format: text

text:
# On the spectral side of the Arthur trace formula

## 0. Introduction

Let $`G`$ be a connected reductive algebraic group defined over $``$ and let $`G(𝔸)`$ be the group of points of $`G`$ with values in the ring of adèles of $``$. Then $`G()`$ embeds diagonally as a discrete subgroup of $`G(𝔸)`$. Let $`G(𝔸)^1`$ be the intersection of the kernels of the maps $`x|\chi (x)|`$, $`xG(𝔸)`$, where $`\chi `$ ranges over the group $`X(G)_{}`$ of characters of $`G`$ defined over $``$. Then the (noninvariant) trace formula of Arthur is an identity

$$\underset{𝔬𝔒}{}J_𝔬(f)=\underset{\chi 𝔛}{}J_\chi (f),fC_0^{\mathrm{}}(G(𝔸)^1),$$

between distributions on $`G(𝔸)^1`$. The left hand side is the geometric side and the right hand side the spectral side of the trace formula. The distributions $`J_𝔬`$ are parametrized by semisimple conjugacy in $`G()`$ and are closely related to weighted orbital integrals on $`G(𝔸)^1`$.

In this paper we are concerned with the spectral side of the trace formula. The distribution $`J_\chi `$ are defined in terms of truncated Eisenstein series. They are parametrized by the set of cuspidal data $`𝔛`$ which consists of the Weyl group orbits of pairs $`(M_B,r_B)`$, where $`M_B`$ is the Levi component of a standard parabolic subgroup and $`r_B`$ is an irreducible cuspidal automorphic representation of $`M_B(𝔸)^1`$. In \[A4\], Arthur has derived an explicit formula for the distributions $`J_\chi `$ which expresses them in terms of generalized logarithmic derivatives of intertwining operators. So far, the resulting integral-series is only known to converge conditionally. This suffices, for example, for the comparison of trace formulas which, at present, is the main application of the trace formula. However, with regard to potential applications of the trace formula in spectral theory and geometry it would be highly desirable to know that the spectral side of the trace formula is absolutely convergent. This would also simplify the applications of the trace formula in the theory of automorphic forms \[Lb\].

The problem of the absolute convergence of the spectral side of the trace formula is the main issue of the present paper. We will not settle the problem, but we shall reduce it to a question about local components of automorphic representations.

To describe the results in more detail we have to introduce some notation. We fix a Levi component $`M_0`$ of a minimal parabolic subgroup $`P_0`$ of $`G`$. Let $`P`$ be a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$, defined over $``$, with unipotent radical $`N_P`$. Let $`M_P`$ be the unique Levi component of $`P`$ which contains $`M_0`$. We denote the split component of the center of $`M_P`$ by $`A_P`$ and its Lie algebra by $`𝔞_P`$. For parabolic groups $`PQ`$ there is a natural surjective map $`𝔞_P𝔞_Q`$ whose kernel we will denote by $`𝔞_P^Q`$. Let $`𝒜^2(P)`$ be the space of square integrable automorphic forms on $`N_P(𝔸)M_P()\backslash G(𝔸)`$. Let $`Q`$ be another parabolic subgroup of $`G`$, defined over $``$, with Levi component $`M_Q`$, split component $`A_Q`$ and corresponding Lie algebra $`𝔞_Q`$. Let $`W(𝔞_P,𝔞_Q)`$ be the set of all linear isomorphisms from $`𝔞_P`$ to $`𝔞_Q`$ which are restrictions of elements of the Weyl group $`W(A_0)`$. The theory of Eisenstein series associates to each $`sW(𝔞_P,𝔞_Q)`$ an intertwining operator

$$M_{Q|P}(s,\lambda ):𝒜^2(P)𝒜^2(Q),\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{},$$

which for $`\mathrm{Re}(\lambda )`$ in a certain chamber, can be defined by an absolutely convergent integral and admits an analytic continuation to a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$. Set

$$M_{Q|P}(\lambda ):=M_{Q|P}(1,\lambda ).$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ be the set of equivalence classes of irreducible unitary representations of $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$. Let $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$. Then $`(\chi ,\pi )`$ singles out a certain subspace $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ of $`𝒜^2(P)`$ (see §1.6). Let $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ be the Hilbert space completion of $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ with respect to the canonical inner product. For each $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$ we have an induced representation $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda )`$ of $`G(𝔸)`$ in $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$.

For each Levi subgroup $`L`$ let $`𝒫(L)`$ be the set of all parabolic subgroups with Levi component $`L`$. If $`P`$ is a parabolic subgroup, let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P`$ denote the set of simple roots of $`(P,A_P)`$. Let $`L`$ be a Levi subgroup which contains $`M_P`$. Set

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔐_L& (P,\lambda )=\hfill \\ & \underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }0}{lim}\left(\underset{Q_1𝒫(L)}{}\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_{Q_1}^G/(\mathrm{\Delta }_{Q_1}^{}))M_{Q|P}(\lambda )^1\frac{M_{Q|P}(\lambda +\mathrm{\Lambda })}{_{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_{Q_1}}\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ^{})}\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are constrained to lie in $`i𝔞_L^{}`$, and for each $`Q_1𝒫(L)`$, $`Q`$ is a group in $`𝒫(M_P)`$ which is contained in $`Q_1`$. Then $`𝔐_L(P,\lambda )`$ is an unbounded operator which acts on the Hilbert space $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$. In the special case that $`L=M`$ and $`dim𝔞_L^G=1`$, the operator $`𝔐_L(P,\lambda )`$ has a simple description. Let $`P`$ be a parabolic subgroup with Levi component $`M`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A_P)`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ be the element in $`(𝔞_M^G)^{}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }(\alpha ^{})=1`$. Let $`\overline{P}`$ be the opposite parabolic group of $`P`$. Then

$$𝔐_L(P,z\stackrel{~}{\omega })=\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_M^G/\alpha ^{})M_{\overline{P}|P}(z\stackrel{~}{\omega })^1\frac{d}{dz}M_{\overline{P}|P}(z\stackrel{~}{\omega }).$$

Let $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(G(𝔸)^1)`$. Then Arthur \[A4, Theorem 8.2\] proved that $`J_\chi (f)`$ equals the sum over Levi subgroups $`M`$ containing $`M_0`$, over $`L`$ containing $`M`$, over $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$, and over $`sW^L(𝔞_M)_{\text{reg}}`$, a certain subset of the Weyl group, of the product of

$$|W_0^M||W_0|^1|det(s1)_{𝔞_M^L}|^1|𝒫(M)|^1,$$

a factor to which we need not pay too much attention , and of

(0.1)
$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}\underset{P𝒫(M)}{}\mathrm{tr}(𝔐_L(P,\lambda )M_{P|P}(s,0)\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,f))d\lambda .$$

So far, it is only known that $`_{\chi 𝔛}|J_\chi (f)|<\mathrm{}`$ and the goal is to show that the integral–sum obtained by summing (0.1) over $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$ is absolutely convergent with respect to the trace norm.

Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$ with $`\pi =_v\pi _v`$, let $`J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ be the local intertwining operator between the induced representations $`I_P^G(\pi _{v,\lambda })`$ and $`I_Q^G(\pi _{v,\lambda })`$. By \[CLL, §15\] and \[A7\] there exist normalizing factors $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ such that the normalized intertwining operators

$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )^1J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )$$

satisfy the conditions of Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\].

If $`v<\mathrm{}`$, let $`K_vG(_v)`$ be an open compact subgroup. Denote by $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}`$ the restriction of $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ to the subspace $`_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}`$ of $`K_v`$-invariant vectors in the Hilbert space $`_P(\pi _v)`$ of the induced representation. If $`v=\mathrm{}`$, let $`K_{\mathrm{}}G()`$ be a maximal compact subgroup. Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let $`R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )_\sigma `$ be the restriction of $`R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ to the $`\sigma `$-isotypical subspace of $`_P(\pi )`$. Let $`\lambda _\pi `$ and $`\lambda _\sigma `$ denote the Casimir eigenvalues of $`\pi `$ and $`\sigma `$, respectively.

For a given place $`v`$, let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(_v))`$ be the subset consisting of all representations $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$ such that there exists an automorphic representation $`\pi `$ in the discrete spectrum of $`M(𝔸)`$ whose local component at the place $`v`$ is $`\pi _v`$. Finally, let $`𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be the space of integrable rapidly decreasing functions on $`G(𝔸)^1`$ (see §1.3 for its definition). Then our main result is the following theorem, which reduces the problem of the absolute convergence of the spectral side of the Arthur trace formula to a problem about local components of automorphic representations.

###### Theorem 0.1.

Suppose that for every $`M(M_0)`$, $`Q,P𝒫(M)`$ and every place $`v`$ the following holds.

1) If $`v<\mathrm{}`$, then for every open compact subgroup $`K_vG(_v)`$ and every invariant differential operator $`D_\lambda `$ on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$ there exists $`C>0`$ such that

(0.2)
$$D_\lambda R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}C$$

for all $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$ and all $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(_v))`$.

2) If $`v=\mathrm{}`$, then for all invariant differential operators $`D_\lambda `$ on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$ there exist $`C>0`$ and $`N`$ such that

(0.3)
$$D_\lambda R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )_\sigma C(1+\lambda +|\lambda _\pi |+|\lambda _\sigma |)^N$$

for all $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$, $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M())`$.

Then for every $`f𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$, the spectral side of the trace formula is absolutely convergent.

We add some comments about the assumptions 1) and 2). It follows from results of Arthur \[A5, p.51\] and \[A8, Lemma 2.1\] that (0.2) and (0.3) hold uniformly for tempered representations $`\pi _v`$. On the other hand, to establish (0.2), (0.3) or (0.4) is not a problem of pure local harmonic analysis. One can not expect that these estimations will hold uniformly for all $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$. Let, for example, $`dim𝔞_M/𝔞_G=1`$ and suppose that for each $`ϵ>0`$ there exists $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$ such that the normalized intertwining operator $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ has a pole $`\lambda _0`$ with $`|\mathrm{Re}(\lambda _0)|ϵ`$. Then it is certainly not possible to obtain uniform estimates for derivatives of $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ along the imaginary axis. An example where this actually occurs is $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$.

Especially the uniformity in $`\sigma `$ in (0.3) seems to be difficult to achieve. Of course, this condition can be relaxed in various ways. If we relax (0.3) by not requesting uniformity in $`\sigma `$, we get the following weaker version of Theorem 0.1 which suffices for many purposes. Let $`K=_vK_v`$ be a maximal compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸)`$ which is admissible relative to $`M_0`$ (see §1.2).

###### Theorem 0.2.

Suppose that in Theorem 0.1 in place of condition 2) the following condition holds:

2’) If $`v=\mathrm{}`$, then for all invariant differential operators $`D_\lambda `$ on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$ and all $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ there exist $`C>0`$ and $`N`$ such that

(0.4)
$$D_\lambda R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )_\sigma C(1+\lambda +|\lambda _\pi |)^N$$

for all $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M())`$.

Then for every $`K`$-finite $`f𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$, the spectral side of the trace formula is absolutely convergent.

At the moment we don’t know how to prove any of the conditions (0.2), (0.3) and (0.4) in general. However, for $`G=\mathrm{GL}_n`$, considered as an algebraic group over a number field, we are able to prove (0.2) and (0.4). The method relies on work of Luo, Rudnick and Sarnak \[LRS\] who established nontrivial bounds towards the generalized Ramanujan conjecture. For $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$ any local component of a cuspidal automorphic representation is equivalent to a full induced representation $`I_P^G(\tau ,𝐬)`$ where $`\tau `$ is tempered and the parameters $`𝐬=(s_1,\mathrm{},s_r)`$ satisfy $`s_1>s_2>\mathrm{}>s_r`$ and $`|s_i|<1/2`$. If $`\pi _v`$ is unramified, it follows from Theorem 2 of \[LRS\] that the $`s_i`$’s satisfy the nontrivial bound

(0.5)
$$|s_i|<\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{n^2+1},i=1,\mathrm{},r.$$

Using the method of \[LRS\], one can show that (0.5) holds also for the ramified components. Furthermore, using the work of Mœglin and Waldspurger \[MW\] on the residual spectrum, one can show that similar nontrivial bounds exist for the continuous parameters of any local component of an automorphic representation in the discrete spectrum of $`\mathrm{GL}_m(𝔸)`$. These bounds are the essential ingredients in the proof of (0.2) and (0.4) in the case of $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$. Details will appear in a forthcoming paper with B. Speh \[MS\].

Now we shall explain the main steps of the proof of Theorem 0.1. First observe that $`M_{P|P}(s,0)`$ is unitary. Therefore, in order to estimate the trace norm of (0.1), it suffices to estimate the integral

(0.6)
$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔐_L(P,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,f)_1𝑑\lambda .$$

To deal with this integral, we introduce a certain normalization of intertwining operators. For $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$ let $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ be the space of square integrable automorphic forms of type $`\pi `$ (see §1). Let $`M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ denote the restriction of the intertwining operator $`M_{Q|P}(\lambda )`$ to $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$. Let $`\pi =_v\pi _v`$ and let $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ be the normalizing factor for the local intertwining operator considered above. Suppose $`\pi =\pi _v`$ occurs in the discrete spectrum of $`M(𝔸)`$, which is equivalent to $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)0`$, then the Euler product

$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\mathrm{\Pi }_vr_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )$$

converges absolutely in some chamber and $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ admits a meromorphic continuation to $`𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. Using this meromorphic function, we introduce the normalized global intertwining operator by

(0.7)
$$N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^1M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ).$$

By definition, the operator $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is equivalent to the direct sum of finitely many copies of $`_vR_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$.

Let $`𝔐_L(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ be the restriction of $`𝔐_L(P,\lambda )`$ to the subspace $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$. It follows from Arthur’s theory of $`(G,M)`$ families \[A4, p.1329\] that

$$𝔐_L(P,\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{S}{}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ),$$

where the sum runs over all parabolic subgroups $`S`$ containing $`L`$, the operator $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ is built out of normalized intertwining operators on the local groups $`G(_v)`$ and $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ is a scalar valued function which is defined in terms of normalizing factors. This reduces the estimation of the integral (0.6) to two separate problems, one involving $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ and the other one $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$.

First we are dealing with $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$. By Proposition 7.5 of \[A4\], $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ can be expressed in terms of logarithmic derivatives of normalizing factors associated with maximal parabolic subgroups in certain Levi subgroups. Therefore we may assume that $`dim(𝔞_P/𝔞_G)=1`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A)`$. Then there exists a meromorphic function $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ of one variable such that $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda (\alpha ^{}))`$, and our problem is to derive estimates, which are uniform with respect to $`\pi `$, of integrals of the form

(0.8)
$$_{}\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,iu)^1\frac{d}{du}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,iu)\right|(1+u^2)^N𝑑u.$$

To deal with this integral, we note that $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ is a meromorphic function of order $`n=16dimG+2`$. This follows from (0.7), since by Theorem 0.1 of \[Mu3\], the matrix coefficients of $`M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ are meromorphic functions of order $`n`$ and by Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\], the normalized local intertwining operators $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ are rational functions of $`q_v^{\lambda (\alpha ^{})}`$, if $`v<\mathrm{}`$, and of $`\lambda (\alpha ^{})`$, if $`v=\mathrm{}`$. Thus there exist entire functions $`r_i(\pi ,z)`$, $`i=1,2`$, of order $`n`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)=r_1(\pi ,z)/r_2(\pi ,z)`$. Using the representation of $`r_i(\pi ,z)`$ as a Weierstraß product, we reduce the estimation of the integral (0.8) to the the estimation of the number of poles, counted with their order, of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ in a circle of radius $`R>0`$. By (0.7), this problem is closely related to the estimation of the number of poles, counted with their order, of matrix coefficients of $`M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ in a circle of radius $`R>0`$. The latter problem has been settled in \[Mu3, Proposition 6.6\]. Together with Proposition 7.5 of \[A4\], these estimates imply estimates for the corresponding integrals involving $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$. In this way we get Theorem 5.4 which is our main technical result.

Next consider $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$. Given an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$ be the subspace of $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ consisting of all automorphic forms which are $`K_f`$-invariant and transform under $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ according to $`\sigma `$. Let $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ be the restriction of $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ to the subspace $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$. Now observe that for any $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ there exists an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ such that $`h`$ is left and right invariant under $`K_f`$. Then the estimation of $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1`$ can be reduced to the estimation of $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ where $`\sigma `$ runs over $`\mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. By Arthur’s theory of $`(G,M)`$-families, the estimation of the norm of the finite rank operators $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ can be reduced to the estimation of derivatives of finitely many normalized local intertwining operators $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}`$, $`v<\mathrm{}`$, and $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma `$. Combined with Theorem 5.4 this implies Theorem 0.1. The proof of Theorem 0.2 is similar.

The paper is organized as follows. In §1 we collect some preliminary facts. In §2 we discuss briefly normalized local and global intertwining operators. The local normalizing factors are studied in some detail in §3. We recall the definition of the normalizing factors and we prove some results that we need in the next section. In §4 we investigate the poles of the global normalizing factors. This section is mainly based on results obtained in \[Mu3\]. In §5 we establish Theorem 5.4 which is the main result about generalized logarithmic derivatives of global normalizing factors. In §6 we study the absolute convergence of the spectral side of the trace formula and we prove our main results, Theorem 0.1 and Theorem 0.2. In §7 we discuss the example of $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$ and we sketch a method to prove (0.2) and (0.4).

Acknowledgments Most of this work was done during the author’s stay at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. The author is very grateful to the IAS for hospitality and financial support by a grant from the Ellentuck Fund. He also would like to thank J. Cogdell, D. Ramakrishnan and F. Shahidi for some very useful discussions. Especially he is very grateful to W. Hoffmann and the referee for their comments, suggestions and corrections which helped to improve the paper considerably.

## 1. Preliminaries

We shall follow partially the notation introduced by Arthur \[A1\]-\[A4\].

