ENDOMORPHISM FIELDS OF ABELIAN VARIETIES

arXiv:1606.02803v2 [math.NT] 4 Jun 2017

ROBERT GURALNICK AND KIRAN S. KEDLAYA

Abstract. We give a sharp divisibility bound, in terms of g, for the degree of the field
extension required to realize the endomorphisms of an abelian variety of dimension g over
an arbitrary number field; this refines a result of Silverberg. This follows from a stronger
result giving the same bound for the order of the component group of the Sato-Tate group
of the abelian variety, which had been proved for abelian surfaces by Fité–Kedlaya–Rotger–
Sutherland. The proof uses Minkowski’s reduction method, but with some care required in
the extremal cases when p equals 2 or a Fermat prime.

1. Introduction
For A an abelian variety over a field K, the endomorphism field of A is the minimal
algebraic extension L of K such that EndpAL q “ EndpAL q. The purpose of this paper is to
establish a bound on the degree rL : Ks in terms of the dimension of A; more precisely, we
compute the LCM of all possible degrees as A, K vary while dimK A remains fixed.
Before stating our result, we state a prior result of Silverberg [8] which already contains
many of the main ideas. For g a positive integer and p a prime, define
^
8 Z
ÿ
2g
rpg, pq :“
.
i
pp
´
1qp
i“0
Theorem 1.1 (Silverberg). For A an abelian variety of dimension g over a number
K,
śfield
rpg,pq
the endomorphism field of A is a finite Galois extension of K of degree dividing 2ˆ p p
.

The proof [8, Theorem 4.1] is elegantly simple: one verifies that for each prime ℓ ą 2, the
Galois group of the endomorphism field extension is isomorphic (via its action on ℓ-torsion
points) to a subquotient of the group Spp2g, Fℓq. The bound is then obtained by taking the
greatest common divisor of the orders of these finite groups. This echoes the method used
by Minkowski to bound the order of a finite group of integer matrices (as exposed in [3]); we
will return to this analogy a bit later.
From this proof, it is not clear whether one should expect the bound of Theorem 1.1 to be
sharp. However, a moment’s thought shows that it is not sharp for g “ 1: the bound is 24 ˆ 3
but the optimal bound is obviously 2, with the worst case being an elliptic curve whose CM
field is not contained in K. More seriously, for g “ 2, the bound of Theorem 1.1 is 28 ˆ 32 ˆ 5,
but (as will be explained shortly) the work of Fité–Kedlaya–Rotger–Sutherland [2] implies
that the optimal bound is 24 ˆ 3. This raises the question of identifying the discrepancy
between Theorem 1.1 and the optimal bound, and this is achieved by our main result.
Date: May 30, 2017.
Thanks to Francesc Fité, Gaël Rémond, Jean-Pierre Serre, Alice Silverberg, and Andrew Sutherland for
feedback. Guralnick was partially supported by NSF grants DMS-1302886 and DMS-1600056. Kedlaya was
supported by NSF grant DMS-1501214 and UC San Diego (Warschawski Professorship).
1

Theorem 1.2. For A an abelian variety of dimension g ą 0 over a number field K, the
degree over K of the endomorphism field of A divides
$
’
if p “ 2;
&rpg, pq ´ g ´ 1
ź 1
r pg,pq
1
p
,
r pg, pq :“ maxt0, rpg, pq ´ 1u if p is a Fermat prime;
’
%rpg, pq
p
otherwise.
Moreover, for fixed g, p (but varying over all K), this value of r 1 pg, pq is best possible.

