text:
# Explicit unobstructed primes for modular deformation problems of squarefree level

## 1. Introduction

Let $`f`$ be a newform of weight $`k2`$, level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$. Let $`K`$ be the number field generated by the Fourier coefficients of $`f`$. For any prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ Deligne has constructed a semisimple Galois representation

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

over the residue field $`k_\lambda `$ of $`K`$ at $`\lambda `$; here $`G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}}`$ is the Galois group of the maximal extension of $`𝐐`$ unramified outside the set $`S`$ of places dividing $`N\mathrm{}`$ and the characteristic $`\mathrm{}`$ of $`k_\lambda `$. The representation $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible for almost all primes $`\lambda `$; we write $`\mathrm{Red}(f)`$ for the set of $`\lambda `$ such that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is not absolutely irreducible.

Following Mazur, we say that a prime $`\lambda \mathrm{Red}(f)`$ is an obstructed prime for $`f`$ if the cohomology group $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$ of the adjoint representation of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is non-zero. We write $`\mathrm{Obs}(f)`$ for the set of such primes. The importance of this notion rests on the fact that for $`\lambda \mathrm{Obs}(f)\mathrm{Red}(f)`$, the universal deformation ring associated to $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is isomorphic to a power series ring in three variables over the Witt vectors of $`k_\lambda `$; see Section 2 for details.

It was shown in  that $`\mathrm{Obs}(f)`$ is finite for $`f`$ of weight $`k3`$. In this paper we obtain an explicit bound on $`\mathrm{Obs}(f)`$ in the case that the level $`N`$ of $`f`$ is squarefree. We state our result here only for $`N>1`$; see Section 4.2 for the general statement (where we also allow $`k=2`$ and $`S`$ non-minimal) and a partial converse.

###### Theorem.

Assume that $`k3`$ and that $`N>1`$ is squarefree. Let $`M`$ denote the conductor of the Dirichlet character $`\omega `$. Then

$$\mathrm{Obs}(f)\{\lambda \mathrm{};\mathrm{}k+1\text{ or }\mathrm{}N\phi (N)\underset{p\frac{N}{M}}{}(p+1)\}\mathrm{Cong}(f)$$

with $`\mathrm{Cong}(f)`$ the set of congruence primes for $`f`$ (as defined in Section 4.1) and $`\phi `$ the Euler totient function.

We note that the set $`\mathrm{Cong}(f)`$ is computable using the results of  and a tool such as . It is not immediately clear to the author what form to expect the analogue of this result for to take for $`N`$ not squarefree.

In Section 2 we give a brief review of deformation theory and use standard duality arguments to reduce the vanishing of $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$ to the vanishing of certain local and global cohomology groups. The local groups are the subject of Section 3; the computations rest on some simple cases of the local Langlands correspondence. In Section 4.1 we use results of Hida (as refined in ) to relate the global cohomology group to a certain Selmer group studied by Diamond, Flach, and Guo. The main results of the paper are proved in Section 4.2. We give several explicit examples in Section 5.

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

### Notation

If $`\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_2R`$ is a representation of a group $`G`$ over a ring $`R`$, we write $`\mathrm{ad}\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_4R`$ for the adjoint representation of $`G`$ on $`\mathrm{End}(\rho )`$ and $`\mathrm{ad}^0\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_3R`$ for the kernel of the trace map from $`\mathrm{ad}\rho `$ to the trivial representation. If $`\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_nR`$ is any representation, we write $`H^i(G,\rho )`$ for the cohomology group $`H^i(G,V_\rho )`$ with $`V_\rho `$ a free $`R`$-module of rank $`n`$ with $`G`$-action via $`\rho `$.

We write $`G_𝐐`$ for the absolute Galois group of $`𝐐`$. We fix now and forever embeddings $`\overline{𝐐}\overline{𝐐}_p`$ for each $`p`$, yielding injections $`G_pG_𝐐`$ with $`G_p`$ the absolute Galois group of $`𝐐_p`$. We write $`I_p`$ for the inertia subgroup of $`G_p`$. Let $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}:G_𝐐𝐙_{\mathrm{}}^\times `$ be the $`\mathrm{}`$-adic cyclotomic character and let $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}:G_𝐐𝐅_{\mathrm{}}^\times `$ be its reduction, the mod $`\mathrm{}`$ Teichmüller character. If $`M`$ is a $`𝐙_{\mathrm{}}[G_𝐐]`$-module, we write $`M(1)`$ for its first Tate twist $`M_𝐙_{\mathrm{}}\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}`$. If $`S`$ is a set of places of $`𝐐`$ containing the infinite place, the expression “$`pS`$” is to be interpreted as “$`pS\{\mathrm{}\}`$”.

## 2. Obstructions

### 2.1. Deformation theory

In this section we review the fundamentals of the deformation theory of representations of profinite groups as in . Let $`k`$ be a finite field and let $`𝒞`$ denote the category of local rings which are inverse limits of artinian local rings with residue field $`k`$; a morphism $`AB`$ in $`𝒞`$ is a continuous local homomorphism inducing the identity map on residue fields. Note that any ring $`A`$ in $`𝒞`$ is canonically an algebra for the Witt vectors $`W(k)`$ of $`k`$.

Let $`G`$ be a profinite group and fix an absolutely irreducible continuous representation

$$\overline{\rho }:G\mathrm{GL}_nk$$

for some $`n1`$. A lifting of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to a ring $`A`$ in $`𝒞`$ is a continuous representation $`\rho :G\mathrm{GL}_nA`$ such that the composition

$$G\stackrel{𝜌}{}\mathrm{GL}_nA\mathrm{GL}_nk$$

is equal to $`\rho `$. Two liftings $`\rho _1,\rho _2`$ of $`\overline{\rho }`$ are said to be strictly equivalent if there is a matrix $`M`$ in the kernel of $`\mathrm{GL}_nA\mathrm{GL}_nk`$ such that $`\rho _1=M\rho _2M^1`$.