### 1.1.

Let $`G`$ be a reductive algebraic group defined over $``$. As in \[A4\], \[A5\], we shall fix a subgroup $`M_0`$ of $`G`$, defined over $``$, which is a Levi component of some minimal parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ defined over $``$. In this paper, a parabolic subgroup will mean a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$, defined over $``$, and a Levi subgroup of $`G`$ will mean a subgroup of $`G`$ which contains $`M_0`$ and is the Levi component of some parabolic subgroup of $`G`$. It is a reductive subgroup of $`G`$ which is defined over $``$. If $`ML`$ are Levi subgroups, we denote the set of Levi subgroups of $`L`$ which contain $`M`$ by $`^L(M)`$. Furthermore, let $`^L(M)`$ denote the set of parabolic subgroups of $`L`$ defined over $``$ which contain $`M`$, and let $`𝒫^L(M)`$ be the set of groups in $`^L(M)`$ for which $`M`$ is a Levi component. If $`L=G`$, we shall denote these sets by $`(M)`$, $`(M)`$ and $`𝒫(M)`$, respectively. Suppose that $`P^L(M)`$. Then

$$P=N_PM_P,$$

where $`N_P`$ is the unipotent radical of $`P`$ and $`M_P`$ is the unique Levi component of $`P`$ which contains $`M`$.

Suppose that $`MM_1L`$ are Levi subgroups of $`G`$. If $`Q𝒫^L(M_1)`$ and $`R𝒫^{M_1}(M)`$, there is a unique group $`Q(R)𝒫^L(M)`$ which is contained in $`Q`$ and whose intersection with $`M_1`$ is $`R`$.

Let $`A_P`$ be the split component of the center of $`M_P`$. $`A_P`$ is defined over $``$. Let $`X(M_P)_{}`$ be the group of characters of $`M_P`$ defined over $``$. Then

$$𝔞_P=\text{Hom}(X(M_P)_{},)$$

is a real vector space whose dimension equals that of $`A_P`$. Its dual space is

$$𝔞_P^{}=X(M_P)_{}.$$

We shall often denote $`A_P`$, $`𝔞_P`$ and $`𝔞_P^{}`$ by $`A_M`$, $`𝔞_M`$ and $`𝔞_M^{}`$, respectively, since they depend only on $`M`$. Also, we shall write $`A_0=A_{M_0}`$, $`𝔞_0=𝔞_{M_0}`$ and $`𝔞_0^{}=𝔞_{M_0}^{}`$.

Let $`P(M_0)`$. We shall denote the roots of $`(P,A_P)`$ by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_P`$, the reduced roots by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$, and the simple roots by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P`$. They are elements in $`X(A_P)_{}`$ and are canonically embedded in $`𝔞_P^{}`$.

Let $`P`$ and $`Q`$ be groups in $`(M_0)`$ with $`PQ`$. Then there is a canonical surjection $`𝔞_P𝔞_Q`$ and a canonical injection $`𝔞_Q^{}𝔞_P^{}`$. The kernel of the first map will be denoted by $`𝔞_P^Q.`$ Then $`𝔞_P^Q`$ is dual to $`𝔞_P^{}/𝔞_Q^{}.`$

The group $`M_QP`$ is a parabolic subgroup of $`M_Q`$ with unipotent radical

$$N_P^Q=N_PM_Q.$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q`$ be the set of simple roots of $`(M_QP,A_P)`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q`$ is a subset of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P`$. We may identify $`𝔞_Q`$ with the subspace

$$\{H𝔞_P\alpha (H)=0,\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q\}.$$

Furthermore, to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q`$ one can associate a basis $`\{\alpha ^{}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q\}`$ of $`𝔞_P^Q`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_P^Q`$ is defined to be the corresponding dual basis of $`(𝔞_P^Q)^{}`$ \[A2\]. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }_P^Q`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_P^Q`$ are naturally embedded subsets of $`𝔞_0^{}`$. Let

$$𝔞_P^+=\{H𝔞_P\alpha (H)>0\text{for all}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P\},$$

and

$$(𝔞_P^{})^+=\{\mathrm{\Lambda }𝔞_P^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }(\alpha ^{})>0\text{for all}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P\}.$$

We shall denote the restricted Weyl group of $`(G,A_0)`$ by $`W_0`$. It acts on $`𝔞_0`$ and $`𝔞_0^{}`$ in the usual way. For every $`sW_0`$ we shall fix a representative $`w_s`$ in the intersection of $`G()`$ with the normalizer of $`A_0`$. $`w_s`$ is determined modulo $`M_0()`$. If $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ are parabolic subgroups, let $`W(𝔞_{P_1},𝔞_{P_2})`$ denote the set of distinct isomorphisms from $`𝔞_{P_1}`$ onto $`𝔞_{P_2}`$ obtained by restricting elements of $`W_0`$ to $`𝔞_{P_1}`$. $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ are said to be associated if $`W(𝔞_{P_1},𝔞_{P_2})`$ is not empty.

### 1.2.

We fix an embedding of $`G`$ into $`\mathrm{GL}_n,`$ defined over $``$. For a given place $`v`$ of $`,`$ let $`G(_v)`$ be the group of $`_v`$-rational points of $`G`$. Let $`𝔸`$ be the ring of adèles of $``$ and let $`G(𝔸)`$ be the corresponding adèle-valued group. If $`f`$ stands for the set of finite places of $``$ and $`𝔸_f`$ is the corresponding ring of finite adèles, then

$$G(𝔸)=G()\times G(𝔸_f).$$

For any prime $`p,`$ let

$$G(_p)=\mathrm{GL}_n(_p)G(_p).$$

This is an open compact subgroup of $`G(_p)`$. We shall fix a maximal compact subgroup

$$K=\underset{v}{}K_v$$

of $`G(𝔸)`$ which is admissible relative to $`M_0`$ in the sense of \[A5\]. For any such $`K`$ the following properties hold:

1. For almost all primes $`p`$, one has $`K_p=G(_p)`$.
2. For every finite $`p`$, $`K_p`$ is a special maximal compact subgroup. This implies that $`G(_p)=P_0(_p)K_p`$ for all $`P_0(M_0)`$.
3. The Lie algebras of $`K_{}`$ and $`A_0()`$ are orthogonal with respect to the Killing form.

Given $`P(M_0)`$, let

$$M_P(𝔸)^1=\underset{\chi X(M_P)_{}}{}\mathrm{ker}(|\chi |).$$

This is a closed subgroup of $`M_P(𝔸)`$, and $`M_P(𝔸)`$ is the direct product of $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$ and $`A_P()^0`$. By the assumptions on $`K`$, $`G(𝔸)=P(𝔸)K`$. Therefore, any $`xG(𝔸)`$ can be written as

(1.1)
$$x=namk,nN_P(𝔸),mM(𝔸)^1,aA_P()^0,kK.$$

Let

$$H_P:G(𝔸)𝔞_P$$

be the associated height function as defined in \[A2\]. Then $`H_P(x)`$ is the image of $`aA_P()^0`$ in the decomposition (1.1) with respect to the isomorphism $`A_P()^0𝔞_P`$.

We shall fix a Euclidean norm $``$ on $`𝔞_0`$ which is invariant under the action of the Weyl group of $`(G,A_0).`$ On each space $`𝔞_P^Q,PQ,`$ we take as Haar measure the Euclidean measure associated to the restriction of $``$ to $`𝔞_P^Q.`$ We then normalize the Haar measures on $`K`$, $`G(𝔸)`$, $`N_P(𝔸)`$, $`M_P(𝔸)`$, $`A_P()^0`$, $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$, etc. as in \[A2\].

### 1.3.

Let $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\sigma `$ be the functions that enter the definition of Harish-Chandra’s Schwartz space on $`G()`$ \[Wa2, p.156\] and extend them to functions on $`G(𝔸)`$ in the obvious way. For any place $`v`$, let $`G(_v)^1`$ denote the intersection of $`G(_v)`$ with $`G(𝔸)^1`$. Let $`𝒰(𝔤()^1)`$ be the universal enveloping algebra of the complexification of the Lie algebra of $`G()^1`$. Let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)^1`$. Then the double coset space $`K_f\backslash G(𝔸)^1/K_f`$ is a discrete union of countably many copies of $`G()^1`$. In particular it is a differentiable manifold. Suppose that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a subset of $`G(𝔸)^1`$ such that $`K_f\mathrm{\Omega }K_f=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`K_f\backslash \mathrm{\Omega }/K_f`$ is the disjoint union of finitely many copies of $`G()^1`$. Let $`𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1;\mathrm{\Omega },K_f)`$ be the space of all functions $`h:G(𝔸)^1`$ satisfying the following conditions:

1. $`h`$ is bi-invariant under $`K_f`$, $`\mathrm{supp}h\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and $`h:K_f\backslash \mathrm{\Omega }/K_f`$ is a smooth function.
2. For all $`D_1,D_2𝒰(𝔤()^1)`$ and all $`r`$, we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill h& _{D_1,D_2,r}\hfill \\ & :=\underset{xG(𝔸)^1}{sup}\left((1+\sigma (x))^r\mathrm{\Xi }^2(x)|D_1hD_2(x)|\right)<\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1;\mathrm{\Omega },K_f)`$ be equipped with the topology defined by the semi-norms $`_{D_1,D_2,r}`$. Let $`𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be the topological direct limit over all pairs $`(\mathrm{\Omega },K_f)`$ of the spaces $`𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1;\mathrm{\Omega },K_f)`$.

### 1.4.

Let $`H`$ be any algebraic group over $``$ and let $`F`$ be a local field. We shall denote by $`\mathrm{\Pi }(H(𝔸))`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{\Pi }(H(F))`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }(K)`$, etc.) the set of equivalence classes of irreducible unitary representations of $`H(𝔸)`$ (resp. $`H(F)`$, $`K`$, etc.).

### 1.5.

Given a unitary character $`\xi `$ of $`A_P()^0`$ , let $`L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸))_\xi `$ be the space of all measurable functions $`\varphi `$ on $`M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)`$ such that $`\varphi (xm)=\xi (x)\varphi (m)`$ for all $`xA_P()^0`$, $`mM_P(𝔸)`$, and $`\varphi `$ is square integrable on $`M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))_\xi `$ denote the subspace of all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸))`$ which are equivalent to a subrepresentation of the regular representation of $`M_P(𝔸)`$ on $`L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸))_\xi `$. Set

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))=\underset{\xi \mathrm{\Pi }(A_P()^0)}{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))_\xi .$$

Recall that $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ can be canonically identified with the set of orbits under the action of $`i𝔞_P^{}`$ defined by

$$\pi \pi _\lambda =e^{\lambda (H_P())}\pi ,\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)),\lambda i𝔞_P^{}.$$

Since $`M_P(𝔸)`$ is the direct product of $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$ and $`A_P()^0`$, any representation of $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$ corresponds to a representation of $`M_P(𝔸)`$ which is trivial on $`A_P()^0`$. We identify these two representations and in this way we obtain an embedding of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸))`$.

Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸))`$ with $`\pi =_v\pi _v`$, set $`\pi _f=_{v<\mathrm{}}\pi _v.`$ For an open compact subgroup $`K_fG(𝔸_f)`$, let

$$K_{M,f}=M_P(𝔸_f)K_f.$$

Set

(1.2)
$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸);K_f)=\left\{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))\right|\pi _f^{K_{M,f}}\{0\}\}.$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸)^1;K_f)`$ be the intersection of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸);K_f)`$ with the subspace $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))`$.

### 1.6.

Let $`P=NM`$ be a parabolic subgroup and let $`\varphi `$ be a measurable, locally integrable function on $`N()\backslash G(𝔸)`$. Then the constant term $`\varphi _P`$ of $`\varphi `$ along $`P`$ is defined for almost every $`g`$ by

(1.3)
$$\varphi _P(g)=_{N()\backslash N(𝔸)}\varphi (ng)𝑑n.$$

This is a measurable, locally integrable function on $`N(𝔸)\backslash G(𝔸)`$.

### 1.7.

Let $`P`$ be a parabolic subgroup. Then we denote by $`𝒜^2(P)`$ the space of automorphic forms on $`N_P(𝔸)M_P()\backslash G(𝔸)`$ which are square integrable on $`M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1\times K`$. This is the space of smooth functions

$$\varphi :N_P(𝔸)M_P()\backslash G(𝔸)$$

which satisfy the following conditions:

1. The span of the set of functions

$$x(z\varphi )(xk),xG(𝔸),$$

indexed by $`kK`$ and $`zZ(𝔤_{})`$, is finite dimensional.
2. $$\varphi ^2=_K_{M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1}|\varphi (mk)|^2𝑑m𝑑k<\mathrm{}.$$

Furthermore, an automorphic form $`\varphi 𝒜^2(P)`$ is called cuspidal, if the following additional condition holds:

1. For all standard parabolic subgroups $`QP`$, $`\varphi _Q=0`$.

The subspace of all cuspidal automorphic forms in $`𝒜^2(P)`$ will be denoted by $`𝒜_0^2(P)`$.

### 1.8.

Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))_\xi `$, let $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ be the subspace of $`𝒜^2(P)`$ consisting of all functions $`\varphi `$ such that for every $`xG(𝔸)`$, the function

$$\varphi _x(m)=\varphi (mx)mM_P(𝔸),$$

belongs to the $`\pi `$-isotypical subspace of $`L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸))_\xi `$. If $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸))`$ is not contained in $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M_P(𝔸))`$, we put $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)=0`$. Let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)`$. Then we denote by $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f}`$ the subspace of all $`K_f`$-invariant functions in $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$. Furthermore, if $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, then we denote by $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$ the $`\sigma `$-isotypical subspace of $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f}`$.

### 1.9.

Let $`𝔛`$ be the set of $`W_0`$ conjugacy classes of pairs $`(M_B,r_B)`$, where $`B`$ is a parabolic subgroup and $`r_B`$ is an irreducible cuspidal automorphic representation of $`M_B(𝔸)^1`$. Let

$$L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1)=\underset{\chi 𝔛}{}L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1)_\chi $$

be the decomposition of $`L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ introduced by Arthur in \[A2, Section 3\]. Given $`\chi 𝔛`$, let $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ be the subspace of $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ consisting of all function $`\varphi `$ such that for each $`xG(𝔸)`$, the restriction of $`\varphi _x`$ to $`M_P(𝔸)^1`$ belongs to $`L^2(M_P()\backslash M_P(𝔸)^1)_\chi `$.

If we identify $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$ with a subset of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸))`$, then $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ is well defined for any $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)`$. This is a space of functions on $`N_P(𝔸)M_P(𝔸)A_P()^0\backslash G(𝔸)`$. The direct sum

$$\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_P(𝔸)^1)}{}𝒜_\chi ^2(P,\pi )$$

is the space that was denoted by $`A^2(P,\chi )`$ in \[Mu3\].

### 1.10.

Let $`\overline{𝒜}^2(P)`$ be the Hilbert space completion of $`𝒜^2(P)`$. For any $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$ we have an induced representation $`\rho (P,\lambda )`$ of $`G(𝔸)`$ on $`\overline{𝒜}^2(P)`$ which is defined by

(1.4)
$$(\rho (P,\lambda ,y)\varphi )(x)=\varphi (xy)e^{(\lambda +\rho _P)(H_P(xy))}e^{(\lambda +\rho _P)(H_P(x))},$$

for elements $`x,yG(𝔸)`$ and $`\varphi \overline{𝒜}^2(P)`$. The Hilbert space completions $`\overline{𝒜}_\pi ^2(P)`$ and $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ of the subspaces $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ and $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$, respectively, are invariant under $`\rho (P,\lambda )`$ and we shall denote the restriction of $`\rho (P,\lambda )`$ to $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ (resp. $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$) by $`\rho _\pi (P,\lambda )`$ (resp. $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda )`$).

### 1.11.

Given any irreducible unitary representation $`\pi `$ of $`M_B(𝔸)^1`$, let $`\lambda _\pi `$ be the eigenvalue of the Casimir operator of $`M_B()`$, acting in the Gårding space $`_\pi _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of the Archimedean constituent $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`\pi `$. For $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`(M_B,r_B)\chi `$, the Casimir eigenvalue $`\lambda _{r_B}`$ depends only on the class $`\chi `$ and we denote it by $`\lambda _\chi `$.

## 2. Normalized intertwining operators

Let $`M,M_1(M_0)`$, $`P𝒫(M)`$ and $`P_1𝒫(M_1)`$. For each $`sW(𝔞_M,𝔞_{M_1})`$, $`\varphi 𝒜^2(P)`$, and $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{Re}(\lambda )(𝔞_P^{})^++\rho _P`$, let $`M_{P_1|P}(s,\lambda )\varphi `$ be defined by

(2.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill M& {}_{P_1|P}{}^{}(s,\lambda )\varphi (x)=e^{(s\lambda +\rho _{P_1})(H_{P_1}(x))}\hfill \\ & _{N_1(𝔸)w_sN(𝔸)w_s^1\backslash N_1(𝔸)}\varphi (w_s^1n_1x)e^{(\lambda +\rho _P)(H_P(w_s^1n_1x))}𝑑n_1\hfill \end{array}$$

for $`xG(𝔸)`$. The integral is absolutely convergent for $`\lambda `$ as above and admits an analytic continuation to a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$ with values in the space of linear operators from $`𝒜^2(P)`$ to $`𝒜^2(P_1)`$. This operator is the global intertwining operator

$$M_{P_1|P}(s,\lambda ):𝒜^2(P)𝒜^2(P_1).$$

Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ and $`\chi 𝔛`$. Then $`M_{P_1|P}(s,\lambda )`$ maps the subspace $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$ (resp. $`A_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$) to $`A_{s\pi }^2(P_1)`$ (resp. $`𝒜_{\chi ,s\pi }^2(P_1)`$). The main functional equations are

(2.2)
$$M_{P_2P}(ts,\lambda )=M_{P_2P_1}(t,s\lambda )M_{P_1|P}(s,\lambda )$$

for $`tW(𝔞_1,𝔞_2)`$ and $`sW(𝔞,𝔞_1)`$.

By (1.4) and (1.5) of \[A4\], most of the considerations concerning intertwining operators can be reduced to the case where $`P_1`$ and $`P`$ have the same Levi component $`M`$, and $`s=1`$.