To give one more example, for g “ 3, the bound from Theorem 1.1 is 211 ˆ 34 ˆ 5 ˆ 7
whereas the optimal bound is 26 ˆ 33 ˆ 7. It is easy to see that the factor of 7 is necessary,
e.g., by considering twists of the Klein quartic (see [5, §4]).
As in [2], our approach uses the relationship between the endomorphism field L of A
and the Sato-Tate group of A; the latter is a compact Lie group whose component group
surjects canonically onto GalpL{Kq, and the bound we ultimately prove is for the order of the
component group (see Theorem 5.4). The Sato-Tate group is constructed as a compact form
of a certain linear algebraic group over Q, the algebraic Sato-Tate group, which allows us to
bound the order of the component group using a variant of Minkowski’s method. One key
point is that the extremal cases occur for CM abelian varieties, for which the connected part
of the algebraic Sato-Tate group is a torus which splits over a CM field; what distinguishes a
Fermat prime p in this context is that Qpµp q contains no proper subfield which is CM. (For
p “ 2, the same statement about Qpµ4 q plays an analogous role.)
To prove that Theorem 1.2 is sharp, we use the relationship between twisting of abelian
varieties and Sato-Tate groups; this reduces the problem to exhibiting abelian varieties admitting actions by large finite groups, which we achieve using CM abelian varieties and the
same wreath product construction as in Minkowski’s theorem. Note that the fields of definition of the resulting abelian varieties are controlled by class groups of abelian number fields,
so we are unable to establish lower bounds over any fixed number field.
To conclude this introduction, we comment on the subtler problem of giving bounds by
size, rather than divisibility. As described in [3, §6], results of Weisfeiler and Feit can be
combined with the classification of finite simple groups to show that for n ą 10, the largest
finite subgroups of GLpn, Qq have order 2n n! (and are unique up to conjugacy). For abelian
varieties of sufficiently large dimension g, one would expect that the largest possible endomorphism field extension, and the largest possible component group of the Sato-Tate group, are
obtained by twisting a power of an elliptic curve with j-invariant 0 using an automorphism
group of order 6g g! (note that these examples already occur over Q). For the endomorphism
field, this expectation has been confirmed by work of Rémond [6]; it is highly likely that
a similar analysis applies to the component group (because the cases where the two differ
tend not to have enough CM to trouble the bounds), but this would require some additional
argument.
2. Group schemes
We start with some notation. Our notation choices are not entirely typical; they are made
to help us distinguish between groups and group schemes.
Definition 2.1. For G a group scheme (over some base), we write GX for the base extension
of G to the base scheme X, and GpXq for the group of X-valued points of G. We say that
2

G is pointful over X if GpXq occupies a Zariski-dense subset of G. By convention, all group
schemes we consider will be smooth and linear; the standard linear groups will be considered
as schemes over Z, and we will write GLpn, Xq instead of GLpnqpXq and so on.
For G a group scheme over a connected base, let G˝ denote the identity connected component, and write π0 pGq :“ G{G˝ for the group of connected components, viewed as a finite
group scheme over the same base. If G is pointful, then so are both G˝ and G{G˝ .
For L{K a finite extension of fields and G a group scheme over Spec L, write ResLK G for
the Weil restriction of scalars of G to Spec K.
Example 2.2. For n a positive integer, the n-torsion subscheme of the multiplicative group
over Q is the group scheme Spec Qrxs{pxn ´ 1q which is obviously defined over Q. However,
it is only pointful for n “ 1, 2.
Definition 2.3. For G a group scheme, let OutpGq be the group scheme of outer automorphisms of G, i.e., the cokernel of the map G Ñ AutpGq induced by conjugation. Note that for
G a group scheme over a field k which is not algebraically closed, an element of AutpGqpkq
may map trivially to OutpGqpkq even though it does not come from the image of Gpkq; that
is, the scheme-theoretic notion of an outer automorphism disagrees with the group-theoretic
notion because the latter is not stable under base extension.
3. Minkowski’s method
We next formulate our version of Minkowski’s reduction method. We implicitly follow [3],
but see also [7] for another detailed treatment (both considering only finite groups).
Throughout §3, let G be a group scheme over a number field K.
Definition 3.1. By convention G is a scheme of finite type over K, so it can be extended
to a group scheme over oK r1{Ns for some positive integer N. In particular, it makes sense
to form the base extension of G to Fq :“ oK {q for all but finitely many prime ideals q of oK .
Let H be a finite pointful subquotient group scheme of G. By the previous paragraph,
HpKq is isomorphic to a subquotient of GpFq q for all but finitely many q; in particular, for
each prime p, any p-Sylow subgroup of HpKq is isomorphic to a subquotient of a p-Sylow
subgroup of GpFq q for all but finitely many q.
To translate this into a numerical bound, define the nonnegative integers rpG, pq by the
formula
ź
prpG,pq “ suptgcd #GpFq qu
p

S

qPS

where S runs over all cofinite
of prime ideals of oK . Then the preceding discussion implies
ś sets
rpG,pq
that H has order dividing p p
; in particular, this bound applies to the component group
of any pointful subgroup scheme of G.
We collect some remarks related to this construction.
Remark 3.2. Suppose that there exists a finite pointful subquotient group scheme H of G
such that the p-part of #H equals the upper bound prpG,pq . Let P be a p-Sylow subgroup of
H; then for infinitely many q, P has the same cardinality as a p-Sylow subgroup of GpFq q,
so by Sylow’s theorem the two must be isomorphic. That is, the isomorphism type of P is
uniquely determined by G.
3