A deformation of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$ is a strict equivalence class of liftings. Let

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

be the functor sending a ring $`A`$ to the set of deformations of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$. The deformation functor $`D_{\overline{\rho }}`$ is representable by \[9, Section 1.2\]; that is, there is a ring $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ in $`𝒞`$ (called the universal deformation ring of $`\overline{\rho }`$) and an isomorphism of functors

(2.1)
$$D_{\overline{\rho }}()\mathrm{Hom}_𝒞(R_{\overline{\rho }},).$$

Note that via (2.1) the identity map on $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ corresponds to a deformation

$$\rho ^{\mathrm{univ}}:G\mathrm{GL}_nR_{\overline{\rho }}$$

of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$; this is the universal deformation of $`\overline{\rho }`$, and the isomorphism (2.1) sends $`f:R_{\overline{\rho }}A`$ to the deformation $`f\rho ^{\mathrm{univ}}`$ of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`A`$.

The next proposition gives the fundamental connection between the deformation problem $`D_{\overline{\rho }}`$ and the cohomology groups $`H^i(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$. We say that $`D_{\overline{\rho }}`$ is unobstructed if $`H^2(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=0`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

Assume that $`H^i(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$ is finite-dimensional over $`k`$ for each $`i`$; set $`d=dim_kH^1(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$. Then there exists a (non-canonical) surjection

(2.2)
$$W(k)[[T_1,\mathrm{},T_d]]R_{\overline{\rho }}$$

with kernel generated by at most $`dim_kH^2(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$ elements. In particular, if $`D_{\overline{\rho }}`$ is unobstructed, then (2.2) is an isomorphism.

###### Proof.

This is proved in \[9, Section 1.6\]. The existence of the surjection (2.2) follows from an isomorphism

$$D_{\overline{\rho }}\left(k[ϵ]/ϵ^2\right)\stackrel{}{}H^1(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })$$

(sending a deformation $`\rho `$ to the cocycle $`c_\rho `$ such that $`\rho (g)=\overline{\rho }(g)(1+ϵc_\rho (g))`$ for all $`gG`$) and the interpretation of these groups as the tangent space of $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ via (2.1). The statement about the kernel $`J`$ of (2.2) follows from an injection

$$\mathrm{Hom}(J,k)H^2(G,\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })$$

constructed using an obstruction two-cocycle measuring the failure of $`\rho ^{\mathrm{univ}}`$ to lift via (2.2). ∎

The next lemma will be useful later in the paper.

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`\overline{\rho }:G\mathrm{GL}_2k`$ be continuous and absolutely irreducible and let $`\chi :Gk^\times `$ be a character of order at least $`3`$. Then $`H^0(G,\chi \mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=0`$.

###### Proof.

If the image of $`\overline{\rho }`$ is dihedral, then the $`G`$-representation $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$ is the sum of the trivial character, a quadratic character, and an irreducible two-dimensional representation of $`G`$. If the image of $`\overline{\rho }`$ is not dihedral, then $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$ is the sum of the trivial character and an irreducible three-dimensional representation of $`G`$. In either case the lemma follows since $`\chi `$ is neither trivial nor quadratic. ∎

### 2.2. Galois cohomology

Let $`k`$ be a finite field of odd characteristic $`\mathrm{}`$. We now apply the discussion of the previous section to the case of a two-dimensional Galois representation over $`k`$. Fix a finite set $`S`$ of places of $`𝐐`$ including $`\mathrm{}`$ and the infinite place. Let $`𝐐_S`$ denote the maximal extension of $`𝐐`$ unramified outside $`S`$; set $`G_{𝐐,S}:=\mathrm{Gal}(𝐐_S/𝐐)`$. Let

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

be continuous and absolutely irreducible. We assume further that $`\overline{\rho }`$ is odd in the sense that the image of complex conjugation has distinct eigenvalues. In this section we study the cohomology groups $`H^i(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$.

###### Lemma 2.3.

Each cohomology group $`H^i(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$ is finite-dimensional over $`k`$ and

$$dim_kH^1(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })dim_kH^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=3.$$

###### Proof.

The first statement is \[10, Corollary 4.15\], while the second is a straightforward calculation using Tate’s global Euler characteristic formula as in \[9, Section 1.10\]. ∎

###### Corollary 2.4.

If $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })=0`$, then the universal deformation ring $`R_{\overline{\rho }}`$ is (non-canonically) isomorphic to $`W(k)[[T_1,T_2,T_3]]`$.

We will use global duality theorems of Poitou and Tate to study $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$. For a $`k[G_{𝐐,S}]`$-module $`M`$, define

$$\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},M):=\mathrm{ker}\left(H^1(G_{𝐐,S},M)\underset{pS}{}H^1(G_p,M)\right).$$

###### Lemma 2.5.

One has

$$dim_kH^2(G_{𝐐,S},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })dim_k\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })+\underset{pS}{}dim_kH^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })$$

with equality if $`\mathrm{}3`$.

###### Proof.

The trace pairing $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }k`$ identifies $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$ with the Cartier dual of $`\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }`$. Thus by \[10, Theorem 4.10\] there is an exact sequence

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

Since $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }=\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}(\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })`$ and $`\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}})`$ vanishes by \[14, Lemma 10.6\], the lemma follows from the exact sequence and Lemma 2.2. ∎

We will study the local terms $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho })`$ in Section 3. The global term $`\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })`$ is difficult to control directly; instead we now relate it to a certain Selmer group, which in turn is often computable using the results of Section 4.1.

Fix a totally ramified extension $`K`$ of the field of fractions of $`W(k)`$. The ring of integers $`𝒪`$ of $`K`$ lies in $`𝒞`$; we write $`𝔪`$ for its maximal ideal. Let $`\rho :G_{𝐐,S}\mathrm{GL}_2𝒪`$ be a lifting of $`\overline{\rho }`$ to $`𝒪`$. 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 $`\mathrm{ad}^0\rho :G_{𝐐,S}\mathrm{GL}_3𝒪`$.