Thus, from now on we shall assume that $`P,Q𝒫(M)`$ and we put

$$M_{Q|P}(\lambda ):=M_{Q|P}(1,\lambda ),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}.$$

Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$, let

$$M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):𝒜_\pi ^2(P)𝒜_\pi ^2(Q)$$

be the restriction of $`M_{Q|P}(\lambda )`$ to $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)`$. We shall now express this operator in terms of local intertwining operators. Let $`\pi _\lambda `$ be the representation of $`P(𝔸)`$ which is defined by

$$\pi _\lambda (nm)=e^{\lambda (H_M(m))}\pi (m),nN_P(𝔸),mM_P(𝔸).$$

Let $`(I_P^G(\pi _\lambda ),_P(\pi ))`$ be the induced representation of $`G(𝔸)`$. Similarly let $`(I_Q^G(\pi _\lambda ),_Q(\pi ))`$ be the representation of $`G(𝔸)`$ induced from $`Q(𝔸)`$. Let $`\xi `$ be a unitary character of $`A_M()^0`$ and suppose that $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))_\xi `$. We extend $`\xi `$ by 1 to a character of $`M()A_M()^0`$. Then there is a canonical isomorphism

(2.3)
$$j_P:_P(\pi )\mathrm{Hom}_{M(𝔸)}(\pi ,I_{M()A_M()^0}^{M(𝔸)}(\xi ))\overline{𝒜}_\pi ^2(P)$$

of $`G(𝔸)`$-modules where $`G(𝔸)`$ acts on the left by $`I_P^G(\pi _\lambda )\mathrm{Id}`$. A similar isomorphism $`j_Q`$ exists with respect to $`Q`$. Let $`_P^0(\pi )`$ (resp. $`_Q^0(\pi )`$) be the subspace of elements which are right $`K`$-finite and left $`Z(𝔤_{})`$-finite. Using (2.3), it follows that $`M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ induces an intertwining operator

$$J_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):_P^0(\pi )_Q^0(\pi )$$

such that

$$j_Q(J_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )\mathrm{Id})=M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )j_P.$$

It follows from (2.1) that for $`\mathrm{Re}(\lambda )(𝔞_P^{})^++\rho _P`$, this operator is defined by the following convergent integral

(2.4)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill J_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )\varphi (x)& =e^{(\lambda +\rho _Q)(H_Q(x))}\hfill \\ & _{N_Q(𝔸)N_P(𝔸)\backslash N_Q(𝔸)}\varphi (nx)e^{(\lambda +\rho _P)(H_P(nx))}dn.\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`xG(𝔸)`$ and $`\varphi _P^0(\pi )`$.

Let $`v`$ be any place of $``$ and let $`(\pi _v,V_v)\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$. Given $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$, let $`\pi _{v,\lambda }`$ be the representation of $`P(_v)`$ on $`V_v`$ defined by

$$\pi _{v,\lambda }(n_vm_v)=\pi _v(m_v)e^{\lambda (H_M(m_v))},n_vN(_v),m_vM(_v).$$

Let $`(I_P^G(\pi _{v,\lambda }),_P(\pi _v))`$ denote induced representation. The Hilbert space is the space of measurable functions

$$\varphi _v:N(_v)G(_v)V_v$$

such that

1. $`\varphi _v(m_vx_v)=\pi (m_v)\varphi _v(x_v),m_vM(_v),x_vG(_v);`$
2. $`\varphi _v^2=_{K_v}\varphi _v(k)_{V_v}^2𝑑k<\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`_P^0(\pi _v)_P(\pi _v)`$ be the subspace of $`K_v`$-finite functions. Then the local intertwining operator

$$J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda ):_P^0(\pi _v)_Q^0(\pi _v)$$

is defined by

(2.5)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill J_{Q|P}& (\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v(x_v)=e^{(\lambda +\rho _Q)(H_Q(x_v))}\hfill \\ & _{N_Q(_v)N_P(_v)\backslash N_Q(_v)}\varphi _v(n_vx_v)e^{(\lambda +\rho _P)(H_P(n_vx_v))}dn_v.\hfill \end{array}$$

The integral converges absolutely for $`\mathrm{Re}(\lambda )(𝔞_P^{})^++\rho _P`$ and can be continued to a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ with values in the space of linear operators from $`_P^0(\pi _v)`$ to $`_Q^0(\pi _v)`$ \[Sh1\].

Now let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$. Then $`\pi `$ is a restricted tensor product

$$\pi =_v\pi _v$$

where almost all $`(\pi _v,V_v)`$ are unramified, i.e., $`dimV_v^{K_vM(_v)}=1`$ for almost all $`v`$. Moreover, we have

$$(I_P^G(\pi _\lambda ),_P(\pi ))(_vI_P^G(\pi _{v,\lambda }),_v_P(\pi _v)).$$

Let $`\varphi _P^0(\pi )`$ and suppose that $`\varphi =_v\varphi _v`$. Observe that each $`\varphi _v`$ belongs to $`_P^0(\pi _v)`$ and for almost all $`v`$, $`\varphi _v`$ is $`K_v`$–invariant. Comparing (2.4) and (2.5), it follows that

(2.6)
$$J_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )\varphi =_v(J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v)$$

whenever the product on the right converges.

It is possible to normalize local intertwining operators. Let $`v`$ be any valuation of $``$ and let $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$. It is proved in \[A7\], \[CLL\] that there exist scalar valued meromorphic functions $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ of $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$ such that the normalized intertwining operators

(2.7)
$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )^1J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )$$

satisfy the conditions $`(R_1)(R_8)`$ of Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\]. We recall some of the properties satisfied by the normalized intertwining operators.

1. If $`S𝒫(M)`$, then

(2.8)
$$R_{S|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=R_{S|Q}(\pi _v,\lambda )R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda ).$$
2. (2.9)
$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )^{}=R_{P|Q}(\pi _v,\overline{\lambda }).$$
3. Let $`L(M)`$, $`S𝒫(L)`$, and $`Q,Q^{}𝒫^L(M)`$. Then

(2.10)
$$\left(R_{S(Q^{})|S(Q)}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi \right)_k=R_{Q^{}|Q}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _k$$

for any $`\varphi _P^0(S(R)(_v))`$ and $`kK_v`$.
4. Let $`v`$ be a finite place. Suppose that $`\pi _v`$ is unramified, and that $`K_v`$ is very special. Let $`\varphi _v_P(\pi _v)`$ be a function such that $`\varphi _v(k)=\varphi _v(1)`$ for all $`kK_v`$. Then in the compact picture of the induced representation, one has

(2.11)
$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v=\varphi _v.$$

The functions $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ are called normalizing factors. They satisfy similar properties. We recall some of them. Given $`P𝒫(M)`$, let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$ be the set of reduced roots of $`(P,A_M)`$.

1. For $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$, let $`M_\beta (M)`$ be such that

$$𝔞_{M_\beta }=\{H𝔞_M\beta (H)=0\}$$

and let $`P_\beta `$ be the unique group in $`𝒫^{M_\beta }(M)`$ whose simple root is $`\beta `$. Then

(2.12)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=\underset{\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r}{}r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi _v,\lambda ),$$

Note that each $`r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ depends only on the projection $`\lambda (\beta ^{})`$.
2. If $`\pi _v`$ is an irreducible constituent of an induced representation $`I_R^M(\sigma _v)`$, where $`\sigma _v\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M_1(_v))`$, $`R𝒫^M(M_1)`$, and $`M_1M`$, then

(2.13)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=r_{Q(R)|P(R)}(\sigma _v,\lambda ).$$
3. (2.14)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )r_{P|Q}(\pi _v,\lambda )=J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )J_{P|Q}(\pi _v,\lambda ).$$
4. (2.15)
$$\overline{r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )}=r_{P|Q}(\pi _v,\overline{\lambda }).$$
5. If $`v`$ is a finite place of $``$, then $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ is a rational function in the variables $`\{q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\beta })}\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r\}`$, where the $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$’s are suitably normalized ”coroots”. If $`v=\mathrm{}`$, then $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ is a rational function in the variables $`\{\lambda (\beta ^{})\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r\}.`$

Now we return to global intertwining operators. Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$. For $`\varphi _P^0(\pi )`$ with $`\varphi =_v\varphi _v`$ set

(2.16)
$$R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )\varphi =_v(R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v).$$

Since $`\varphi _v`$ is $`K_v`$\- invariant for almost all $`v`$, it follows from (2.11) that the right hand side is actually a finite product and therefore, it converges for all $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ which are not poles of the local intertwining operators. In this way we get a a meromorphic operator valued function

$$R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):_P^0(\pi )_Q^0(\pi )$$

of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. Using the isomorphism (2.3) and the corresponding one for $`Q`$, we obtain a meromorphic operator valued function

$$N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):𝒜_\pi ^2(P)𝒜_\pi ^2(Q)$$

of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ such that

(2.17)
$$j_QN_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=(R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )\mathrm{Id})j_P.$$

Furthermore, put

(2.18)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{v}{}r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda ).$$

By (R.4) it follows that for $`\varphi `$ as above, we have

$$J_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v=r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )\varphi _v$$

for almost all $`v`$. Therefore, the infinite product (2.18) converges in the domain of absolute convergence of the infinite product (2.6) and for $`\lambda `$ in this domain we have

(2.19)
$$M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ).$$

Since both $`M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ and $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ are meromorphic functions of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$, it follows that $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ admits a meromorphic continuation to $`𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. The meromorphic function $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is the global normalizing factor and $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is the normalized global intertwining operator.

Using (2.12), (2.14), (2.15) and the functional equations (2.2), it follows that $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ has the following properties

1. (2.20)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )r_{P|Q}(\pi ,\lambda )=1.$$
2. (2.21)
$$\overline{r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )}=r_{P|Q}(\pi ,\overline{\lambda }).$$
3. For each $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r`$ let $`P_\beta `$ be as in (2.12). Then

(2.22)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r}{}r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi ,\lambda ).$$

Note that $`r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi ,\lambda )`$ depends only on the projection $`\lambda (\beta ^{})`$.

## 3. Local normalizing factors

In this section we shall investigate the local normalizing factors in more detail. In particular, we shall study their logarithmic derivatives. To begin with, we recall the construction of the normalizing factors.

First assume that $`v`$ is a finite valuation. Then the existence of normalizing factors such that Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\] holds has been verified by Langlands in \[CLL\], Lecture 15. Let $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$. The local normalizing factors $`r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ have to satisfy (2.1)-(2.3) in \[A7\]. Therefore, it suffices to define them when $`dim(𝔞_M/𝔞_G)=1`$ and $`\pi _v`$ is square integrable modulo $`A_G`$. Assume for the moment that these conditions are satisfied. Let $`P𝒫(M)`$ and let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A_M)`$. Then Langlands has shown that there exists a rational function $`V_P(\pi _v,z)`$ of one variable such that

(3.1)
$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=V_P(\pi _v,q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}),$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }𝔞_M`$ is independent of $`\pi _v`$. We recall the definition of $`V_P(\pi _v,z)`$. Suppose that $`P_v`$ is a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ defined over $`_v`$ and let $`M_v`$ be a Levi component of $`P_v`$ over $`_v`$. Denote by $`A_{M_v}`$ the split component of the center of $`M_v`$. Set

$$𝔞_{M_v}=\mathrm{Hom}(X(M_v)__v,)$$

and

$$𝔞_{M_v}^{}=X(M_v)__v.$$

Let

$$H_{M_v}:M_v(_v)𝔞_{M_v}$$

be defined by

$$q_v^{H_{M_v}(m_v),\chi }=|\chi (m_v)|_v,\chi X(M_v)__v,m_vM_v(_v).$$

Given $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_v(_v))`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_{M_v}^{}`$, let $`\pi _\lambda `$ denote the representation defined by

$$\pi _\lambda (m_v)=\pi (m_v)e^{\lambda (H_{M_v}(m_v))},m_vM_v(_v).$$

Let

$$𝔞_{M_v,\pi }^{}=\{\lambda i𝔞_{M_v}^{}\pi _\lambda \pi \}$$

denote the stabilizer of $`\pi `$ with respect to this action of $`i𝔞_{M_v}^{}`$. Then $`𝔞_{M_v,\pi }^{}`$ is a lattice in $`i𝔞_{M_v}^{}`$ and the orbit $`𝔬_\pi `$ of $`\pi `$ is equal to $`i𝔞_{M_v}^{}/𝔞_{M_v,\pi }^{}`$. Let

$$𝔞_{M_v,_v}=H_{M_v}(M_v(_v)),\stackrel{~}{𝔞}_{M_v,_v}=H_{M_v}(A_{M_v}(_v)).$$

Then $`𝔞_{M_v,_v}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝔞}_{M_v,_v}`$ are lattices in $`𝔞_{M_v}`$. Given a real vector space $`V`$ and a closed subgroup $`V_1`$ of $`V`$,

$$V_1^{}=\mathrm{Hom}(V_1,2\pi i)iV^{}.$$

let us agree to set Let $`𝔞_{M_v,\pi }𝔞_{M_v}`$ be the dual lattice to $`𝔞_{M_v,\pi }^{}`$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{𝔞}_{M_v,_v}𝔞_{M_v,\pi }𝔞_{M_v,_v}.$$

Set

$$L_{M_v}=\left(𝔞_{M_v,_v}+𝔞_{G_v}\right)/𝔞_{G_v},\stackrel{~}{L}_{M_v}=\left(\stackrel{~}{𝔞}_{M_v,_v}+𝔞_{G_v}\right)/𝔞_{G_v},$$

and

$$L(\pi )=\left(𝔞_{M_v,\pi }+𝔞_{G_v}\right)/𝔞_{G_v}.$$

Then $`L_{M_v}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{M_v}`$, and $`L(\pi )`$ are lattices in $`𝔞_{M_v}^{G_v}=𝔞_{M_v}/𝔞_{G_v}`$.

Suppose that $`P_v`$ is a maximal parabolic subgroup, that is $`dim𝔞_{M_v}^{G_v}=1`$. Then there exists $`\alpha (\pi )𝔞_{M_v}`$ such that

$$L(\pi )=\frac{\mathrm{log}q}{2\pi }(\alpha (\pi )).$$

In \[Si1\] Silberger has shown that for a supercuspidal representation $`\pi `$ there exists a rational function $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{P_v}(\pi ,z)`$ such that the Plancherel measure $`\mu (\pi ,\lambda )`$ satisfies

(3.2)
$$\mu (\pi ,\lambda )=\stackrel{~}{U}_{P_v}(\pi ,q^{\lambda (\alpha (\pi ))}).$$

Let $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }𝔞_{M_v}`$ be such that

$$L_{M_v}=\frac{\mathrm{log}q}{2\pi }(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }).$$

Since $`L(\pi )L_{M_v}`$, there exists $`k(\pi )`$ such that $`\alpha (\pi )=k(\pi )\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$. Let

(3.3)
$$U_{P_v}(\pi ,z)=\stackrel{~}{U}_{P_v}(\pi ,z^{k(\pi )}).$$

Then

$$\mu (\pi ,\lambda )=U_{P_v}(\pi ,q^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}).$$

Now suppose that $`P_v`$ is arbitrary, but $`\pi `$ is still supercuspidal. For each reduced root $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_r(P_v,A_v)`$ let $`A_\alpha `$ denote the largest subtorus of $`A_v`$ which lies in the kernel of the root character of $`\alpha `$. Let $`M_\alpha `$ denote the centralizer of $`A_\alpha `$. Let $`{}_{}{}^{}P_{\alpha }^{}=P_vM_\alpha `$. Then $`{}_{}{}^{}P_{\alpha }^{}=M_vN_\alpha `$. Let $`\mu _\alpha (\pi ,\lambda )`$ be the Plancherel measure with respect to $`(M_\alpha ,{}_{}{}^{}P_{\alpha }^{})`$. According to \[HC3\], Theorem 24, there exist constants $`\gamma =\gamma (G/M)`$ and $`\gamma _\alpha =\gamma (M_\alpha /M)`$, $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_r(P_v,A_v)`$, such that

(3.4)
$$\gamma ^2\mu (\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_r(P_v,A_v)}{}\gamma _\alpha ^2\mu _\alpha (\pi ,\lambda ),$$

Hence if $`\{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_{P_v}\}`$ is a set of generators of the lattice $`L_{M_v}`$, then $`\mu (\pi ,\lambda )`$ is a rational function in the variables $`\{q^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_{P_v}\}`$. Finally, by Theorem 1 of \[Si2\], this can be extended to all discrete series representations of $`M_v(_v)`$.

Now let $`P=MN`$ be a maximal parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ defined over $``$. Then $`X(M)_{}X(M)__v`$ induces an embedding $`𝔞_M^{}𝔞_{M_v}^{}`$ and by the above, it follows that there exists $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }𝔞_M`$ and a rational function $`U_P(\pi ,z)`$ such that

(3.5)
$$\mu (\pi ,\lambda )=U_P(\pi ,q^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}),$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$, $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. As shown by Langlands \[CLL\], the rational function $`U_P(\pi ,z)`$ has the form

$$U_P(\pi ,z)=a\frac{_{i=1}^r(1\alpha _iz)(1\overline{\alpha }_i^1z)}{_{i=1}^r(1\beta _iz)(1\overline{\beta }_i^1z)},$$

where the $`\alpha _i`$’s and $`\beta _i`$’s satisfy $`|\alpha _i|1`$, $`|\beta _i|1`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, and $`a`$ is a certain constant. Then the rational function $`V_P(\pi ,z)`$ in (3.1) is defined by

(3.6)
$$V_P(\pi ,z)=b\frac{_{i=1}^r(1\beta _iz)}{_{i=1}^r(1\alpha _iz)}$$

for a suitable constant $`b`$. In particular, it follows that $`2r`$ is the number of poles of $`U_P(\pi ,z)`$. For our applications we need a bound for $`r`$. This is done in the following lemma.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`M(M_0)`$ be such that $`dim(𝔞_M/𝔞_G)=1`$. There exists $`C>0`$ such that for all $`P𝒫(M)`$ and all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$ the number of poles of the rational function $`V_P(\pi ,z)`$ is less than or equal to $`C`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`P_v`$ be a maximal parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ defined over $`_v`$ and let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M_v(_v))`$ be supercuspidal. By Theorem 1.6 of \[Si1\], the rational function $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{P_v}(\pi ,z)`$ in (3.2) has at most 4 poles. Now observe that $`\stackrel{~}{L}_{M_v}L(\pi )L_{M_v}`$ and $`L_{M_v}/\stackrel{~}{L}_{M_v}`$ is finite. This implies that the number of poles of the rational function $`U_{P_v}(\pi ,z)`$ defined by (3.3) is bounded by a constant which is independent of $`\pi `$. The general case is reduced to this one using the product formula (3.4) and Theorem 1 of \[Si2\]. ∎

Using (2.1)-(2.3) of \[A7\], the local normalizing factors can be defined for all $`M(M_0)`$, $`P,Q𝒫(M)`$ and $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$.

