defined in (25). It follows from the acyclicity and (40) that the rank of $`S_j`$ and $`R_j`$ equals $`p1`$ for $`j=0`$ and $`p2`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},p1`$.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Let $`𝒟_j`$ and $`_j`$ be the corresponding subsets of $`_3^{(j)}`$ for the matrices $`S_j`$ and $`R_j`$ respectively. Then,

$$det{}_{𝒟_j}{}^{}S_{j}^{}=\{\begin{array}{cc}p,\hfill & j=0,\hfill \\ \frac{\zeta ^j1}{\zeta ^{qj}1},\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},p1\hfill \end{array}$$
(42)
and

$$det{}_{_j}{}^{}R_{j}^{}=\{\begin{array}{cc}p,\hfill & j=0,\hfill \\ \frac{\zeta ^j1}{\zeta ^{qj}1},\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},p1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(43)
Proof is done by similar methods as we used proving theorem 3.2. ∎

Now, according to (40),

$$det{}_{_3^{(j)}}{}^{}f_{3}^{(j)}=\{\begin{array}{cc}|det{}_{𝒟_0}{}^{}S_{0}^{}|^2|det{}_{_0}{}^{}R_{0}^{}|^2p^2=p^6,\hfill & j=0,\hfill \\ |det{}_{𝒟_j}{}^{}S_{j}^{}|^2|det{}_{_j}{}^{}R_{j}^{}|^2=\frac{\mathrm{sin}^4\frac{\pi j}{p}}{\mathrm{sin}^4\frac{\pi qj}{p}},\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},p1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(44)
Finally, we calculate the torsions (35) which are equal to the invariants, according to (36). Thus we get (39). ∎

###### Remark 4.1.

Since we performed the unitary change-of-basis transformations, then the torsion of (32) does not change. It follows that multiplying together the found values (39), we get the invariant for $`\stackrel{~}{L(p,q)}S^3`$, that is

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{p1}{}}I_j(L(p,q))=I(S^3)=1.$$