Let $`V`$ (resp. $`A`$) denote either $`V_\rho `$ (resp. $`A_\rho `$) or else its Tate twist. For a prime $`p`$, define

$$H_f^1(G_p,V):=\{\begin{array}{cc}H^1(G_p/I_p,V^{I_p})\hfill & p\mathrm{};\hfill \\ \mathrm{ker}\left(H^1(G_p,V)H^1(G_p,VB_{\mathrm{crys}})\right)\hfill & p=\mathrm{};\hfill \end{array}$$

regarded as a $`K`$-subspace of $`H^1(G_p,V)`$; here $`B_{\mathrm{crys}}`$ is the crystalline period ring of Fontaine. Let $`H_f^1(G_p,A)`$ denote the image of $`H_f^1(G_p,V)`$ under the pushforward from $`H^1(G_p,V)`$ to $`H^1(G_p,A)`$. For $`M`$ denoting either of $`V`$ or $`A`$, the Selmer group of $`M`$ is defined by

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

Following \[3, Section 7\], we will also need a slight variant of this construction. Define

$$H_w^1(G_p,A):=\{\begin{array}{cc}H^1(G_p/I_p,A^{I_p})\hfill & p\mathrm{};\hfill \\ H_f^1(G_{\mathrm{}},A)\hfill & p=\mathrm{};\hfill \end{array}$$

$$H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A):=\left\{cH^1(G_𝐐,A);c|_{G_p}H_w^1(G_p,A)\text{ for all }p\right\}.$$

Clearly one has $`H_f^1(G_p,A)H_w^1(G_p,A)`$ for all $`p`$, so that

(2.3)
$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,A)H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A).$$

In fact, this inclusion is an equality if $`A^{I_p}`$ is divisible for all $`p\mathrm{}`$.

###### Lemma 2.6.

Assume that $`\mathrm{}>3`$ and $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,V_\rho )=H_f^1(G_𝐐,V_\rho (1))=0`$. Then

$$dim_k\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })dim_kH_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_{𝐐,S},A_\rho )[𝔪].$$

###### Proof.

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

(2.4)
$$H^1(G_𝐐,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })=H^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1)[𝔪])H^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))$$

which is injective by Lemma 2.2. The image of $`\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })`$ under (2.4) is easily seen to lie in $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))`$, so that we obtain an injection

(2.5)
$$\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho })H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1)).$$

By \[5, Theorem 1\], the latter group is (non-canonically) isomorphic to $`H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho )`$ (see \[15, Proposition 2.2\]; this also uses the assumption on the vanishing of the Selmer group of $`V_\rho `$ and $`V_\rho (1)`$). The lemma thus follows from (2.5) and (2.3). ∎

###### Remark 2.7.

The only difficulty in analyzing the failure of (2.5) to be an isomorphism on $`𝔪`$-torsion is the determination of the image of the restriction map

$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,A_\rho (1))[𝔪]H_f^1(G_{\mathrm{}},A_\rho (1))[𝔪].$$

Unfortunately, this question appears to be quite difficult in general.

## 3. Local invariants

Let $`f=a_nq^n`$ be a newform of weight $`k2`$, squarefree level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$. Let $`K`$ be the number field generated by the Fourier coefficients $`a_n`$ of $`f`$. For any prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$, Deligne has constructed a continuous $`\lambda `$-adic Galois representation

$$\rho _{f,\lambda }:G_𝐐\mathrm{GL}_2K_\lambda .$$

This representation is unramified at $`pN\mathrm{}`$ (with $`\mathrm{}`$ the characteristic of the residue field $`k_\lambda `$ of $`K_\lambda `$) and for such $`p`$ the trace (resp. the determinant) of the image of an arithmetic Frobenius element $`\mathrm{Frob}_p`$ under $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$ is equal to $`a_p`$ (resp. $`p^{k1}\omega (p)`$).

As usual we identify $`\omega :(𝐙/N𝐙)^\times \mu _{\phi (N)}`$ with a Galois character via the canonical isomorphism $`\mathrm{Gal}(𝐐(\mu _N)/𝐐)(𝐙/N𝐙)^\times `$; the determinant of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$ is then $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}^{k1}\omega `$. Let $`M`$ denote the conductor of $`\omega `$ and let $`\omega _0:(𝐙/M𝐙)^\times \mu _{\phi (M)}`$ be the associated primitive Dirichlet character. Then $`\omega `$ is ramified at $`p`$ if and only if $`p`$ divides $`M`$, in which case the restriction of $`\omega `$ to the inertia group $`I_p`$ is a non-trivial character taking values in $`\mu _{p1}`$.

For the remainder of this section we fix a prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ dividing a rational prime $`\mathrm{}`$. Let

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }:G_𝐐\mathrm{GL}_2k_\lambda $$

be the semisimple reduction of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$; this is well-defined independent of any choice of integral model of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }`$. We are interested in the local invariants $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$ for all primes $`p`$. As

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

and

$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}})0p1(mod\mathrm{}),$$

we will restrict our attention below to the case that $`\mathrm{}`$ does not divide $`p1`$ and to the study of $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$.

In the analysis below we make use of the local Langlands correspondence and the compatibility results completed in . Rather than review these results in detail, we will only recall the consequences we need; see  for more details and references.

### 3.1. $`𝒑\mathbf{}𝑵\mathbf{}`$

Fix $`\alpha _p,\beta _p\overline{K}`$ with $`\alpha _p+\beta _p=a_p`$ and $`\alpha _p\beta _p=p^{k1}\omega (p)`$. In this case, we have

$$\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{K}_\lambda \chi _1\chi _2$$

where the $`\chi _i:G_p\overline{K}_\lambda ^\times `$ are unramified characters with

(3.1)
$$\chi _1(\mathrm{Frob}_p)=\alpha _p;\chi _2(\mathrm{Frob}_p)=\beta _p.$$

We write $`\overline{\chi }_i:G_p\overline{k}_\lambda ^\times `$ for the reduction of $`\chi _i`$.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Assume $`pN\mathrm{}`$ and $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$. Then $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$ if and only if $`a_p^2(p+1)^2p^{k2}\omega (p)(mod\lambda )`$.