Next suppose that $`v=\mathrm{}`$. In this case the existence of normalizing factors such that Theorem 2.1 in \[A7\] holds has been established by Arthur \[A7\]. The definition is as follows. Let $`{}_{}{}^{L}M`$ be the $`L`$-group of $`M`$ and let $`\rho =\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{Q|P}`$ be the contragredient representation of the adjoint representation $`\rho _{Q|P}`$ of $`{}_{}{}^{L}M`$ on the complex vector space $`{}_{}{}^{L}𝔫_{Q}^{}{}_{}{}^{L}𝔫_{P}^{}\backslash {}_{}{}^{L}𝔫_{Q}^{}`$. Let $`L(s,\pi ,\rho )`$ be the $`L`$-factor attached to $`\pi `$ and $`\rho =\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{Q|P}`$. Then Arthur has shown in \[A7\] that the functions

(3.7)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):=\frac{L(0,\pi _\lambda ,\rho )}{L(1,\pi _\lambda ,\rho )}$$

satisfy all properties required by normalizing factors. We briefly recall the definition of the $`L`$-function and refer to \[A7, pp.33-35\] for more details.

To any $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ and $`\lambda 𝔞_{P,}^{}`$, there corresponds a map

$$\varphi _\lambda :W_{}{}_{}{}^{L}M$$

from the Weil group of $``$ to the $`L`$-group of $`M`$, which is uniquely determined by $`\pi _\lambda `$ up to conjugation by $`{}_{}{}^{L}M_{}^{0}`$ \[L3\]. Let

(3.8)
$$\rho \varphi _\lambda =\underset{\tau }{}\tau _\lambda $$

be the decomposition of $`\rho \varphi _\lambda `$ into irreducible representations of $`W_{}`$. Then by definition

$$L(s,\pi _\lambda ,\rho )=L(s,\rho \varphi _\lambda )=\underset{\tau }{}L(s,\tau _\lambda ).$$

So it remains to describe the $`L`$-factors $`L(0,\tau _\lambda )L(1,\tau _\lambda )^1`$. To this end let $`TM`$ be a maximal torus over $``$ whose real split component is $`A_M`$. Let $`\lambda ,\lambda ^{}`$ denote the canonical pairing $`X^{}(T)\times X_{}(T)`$ between the space $`X^{}(T)`$ of characters and the space $`X_{}(T)`$ of one-parameter subgroups of $`T`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$ be the set of roots of $`(G,T)`$ which restrict to roots of $`(P,A_M)`$. The Galois group Gal$`(/)`$ acts on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$. Let $`\overline{\sigma }`$ be the action of the nontrivial element of Gal$`(/)`$. The eigenspaces of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{Q|P}(\varphi _\lambda (^{}))`$ are the root spaces of $`\{\alpha ^{}|\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)\}`$ and the irreducible constituents $`\tau _\lambda `$ of $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{Q|P}\varphi _\lambda `$ correspond to orbits of $`\overline{\sigma }`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$. Furthermore, the map $`\varphi :W_{}{}_{}{}^{L}M`$ determines elements $`\mu ,\nu X^{}(T)`$ with $`\mu \nu X^{}(T)`$. Let

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(z):=2(2\pi )^z\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)\text{and}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(z)=\pi ^{z/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(z/2).$$

If a two-dimensional constituent $`\tau _\lambda `$ corresponds to a pair $`\{\alpha ,\overline{\sigma }\alpha \}`$ of complex roots, then $`\tau _\lambda `$ is induced from the quasi-character

$$zz^{\mu +\lambda ,\alpha ^{}}\overline{z}^{\nu +\lambda ,\alpha ^{}}$$

of $`^{}`$. Replacing $`\alpha ^{}`$ by $`\overline{\sigma }\alpha ^{}`$ if necessary, we can assume that $`\overline{\sigma }\mu \mu ,\alpha ^{}`$ is a nonpositive integer. Then

(3.9)
$$\frac{L(0,\tau _\lambda )}{L(1,\tau _\lambda )}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(\mu +\lambda ,\alpha ^{})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(\mu +\lambda ,\alpha ^{}+1)}.$$

The one-dimensional constituents $`\tau _\lambda `$ correspond to real roots $`\alpha _0`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$. There is at most one of these. If $`\alpha _0`$ exists, then $`\tau _\lambda `$ is induced from the quasi-character of $`^{}`$

$$x\left(\frac{x}{|x|}\right)^{N_0}|x|^{\mu +\lambda ,\alpha _0^{}},$$

where $`N_0\{0,1\}`$. In this case

(3.10)
$$\frac{L(0,\tau _\lambda )}{L(1,\tau _\lambda )}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(\mu +\lambda ,\alpha _0^{}+N_0)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(\mu +\lambda ,\alpha _0^{}+N_0+1)}.$$

Remark: It has been conjectured by Langlands \[L1, p.282\] that for any local field, intertwining operators can be normalized by $`L`$-functions. For $`\mathrm{GL}(n)`$ this was proved by Shahidi \[Sh2\]. Namely, let $`P`$ be a standard maximal parabolic subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}(n)`$. Then $`𝔞_{P,}^{}^2`$ and $`M_P=\mathrm{GL}(n_1)\times \mathrm{GL}(n_2)`$ for some decomposition $`n=n_1+n_2`$. Let $`F`$ be a local non-Archimedean field and let $`\psi `$ be a non-trivial additive character of $`F`$. Let $`\pi _1\pi _2`$ be an irreducible unitary representation of $`M_P(F)=\mathrm{GL}(n_1,F)\times \mathrm{GL}(n_2,F)`$. Let $`L(z,\pi _1\times \stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_2)`$ and $`\epsilon (z,\pi _1\times \stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_2,\psi )`$ be the Rankin-Selberg $`L`$-function and the $`\epsilon `$-factor defined by Jacquet, Piatetski-Shapiro and Shalika \[JPS\]. Then the normalizing factor $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,s)`$, $`s=(s_1,s_2)`$, can be chosen to be

$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,s)=\frac{L(s_1s_2,\pi _1\times \stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_2)}{\epsilon (s_1s_2,\pi _1\times \stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_2,\psi )L(1+s_1s_2,\pi _1\times \stackrel{ˇ}{\pi }_2)}.$$

In \[Sh4\], this has been generalized to quasi-split groups and generic representations $`\pi `$.

We can now estimate the logarithmic derivatives of the normalizing factors. First we consider the case of a finite place $`v`$. Let $`q_v`$ be the number of elements of the residue field of $`_v`$ (which in our case is a prime number).

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`\alpha \overline{(𝔞_M^{})^+}`$. There exist $`C,c>0`$ such that for every finite valuation $`v`$ and every $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$ we have

(3.11)
$$\left|r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )\right|Cq_v^2$$

for $`\mathrm{Re}(z)c`$.

###### Proof.

First we assume that $`dim𝔞_M/𝔞_G=1`$ and $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$ is square integrable modulo $`A_M(_v)`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A)`$. Then $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ is given by (3.1). Let $`\lambda =z\alpha `$, $`z`$. Then $`\lambda (\alpha ^{})=z`$ and by (3.6), it follows that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )=& \mathrm{log}(q_v)q_v^z\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\{\frac{\beta _i}{1\beta _iq_v^z}\frac{\alpha _i}{1\alpha _iq_v^z}\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Recall that the $`\alpha _i`$’s and $`\beta _i`$’s satisfy $`|\alpha _i|1`$, $`|\beta _i|1`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Moreover, by Lemma 3.1 there exists $`C_10`$, which is independent of $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$, such that $`rC_1`$. Therefore, for $`\mathrm{Re}(z)>3`$ we obtain

(3.12)
$$\left|r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha )\right|C_1\frac{\mathrm{log}(q_v)q_v^{\mathrm{Re}(z)}}{1q_v^{\mathrm{Re}(z)}}<C_2q_v^2.$$

Now let $`M(M_0)`$ be arbitrary, but still assume that $`\pi _v`$ is square integrable modulo $`A_M(_v)`$. Let $`P,Q𝒫(M)`$. For each $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$ let $`M_\beta (M)`$ be such that

$$𝔞_{M_\beta }=\{H𝔞_M\beta (H)=0\}.$$

Then $`dim𝔞_M/𝔞_{M_\beta }=1`$. Let $`P_\beta `$ be the unique group in $`𝒫^{M_\beta }(M)`$ whose simple root is $`\beta `$. Furthermore, let $`\alpha (𝔞_M^{})^+`$, $`\nu 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ and $`z`$. Then by (2.12) we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}& r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu )\hfill \\ & =\underset{\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{Q}}^r}{}r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu ,\beta ^{}\beta )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu ,\beta ^{}\beta ).\hfill \end{array}$$

By assumption we have $`\alpha ,\beta ^{}0`$ for every $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$. If $`\alpha ,\beta ^{}=0`$, then the corresponding logarithmic derivative vanishes. Suppose that $`a:=\alpha ,\beta ^{}>0`$. Let $`c_0>0`$ be such that $`\beta c_0`$ for all $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r`$. Then

$$\mathrm{Re}\left(z\alpha ,\beta ^{}+\nu ,\beta ^{}\right)a\mathrm{Re}(z)c_0\nu $$

and it follows from (3.7) that there exist $`C,c>0`$, depending on $`\alpha `$, $`c_0`$ and $`\nu `$, such that

(3.13)
$$\left|r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,z\alpha +\nu )\right|Cq_v^2$$

for all $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}(z)c`$.

Next assume that $`\pi _v`$ is tempered. Then $`\pi _v`$ is an irreducible constituent of an induced representation $`I_R^M(\tau _v)`$, where $`R𝒫^M(M_1)`$, $`M_1M`$ and $`\tau _v\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M_R(_v))`$. Then $`I_P^G(\pi _{v,\lambda })`$ is canonically isomorphic to a subrepresentation of $`I_{P(R)}^G(\tau _{v,\lambda })`$ and by (2.13) we have

$$r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=r_{Q(R)|P(R)}(\tau _v,\lambda ),$$

where $`P(R)P`$, $`Q(R)Q`$. Now recall that there is a canonical inclusion $`𝔞_P^{}𝔞_{P(R)}^{}`$ and with respect to this inclusion, we have $`(𝔞_P^{})^+\overline{(𝔞_{P(R)}^{})^+}`$. Thus $`\alpha `$ can be identified with an element of $`\overline{(𝔞_{P(R)}^{})^+}`$. Hence (3.11) holds for all tempered $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$.

Now let $`\pi _v`$ be an arbitrary representation in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$. Then $`\pi _v`$ is the Langlands quotient $`J_R^M(\tau _v,\mu )`$ of a representation $`I_R^M(\tau _v,\mu )`$, where $`M_R`$ is an admissible Levi subgroup of $`M`$, $`\tau _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M_R(_v))`$ is a tempered representation, and $`\mu `$ is a point in the chamber of $`(𝔞_R^M)^{}=𝔞_R^{}/𝔞_M^{}`$ attached to $`R`$ \[Si3\]. Set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mu +\lambda `$. Then, as explained in \[A7, p.30\], we have

(3.14)
$$r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=r_{Q(R)|P(R)}(\tau _v,\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$

Let $`\rho _v𝔞_M^{}`$ be defined by

$$\delta _P(a)^{1/2}=q_v^{\rho _v(H(a))},aA_M.$$

Then it follows from Theorem 3.3 of Chapter XI of \[BW\] that

$$\mu ,\beta ^{}\rho _v,\beta ^{},\beta \mathrm{\Phi }(R,A_R).$$

Since $`\mu `$ belongs to $`𝔞_R^{}/𝔞_M^{}`$, it follows that $`\mu \rho _v`$. Let $`\alpha (𝔞_P^{})^+`$. As observed above, $`\alpha `$ can be identified with an element of $`\overline{(𝔞_{P(R)}^{})^+}`$. Hence, combining (3.13) and (3.14) the desired estimation (3.11) follows. ∎

Next we consider the infinite place. Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ and let $`\varphi :W_{}{}_{}{}^{L}M`$ be the map associated to $`\pi `$. Let $`\mu ,\nu X^{}(T)`$ be the elements determined by the map $`\varphi `$ (see \[L3\], \[A7, p.34\]). To indicate the dependence on $`\pi `$, we shall write $`\mu _\pi `$ and $`\nu _\pi `$. We note that there is a canonical injection of the space

$$𝔞_{M,}^{}=X^{}(M)_{}$$

into $`X^{}(T)`$.

###### Lemma 3.3.

Let $`\beta (𝔞_M^{})^+`$. There exist $`C,c>0`$ such that

(3.15)
$$\left|r_{Q|P}(\pi ,z\beta )^1\frac{d}{dz}r_{Q|P}(\pi ,z\beta )\right|C$$

for for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ and all $`z`$ with $`\mathrm{Re}(z)c`$.

###### Proof.

First assume that $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ is tempered. As explained above, the normalizing factor $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is a product of finitely many meromorphic functions each of which is either of the form (3.9) or (3.10). So it suffices to consider the logarithmic derivative of the Gamma factors. Recall that for $`\mathrm{Re}(z)>0`$ the following formula holds

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(z+1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z+1)}=\frac{1}{2z}+\mathrm{log}z_0^{\mathrm{}}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{u}+\frac{1}{e^u1}\right\}e^{uz}𝑑u$$

\[Wh, p.248\]. Let $`0a1`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}(z)>2`$. Then we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \left|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(z)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(z+a)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z+a)}\right|& \frac{2}{\mathrm{Re}(z)}+\mathrm{log}\left|1+\frac{a}{z1}\right|+\frac{\pi }{2}\hfill \\ & +2_0^{\mathrm{}}\left|\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{u}+\frac{1}{e^u1}\right|e^{u\mathrm{Re}(z)/2}𝑑u.\hfill \end{array}$$

Hence there exists $`C>0`$ such that

(3.16)
$$\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(z)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}(z+a)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(z+a)}\right|C\text{for}\mathrm{Re}(z)>2.$$

Let $`\beta (𝔞_M^{})^+`$, $`\nu 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$. Since $`\alpha 𝔞_M`$ is a root of $`(P,A)`$, it follows that $`\beta ,\alpha ^{}>0`$. Let $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }_P(G,T)`$ be such that $`\overline{\sigma }\mu _\pi \mu _\pi ,\alpha ^{}0`$. Then we have $`\mathrm{Re}\mu _\pi ,\alpha ^{}0`$. Hence

$$\mathrm{Re}\mu _\pi +z\beta +\nu ,\alpha ^{}\beta ,\alpha ^{}\mathrm{Re}(z)\alpha \nu .$$

Using (3.16) together with (3.9) and (3.10), it follows that there exist constants $`C,c>0`$ such that

(3.17)
$$\left|\frac{L(1,\tau _{z\beta +\nu })}{L(0,\tau _{z\beta +\nu })}\frac{d}{dz}\left(\frac{L(0,\tau _{z\beta +\nu })}{L(1,\tau _{z\beta +\nu })}\right)\right|C$$

for $`\mathrm{Re}(z)c(1+\nu )`$ and all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$, where $`\tau _\lambda `$ and $`\pi _\lambda `$ are related by (3.8).

Now let $`\pi `$ be an arbitrary representation in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$. Then there exist a parabolic subgroup $`R`$ of $`M`$, a tempered representation $`\tau `$ of $`M_R()`$ and a point $`\xi `$ in the positive chamber of $`(𝔞_R^{}/𝔞_M^{})`$ attached to $`R`$ such that $`\pi `$ is equivalent to the Langlands quotient $`J_R(\tau ,\xi )`$ \[L3\]. Set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\xi +\lambda `$. Then, as explained in \[A7, p.30\], we have

$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=r_{Q(R)|P(R)}(\tau ,\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$

Moreover, by Theorem 5.2 of Chapter IV of \[BW\] it follows that

$$|\mathrm{Re}\xi ,\alpha ^{}|4\rho _P\text{for all}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P.$$

Together with (3.17) this implies the claimed result. ∎

## 4. Poles of global normalizing factors

Let $`M(M_0)`$ and $`P,Q𝒫(M)`$. Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ with $`\pi =_v\pi _v`$. Then by §2 the infinite product

$$r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{v}{}r_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )$$

is absolutely convergent in some chamber and admits an analytic extension to a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. In this section we shall study the poles of $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$.

Recall that a function $`f:^N`$ is called a meromorphic function of order $`p0`$, if $`f`$ can be written as a quotient $`f=g_1/g_2`$ of two entire functions $`g_i:^N`$, $`i=1,2`$, satisfying

$$|g_i(z)|Ce^{cz^p},z^N,i=1,2,$$

for certain constants $`C,c>0`$. With this definition we have the following proposition.

###### Proposition 4.1.

Let $`n=dimG()/K_{\mathrm{}}`$. For all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$, the normalizing factor $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ of order $`n+2`$.