Remark 3.3. Let H be a pointful subgroup scheme of G. Then #π0 pHq divides
for
ź
pδpG,pq “ inf tgcd #H ˝ pFq qu.
S

p

ś

p

prpG,pq´δpG,pq

qPS

Remark 3.4. In light of Wedderburn’s theorem, for any number field K and any twisted
form G of GLpnqK one has rpG, pq “ rpGLpnqK , pq.
Remark 3.5. For each prime p, the group Cp ≀ Stn{pp´1qu embeds into GLpn, Qq, as then do
its p-Sylow subgroups. The original theorem of Minkowski asserts that the conjugates of the
latter are the largest possible p-subgroups of GLpn, Qq. However, if we compare this to the
values
Z
^ Z
^ Z
^
n
n
n
rpGLpnqQ , pq “
`
` 2
` ¨¨¨
pp ą 2q
p´1
ppp ´ 1q
p pp ´ 1q
Yn] Yn]
`
` ¨¨¨ ,
rpGLpnqQ , 2q “ n ` 2
2
4
we see that theX Minkowski
bound is only sharp for p ą 2; for p “ 2, the Minkowski bound
\
n
is too large by 2 , and one must supplement using some extra analysis involving quadratic
forms over finite fields [3, §5]. For this reason, we do not know whether the example Cp ≀
Stn{pp´1qu is optimal also for subquotients when p “ 2.
Remark 3.6. For K a number field, the Chebotarev density theorem implies that rpGLpnqK , pq
depends only on K X Qpµp8 q. For
mpK, pq :“ mintm ě 1 : K X Qpµpm q “ K X Qpµp8 qu

for p ą 2 we have
(3.1)

tpK, pq :“ rQpµpmpK,pq q : K X QpµpmpK,pq qs,

^ Z
^ Z
^
n
n
n
`
` 2
` ¨¨¨
rpGLpnqK , pq “ mpK, pq
tpK, pq
ptpK, pq
p tpK, pq
Z

and this bound is again optimal (see [3, §5.3] for a detailed discussion).
For p “ 2, the situation depends crucially on whether Qpζ4 q Ď K. If so, then tpK, 2q “ 1,
Yn] Yn]
`
` ¨¨¨ ,
(3.2)
rpGLpnqK , 2q “ mpK, 2qn `
2
4
Sn . If not, the situation is more complicated;
and this bound is optimal, achieved by C2mpK,2q ≀ ?
we limit ourselves?to observing that for K “ Qp ´2q we have rpGLpnq
K , 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q,
X \
while for K “ Qp 2q we have rpGLpnqK , 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q ` n2 .

Remark 3.7. Although we do not need this for our main result, we note in passing the
following corollary of Remark 3.6 (which only affects the prime p “ 2): the
divisibility
ś optimal
rpGLpgqQpiq ,2q
rpGLp2gq,pq
bound for the order of a finite subgroup of Spp2g, Qq is 2
. This
pą2 p
comes down to the fact that any irreducible finite subgroup of Spp2g, Qq is centralized by
some totally imaginary number field [4, Lemma 2.3].
Remark 3.8. It is natural to use Minkowski’s method as a starting point for bounding
the order of finite subgroups of any reductive group over any field. This has been discussed
extensively by Serre [7].
4

4. Comparison of Minkowski bounds
For our purposes, it will be important to compare the Minkowski bounds for various
group/subgroup pairs. The key points will be to identify discrepancies for p “ 2, and to
isolate cases for p ą 2 where the bound for the subgroup matches that of the full group.
Remark 4.1. A trivial but useful observation along these lines is that for n ě 1, p ą 2,
d ą 1,
rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą rpGLpnqQ , pq
whenever rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą 0.
A slightly less trivial observation is that for n ě 1,
rpGLpnqQpiq , 2q ą rpGLpnqQ , 2q.