###### Proof.

Since the existence of eigenvectors with $`k_\lambda `$-rational eigenvalues is invariant under base extension, the existence of $`G_p`$-invariants in $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is equivalent to the existence of $`G_p`$-invariants in

$$\left(\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\right)\overline{k}_\lambda \overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^{}\overline{\chi }_2^1\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^1\overline{\chi }_2^{}.$$

As $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$, this has non-trivial $`G_p`$-invariants if and only if one of the characters $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^{}\overline{\chi }_2^1`$, $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^1\overline{\chi }_2^{}`$ is trivial. By (3.1) this occurs if and only if

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _p}{\beta _p}}`$ $`p^{\pm 1}`$ $`(mod\lambda ).`$
This in turn is equivalent to
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _p}{\beta _p}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _p}{\alpha _p}}`$ $`p+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{p}}`$ $`(mod\lambda )`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha _p+\beta _p)^2}{\alpha _p\beta _p}}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(p+1)^2}{p}}`$ $`(mod\lambda )`$
$`a_p^2`$ $`(p+1)^2p^{k2}\omega (p)`$ $`(mod\lambda )`$
as claimed. ∎

### 3.2. $`𝒑\mathbf{}𝑴`$, $`𝒑\mathbf{}\mathbf{}`$

In this case the $`p`$-component $`\pi _p`$ of the automorphic representation associated to $`f`$ has conductor $`1`$ and ramified central character. It follows that $`\pi _p`$ is a principal series representation associated to one ramified character and one unramified character. On the Galois side, this translates to

$$\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{K}_\lambda \chi _1\chi _2$$

for continuous characters $`\chi _i:G_p\overline{K}_\lambda ^\times `$ with $`\chi _1`$ ramified and $`\chi _2`$ unramified. Since $`\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$ has determinant $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}^{k1}\omega |_{G_p}`$, we have $`\chi _1\chi _2=\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}^{k1}\omega |_{G_p}`$. In particular $`\chi _1|_{I_p}=\omega |_{I_p}`$ is a non-trivial character taking values in $`\mu _{p1}`$. If $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$, then $`\mu _{p1}`$ injects into $`k_\lambda ^\times `$ and consequently the reduction $`\overline{\chi }_1:G_p\overline{k}_\lambda ^\times `$ is still ramified at $`p`$.

###### Lemma 3.2.

Assume $`pM`$, $`p\mathrm{}`$, and $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$. Then $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0`$.

###### Proof.

As in Lemma 3.1, it suffices to show that the two characters $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^{}\overline{\chi }_2^1`$, $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\chi }_1^1\overline{\chi }_2^{}`$ are non-trivial. Since $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\overline{\chi }_2`$ are unramified at $`p`$ while $`\overline{\chi }_1`$ is ramified at $`p`$, this is clear. ∎

### 3.3. $`𝒑\mathbf{}\frac{𝑵}{𝑴}`$, $`𝒑\mathbf{}\mathbf{}`$

In this case $`\pi _p`$ has conductor $`1`$ and unramified central character. It follows that $`\pi _p`$ is the special representation associated to an unramified character. This means that there exists an unramified character $`\chi :G_p\overline{K}_\lambda ^\times `$ such that

(3.2)
$$\rho _{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}\overline{K}_\lambda \left(\begin{array}{cc}\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}\chi & \\ 0& \chi \end{array}\right)$$

with the upper right corner ramified.

###### Lemma 3.3.

Assume $`p\frac{N}{M}`$, $`p\mathrm{}`$, and $`p^21(mod\mathrm{})`$. Then $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$ if and only if $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is unramified at $`p`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`p^21(mod\mathrm{})`$, by \[15, Lemma 5.1\] we have

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

for some $`\nu :G_p\overline{k}_\lambda `$; in fact, one checks directly that $`\overline{\chi }^1\nu `$ is naturally an element of $`H^1(G_p,\overline{k}_\lambda (1))`$. Since $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\overline{\chi }`$ are unramified, $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$ is unramified if and only if $`\overline{\chi }^1\nu `$ is unramified. However, since $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$ every non-zero element of $`H^1(G_p,\overline{k}_\lambda (1))`$ is ramified. We conclude that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_p}`$ is unramified if and only if it is semisimple. \[15, Lemma 5.2\] now completes the proof. ∎

###### Lemma 3.4.

Assume $`p\frac{N}{M}`$, $`p\mathrm{}`$, $`p^21(mod\mathrm{})`$, and $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ absolutely irreducible. Then $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$ if and only if there exists a newform $`f^{}`$, of weight $`k`$ and level dividing $`\frac{N}{p}`$, such that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\overline{\lambda }}\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$ for some prime $`\overline{\lambda }`$ of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ over $`\lambda `$.

Here by $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\overline{\lambda }}`$ (resp. $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$) we mean $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }\overline{k}_\lambda `$ (resp. $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\lambda ^{}}\overline{k}_\lambda ^{}^{}`$ with $`\lambda ^{}`$ the intersection of $`\overline{\lambda }`$ with the field $`K^{}`$ of Fourier coefficients of $`f^{}`$ and with $`k_\lambda ^{}^{}`$ the residue field of $`K^{}`$ at $`\lambda ^{}`$.)