###### Proof.

By (2.22) we may assume that $`dim(𝔞_M/𝔞_G)=1`$. Let $`P𝒫(M)`$ and let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A_M)`$. Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$. Then $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)\{0\}`$ and we have to consider the intertwining operator $`M_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$. Recall that $`M_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is unitary for $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$. In particular, $`M_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is regular at $`\lambda =0`$. Put

$$M(\pi ,\lambda )=M_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)M_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda ),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}.$$

Next consider the normalized intertwining operator $`N_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ which is defined by (2.19). It follows from (2.8), (2.9), (2.16) and (2.17) that

$$N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)^{}N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)=\mathrm{Id}.$$

Hence $`N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is regular at $`\lambda =0`$ and $`N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)`$ is invertible. Put

$$N(\pi ,\lambda )=N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)N_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda ),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}.$$

Furthermore by (2.20) and (2.21) we get

(4.1)
$$|r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )|=1,\lambda i𝔞_M^{}.$$

Thus $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is also regular at $`\lambda =0`$ and $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,0)0`$. By (2.19) we get

(4.2)
$$M(\pi ,\lambda )=r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )N(\pi ,\lambda ).$$

Now observe that there exists an open compact subgroup $`K_fG(𝔸_f)`$ such that $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f}\{0\}`$. Hence there exists $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ such that $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }\{0\}`$ (cf. section 1.8 for the definition). Put

$$d=dim𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }$$

and

$$c(\pi ,\sigma )=r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,0)^d.$$

Then $`|c(\pi ,\sigma )|=1`$. Let $`M(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ (resp. $`N(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$) denote the restriction of $`M(\pi ,\lambda )`$ (resp. $`N(\pi ,\lambda )`$) to the subspace $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$. Then we have $`detN(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }0`$ and by (4.2) we get

(4.3)
$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^d=c(\pi ,\sigma )\frac{detM(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }}{detN(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }}.$$

Thus it suffices to prove that both the numerator and the denominator on the right hand side are meromorphic functions of order $`n+2`$. As for the numerator, it follows from Theorem 0.1 of \[Mu3\] that $`detM(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ is a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ of order $`n+2`$. In fact, in \[Mu3\] we only dealt with the case of the trivial character $`\xi `$. However, all the results of \[Mu3\] can be extend without any difficulty to the case of a nontrivial character $`\xi `$. It remains to consider the denominator. By (2.11), (2.16) and (2.17) there exists a finite set $`S_\pi `$ of finite places of $``$ such that

(4.4)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill detN(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }& =det\left(R_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},0)_\sigma R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma \right)\hfill \\ & \underset{vS_\pi }{}det\left(R_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,0)_{K_v}R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma `$ denotes the restriction of $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$ to the $`\sigma `$-isotypical subspace $`_P(\pi _{\mathrm{}})_\sigma `$ of $`_P(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}`$ denotes the restriction of $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ to the subspace $`_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}`$ of $`K_v`$-invariant functions. By Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\], $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$ is a rational function of $`\lambda (\alpha ^{})`$ and for each finite place $`v`$, $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ is a rational function of $`q_v^{\lambda (\alpha ^{})}`$. Therefore $`det(R_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},0)_\sigma R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma )`$ is a rational functions of $`\lambda (\alpha ^{})`$ and for each $`v<\mathrm{}`$, $`det(R_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,0)_{K_v}R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v})`$ is a rational function of $`q_v^{\lambda (\alpha ^{})}`$. Since the function $`zq^z`$ is entire and of order 1, it follows that $`detN(\pi ,\lambda )_{\sigma ,K_f}`$ is a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ of order $`1`$. By (4.3) it follows that $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^d`$ and hence $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}`$ of order $`n+2`$. ∎

Remark. Assume that $`G`$ is a quasi-split connected reductive group over a number field $`F`$ with ring of adèles $`𝔸_F`$. Let $`P=MN`$ be a maximal parabolic subgroup of $`G`$. Let $`\pi `$ be a globally generic cuspidal representation of $`M(𝔸_F)`$. Then it follows from \[Sh4\] that the intertwining operator $`M_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ can be normalized by automorphic $`L`$-functions. Furthermore in \[GS\], Gelbart and Shahidi proved that the $`L`$-functions occurring in the normalizing factor are meromorphic functions of order 1. Therefore, one should expect that the normalizing factor $`r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is of order 1 in general.

Now assume that $`dim𝔞_M/𝔞_G=1`$. Our next goal is to estimate the number of poles of $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ in a circle of radius $`R>0`$. For this purpose we have to introduce some notation.

Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$ be the space of representations defined by (1.2). For every $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$ we have $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)^{K_f}\{0\}`$.

Let $`\pi `$ be an irreducible unitary representation of $`M()`$ and let $`I_P^G(\pi )`$ be the induced representation of $`G()`$. Recall that among all $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-types $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ occurring in $`I_P^G(\pi )`$, the minimal $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-types of $`I_P^G(\pi )`$ are those $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ for which $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}+2\rho _K|^2`$ is minimizing at $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Let $`W_P(\pi )`$ be the set of minimal $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-types of $`I_P^G(\pi )`$. Then $`W_P(\pi )`$ is a non empty finite subset of $`\mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. Let $`\lambda _\pi `$ be the Casimir eigenvalues of $`\pi `$ and for any $`\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let $`\lambda _\tau `$ be the Casimir eigenvalue of $`\tau `$. Put

(4.5)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi :=\underset{\tau W_P(\pi )}{\mathrm{min}}\sqrt{\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\tau ^2}.$$

If $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$, put

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi :=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi _{\mathrm{}}.$$

For a given pole $`\eta `$ of $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$, let $`m(\eta )`$ denote its order. Set

$$n_P(\pi ,R)=\underset{|\eta |R}{}m(\eta ),$$

where the sum runs over all poles of $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$.

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`m=dimG`$ and let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)`$. There exists $`C>0`$ such that for all $`R>0`$ and all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$ we have

$$n_P(\pi ,R)C(1+R^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$. Then there exists $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ such that $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }\{0\}`$. Put

$$\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda ):=N_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi ,\lambda )N_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,0),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}.$$

Then

$$\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda )N(\pi ,\lambda )=\mathrm{Id}$$

and by (4.3) we get

(4.6)
$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^d=c(\pi ,\sigma )det(M(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma })det(\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }).$$

Thus it suffices to estimate the number of poles of the functions occurring on the right. It follows from Proposition 6.6 and Lemma 6.1 of \[Mu3\], that the number of poles, counted with their order, of $`detM(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ in the disc $`|\lambda |R`$ is bounded by

$$C(1+R^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{8m},$$

where $`C>0`$ is independent of $`\pi `$ and $`\sigma `$. As noted above, in \[Mu3\] we only dealt with the case of the trivial character $`\xi `$. However, everything can be extended to a nontrivial character $`\xi `$ without any difficulty.

It remains to consider $`det\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$. For any place $`v`$ let

$$\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )=R_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,\lambda )R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,0).$$

By (2.16) and (2.17) we have

$$\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda )j_P=j_P((_v\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda ))\mathrm{Id}),$$

and there exists a finite set $`S_\pi `$ of finite places, which depends only on $`\pi `$ and $`K_f`$, such that

$$\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}=\mathrm{Id}$$

for all $`vS_\pi \{\mathrm{}\}`$. Thus

(4.7)
$$det\left(\overline{N}(\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }\right)=det\left(\overline{R}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma \right)\underset{vS_\pi }{}det\left(\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}\right).$$

Let $`n_P(\pi _v,R)`$, $`v<\mathrm{}`$, (resp. $`n_P(\pi _{\mathrm{}},R)`$) denote the number of poles, counted with the order, of $`det\left(\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}\right)`$ (resp. $`det\left(\overline{R}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma \right)`$) in the disc $`|\lambda |<R`$. Then we have to estimate $`n_P(\pi _v,R)`$ for any $`v\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`v<\mathrm{}`$ and let $`\pi _v`$ be any irreducible unitary representation of $`M(_v)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }𝔞_M`$ be as (3.5). By Theorem 2.2.2 of \[Sh1\] there exists a polynomial $`Q_v(z)`$, $`Q_v(0)=1`$, such that

$$Q_v\left(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}\right)J_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,\lambda )$$

is a holomorphic and non-zero operator. Moreover, the degree of the polynomial $`Q_v`$ is independent of $`\pi _v`$. Let

$$d_v=dim_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}.$$

Then it follows from (2.7) and the definition of $`\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ that

$$r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,\lambda )^{d_v}Q_v\left(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })}\right)^{d_v}det\left(\overline{R}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}\right)$$

is a holomorphic function on $`𝔞_{M,}^{}`$. By (r.5) there exist polynomials $`P_1(z)`$ and $`P_2(z)`$ such that

$$r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _v,\lambda )=\frac{P_1(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })})}{P_2(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })})}.$$

Thus it suffices to estimate the number of zeros of $`P_1(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })})`$ and $`Q_v(q_v^{\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\alpha })})`$, respectively, in a circle of radius $`R>0`$. First observe that for every $`z`$ the number of solutions of $`q_v^s=z`$ in the disc $`|s|R`$ is bounded by $`1+(2\pi )^1\mathrm{log}(q_v)R`$. Furthermore, the degree of the polynomial $`Q_v`$ is bounded by some constant $`c_v>0`$ which is independent of $`\pi _v`$. Using Lemma 3.1 and (2.1)–(2.3) of \[A7\], it follows that the degree of the polynomial $`P_1(z)`$ is also bounded by a constant which is independent of $`\pi _v`$. This implies that there exists $`C_v>0`$ such that

$$n_P(\pi _v,R)C_vdim\left(_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}\right)(1+R)$$

for all $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(M(_v))`$ and $`R>0`$. It remains to estimate the dimension of $`_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}`$. Suppose that $`\pi _v`$ is the component at $`v`$ of a representation $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸));K_f)`$. Then there exists $`\xi \mathrm{\Pi }(A_M()^0)`$ such that $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))_\xi `$. Let $`_P(\pi )_\sigma ^{K_f}`$ be the $`\sigma `$-isotypical subspace of $`_P(\pi )^{K_f}`$. By (2.3) it follows that

$$_P(\pi )_\sigma ^{K_f}\mathrm{Hom}_{M(𝔸)}(\pi ,I_{M()AM()^0}^{M(𝔸)}(\xi ))𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }.$$

Moreover we have

$$_P(\pi )_\sigma ^{K_f}_P(\pi _{\mathrm{}})_\sigma \underset{v<\mathrm{}}{}_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}$$

and $`dim_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}=1`$ for $`vS_\pi `$. Thus it follows that

$$dim_P(\pi _v)^{K_v}dimA_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }.$$

The right hand side can be estimated by Lemma 6.1 of \[Mu3\]. It follows that

(4.8)
$$n_P(\pi _v,R)C_v(1+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{3m}(1+R).$$

Now let $`v=\mathrm{}`$ and let $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$. Set

$$\overline{J}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )=J_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )J_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},0).$$

Then

(4.9)
$$\overline{R}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )=\left(r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},0)\right)^1\overline{J}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda ).$$

Let $`K_{M,\mathrm{}}=K_{\mathrm{}}M()`$ and let

$$\sigma |_{K_{M,\mathrm{}}}=\underset{\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{M,\mathrm{}})}{}n_\tau \tau .$$

Set

$$[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}]=\underset{\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{M,\mathrm{}})}{}n_\tau [\tau :\pi _{\mathrm{}}|_{K_{M,\mathrm{}}}].$$

By Corollary 4.7 of \[VW\], there exist complex numbers $`a_i(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, and $`b_i(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\sigma )`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}]`$, with $`r=r(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$ depending only on $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}`$, and a constant $`C`$, such that

(4.10)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill det& \overline{J}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )\hfill \\ & =C\frac{_{i=1}^{r(\pi _{\mathrm{}})}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\lambda ,\alpha ^{}/(4\rho _P,\alpha ^{})a_i(\pi _{\mathrm{}})\right)^{[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}]}}{_{i=1}^{r(\pi _{\mathrm{}})[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}]}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\lambda ,\alpha ^{}/(4\rho _P,\alpha ^{})b_i(\pi _{\mathrm{}})\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Lemma 4.3.

There exists $`c>0`$ such that $`r(\tau )c`$ for all $`\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`b_\tau `$ be the polynomial which is associated to $`\tau `$ by Theorem 1.5 of \[VW\]. Then $`r(\tau )`$ is the degree of $`b_\tau `$ \[VW, p.228\]. So we have to estimate the degree of $`b_\tau `$. The polynomial $`b_\tau `$ is obtained from a more general polynomial $`b_{\tau ,\lambda }`$ occurring in Theorem 2.2 of \[VW\] by choosing $`\lambda =4\rho _P`$. The polynomial $`b_{\tau ,\lambda }`$ is associated to $`\tau `$ and a finite dimensional representation $`(\eta ,F)`$ of $`G`$ satisfying the conditions (1)–(3) in \[VW, p.210\]. Then $`\lambda `$ is the action of $`𝔞_M`$ on $`F^𝔫`$. It follows from the constructions on pp. 217-219 in \[VW\], that the polynomial $`b_{\tau ,\lambda }`$ is the product of the denominator of $`\beta `$ and the denominator of the element $`\stackrel{ˇ}{z}_\nu `$, defined on p.219. Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }Z(𝔤_{})`$ be the Casimir element, and let $`\chi _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the infinitesimal character of $`\tau `$. Then it follows that $`b_{\tau ,\lambda }`$ equals

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill b_{\tau ,\lambda }(\nu )=& \underset{\mu \mathrm{\Pi }(F)\{\lambda \}}{}\left(\chi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }+\nu }(\mathrm{\Omega })\chi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }+\nu +\lambda \mu }(\mathrm{\Omega })\right)^{r(\mu )}\hfill \\ & \underset{\mu \mathrm{\Pi }(F)\{\lambda \}}{}(\chi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }+\nu +\lambda }(\mathrm{\Omega })\chi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }+\nu +\mu }(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{r(\mu )}\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`\mathrm{\Pi }(F)`$ denotes the set of weights of $`F`$ with respect to a fixed Cartan subalgebra $`𝔥`$ of $`𝔤`$ and $`r(\mu )`$ is the multiplicity of a given weight $`\mu `$. From this description of $`b_{\tau ,\lambda }`$ it follows that

$$r(\tau )2(dimF1).$$

Finally, $`b_\tau `$ is obtained by choosing $`F`$ to be the representation described in example 2.1 of \[VW\]. ∎

Now recall that the poles of the Gamma function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)`$ are simple poles at $`z=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ and $`1/\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)`$ is entire. Then it follows from (4.10) together with Lemma 4.3 that there exists a constant $`C_1>0`$, independent of $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}`$, such that the number of zeros, counted with their order, of $`det\overline{J}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$ in the disc $`|\lambda |R`$ is bounded by

(4.11)
$$C_1[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}](1+R).$$

By Theorem 8.1 of \[Kn\] and remark 1 following Theorem 8.4 in \[Kn\], we have

$$[\sigma :\pi _{\mathrm{}}]\underset{\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{M,\mathrm{}})}{}n_\tau dim\tau dim\sigma .$$

Furthermore, by Weyl’s dimension formula, there exists $`C_2>0`$ such that $`dim\sigma C_2(1+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^p`$, where $`p=1/2dimK`$. Thus (4.11) is bounded by

$$C_2(1+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^p(1+R).$$

It remains to consider the normalizing factor $`r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$. It is given by formula (3.7). Let $`\varphi _\lambda :W_{}{}_{}{}^{L}M`$ be the map associated to $`(\pi _{\mathrm{}})_\lambda `$. Let $`q`$ be the number of irreducible constituents occurring in the decomposition (3.8) of $`\rho \varphi _\lambda `$. Then $`q`$ is bounded independently of $`\pi `$ and it follows from the description of the $`L`$-factors in §3 that $`r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$ is a product of $`q`$ meromorphic functions of the form (3.9) or (3.10). From the form of these functions it follows immediately that the number of poles, counted with their order, of $`r_{P|\overline{P}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )`$ in the disc $`|\lambda |R`$ is bounded by $`C(1+R)`$. Putting our estimated together, we have proved that there exists $`C>0`$, depending on $`K_f`$, such that

(4.12)
$$n_P(\pi ,R)C(1+R^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{8m}$$

for all $`R0`$, and all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ such that $`A_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }\{0\}`$.

Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$. Let $`\tau `$ be a minimal $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-type of $`I_P^G(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$. Choose $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ such that $`\sigma =\tau `$. Then (4.12) applied to $`\sigma `$ together with the definition of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi `$ implies the proposition. ∎

###### Corollary 4.4.

Let $`m=dimG`$ and $`n=16m+2`$. There exists $`C>0`$, depending on $`K_f`$, such that for each $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$ we have

$$\underset{\rho 0}{}\frac{m(\rho )}{|\rho |^n}C(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m},$$

where $`\rho `$ runs over the poles of $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$.

## 5. Logarithmic derivatives of global normalizing factors

In this section we shall study generalized logarithmic derivatives of the global normalizing factors. First we assume that $`M(M_0)`$ is such that $`dim𝔞_M/dim𝔞_G=1`$. Let $`P𝒫(M)`$ and let $`\alpha `$ be the unique simple root of $`(P,A)`$. Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ with $`\pi =_v\pi _v`$. By property (r.5) satisfied by the local normalizing factors, it follows that for each place $`v`$, there exists a meromorphic function $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z)`$ of one complex variable $`z`$ such that the local normalizing factor $`r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )`$ is given by

$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )=\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,\lambda (\alpha ^{})).$$

Let

$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z):=\underset{v}{}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z).$$

The infinite product is absolutely convergent in the half-plane $`\mathrm{Re}(z)>\rho _P(\alpha ^{})`$, admits a meromorphic continuation to $``$ and the global normalizing factor is given by

$$r_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\lambda (\alpha ^{})),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{}.$$

Our present goal is to estimate the logarithmic derivative of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ along the imaginary axis.

To begin with, observe that by Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.3 there exist $`C,c>0`$ such that

(5.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}& (\pi ,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)|\hfill \\ & \underset{v\mathrm{}}{}\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,z)\right|C\hfill \end{array}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ and $`\mathrm{Re}(z)c`$. Using (2.20) and (2.21), it follows that the function $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ satisfies

(5.2)
$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)\overline{\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\overline{z})}=1.$$

Hence we get

$$\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)\right|=\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,\overline{z})^1\left(\frac{d\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}}{dz}\right)(\pi ,\overline{z})\right|,$$

and together with (5.1) we obtain the following proposition.

###### Proposition 5.1.

There exist $`C,c>0`$ such that

$$\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)\right|C$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ and all $`z`$ with $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|c`$.

In order to get estimates for the logarithmic derivative on the imaginary axis, we shall use the partial fraction decomposition of the meromorphic function $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)^1(d/dz)(\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z))`$, which allows us to treat the sum of the principal parts separately. Let $`n=16dimG+2`$. Then it follows from Corollary 4.4 that $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ is a meromorphic function of order $`n`$. Thus there exist entire functions $`r_1(\pi ,z)`$ and $`r_2(\pi ,z)`$ of order $`n`$ such that

$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)=\frac{r_1(\pi ,z)}{r_2(\pi ,z)}.$$

Furthermore, observe that by (5.2) a complex number $`\eta `$ is a zero of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ if and only if $`\overline{\eta }`$ is a pole of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$. Thus by Hadamard’s factorization theorem there exists a polynomial $`Q(z)`$ of degree $`n`$ such that

(5.3)
$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)=e^{Q(z)}\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{\eta }{}}\left[(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\eta }})\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\eta }}\right)^k\right)\right]^{a(\eta )}}{{\displaystyle \underset{\eta }{}}\left[(1+{\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{\eta }}})\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{z}{\overline{\eta }}}\right)^k\right)\right]^{a(\eta )}},$$

where $`\eta `$ runs over all zeros of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ and $`a(\eta )`$ denotes the order of the zero $`\eta `$.

