show · dq.mf.hilbert.reliability all knowls · up · search:

All Hilbert modular form eigenform data has been computed using rigorous algorithms.

  • When “is base change” says no, we have certified that the form is not a base change; when yes, there is strong evidence of a base change (Hecke eigenvalues seem to match their conjugates under a nontrivial subgroup of automorphisms) but this has not been rigorously established.
  • When “is cm” says no, we have certified that the form is not a CM form; when yes, there is strong evidence that the form has complex multiplication (the form seems to match its twist by a CM character) but this has not been rigorously established.

Wherever possible (specifically, when there is a prime $\mathfrak{p} \parallel \mathfrak{N}$ exactly dividing the level), we computed the forms using both definite and indefinite algorithms (see the description in Donnelly-Voight [arXiv:1605.02637]) and got the same answer.

Authors:
Knowl status:
  • Review status: beta
  • Last edited by John Voight on 2019-04-09 09:22:29
Referred to by:
History: (expand/hide all) Differences (show/hide)