###### Proof.

By \[4, (B) of p. 221\], the existence of such an $`f^{}`$ is equivalent to $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ being unramified at $`p`$. Thus the lemma follows from Lemma 3.3. ∎

###### Remark 3.5.

If one further assumes that $`p^{}1(mod\mathrm{})`$ for all $`p^{}`$ dividing $`N`$, then the newform $`f^{}`$ of Lemma 3.4 must have level a multiple of $`M`$ and character lifting $`\omega _0`$, so that $`\lambda `$ is a congruence prime for $`f`$ of level dividing $`\frac{N}{p}`$ in the terminology of Section 4.1. Indeed, $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\lambda }`$ is isomorphic to $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ and thus has determinant $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}^{k1}\overline{\omega }`$; therefore the character $`\omega ^{}`$ of $`f^{}`$ must have reduction equal to $`\overline{\omega }`$. However, since $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$ for all $`p`$ dividing $`N`$, the only such characters of conductor dividing $`N`$ are those which lift $`\omega _0`$. Thus $`f^{}`$ must have level divisible by $`M`$ and character lifting $`\omega _0`$, as claimed.

### 3.4. $`𝒑\mathbf{=}\mathbf{}`$, $`\mathbf{}\mathbf{}𝑵`$

We now give some mild improvements on the results of \[15, Section 4\] on the vanishing of $`H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$. Recall that $`f=a_nq^n`$ is said to be ordinary (resp. supersingular) at $`\lambda `$ if $`v_\lambda (a_{\mathrm{}})=0`$ (resp. $`v_\lambda (a_{\mathrm{}})>0`$), with $`v_\lambda `$ the $`\lambda `$-adic valuation. If $`f`$ is ordinary at $`\lambda `$, then the semisimplification of $`\rho _{f,\lambda }|_I_{\mathrm{}}\overline{K}_\lambda `$ is isomorphic to $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}^{k1}1`$, while if $`f`$ is supersingular at $`\lambda `$, then $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_G_{\mathrm{}}`$ is absolutely irreducible. (This all follows from the discussion of \[4, pp. 214–215\], for example.)

###### Lemma 3.6.

Assume $`\mathrm{}N`$. If $`f`$ is ordinary at $`\lambda `$ and $`H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$, then $`k0,2(mod\mathrm{}1)`$.

###### Proof.

It suffices to prove the corresponding result for the $`I_{\mathrm{}}`$-invariants of the semisimplification of $`(\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })\overline{k}_\lambda `$. By the above discussion this semisimplification is isomorphic to

$$\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}^k\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}^{2k}.$$

Since $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}`$ has order $`\mathrm{}1`$, the lemma follows. ∎

Note that the above lemma is vacuous in the case of weight $`2`$.

###### Lemma 3.7.

Assume $`\mathrm{}N`$. If $`f`$ is supersingular at $`\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{}>3`$, then $`H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0`$.

###### Proof.

As $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_G_{\mathrm{}}`$ is absolutely irreducible, this is immediate from Lemma 2.2. ∎

## 4. Global results

We continue with a newform $`f=a_nq^n`$ of weight $`k`$, squarefree level $`N`$, and character $`\omega `$ of conductor $`M`$ as in Section 3. Let $`𝒪`$ be the ring of integers of the field $`K`$ of Fourier coefficients of $`f`$. For each prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$, let $`V_{\rho ,\lambda }`$ be a three-dimensional $`K_\lambda `$-vector space with $`G_𝐐`$-action via $`\mathrm{ad}^0\rho _{f,\lambda }`$. Fix a $`G_𝐐`$-stable $`𝒪_\lambda `$-lattice $`T_{\rho ,\lambda }`$ in $`V_{\rho ,\lambda }`$ and set $`A_{\rho ,\lambda }:=V_{\rho ,\lambda }/T_{\rho ,\lambda }`$. In general the $`k_\lambda [G_𝐐]`$-module $`A_{\rho ,\lambda }[\lambda ]`$ need not agree with the semisimple reduction $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$; however, these two representations must be isomorphic when $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible, which is the only case we will consider below.

### 4.1. Congruences and Selmer groups

The purpose of this section is to explain how the results of  (as refined in ) and  relate adjoint Selmer groups with congruences of modular forms. Let $`d`$ be a divisor of $`N`$ which is divisible by $`M`$. We say that a prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ is a congruence prime of level $`d`$ for $`f`$ if there exists a newform $`f^{}`$ of weight $`k`$ and level $`d`$ such that:

1. $`f^{}`$ has character lifting $`\omega _0`$;
2. $`f^{}`$ is not a Galois conjugate of $`f`$;
3. $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\overline{\lambda }}\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$ for some prime $`\overline{\lambda }`$ of $`\overline{𝐐}`$ above $`\lambda `$.

(Of course, by the Cebatorev density theorem the last condition is equivalent to a congruence $`a_p(f)a_p(f^{})(mod\overline{\lambda })`$ for all primes $`p`$ not dividing $`N`$.)

We say that a congruence prime $`\lambda `$ of level $`d`$ for $`f`$ is proper (resp. strict) if $`d<N`$ (resp. $`d=N`$). Let $`\mathrm{Cong}(f)`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{Cong}_{<N}(f)`$, resp. $`\mathrm{Cong}_N(f)`$) denote the set of congruence primes (resp. proper congruence primes, resp. strict congruence primes) for $`f`$.

We need a simple lemma.

###### Lemma 4.1.

Let $`\lambda `$ be a prime of $`K`$ dividing a rational prime $`\mathrm{}`$ not dividing $`N`$. Assume that $`N>1`$ and that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is ramified at some $`p`$ dividing $`N`$. If $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible, then $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_F}`$ is absolutely irreducible as well, where $`F=𝐐(\sqrt{(1)^{(\mathrm{}1)/2}\mathrm{}})`$.

###### Proof.

As in \[3, Lemma 7.14\], if $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }|_{G_F}`$ is absolutely reducible, then $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is induced from a character of $`G_F`$. In particular, it follows that the conductor $`N^{}`$ of $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ (in the sense of ) is a square. However, $`N^{}`$ must also divide the level $`N`$ of $`f`$; since $`N^{}`$ is non-trivial by hypothesis and $`N`$ is squarefree, this is impossible. ∎

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`\lambda `$ be a prime of $`K`$ dividing the rational prime $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that:

1. $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible;
2. $`\mathrm{}>k`$;
3. Either $`N>1`$ or $`\mathrm{}(2k3)(2k1)`$;
4. $`\mathrm{}N`$;
5. $`\mathrm{}\phi (N)`$ (that is, $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$ for all $`pN`$);
6. $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is ramified at $`p`$ for all $`p\frac{N}{M}`$;

Then $`H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho ,\lambda })0`$ if and only if $`\lambda \mathrm{Cong}_N(f)`$.