Let $`D(\pi )`$ denote the set of all poles and zeros of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$. Given $`\eta D(\pi )`$, we denote by $`m(\eta )`$ the order of $`\eta `$, i.e., $`m(\eta )`$ is the integer such that $`(z\eta )^{m(\eta )}`$ $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ is holomorphic in a neighborhood of $`\eta `$ and does not vanish at $`z=\eta `$. For $`\eta ^\times `$ we define the function $`h_\eta (z)`$ by

$$h_\eta (z)=\frac{1}{\eta }\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(\frac{z}{\eta }\right)^k,z.$$

Then it follows from Corollary 4.4 that the series

(5.4)
$$f(\pi ,z)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{|\eta |1}}{}\frac{m(\eta )}{z\eta }+\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{|\eta |>1}}{}m(\eta )\left\{\frac{1}{z\eta }h_\eta (z)\right\}$$

is absolutely convergent on compact subsets of $`D(\pi )`$ and the resulting function $`f(\pi ,z)`$ is a meromorphic function on $``$ whose set of poles equals $`D(\pi )`$. Differentiating (5.3), we get

$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)=f(\pi ,z)\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{|\eta |1}}{}m(\eta )h_\eta (z)+Q^{}(z).$$

Thus there is a polynomial $`g(\pi ,z)`$ of degree $`n1`$ such that

(5.5)
$$\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)^1\frac{d}{dz}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)=f(\pi ,z)+g(\pi ,z).$$

We begin with the investigation of $`g(\pi ,z)`$.

###### Proposition 5.2.

Let $`m=dimG`$. There exist $`C,c>0`$ such that

$$|g(\pi ,z)|C(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{18m}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and all $`z`$ with $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|c`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`c>0`$ be the constant occurring in Proposition 5.1. First assume that $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|=c`$. By Proposition 5.1 it suffices to estimate $`f(\pi ,z)`$. Referring again to Proposition 5.1, it follows that $`D(\pi )`$ is contained in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|c`$. Hence we may assume that $`c>0`$ has been chosen so that for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$, the zeros and poles of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ are contained in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|<c\delta `$, where $`\delta >0`$ is independent of $`\pi `$. Hence the poles of $`f(\pi ,z)`$ are contained in $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|<c\delta `$. Let $`\eta `$ be a pole of $`f(\pi ,z)`$. Then for $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|c`$ we get

(5.6)
$$|z\eta ||\mathrm{Re}(z\eta )|c|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|\delta .$$

Furthermore, from the definition of $`f(\pi ,z)`$ it follows that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |f(\pi ,z)|& \underset{|\eta |2|z|}{}\frac{|m(\eta )|}{|z\eta |}+\underset{1|\eta |2|z|}{}|m(\eta )||h_\eta (z)|\hfill \\ & +\underset{|\eta |>2|z|}{}|m(\eta )|\left|\frac{1}{z\eta }h_\eta (z)\right|.\hfill \end{array}$$

Using (5.6) and Proposition 4.2, we can estimate the first sum as follows

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{|\eta |2|z|}{}\frac{|m(\eta )|}{|z\eta |}\frac{1}{\delta }\underset{|\eta |2|z|}{}|m(\eta )|& \frac{2}{\delta }n_P(\pi ,2|z|)\hfill \\ & C(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Again by Proposition 4.2, we obtain for the second sum

(5.7)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{1|\eta |2|z|}{}|m(\eta )||h_\eta (z)|& \underset{1|\eta |2|z|}{}|m(\eta )|\underset{k=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{|z|^k}{|\eta |^{k+1}}\hfill \\ & C|z|^{n1}n_P(\pi ,2|z|)\hfill \\ & C_1|z|^{n1}(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Finally, by Corollary 4.4 we get

(5.8)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{|\eta |>2|z|}{}|m(\eta )|\left|\frac{1}{z\eta }h_\eta (z)\right|& 2|z|^n\underset{|\eta |>2|z|}{}\frac{|m(\eta )|}{|\eta |^{n+1}}\hfill \\ & C(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}|z|^n\hfill \\ & C(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Putting our estimates together, it follows that there exists $`C>0`$ such that

$$|f(\pi ,z)|C(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{18m}$$

for $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|c`$. Hence by Proposition 5.1, there exists $`C>0`$ such that

(5.9)
$$|g(\pi ,z)|C(1+|z|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{18m}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and all $`z`$ with $`|\mathrm{Re}(z)|=c`$. Now the proposition follows from the Phragmen-Lindelöf theorem. ∎

Note that Proposition 5.2 gives an upper bound for $`g(\pi ,z)`$ on the imaginary axis.

We shall now investigate $`f(\pi ,z)`$. From the definition of $`f(\pi ,z)`$ by (5.3) it is clear that the growth of $`f(\pi ,z)`$ along the imaginary axis depends on the distance of the poles and zeros of $`\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,z)`$ from the imaginary axis. Therefore, without any further information about the distribution of the poles and zeros we cannot expect to get any estimates for $`f(\pi ,i\lambda )`$ as $`|\lambda |\mathrm{}`$. However, what we can hope for is to obtain estimates for integrals involving $`f(\pi ,i\lambda )`$.

To this end, we decompose $`f(\pi ,z)`$ as follows

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill f(\pi ,z)=& \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{|\eta |2|z|}}{}m(\eta )\frac{1}{z\eta }\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{1|\eta |2|z|}}{}m(\eta )h_\eta (z)\hfill \\ & +\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D(\pi )}{|\eta |>2|z|}}{}m(\eta )\left\{\frac{1}{z\eta }h_\eta (z)\right\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

As for the second and the third sum, we observe that the estimations (5.7) and (5.8) are uniform in $`z`$. It remains to consider the first sum which we denote by $`f_1(\pi ,z)`$. Let

$$D_\pm (\pi )=\{\eta D(\pi )\pm m(\eta )>0\}.$$

Then the map $`\eta \overline{\eta }`$ is a bijection of $`D_+(\pi )`$ onto $`D_{}(\pi )`$, and therefore, $`f_1(\pi ,z)`$ can be written as

$$f_1(\pi ,z)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D_+(\pi )}{|\eta |2|z|}}{}m(\eta )\left\{\frac{1}{z\eta }\frac{1}{z+\overline{\eta }}\right\}.$$

In particular, for $`\lambda \{0\}`$ we get

$$f_1(\pi ,i\lambda )=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D_+(\pi )}{|\eta |2|\lambda |}}{}m(\eta )\frac{2\mathrm{Re}(\eta )}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(\lambda \mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2}.$$

Let $`\zeta C^{\mathrm{}}()`$ be such that $`0\zeta 1`$, $`\zeta (u)=0`$ for $`|u|3`$ and $`\zeta (u)=1`$ for $`|u|2`$. Then it follows that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |f_1(\pi ,i\lambda )|& \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D_+(\pi )}{|\eta |2|\lambda |}}{}m(\eta )\frac{2|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(\lambda \mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2}\hfill \\ & \underset{\eta D_+(\pi )}{}\zeta \left(\frac{|\eta |}{|\lambda |}\right)m(\eta )\frac{2|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(\lambda \mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus we have proved that for $`\lambda \{0\}`$ the following inequality holds

(5.10)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |f(\pi ,i\lambda )|& \underset{\eta D_+(\pi )}{}\zeta \left(\frac{|\eta |}{|\lambda |}\right)m(\eta )\frac{2|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(\lambda \mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2}\hfill \\ & +C(1+\lambda ^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Put

$$F(\lambda ):=\{\begin{array}{cc}\underset{\eta D_+(\pi )}{}\zeta \left(\frac{|\eta |}{|\lambda |}\right)m(\eta )\frac{2|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(\lambda \mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2},\hfill & \lambda 0;\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \lambda =0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Note that $`0D(\pi )`$. Therefore, on any finite interval $`[a,a]`$, $`F(\lambda )`$ is the sum of finitely many smooth and nonnegative functions. Hence $`F(\lambda )`$ is a smooth and nonnegative function. We shall now estimate the integral of $`F(u)`$ over a finite interval. Using Proposition 4.2 and the properties of $`\zeta `$, we obtain

(5.11)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _0^\lambda F(u)𝑑u\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\eta D_+(\pi )}{|\eta |3\lambda }}{}& m(\eta )_0^\lambda \frac{2|\mathrm{Re}(\eta )|}{\mathrm{Re}(\eta )^2+(u\mathrm{Im}(\eta ))^2}𝑑u\hfill \\ & 2\pi n_P(\pi ,3\lambda )\hfill \\ & C(1+\lambda ^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`N8m+2`$ and $`R>0`$. Using integration by parts and (5.11), we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |_R^RF(u)(1+& u^2)^Ndu|\hfill \\ & =\left|_R^R\left(_0^uF(t)𝑑t\right)\frac{d}{du}(1+u^2)^N𝑑u\right|\hfill \\ & +\left|_R^RF(t)𝑑t\right|(1+R^2)^N\hfill \\ & C(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}_{}(1+u^2)^{8m}\left|\frac{d}{du}(1+u^2)^N\right|𝑑u\hfill \\ & C_N(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{8m}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Here we have used that by (5.11) the boundary term is bounded by a constant independent of $`R`$. Since $`F0`$, this inequality implies that $`F(u)`$ is integrable with respect to the measure $`(1+u^2)^Ndu`$. Putting our estimates together, we obtain the following theorem.

###### Theorem 5.3.

Let $`M(M_0)`$ and assume that $`dim𝔞_M/𝔞_G=1`$. Let $`P𝒫(M)`$ and let $`m=dimG()`$. For every $`N8m+2`$ there exists $`C_N>0`$ such that for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸);K_f)`$ the following inequality holds

$$_{}\left|\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,iu)^1\frac{d}{du}\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi ,iu)\right|(1+u^2)^N𝑑uC_N(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{18m}.$$

Now suppose that $`M(M_0)`$ is arbitrary. Then we have to consider the multidimensional logarithmic derivatives of the normalizing factors defined by Arthur in \[A4\]. For this purpose we will use the notion of a $`(G,M)`$ family introduced by Arthur in Section 6 of \[A5\]. For the convenience of the reader we recall the definition of a $`(G,M)`$ family and explain some of its properties.

For each $`P𝒫(M)`$, let $`c_P(\lambda )`$ be a smooth function on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$. Then the set

$$\{c_P(\lambda )P𝒫(M)\}$$

is called a $`(G,M)`$ family if the following holds: Let $`P,P^{}𝒫(M)`$ be adjacent parabolic groups and suppose that $`\lambda `$ belongs to the hyperplane spanned by the common wall of the chambers of $`P`$ and $`P^{}`$. Then

$$c_P(\lambda )=c_P^{}(\lambda ).$$

Let

(5.12)
$$\theta _P(\lambda )=\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_P^G/(\mathrm{\Delta }_P^{}))^1\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P}{}\lambda (\alpha ^{}),\lambda i𝔞_P^{},$$

where $`(\mathrm{\Delta }_P^{})`$ is the lattice in $`𝔞_P^G`$ generated by the co-roots

$$\{\alpha ^{}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_P\}.$$

Let $`\{c_P(\lambda )\}`$ be a $`(G,M)`$ family. Then by Lemma 6.2 of \[A5\], the function

(5.13)
$$c_M(\lambda )=\underset{P𝒫(M)}{}c_P(\lambda )\theta _P(\lambda )^1,$$

which is defined on the complement of a finite set of hyperplanes, extends to a smooth function on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$. The value of $`c_M(\lambda )`$ at $`\lambda =0`$ is of particular importance in connection with the spectral side of the trace formula. It can be computed as follows. Let $`p=dim(A_M/A_G)`$. Set $`\lambda =t\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`t`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }𝔞_M^{}`$, and let $`t`$ tend to 0. Then

(5.14)
$$c_M(0)=\frac{1}{p!}\underset{P𝒫(M)}{}\left(\underset{t0}{lim}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\right)^pc_P(t\mathrm{\Lambda })\right)\theta _P(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1$$

\[A5, (6.5)\]. This expression is of course independent of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

For any $`(G,M)`$ family $`\{c_P(\lambda )P𝒫(M)\}`$ and any $`L(M)`$ there is associated a natural $`(G,L)`$ family which is defined as follows. Let $`Q𝒫(L)`$ and suppose that $`PQ`$. The function

$$\lambda i𝔞_L^{}c_P(\lambda )$$

depends only on $`Q`$. We will denote it by $`c_Q(\lambda )`$. Then

$$\{c_Q(\lambda )Q𝒫(L)\}$$

is a $`(G,L)`$ family. We write

$$c_L(\lambda )=\underset{Q𝒫(L)}{}c_Q(\lambda )\theta _Q(\lambda )^1$$

for the corresponding function (5.13).

Let $`Q𝒫(L)`$ be fixed. If $`R𝒫^L(M)`$, then $`Q(R)`$ is the unique group in $`𝒫(M)`$ such that $`Q(R)Q`$ and $`Q(R)L=R`$. Let $`c_R^Q`$ be the function on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$ which is defined by

$$c_R^Q(\lambda )=c_{Q(R)}(\lambda ).$$

Then $`\{c_R^Q(\lambda )R𝒫^L(M)\}`$ is an $`(L,M)`$ family. Let $`c_M^Q(\lambda )`$ be the function (5.13) associated to this $`(L,M)`$ family.

We consider now special $`(G,M)`$ families defined by the global normalizing factors. Fix $`P𝒫(M)`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$. Define

(5.15)
$$\nu _Q(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda }):=r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^1r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda +\mathrm{\Lambda }),Q𝒫(M).$$

This set of functions is a $`(G,M)`$ family \[A4, p.1317\]. It is of a special form. Given $`\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_P^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{Q}}^r`$, set

$$r_\beta (\pi ,z)=\stackrel{~}{r}_{\overline{P}_\beta |P_\beta }(\pi ,z),z.$$

Then by (2.22) we have

$$\nu _Q(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{\beta \mathrm{\Sigma }_Q^r\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}}^r}{}r_\beta (\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))^1r_\beta (\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{})+\mathrm{\Lambda }(\beta ^{})).$$

Suppose that $`L(M)`$, $`L_1(L)`$ and $`S𝒫(L_1)`$. Let

$$\{\nu _{Q_1}^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })Q_1𝒫^{L_1}(L)\}$$

be the associated $`(L_1,L)`$ family and let $`\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ be the function (5.13) defined by this family. Set

$$\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ):=\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ,0).$$

If $`\beta `$ is any root in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^r(G,A_M)`$, let $`\beta _L^{}`$ denote the projection of $`\beta ^{}`$ onto $`𝔞_L`$. If $`F`$ is a subset of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^r(G,A_M)`$, let $`F_L^{}`$ be the disjoint union of all the vectors $`\beta _L^{}`$, $`\beta F`$. Then by Proposition 7.5 of \[A4\] we have

(5.16)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )=& \underset{F}{}\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_L^{L_1}/(F_L^{}))\hfill \\ & \left(\underset{\beta F}{}r_\beta (\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))^1r_\beta ^{}(\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`F`$ runs over all subsets of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^r(L_1,A_M)`$ such that $`F_L^{}`$ is a basis of $`𝔞_L^{L_1}`$. Let $`N`$. Then by (5.16) we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _{i𝔞_L^{}/𝔞_G^{}}|& \nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|(1+\lambda ^2)^Nd\lambda \underset{F}{}\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_L^{L_1}/(F_L^{}))\hfill \\ & _{i𝔞_L^{}/𝔞_G^{}}\underset{\beta F}{}\left|r_\beta (\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))^1r_\beta ^{}(\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))\right|(1+\lambda ^2)^Nd\lambda .\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`F`$ runs over all subsets of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^r(L_1,A_M)`$ such that $`F_L^{}`$ is a basis of $`𝔞_L^{L_1}`$. Fix such a subset $`F`$. Let

$$\{\stackrel{~}{\omega }_\beta \beta F\}$$

be the basis of $`(𝔞_L^{L_1})^{}`$ which is dual to $`F_L^{L_1}`$. We can write $`\lambda i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}`$ as

$$\lambda =\underset{\beta F}{}z_\beta \stackrel{~}{\omega }_\beta +\lambda _1,z_\beta i,\lambda _1i𝔞_{L_1}^{}/i𝔞_G^{}.$$

Observe that $`\lambda (\beta ^{})=z_\beta `$. Suppose that $`N>2dim(A_{L_1}/A_G)+2`$. Then there exists $`C_N>0`$, independent of $`\pi `$, such that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill _{i𝔞_L^{}/𝔞_G^{}}\underset{\beta F}{}& \left|r_\beta (\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))^1r_\beta ^{}(\pi ,\lambda (\beta ^{}))\right|(1+\lambda ^2)^Nd\lambda \hfill \\ & C_N\underset{\beta F}{}_i\left|r_\beta (\pi ,z_\beta )^1r_\beta ^{}(\pi ,z_\beta )\right|(1+|z_\beta |^2)^{N/2}𝑑z_\beta .\hfill \end{array}$$

Combined with Theorem 5.3 we obtain

###### Theorem 5.4.

Let $`M(M_0)`$, $`L(M)`$, $`L_1(L)`$ and $`S𝒫(L_1)`$. Let $`m=dimG()/K_{\mathrm{}}`$. For every $`N8m+2`$ there exists $`C_N>0`$ such that

$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/𝔞_G^{}}|\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|(1+\lambda ^2)^N𝑑\lambda C_N(1+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{8m^2}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and any minimal $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-type $`\sigma `$ of $`I_P^G(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$.

## 6. Absolute convergence of the spectral side

In this section we prove Theorem 0.1 and Theorem 0.2. For this purpose we have to study the multidimensional logarithmic derivatives of the global intertwining operators that are the main ingredients of the spectral side. First we explain the structure of the spectral side in more detail. Let $`M(M_0)`$. Fix $`P𝒫(M)`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$. For $`Q𝒫(M)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_M^{}`$ define

$$𝔐_Q(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=M_{Q|P}(\lambda )^1M_{Q|P}(\lambda +\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$

Then

(6.1)
$$\{𝔐_Q(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_M^{},Q𝒫(M)\}$$

is a $`(G,M)`$ family with values in the space of operators on $`𝒜^2(P)`$ \[A4, p.1310\].

Let $`L(M)`$. Then as above, the $`(G,M)`$ family (6.1) has an associated $`(G,L)`$ family

$$\{𝔐_{Q_1}(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_L^{},Q_1𝒫(L)\}$$

and

$$𝔐_L(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{Q_1𝒫(L)}{}𝔐_{Q_1}(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\theta _{Q_1}(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1$$

extends to a smooth function on $`i𝔞_L^{}`$. Put

$$𝔐_L(P,\lambda )=𝔐_L(P,\lambda ,0).$$

For $`sW(𝔞_M^{})`$ let

$$M(P,s)=M_{P|P}(s,0).$$

The spectral side is a sum of distributions

$$\underset{\chi 𝔛}{}J_\chi $$

on $`G(𝔸)^1`$. By Theorem 8.2 of \[A4\], the distribution $`J_\chi `$ can be described as follows. Let $`\chi 𝔛`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$ and $`hC_c^{\mathrm{}}(G(𝔸)^1)`$. Note that $`𝔐_L(P,\lambda )`$ and $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)`$ both act in the Hilbert space $`_P(\pi )_\chi `$. Let $`W^L(𝔞_M)_{\text{reg}}`$ be the set of elements $`sW(𝔞_M)`$ such that $`\{H𝔞_MsH=H\}=𝔞_L`$. Then $`J_\chi (f)`$ equals the sum over $`M(M_0)`$, $`L(M)`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$ and $`sW^L(𝔞_M)_{\text{reg}}`$ of the product of

$$|W_0^M||W_0|^1|det(s1)_{𝔞_M^L}|^1$$

with

$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}|𝒫(M)|^1\underset{P𝒫(M)}{}\mathrm{tr}\left(𝔐_L(P,\lambda )M(P,s)\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)\right)d\lambda .$$

Our goal is to determine the conditions under which the integral-series obtained by summing this expression over $`\chi 𝔛`$, is absolutely convergent. Since $`M(P,s)`$ is unitary, we have to estimate the integral

(6.2)
$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔐_L(P,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1𝑑\lambda ,$$

where $`_1`$ denotes the trace norm.

We shall now assume that $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$. Let $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$, $`P,Q𝒫(M)`$, be the normalized intertwining operator which by (2.19) is defined as

$$N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ):=r_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^1M_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda ),\lambda 𝔞_{M,}^{},$$

Let $`P𝒫(M)`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$ be fixed. For $`Q𝒫(M)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_M^{}`$ define

(6.3)
$$𝔑_Q(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )^1N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda +\mathrm{\Lambda }),$$

Then as functions of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_M^{}`$,

$$\{𝔑_Q(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })Q𝒫(M)\}$$

is a $`(G,M)`$ family. The verification is the same as in the case of the unnormalized intertwining operator \[A4, p.1310\]. For $`L(M)`$, let

$$\{𝔑_{Q_1}(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_L^{},Q_1𝒫(L)\}$$

be the associated $`(G,L)`$ family.

Let $`𝔐_{Q_1}(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ be the restriction of $`𝔐_{Q_1}(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ to $`_P(\pi )_\chi `$. Then by (2.19) and (5.15) it follows that

(6.4)
$$𝔐_{Q_1}(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=𝔑_{Q_1}(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\nu _{Q_1}(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })$$

for all $`\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_L^{}`$ and all $`Q_1𝒫(L)`$.

For $`QP`$ let $`\widehat{L}_P^Q𝔞_P^Q`$ be the lattice generated by $`\{\stackrel{~}{\omega }^{}\stackrel{~}{\omega }\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_P^Q\}`$. Define

$$\widehat{\theta }_P^Q(\lambda )=\mathrm{vol}(𝔞_P^Q/\widehat{L}_P^Q)^1\underset{\stackrel{~}{\omega }\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_P^Q}{}\lambda (\stackrel{~}{\omega }^{}).$$

For $`S(L)`$ put

(6.5)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}& (P,\pi ,\lambda )\hfill \\ & =\underset{\mathrm{\Lambda }0}{lim}\underset{\{RRS\}}{}(1)^{dim(A_S/A_R)}\widehat{\theta }_S^R(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1𝔑_R(P,\pi ,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Lambda })\theta _R(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`𝔐_L(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ be the restriction of $`𝔐_L(P,\lambda )`$ to $`_P(\pi )_\chi `$. Then by Lemma 6.3 of \[A5\] we have

(6.6)
$$𝔐_L(P,\pi ,\lambda )=\underset{S(L)}{}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda ).$$

Hence the integral (6.2) can be estimated by

$$\underset{S(L)}{}_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1|\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|𝑑\lambda .$$

We shall now study the integral in more detail. Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$ be the Casimir operators of $`G()`$ and $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ respectively. Set

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{Id}\mathrm{\Omega }+2\mathrm{\Omega }_K.$$

Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acts on $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ through each of the representations $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda )`$. Let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and let $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. Then the operators

$$\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }),\lambda i𝔞_P^{},$$

have $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f}`$ and $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$ as invariant subspaces. We shall denote the restriction of $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ to $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f}`$ and $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$, respectively, by $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta })_{K_f}`$ and $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta })_{K_f,\sigma }`$, respectively. Recall that by (2.3), $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda )`$ is equivalent to $`I_P^G(\pi _\lambda )\mathrm{Id}`$. Let $`\lambda _\pi `$ and $`\lambda _\sigma `$ denote the Casimir eigenvalues of $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\sigma `$, respectively. Then it follows from Proposition 8.22 of \[Kn\] that

(6.7)
$$\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta })_{K_f,\sigma }=\left(1+\lambda ^2\lambda _\pi +2\lambda _\sigma \right)\mathrm{Id}.$$

To estimate the right hand side we use the following lemma.

###### Lemma 6.1.

For all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1;K_f)`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, one has

(6.8)
$$\lambda _\pi +\lambda _\sigma 0,\text{if}dim𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }\{0\}.$$

###### Proof.

The lemma is a consequence of a more general result. Let $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ and suppose that $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ occurs in $`I_{P()}^{G()}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})|_K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Let

$$\pi _{\mathrm{}}|_{K_{\mathrm{}}M()}=\underset{\omega \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}}M())}{}n_\omega \omega .$$

Then

$$[I_{P()}^{G()}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})|_K_{\mathrm{}}:\sigma ]=\underset{\omega \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}}M())}{}n_\omega [\sigma |_{K_{\mathrm{}}M()}:\omega ]$$

\[Kn, p.208\]. Hence there exists $`\omega \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}}M())`$ such that

$$[\sigma |_{K_{\mathrm{}}M()}:\omega ]>0\text{and}[\pi _{\mathrm{}}|_{K_{\mathrm{}}M()}:\omega ]>0.$$

By \[Mu2, (5.15)\], the first condition implies that the Casimir eigenvalues $`\lambda _\omega `$ of $`\omega `$ and $`\lambda _\sigma `$ of $`\sigma `$ satisfy $`\lambda _\omega \lambda _\sigma _{\mathrm{}}`$. On the other hand, since $`\omega `$ occurs in $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}|_{K_{\mathrm{}}M()}`$ it follows that $`\lambda _\pi _{\mathrm{}}+\lambda _\omega 0`$ \[DH, Lemma 2.6\]. This completes the proof. ∎

Using (6.7) and (6.8), it follows that

(6.9)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta })_{K_f,\sigma }^2& (1+\lambda )^2+(\lambda _\pi +2\lambda _\sigma )^2\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{4}(1+\lambda ^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2).\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`S(L)`$ be fixed. Given an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }`$ denote the restriction of $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ to $`𝒜_\pi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$.

###### Lemma 6.2.

Let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and let $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be bi-invariant under $`K_f`$. Suppose that there exist $`N`$ and $`C>0`$ such that

(6.10)
$$𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }C(1+\lambda ^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^N$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$, $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_L^{}`$. Then for every $`k`$ there exists $`C_k>0`$ such that

$$_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1|\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|𝑑\lambda C_k(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi )^k$$

for all $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`h`$ is bi-invariant under $`K_f`$, $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)`$ maps the Hilbert space $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ into the subspace $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f}`$. Moreover $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f}`$ is an invariant subspace for $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)`$. Hence $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)=0`$, unless $`\pi `$ belongs to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$. So we may assume that $`\pi `$ belongs to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$. Then for each $`k`$ we get

(6.11)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}(P,& \pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1\hfill \\ & =𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f}\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_{K_f}_1\hfill \\ & 𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f}\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k})_{K_f}^1_1\hfill \\ & \rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k}h).\hfill \end{array}$$

Furthermore, using (6.9) and (6.10) we get

(6.12)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}& (P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f}\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k})_{K_f}^1_1\hfill \\ & \underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})}{}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k})_{K_f,\sigma }^1_1\hfill \\ & 2C\underset{\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})}{}\frac{dim𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }}{(1+\lambda ^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{kN}}.\hfill \end{array}$$

By Lemma 6.1 of \[Mu3\] there exist $`C_1>0`$ and $`N_1`$ such that

$$dim𝒜_\chi ^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }C_1(1+\lambda _\chi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{N_1}$$

for all $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. Actually in \[Mu3\] we considered the space $`𝒜^2(P,\chi ,\sigma )`$, where $`\sigma `$ is an irreducible representation of $`K`$. The two spaces are not equal, but they are closely related. Moreover $`\lambda _\chi `$ was denoted by $`\mu _\chi `$ in \[Mu3\]. If $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)0`$, it follows from Langlands’ construction of $`𝒜_\chi ^2(P)`$ in terms of iterated residues of cuspidal Eisenstein series that

(6.13)
$$|\lambda _\chi \lambda _\pi |c$$

with $`c>0`$ independent of $`\chi `$ and $`\pi `$ (see (4.21) of \[Mu3\]). Hence there exist $`C_2>0`$ and $`N_1`$ such that

(6.14)
$$dim𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }C_2(1+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^{N_1}$$

for all $`\chi 𝔛`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. Set

$$N_2=\frac{1}{2}(N+N_1).$$

Now observe that there exists $`n_0`$ such that

$$\underset{\sigma _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})}{}(1+\lambda _\sigma )^n<\mathrm{}.$$

the right hand side is finite for $`nn_0`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi `$ be the number defined by (4.5). Then by (6.12) and (6.14) it follows that for every $`k>2(n_0+N_2)`$ there exists $`C_k>0`$ such that

(6.15)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f}& \rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{4k})_{K_f}^1_1\hfill \\ & C_k(1+\lambda ^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{N_2k}\hfill \\ & C_k(1+\lambda ^2)^{(N_2k)/2}(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^{(N_2k)/2}\hfill \end{array}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and $`\chi 𝔛`$. Next observe that for $`\lambda i𝔞_L^{}`$ the operator $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,g)`$ is unitary. Hence it follows that

(6.16)
$$\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{4k}h)\mathrm{\Delta }^{4k}h_{L^1(G(𝔸)^1)}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$ and $`\chi 𝔛`$. Combing (6.11), (6.15) and (6.16), it follows that for every $`n`$ there exists $`C_n>0`$ such that

$$𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1C_n(1+\lambda ^2)^n(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi ^2)^n$$

for all $`\chi 𝔛`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$. Combined with Theorem 5.4 the claimed estimation of the integral follows. ∎

Proof of Theorem 0.1: Let $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be bi-invariant under $`K_f`$. As observed in the proof of Lemma 6.2, it follows that $`\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)=0`$, unless $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$. Let $`L_{\text{disc}}^2(M()A_P()^0\backslash M(𝔸))`$ be the largest closed subspace of the Hilbert space $`L^2(M()A_P()^0\backslash M(𝔸))`$ which decomposes discretely under the regular representation of $`M(𝔸)`$. Then

$$L_{\text{disc}}^2(M()A_P()^0\backslash M(𝔸))=\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))}{}m(\pi )_\pi ,$$

and each multiplicity $`m(\pi )`$ is finite. Thus, if the assumption (6.10) of Lemma 6.2 is satisfied, it follows from Lemma 6.2 that for every $`n`$ there exists $`C_n>0`$ such that

(6.17)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{\chi 𝔛}{}\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)}{}_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔑_S^{}(& P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1|\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|d\lambda \hfill \\ & C_n\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1,K_f)}{}m(\pi )(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi )^n.\hfill \end{array}$$

It remains to investigate the sum on the right hand side. Let

$$K_{M,f}=K_fM(𝔸_f).$$

Then there exist arithmetic subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}M()`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},l`$, such that

$$M()\backslash M(𝔸)/K_{M,f}\underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M())$$

(cf. Section 9 of \[Mu1\]). Therefore we get

(6.18)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill L^2(A_M()^0M()& \backslash M(𝔸))^{K_{M,f}}\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}L^2\left(A_M()^0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M()\right)\hfill \end{array}$$

as $`M()`$-modules. For each $`i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},l`$, let $`L_{\text{disc}}^2(A_P()^0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M())`$ be the discrete subspace of the regular representation of $`M()`$ in $`L^2(A_P()^0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M())`$. Then it follows from (6.18) that

(6.19)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill L_{\text{disc}}^2(A_P()^0M()& \backslash M(𝔸))^{K_{M,f}}\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}L_{\text{disc}}^2(A_P()^0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M())\hfill \end{array}$$

as $`M()`$ modules. For $`i`$, $`1il`$, and $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())`$ denote by $`m_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$ the multiplicity of $`\pi _{\mathrm{}}`$ in the regular representation of $`M()`$ in $`L_{\text{disc}}^2(A_P()^0\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}\backslash M())`$. Then by (6.19) we get

(6.20)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& \underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1,K_f)}{}m(\pi )(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi )^n\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}\underset{\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())}{}m_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})(1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\pi _{\mathrm{}})^n\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ be a minimal $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-type occurring in $`I_P^G(\pi _{\mathrm{}})`$ with Casimir eigenvalue $`\lambda _\sigma `$. Let $`K_{M,\mathrm{}}=M()K_{\mathrm{}}`$. By (5.15) of \[Mu2\] we have that $`\lambda _\sigma \lambda _\tau `$ for any irreducible constituent $`\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{M,\mathrm{}})`$ of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{}}|K_{M,\mathrm{}}`$. Thus the right hand side of (6.20) is bounded by

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}\underset{\tau \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{M,\mathrm{}})}{}\underset{\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())}{}m_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})\frac{dim((\pi _{\mathrm{}})V_\tau )^{K_{M,\mathrm{}}}}{(1+\lambda _\pi _{\mathrm{}}^2+\lambda _\tau ^2)^{n/2}}.$$

By Corollary 0.3 of \[Mu2\] this sum is finite for $`n`$ sufficiently large. Thus we proved

###### Proposition 6.3.

Let $`K_f`$ be an open compact subgroup of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and let $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be bi-invariant under $`K_f`$. Suppose that there exist $`N`$ and $`C>0`$ such that

(6.21)
$$𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }C(1+\lambda ^2+\lambda _\pi ^2+\lambda _\sigma ^2)^N$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f)`$, $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`\lambda i𝔞_L^{}`$. Then

(6.22)
$$\underset{\chi 𝔛}{}\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)}{}_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔐_L(P,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1𝑑\lambda <\mathrm{}$$

Let $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$. Then there exists an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ such that $`h`$ is bi-invariant under $`K_f`$. Using the observations made at the beginning of this section, it follows that (6.22) implies that the spectral side of the trace formula is absolutely convergent.

We shall now continue by investigating condition (6.21) in detail. To calculate $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$, let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }i𝔞_M^{}`$. By \[A5, p.37\] $`𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )`$ equals

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill \frac{1}{q!}\underset{\{RRS\}}{}(1)^q\widehat{\theta }_S^R(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1\left(\underset{t0}{lim}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\right)^q𝔑_R(P,\pi ,\lambda ,t\mathrm{\Lambda })\right)\theta _R(\mathrm{\Lambda })^1,\end{array}$$

where $`q=dim(A_S/A_R)`$. Since $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ is unitary for $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$, it follows from (6.3) that we have to estimate the norm of

(6.23)
$$\underset{t0}{lim}\left(\frac{d}{dt}\right)^qN_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda +t\mathrm{\Lambda })_\sigma ,\lambda i𝔞_M^{}.$$

To this end, we may use (2.16) and (2.17) to replace $`N_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )`$ by

$$R_{Q|P}(\pi ,\lambda )=_vR_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda ).$$

Next note that any compact open subgroup $`K_f=_{v<\mathrm{}}K_v`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ is such that $`K_v`$ is a hyperspecial compact subgroup for almost all $`v`$. Hence, by (2.11) there exists a finite set of places $`S_0`$, including the Archimedean one, such that we have

$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}=\mathrm{Id},vS_0,\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸),K_f).$$

Let $`D_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ denote the directional derivative on $`i𝔞_M^{}`$ in the direction of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then it follows that there exists $`C>0`$ such that

(6.24)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma }& C(\underset{vS_0\{\mathrm{}\}}{}\underset{k=1}{\overset{q}{}}D_\mathrm{\Lambda }^kR_{Q|P}(\pi _v,\lambda )_{K_v}\hfill \\ & +\underset{k=1}{\overset{q}{}}D_\mathrm{\Lambda }^kR_{Q|P}(\pi _{\mathrm{}},\lambda )_\sigma )\hfill \end{array}$$

for all $`\lambda i𝔞_M^{}`$, $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ and $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸))`$. Together with Proposition 6.3 this implies Theorem 0.1.

$`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 0.2: The proof of Theorem 0.2 is similar to the proof of Theorem 0.1. We only have to modify some of the arguments. Given an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{K_f,\sigma }`$ denote the orthogonal projection of the Hilbert space $`\overline{𝒜}_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)`$ onto the finite dimensional subspace $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma }`$. Let $`h𝒞^1(G(𝔸)^1)`$ be $`K`$-finite. Then there exists an open compact subgroup $`K_f`$ of $`G(𝔸_f)`$ such that $`h`$ is left and right invariant under $`K_f`$. Furthermore, there exist $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _m\mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$ such that

(6.25)
$$\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)=\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{K_f,\sigma _i}\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)\mathrm{\Pi }_{K_f,\sigma _j}$$

for all $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$ and $`\chi 𝔛`$. Let $`k`$. Then by (6.25) we get

(6.26)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔑_S^{}& (P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )_{K_f,\sigma _i}\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k})_{K_f,\sigma _i}^1_1\hfill \\ & \rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k}h).\hfill \end{array}$$

Here we assume, of course, that $`𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma _i}0`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$. Then it follows from (6.9) that

(6.27)
$$\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,\mathrm{\Delta }^{2k})_{K_f,\sigma _i}^1_1C\frac{dim𝒜_{\chi ,\pi }^2(P)_{K_f,\sigma _i}}{(1+\lambda ^2+\lambda _\pi ^2)^k}$$

for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$. Given $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$, let

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}& (M(𝔸)^1)_{K_f,\sigma }\hfill \\ & =\{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1;K_f)|[I_P^G(\pi _{\mathrm{}})|_K_{\mathrm{}}:\sigma ]>0\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then we proceed as above to show that for every $`n`$ there exists $`C_n>0`$ such that

(6.28)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{\chi 𝔛}{}\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)}{}& _{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔑_S^{}(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1|\nu _L^S(P,\pi ,\lambda )|𝑑\lambda \hfill \\ & C_n\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1)_{K_f,\sigma _i}}{}m(\pi )(1+\lambda _\pi ^2)^n.\hfill \end{array}$$

To estimate the right hand side, we fix $`\sigma \mathrm{\Pi }(K_{\mathrm{}})`$. Then as in (6.20) we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸)^1)_{K_f,\sigma }}{}\frac{m(\pi )}{(1+\lambda _\pi ^2)^n}\hfill \\ & \underset{i=1}{\overset{l}{}}\underset{\pi _{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Pi }(M())}{}m_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{M,i}}(\pi _{\mathrm{}})\frac{dim((\pi _{\mathrm{}})V_\sigma )^{K_{M,\mathrm{}}}}{(1+\lambda _\pi _{\mathrm{}}^2)^n}.\hfill \end{array}$$

It follows from Theorem 0.1 of \[Mu1\] that for sufficiently large $`n`$, this series is convergent. This completes the proof of Theorem 0.2.