###### Proof.

Conditions (4)–(6) guarantee that $`A_{\rho ,\lambda }`$ is minimally ramified in the sense of \[2, Section 3\]. Using (1), (2), (4), and Lemma 4.1 (or (3) and \[3, Lemma 7.14\] for $`N=1`$), we may apply \[3, Theorem 7.15\] to conclude that

(4.1)
$$\text{length}_{𝒪_\lambda }H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho ,\lambda })=v_\lambda (\eta _f^{\mathrm{}});$$

here $`\eta _f^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the fractional ideal of $`K`$ defined in \[3, Section 6.4\] and $`v_\lambda `$ is the $`\lambda `$-adic valuation.

By definition, the ideal $`\eta _f^{\mathrm{}}`$ is generated by the discriminant $`d(L_f(𝒪_K))`$ of \[6, proof of Theorem 5\], which in turn equals the square of the algebraic special value of the adjoint $`L`$-function of $`f`$:

(4.2)
$$d\left(L_f(𝒪_K)\right)=\left(\frac{W(f)\mathrm{\Gamma }(1,\mathrm{ad}f)L(1,\mathrm{ad}f)}{\mathrm{\Omega }(f,+)\mathrm{\Omega }(f,)}\right)^2.$$

(All of this is only true up to factors of primes violating (1)–(4).) In particular, (4.1) implies that $`H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho ,\lambda })`$ is non-zero if and only if (4.2) has positive $`\lambda `$-adic valuation. By \[6, Theorems 1 and 2\], the latter condition is equivalent to the existence of a newform $`f^{}`$ of weight $`k`$ and level dividing $`N`$, not Galois conjugate to $`f`$, such that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\overline{\lambda }}\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$ for some prime $`\overline{\lambda }`$ above $`\lambda `$.

It remains to show that $`f^{}`$ has level $`N`$ and character $`\omega `$. Since $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$ has determinant $`\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}^{k1}\overline{\omega }`$ and $`\mu _{\phi (N)}`$ injects into $`k_\lambda ^\times `$ (by (5)), $`f^{}`$ has level divisible by $`M`$ and character lifting $`\omega _0`$. Hypothesis (6) guarantees that $`\overline{\rho }_{f^{},\overline{\lambda }}`$ is ramified at all $`p\frac{N}{M}`$ as well, so that $`f^{}`$ must in fact have level $`N`$. ∎

### 4.2. Vanishing of cohomology

Let $`S`$ be a finite set of places of $`𝐐`$ containing all places dividing $`N\mathrm{}`$; let $`N_S`$ denote the product of all primes in $`S`$. Fix a prime $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ dividing a rational prime $`\mathrm{}`$. We are now in a position to compute $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })`$.

###### Theorem 4.3.

Assume that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible and $`\mathrm{}>3`$. If

(4.3)
$$H^2(G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}},\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0,$$

then one of the following holds:

1. $`\mathrm{}k`$;
2. $`\mathrm{}N`$;
3. $`\mathrm{}\phi (N_S)`$;
4. $`\mathrm{}p+1`$ for some $`p\frac{N}{M}`$;
5. $`a_p^2(p+1)^2p^{k2}\omega (p)(mod\lambda )`$ for some $`p\frac{N_S}{N}`$, $`p\mathrm{}`$;
6. $`\mathrm{}=k+1`$ and $`f`$ is ordinary at $`\lambda `$;
7. $`k=2`$ and $`a_{\mathrm{}}^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda )`$;
8. $`N=1`$ and $`\mathrm{}(2k3)(2k1)`$;
9. $`\lambda \mathrm{Cong}(f)`$.

Using Lemma 2.5 and the results of Sections 3 and 4.1, the reader should have little difficulty in detecting the source of each of the conditions above. We shall nevertheless endeavor to give a complete proof.

###### Proof.

If (4.3) holds, then Lemma 2.5 implies that either

(4.4)
$$H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0$$

for some $`pS\{\mathrm{}\}`$ or

(4.5)
$$\text{Sh}^1(G_{𝐐,S},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0.$$

Suppose first that (4.4) holds for a prime $`pS\{\mathrm{}\}`$; we may assume $`\mathrm{}N`$ by (2). If $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}})0`$, then $`\mathrm{}`$ divides $`p1`$ which in turn divides $`\phi (N_S)`$, so that (3) holds. We may thus assume that $`p1(mod\mathrm{})`$ and

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

By Lemma 3.2 we know that $`p`$ does not divide $`M`$. If $`p`$ divides $`\frac{N}{M}`$, then by Lemma 3.4 and Remark 3.5 one of (4) or (9) holds, while if $`p`$ does not divide $`N\mathrm{}`$, then Lemma 3.1 implies that (5) must hold. Finally, if $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`k>2`$, then Lemmas 3.6 and 3.7 force (1) or (6) to hold; if $`k=2`$, then \[15, Proposition 4.4\] forces (7) to hold.

It remains to consider the case that (4.5) holds, (4.4) does not hold for any $`pS\{\mathrm{}\}`$, and none of (1)–(8) hold. Then by \[3, Theorem 8.2\]

$$H_f^1(G_𝐐,V_{f,\lambda })=H_f^1(G_𝐐,V_{f,\lambda }(1))=0.$$

Lemma 2.6 and (4.5) thus imply that

$$H_{\mathrm{}}^1(G_𝐐,A_{\rho ,\lambda })0.$$

Since $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })=0`$ for all $`p`$ dividing $`\frac{N}{M}`$, Lemma 3.3 implies that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is ramified at all such $`p`$. Proposition 4.2 now applies to show that $`\lambda \mathrm{Cong}_N(f)`$. Thus (9) holds, completing the proof. ∎

###### Corollary 4.4.

If $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible, $`\mathrm{}>3`$, and $`\lambda `$ does not satisfy (1)–(9), then

$$R_{\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }}W(k_\lambda )[[T_1,T_2,T_3]].$$

###### Proof.

This follows immediately from Theorem 4.3 and Corollary 2.4. ∎

We also obtain the following partial converse to Theorem 4.3.

###### Theorem 4.5.

Assume that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible. Suppose that $`\mathrm{}>3`$ and one of the following holds:

1. $`\mathrm{}\phi (N_S)`$;
2. $`a_p^2(p+1)^2p^{k2}\omega (p)(mod\lambda )`$ for some $`p\frac{N_S}{N}`$, $`p\mathrm{}`$;
3. $`\lambda `$ is a congruence prime for $`f`$ of level dividing $`\frac{N}{p}`$ for some $`p\frac{N}{M}`$, $`\mathrm{}p(p+1)`$;
4. $`k=2`$, $`\mathrm{}N`$, and $`a_{\mathrm{}}^2\omega (\mathrm{})(mod\lambda )`$.

Then $`H^2(G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 2.5 it suffices to show that these conditions guarantee that $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$ for some $`pS`$. If (1) holds, then $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}})0`$ for some $`pS`$, so that this is clear. If (2) holds, then by Lemma 3.1 we have $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$. If (1) does not hold but (3) does hold, then Lemma 3.4 implies that $`H^0(G_p,\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}^0\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$. Finally, if (4) holds, then the proof of \[15, Proposition 4.4\] shows that $`H^0(G_{\mathrm{}},\overline{\epsilon }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0`$. ∎

## 5. Examples

In this section we use the data of  to bound the obstructed primes for the deformation problems associated to a few specific modular forms. Of course, the most interesting aspect of these computations are the determination of congruences between newforms. Using  we can check such congruences on the $`p^{\text{th}}`$ Fourier coefficients for all $`p<1000`$; by the results of  these checks are more than sufficient to prove that these congruences actually exist in our examples. We will not comment further on this issue.

For a modular form $`f`$, we let $`\mathrm{Red}(f)`$ denote the set of primes $`\lambda `$ of $`K`$ such that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely reducible. We recall the following well-known facts regarding $`\mathrm{Red}(f)`$; see \[3, Lemma 7.13\] for example.

###### Lemma 5.1.

Let $`f=a_nq^n`$ be a newform of weight $`k`$ and level $`N`$ with coefficient field $`K`$. Let $`\lambda `$ be a prime of $`K`$ dividing a rational prime $`\mathrm{}`$. Suppose that $`\lambda \mathrm{Red}(f)`$, so that

$$\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }\overline{k}_\lambda \chi _1\chi _2$$

for characters $`\chi _1,\chi _2:G_𝐐\overline{k}_\lambda ^\times `$. If $`\mathrm{}`$ does not divide $`N`$, then each $`\chi _i`$ has conductor dividing $`N\mathrm{}`$. If also $`\mathrm{}>k`$, then one of the $`\chi _i`$ has conductor dividing $`N`$, so that

$$a_pp^{k1}+1(mod\lambda )$$

for all $`p1(modN)`$.

In practice one uses the second condition to bound the set $`\mathrm{Red}(f)`$ and the first condition to check each remaining $`\lambda `$ not dividing $`N`$. For a prime $`\lambda `$ dividing $`N`$, one can still check that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely reducible, but it is much more difficult to show that $`\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda }`$ is absolutely irreducible; we will make no attempt to deal with this case below.

For a finite set of places $`S`$ containing all places dividing $`N\mathrm{}`$, we let $`\mathrm{Obs}_S(f)`$ denote the set of $`\lambda \mathrm{Red}(f)`$ such that

$$H^2(G_{𝐐,S\{\mathrm{}\}},\epsilon _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{ad}\overline{\rho }_{f,\lambda })0,$$

or equivalently such that the deformation problem associated to

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

is obstructed. We simply write $`\mathrm{Obs}(f)`$ for $`\mathrm{Obs}_{\{pN\mathrm{}\}}(f)`$.

In the interests of space, we make the following notational conventions. Fix a quadratic extension $`K`$ of $`𝐐`$ and let $`p`$ be a rational prime. If $`p`$ ramifies in $`K`$, then we simply write $`𝔭_p`$ for the prime of $`K`$ above $`p`$. If $`p`$ splits, then we will write $`𝔭_p`$ and $`\overline{𝔭}_p`$ for the two primes of $`K`$ above $`p`$, at least when it is not important to distinguish between them.

### 5.1. Weight $`\mathrm{𝟏𝟐}`$, level $`\mathrm{𝟓}`$, trivial character

There are three newforms of weight $`12`$, level $`5`$, and trivial character. The first has rational Fourier coefficients and $`q`$-expansion

$$f_1=q+34q^2792q^3892q^4+3125q^526928q^617556q^7+\mathrm{}$$

while the other two,

$$\begin{array}{c}f_2=q+(10+6\sqrt{151})q^2+(110+32\sqrt{151})q^3+(3448120\sqrt{151})q^4\hfill \\ \hfill 3125q^5+(30092980\sqrt{151})q^6+(28950+1056\sqrt{151})q^7+\mathrm{}\end{array}$$

and its Galois conjugate, have field of Fourier coefficients $`𝐐(\sqrt{151})`$. Note that $`\mathrm{Obs}(\overline{f}_2)`$ is simply the set of conjugates of elements of $`\mathrm{Obs}(f_2)`$, so that it suffices to study $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$.