$`\mathrm{}`$

We observe that for tempered representations, the existence of estimates like (0.2), (0.3) and (0.4) follows from results of Arthur \[A5, p.51\] and \[A8, Lemma 2.1\]. Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{temp}}(M(𝔸)^1)`$ be the subspace of all $`\pi `$ in $`\mathrm{\Pi }(M(𝔸)^1)`$ such that the local constituents $`\pi _v`$ of $`\pi `$ are tempered for all $`v`$. Then we obtain

###### Proposition 6.4.

For every $`M(M_0)`$, $`L(M)`$ and $`P𝒫(M)`$ we have

$$\underset{\chi 𝔛}{}\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{temp}}(M(𝔸)^1)}{}_{i𝔞_L^{}/i𝔞_G^{}}𝔐_L(P,\pi ,\lambda )\rho _{\chi ,\pi }(P,\lambda ,h)_1𝑑\lambda <\mathrm{}.$$

## 7. The example of $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$

In this section we shall briefly discuss the case where $`G=\mathrm{GL}_n`$. Let $`P_0`$ be the subgroup of upper triangular matrices of $`G`$. This is the minimal standard parabolic subgroup of $`G`$. Its Levi subgroup $`M_0`$ is the group of diagonal matrices. Let $`P`$ be a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ defined over $``$, and let $`M`$ be the unique Levi component of $`P`$ which contains $`M_0`$. Then

$$M\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{GL}_{n_r}.$$

We shall identify $`𝔞_M`$ with $`^r`$. Let $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_r`$ denote the standard basis of $`(^r)^{}`$. Then the roots $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_P`$ are given by

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_P=\{e_ie_j1i<jr\}.$$

Let $`v`$ be a place of $``$. Fix a nontrivial continuous character $`\psi _v`$ of the additive group $`_v^+`$ of $`_v`$ and equip $`_v`$ with the Haar measure which is selfdual with respect to $`\psi _v`$. Given irreducible unitary representations $`\pi _{1,v}`$ and $`\pi _{2,v}`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}(_v)`$ and $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_2}(_v)`$, respectively, let $`L(s,\pi _{1,v}\times \pi _{2,v})`$ and $`ϵ(s,\pi _{1,v}\times \pi _{2,v},\psi _v)`$ denote the Rankin-Selberg $`L`$-factor and the $`ϵ`$-factor defined by Jacquet, Piateski-Shapiro, and Shalika \[JPS\], \[JS1\].

Let $`P_1,P_2𝒫(M)`$. Then there exist permutations $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2S_r`$ such that the set of roots of $`(P_i,A_i)`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{P_k}=\{e_ie_j\sigma _k(i)<\sigma _k(j)\}.$$

Put

$$I(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)=\{(i,j)1i,jr,\sigma _1(i)<\sigma _1(j),\sigma _2(i)>\sigma _2(j)\}.$$

Then

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{P_1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\overline{P}_2}=\{e_ie_j(i,j)I(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)\}.$$

Let $`\pi _v=\pi _{1,v}\mathrm{}\pi _{r,v}`$, where $`\pi _{i,v}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{GL}_{n_i}(_v))`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Given $`𝐬=(s_1,\mathrm{},s_r)^r`$, set

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill r_{P_2|P_1}& (\pi _v,𝐬):=\hfill \\ & \underset{(i,j)I(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)}{}\frac{L(s_is_j,\pi _{i,v}\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{j,v})}{L(1+s_is_j,\pi _{i,v}\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{j,v})ϵ(s_is_j,\pi _{i,v}\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_{j,v},\psi _v)}.\hfill \end{array}$$

As explained in \[AC, p.87\], the meromorphic functions $`r_{P_2|P_1}(\pi ,𝐬)`$ satisfy all the properties of Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\] and they are the natural choice of normalizing factors in the case of $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$. We note that they do not coincide with the normalizing factors used in the previous sections. They differ, however, only by a factor which can be expressed in terms of the $`ϵ`$-factors.

Now let $`\pi _1`$ and $`\pi _2`$ be automorphic representations of $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}(𝔸)`$ and $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_2}(𝔸)`$, respectively. Then the global Rankin-Selberg $`L`$-function $`L(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2)`$ is defined by

$$L(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2)=\underset{v}{}L(s,\pi _{1,v}\times \pi _{2,v}),$$

where the product is over all places $`v`$ of $``$ and $`\pi _i=_i\pi _{i,v}`$. The product converges absolutely in a half-plane $`\mathrm{Re}(s)0`$. If $`\pi _1`$ and $`\pi _2`$ belong to the discrete spectrum of $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}(𝔸)`$ and $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_2}(𝔸)`$, respectively, then $`L(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2)`$ admits a meromorphic extension to the whole complex plane.

To define the global $`ϵ`$-factor $`ϵ(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2)`$ one has to pick a non-trivial continuous character $`\psi :𝔸^+^\times `$ of the additive group $`𝔸^+`$ of $`𝔸`$. Then $`\psi =_v\psi _v`$ and $`ϵ(s,\pi _{1,v}\times \pi _{2,v},\psi _v)=1`$ for almost all places $`v`$. Hence the product

$$ϵ(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2,\psi )=\underset{v}{}ϵ(s,\pi _{1,v}\times \pi _{2,v},\psi _v)$$

exists for all $`s`$ and defines an entire function. The global $`ϵ`$-factor is independent of $`\psi `$ and therefore, will be denoted by $`ϵ(s,\pi _1\times \pi _2)`$.

Let $`\pi \mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(M(𝔸))`$. Then $`\pi =\pi _1\mathrm{}\pi _r`$ with $`\pi _i\mathrm{\Pi }_{\text{disc}}(\mathrm{GL}_{n_i}(𝔸))`$ and for $`𝐬^r`$, the global normalizing factor is defined by

$$r_{P_2|P_1}(\pi ,𝐬):=\underset{(i,j)I(\sigma _1,\sigma _2)}{}\frac{L(s_is_j,\pi _i\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_j)}{L(1+s_is_j,\pi _i\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_j)ϵ(s_is_j,\pi _i\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_j)}.$$

Theorem 5.3 is closely related to the estimation of the winding numbers

$$_1^\lambda \frac{L^{}(1+it,\pi _1\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_2)}{L(1+it,\pi _1\times \stackrel{~}{\pi }_2)}𝑑t$$

with upper bounds depending on the Casimir eigenvalues of $`\pi _{1,\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\pi _{2,\mathrm{}}`$ in the same way as in Theorem 5.3. In the present case, such estimates can be obtained using standard methods of analytic number theory. In fact, the bounds can be improved considerably.

Next we discuss the conditions (0.2) and (0.4). As mentioned in the introduction, for $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$ it is possible to prove that (0.2) and (0.4) hold. We shall briefly indicate the main steps of the proof. Let $`\rho `$ be a representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_m(_v)`$ and $`s`$. Then we denote by $`\rho [s]`$ the representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_m(_v)`$ defined by

$$\rho [s](g)=|detg|^s\rho (g),g\mathrm{GL}_m(_v).$$

Let $`\pi `$ be a cuspidal automorphic representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_m(𝔸)`$. Then it is known that each local component $`\pi _v`$ of $`\pi `$ is generic \[Sk\] and therefore, by \[JS2\] it follows that $`\pi _v`$ is equivalent to a full induced representation, i.e.,

(7.1)
$$\pi _vI_P^{\mathrm{GL}_m}(\tau _1[t_1]\mathrm{}\tau _r[t_r]),$$

where $`P`$ is a standard parabolic subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}_m`$ with Levi component $`\mathrm{GL}_{m_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{GL}_{m_r}`$, $`\tau _i`$ is a tempered representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_{m_i}(_v)`$ and the $`t_i`$’s are real numbers satisfying

$$t_1>t_2>\mathrm{}>t_r,|t_i|<1/2,i=1,\mathrm{},r.$$

For $`\pi _v`$ unramified, Luo, Rudnick and Sarnak \[LRS\] proved that the parameters $`t_i`$ satisfy the following nontrivial bound:

(7.2)
$$\underset{i}{\mathrm{max}}|t_i|<\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{m^2+1}.$$

Using the same method, one can show that (7.2) holds at all places. Now let $`P`$ be a standard parabolic subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$ with Levi component $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{GL}_{n_r}`$ and let $`\pi _v`$ be the local $`v`$-component of a cuspidal automorphic representation of $`M(𝔸)`$. Then $`\pi _v=_i\pi _{i,v}`$ and each $`\pi _{i,v}`$ is a full induced representation of the form (7.1) with parameters $`t_{ij}`$ satisfying (7.2). Using induction in stages, it follows that for each $`i`$ there exist a parabolic subgroup $`R_i`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_{n_i}(_v)`$ of type $`(n_{i1},\mathrm{},n_{il_i})`$, a discrete series representation $`\delta _{i,v}`$ of $`M_{R_i}(_v)`$ and $`𝐭_i=(t_{i1},\mathrm{},t_{il_i})^{l_i}`$ satisfying

(7.3)
$$\underset{i}{\mathrm{max}}|t_{ij}|<\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{n_i^2+1},$$

such that $`\pi _{i,v}I_{R_i}^M(\delta _{i,v},𝐭_i)`$. Put $`l=l_1+\mathrm{}+l_r`$,

$$\delta _v=_i\delta _{i,v},𝐭=(t_{11},\mathrm{},t_{1l_1},\mathrm{},t_{r1},\mathrm{},t_{rl_r}).$$

Generalizing property (R.2) of \[A8, p.172\], we get

(7.4)
$$R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,𝐬)=R_{Q(R)|P(R)}(\delta _v,𝐬+𝐭),𝐬^l,$$

where $`𝐬`$ is identified with an element in $`^l`$ with respect to the embedding which corresponds to the canonical embedding $`𝔞_M^{}𝔞_{P(R)}^{}.`$ This leads to an immediate reduction of the problem. We can assume that $`\pi _v`$ is square integrable. However, now we have to estimate the norm of the derivatives of $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,𝐬)_{K_v}`$ (resp. $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,𝐬)_{\sigma _v}`$) in the domain

$$\{𝐬^r|\mathrm{Re}(s_i)|<1/21/(n^2+1),i=1,\mathrm{},r\}.$$

The important point is that for $`\pi _v`$ square integrable, $`R_{Q|P}(\pi _v,𝐬)`$ is holomorphic in the domain

$$\{𝐬^r\mathrm{Re}(s_is_j)>1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}i<jr\}$$

\[MW\]. Using the product formula for normalized intertwining operators, the above problem can be further reduced to the case where $`P`$ is maximal parabolic and $`Q=\overline{P}`$. Then $`M=\mathrm{GL}_{n_1}\times \mathrm{GL}_{n_2},`$ $`\pi _v=\pi _{1,v}\pi _{2,v}`$, and we may regard the intertwining operator as a function $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)`$ of one complex variable. Now we distinguish two cases.

1. $`v<\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`K_v\mathrm{GL}_n(_v)`$ be an open compact subgroup. We may assume that $`K_v`$ is a congruence subgroup. Then we have to estimate the norm of derivatives of $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{K_v}`$ in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|<12/(n^2+1)`$. Let

$$K_{M,v}=K_vM(_v).$$

Then $`K_{M,v}`$ is an open compact subgroup of $`M(_v)`$. Let $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ denote the trivial representation of $`K_{M,v}`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v);K_{M,v})`$ be the set of all $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$ such that $`[\pi _v|_{K_{M,v}}:\mathrm{𝟏}]>0`$. By Theorem 10 of \[HC2\], $`\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v);K_{M,v})`$ is a compact subset of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$. Furthermore, $`𝔞_M^{}^2`$ acts on $`\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v))`$ by

$$\pi _{1,v}\pi _{2,v}\pi _{1,v}[iu_1]\pi _{2,v}[iu_2],(u_1,u_2)^2.$$

The stabilizer of a given representation $`\pi _v`$ is a lattice $`L^2`$ so that the orbit $`𝔬_{\pi _v}`$ of $`\pi _v`$ is a compact torus $`^2/L`$. Thus there exist $`\delta _1,\mathrm{},\delta _l\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v);K_{M,v})`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_2(M(_v);K_{M,v})=𝔬_{\delta _1}\mathrm{}𝔬_{\delta _l}.$$

Since

$$R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{1,v}[iu_1]\pi _{2,v}[iu_2],s)=R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _{1,v}\pi _{2,v},s+i(u_1+u_2)),$$

it suffices to consider a fixed discrete series representation $`\pi _v`$. Now recall that $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)`$ is holomorphic in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|<1`$. Furthermore by Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\], $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{K_v}`$ is a finite rank matrix whose entries are rational functions of $`p_v^s`$. Hence for every $`u`$, $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,u+iw)_{K_v}`$ is a periodic function of $`w`$. From these observations it follows immediately that for every $`k_0`$ there exists $`C>0`$ such that

(7.5)
$$D_s^kR_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{K_v}C$$

for all $`s`$ in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|12/(n^2+1).`$

2. $`v=\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`\sigma _v\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{O}(n))`$. Then we have to estimate the norm of derivatives of $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{\sigma _v}`$ in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|<12/(n^2+1)`$. First note that

$$M()(^{})^2\times (\mathrm{SL}_{n_1}()\times \mathrm{SL}_{n_2}()).$$

Furthermore the set of discrete series representations of $`\mathrm{SL}_{n_i}()`$ containing a fixed $`\mathrm{SO}(n_i)`$-type is finite \[Wa2, p.398\]. Hence in the same way as above, it follows that we can fix the discrete series representation $`\pi _v`$. Again $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)`$ is holomorphic in the strip $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|<1`$ and by Theorem 2.1 of \[A7\], $`R_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{\sigma _v}`$ is a rational function of $`s`$. This implies that for every $`k_0`$ there exist $`C>0`$ and $`N`$ such that

(7.6)
$$D_s^kR_{\overline{P}|P}(\pi _v,s)_{\sigma _v}C(1+|s|)^N$$

for all $`s`$ with $`|\mathrm{Re}(s)|<12/(n^2+1)`$.

Combining (7.5) and (7.6) with the various steps of the reduction it follows that (0.2) and (0.4) hold for all local components $`\pi _v`$ of cuspidal automorphic representations.

It remains to deal with local components of automorphic forms in the residual spectrum. For this purpose we use the description of the residual spectrum given by Mœglin and Waldspurger \[MW\]. First we recall the notion of a Speh representation \[MW, I.5\]. Let $`k|m`$, $`d=m/k`$ and $`R`$ a standard parabolic subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}_m`$ of type $`(d,\mathrm{},d)`$. Let $`\delta `$ be a discrete series representation of $`\mathrm{GL}_d(_v)`$. Then the induced representation

$$I_R^{\mathrm{GL}_m}(\delta [(k1)/2]\delta [(k3)/2\mathrm{}\delta [(1k)/2])$$

has a unique irreducible quotient which we denote by $`J(\delta ,k)`$. It follows from Theorem D of \[Ta\] and \[Vo\] that for every $`\pi _v\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{GL}_m(_v))`$ there exist a standard parabolic subgroup $`P`$ of type $`(m_1,\mathrm{},m_r)`$, $`k_i|m_i`$, discrete series representations $`\delta _i`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_{d_i}(_v)`$, $`d_i=m_i/k_i`$, and real numbers $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_r`$ satisfying $`|t_i|<1/2`$ such that

$$\pi _vI_P^{\mathrm{GL}_m}(J(\delta _1,k_1)[t_1]\mathrm{}J(\delta _r,k_r)[t_r]).$$

Now suppose that $`\pi _v`$ is a local component of an automorphic representation $`\pi `$ in the residual spectrum of $`\mathrm{GL}_m(𝔸)`$. By \[MW\] there exist a standard parabolic subgroup $`Q`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_m`$ of type $`(d,\mathrm{},d)`$ and a cuspidal automorphic representation $`\mu `$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_d(𝔸)`$ such that $`\pi _v`$ is the unique irreducible quotient of the induced representation

$$I_Q^{\mathrm{GL}_m}(\mu _v[(k1)/2]\mu _v[(k3)/2]\mathrm{}\mu _v[(1k)/2]),$$

where $`\mu _v`$ is the $`v`$-component of $`\mu `$. As explained above, $`\mu _v`$ is equivalent to an induced representation of the form (7.1) with parameters $`t_i`$ satisfying (7.2). Using induction in stages, it follows that

$$\mu _vI_R^{\mathrm{GL}_d}(\delta _1[t_1]\mathrm{}\delta _r[t_r]),$$

where $`R`$ is a standard parabolic subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}_d`$ of type $`(d_1,\mathrm{},d_r)`$, $`\delta _i`$ is a discrete series representations of $`\mathrm{GL}_{d_i}(_v)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, and the parameters $`t_i`$ satisfy $`t_1t_2\mathrm{}t_r`$ and (7.2). Then it follows from Proposition I.9 and Lemma I.8 of \[MW\] that there is a standard parabolic subgroup $`P`$ of $`\mathrm{GL}_m`$ of type $`(kd_1,\mathrm{},kd_r)`$ such that

(7.7)
$$\pi _vI_P^{\mathrm{GL}_m}(J(\delta _1,k)[t_1]\mathrm{}J(\delta _r,k)[t_r])$$

and

(7.8)
$$\underset{i}{\mathrm{max}}|t_i|<\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{m^2+1}.$$

This is the extension of the results of \[LRS\] to local components of automorphic representations in the discrete spectrum.

Now we can proceed in the same way as in the cuspidal case. The only difference is that we have to deal with the slightly more general Speh representations in place of the discrete series representations. In this way one can establish (0.2) and (0.4). This implies that for $`\mathrm{GL}_n`$ the spectral side of the Arthur trace formula is absolutely convergent. Details will appear in \[MS\].