Using Lemma 5.1, one computes that:

$$\mathrm{Red}(f_1)=\{2,5,31\};$$

$$\mathrm{Red}(f_2)=\{𝔭_2,𝔭_5,\overline{𝔭}_5,(601,358+\sqrt{151})\}.$$

We now consider congruences. By comparing Fourier coefficients, one sees that $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are congruent modulo primes above $`2`$ and $`5`$:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_5(f_1)=\{2,5\};$$

$$\mathrm{Cong}_5(f_2)=\{𝔭_2,(5,1+\sqrt{151})\}.$$

The only possible proper congruences is with the unique newform

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=q24q^2+252q^31472q^4+4830q^56048q^616744q^7+\mathrm{}$$

of weight $`12`$ and level $`1`$; one computes that:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{<5}(f_1)=\{2,29\};$$

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{<5}(f_2)=\{𝔭_2,(5,4+\sqrt{151}),(131,46+\sqrt{151})\}.$$

Both $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are ordinary at $`13`$, so that by Theorems 4.3 and 4.5 we conclude that:

$$\{29\}\mathrm{Obs}(f_1)\{3,7,11,13,29\};$$

$$\left\{(131,46+\sqrt{151})\right\}\mathrm{Obs}(f_2)\{𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3,𝔭_7,\overline{𝔭}_7,(11),(13),(131,46+\sqrt{151})\}.$$

### 5.2. Weight $`\mathrm{𝟔}`$, level $`\mathrm{𝟑𝟎}`$, trivial character

There are two newforms of weight $`6`$, level $`30`$, and trivial character, both with rational Fourier coefficients:

$$\begin{array}{c}f_1=q+4q^2+9q^316q^4+25q^5+36q^6+32q^7192q^8\hfill \\ \hfill 162q^9+100q^{10}+12q^{11}144q^{12}154q^{13}+\mathrm{}\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{c}f_2=q4q^2+9q^316q^425q^536q^6+164q^7+192q^8\hfill \\ \hfill 162q^9+100q^{10}+720q^{11}144q^{12}+698q^{13}+\mathrm{}\end{array}$$

Using Lemma 5.1, one computes that:

$$\mathrm{Red}(f_1)=\{2,3,5\};$$

$$\{2,3\}\mathrm{Red}(f_2)\{2,3,5\}.$$

The newforms $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ have a congruence modulo $`12`$ (remember that one only checks the Fourier coefficients with exponent prime to $`30`$), so that:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{30}(f_1)=\mathrm{Cong}_{30}(f_2)=\{2,3\}.$$

There are ten newforms of level dividing $`30`$ and trivial character to consider for proper congruences. The most interesting occur for $`f_2`$: it has a congruence modulo $`19`$ with the newform

$$\begin{array}{c}q+7q^2+9q^3+17q^425q^5+63q^6+12q^7105q^8\hfill \\ \hfill 162q^9175q^{10}+112q^{11}+153q^{12}974q^{13}+\mathrm{}\end{array}$$

of level $`15`$, and modulo $`31`$ with the newform

$$\begin{array}{c}q4q^226q^316q^425q^5+104q^622q^7+192q^8\hfill \\ \hfill +433q^9+100q^{10}768q^{11}+416q^{12}46q^{13}+\mathrm{}\end{array}$$

of level $`10`$. In any event, one computes:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{<30}(f_1)=\{2,3,5\};\mathrm{Cong}_{<30}(f_2)=\{2,3,19,31\}.$$

Both $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are ordinary at $`7`$, so that we conclude that:

$$\mathrm{Obs}(f_1)\{7\};$$

$$\{19,31\}\mathrm{Obs}(f_2)\{5,7,19,31\}.$$

To give an explicit example of an obstructed set, using (3) of Theorem 4.5 one finds that

$$\mathrm{Obs}_{\{2,3,5,17,\mathrm{}\}}(f_1)=\{7\}.$$

### 5.3. Weight $`\mathrm{𝟑}`$, level $`\mathrm{𝟑𝟓}`$, character of conductor $`\mathrm{𝟕}`$

There are four newforms of weight $`3`$, level $`35`$, and with quadratic character

$$\omega :(𝐙/35𝐙)^\times \{\pm 1\}$$

the Legendre symbol $`\left(\frac{}{7}\right)`$. All four are defined over $`𝐐(\sqrt{5})`$: two are

$$f_1=qq^22\sqrt{5}q^33q^4\sqrt{5}q^5+2\sqrt{5}q^6+7q^7+\mathrm{}$$

and its Galois conjugate while the other two are

$$f_2=q+2q^2+\sqrt{5}q^3\sqrt{5}q^5+2\sqrt{5}q^6(2+3\sqrt{5})q^7+\mathrm{}$$

and its Galois conjugate. As before, it suffices to study $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$. Using Lemma 5.1, one finds that:

$$\{𝔭_2,𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3,𝔭_5\}\mathrm{Red}(f_1)\{𝔭_2,𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3,𝔭_5,𝔭_7,\overline{𝔭}_7\}$$

$$\{𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3\}\mathrm{Red}(f_2)\{𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3,𝔭_5,𝔭_7,\overline{𝔭}_7\}.$$

The newforms $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ have a congruence modulo $`3`$, while $`f_1`$ and $`\overline{f}_2`$ have no congruences; thus:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{35}(f_1)=\mathrm{Cong}_{35}(f_2)=\{𝔭_3,\overline{𝔭}_3\}.$$

Since $`\omega `$ has conductor $`7`$, the only proper congruences we need to check are with the unique newform

$$q3q^2+5q^47q^73q^89q^96q^{11}+\mathrm{}$$

of weight $`3`$, level $`7`$, and character $`\left(\frac{}{7}\right)`$. One finds that:

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{<35}(f_1)=\left\{𝔭_2\right\};$$

$$\mathrm{Cong}_{<35}(f_2)=\left\{𝔭_5\right\}.$$

Theorem 4.3 allows us to conclude that:

$$\mathrm{Obs}(f_1)\{𝔭_7,\overline{𝔭}_7\}$$

$$\mathrm{Obs}(f_2)\{𝔭_2,𝔭_5,𝔭_7,\overline{𝔭}_7\}.$$