Lemma 4.2. Let K be a number field of degree d over Q. For each integer n ě 1 and each
odd prime p,
rpGLpdnqQ , pq ě rpGLpnqK , pq ` rpSd , pq;
moreover, if n ą 1 and mpK, pq ą 1, or if d ě ppp ´ 1q, then the inequality is strict.
Proof. There is nothing to check when d “ 1, so we may assume d ě 2. Put m “ mpK, pq,
t “ tpK, pq; then the desired inequality is
Z
^ Z
^
Z ^ Z ^
Yn] Z n ^
dn
dn
d
d
`
` ¨¨¨ ě m
`
` ¨¨¨`
` 2 ` ¨¨¨ .
p´1
ppp ´ 1q
t
pt
p
p

d
equals 1t times the integer pm´1 which is
From the equality dt “ pm´1 pp ´ 1q, we see that p´1
no less than m (and strictly greater than m if m ą 1). Consequently, by writing the difference
between the two sides as
Z
^
Z ^ Z ^
Y n ] Z dn ^ Z n ^
dn
d
d
´m
`
´
` ¨¨¨`
` 2 ` ¨¨¨ ,
p´1
t
ppp ´ 1q
pt
p
p

we see that this difference does not decrease if we increase n by 1 (and strictly increases if
m ą 1). If n “ 1, then the desired inequality becomes rpGLpdqQ , pq ě rpSd , pq, which holds
because Sd embeds into GLpd, Qq; this equality is strict whenever d ě ppp ´ 1q. This proves
the claim.

Corollary 4.3. For K a number field of degree d, for p ą 2 we have

(4.1)

rpGLpdnqQ , pq ě rpAutpK{Qq ˙ ResK
Q GLpnqK , pq.

Moreover, if K Ę Qpµp q, K is not the degree-p subextension of Qpµp2 q, and rpGLpdnqQ , pq ‰
0, then the equality is strict.
Proof. The inequality (4.1) holds because AutpK{Qq ˙ ResK
Q GLpnqK embeds into GLpdnqQ .
We thus only need to obtain a contradiction assuming that K Ę Qpµp q, K is not the degree-p
subextension of Qpµp2 q, rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą 0, and equality holds in (4.1).
Note that (4.1) also follows from Lemma 4.2, so equality must also hold in the latter. By
Remark 3.6, if K 1 :“ K X Qpµp8 q has degree d1 ‰ d, then rpGLpnqK , pq “ rpGLpnqK 1 , pq; we
then get the strict inequality by applying Lemma 4.2 to the field K 1 and invoking Remark 4.1
(using the condition that rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą 0). We must therefore have K “ K 1 and hence
K Ď Qpµp8 q; since we assumed K Ę Qpµp q, this implies that mpK, pq ą 1. To have equality
in Lemma 4.2, we must then have n “ 1 and d ă ppp ´ 1q.
5

Since mpK, pq ą 1, K must contain the degree-p subextension of Qpµp2 q, necessarily
strictly by hypothesis; hence d{p is an integer strictly greater than 1. By the bound on d, we
cannot then have Qpµp q Ď K, so rpGLp1qK , pq “ 0. Meanwhile, K is an abelian extension
of Q, so rpAutpK{Qq, pq “ 1. However, since d ě 2p, rpGLpdqQ , pq ě 2, yielding the desired
contradiction.

Corollary 4.4. For any integers n, d ą 1, for each odd prime p for which rpGLpndqQ , pq ą 0,
we have
rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą rpGLpnqQ , pq ` rpSd , pq.

Proof. XWe\ first reduce to the case where d is even. Namely, we may do this by replacing d
with 2 d2 except if d is odd, rpGLpdnqQ , pq ą 0, and rpGLppd ´ 1qnqQ , pq “ 0. This implies
pd ´ 1qn ă p ´ 1 ď dn, which implies on one hand that n ă p ´ 1 and rpGLpnqQ , pq “ 0, and
on the other hand that d ´ 1 ă p ´ 1 and so rpSd , pq “ 0; this yields the claimed inequality.
For any number field K of even degree d, by Lemma 4.2 we have
rpGLpdnqQ , pq ě rpGLpnqK , pq ` rpSd , pq ě rpGLpnqQ , pq ` rpSd , pq,

so it suffices to confirm that both equalities cannot hold simultaneously. Since we are free
to choose K, we take it to contain the quadratic subfield of Qpµp q; then by Remark 3.6, we
have rpGLpnqK , pq ą rpGLpnqQ , pq unless both quantities equal zero. It thus suffices to rule
out the equality rpGLpdnqQ , pq “ rpSd , pq; since rpGLpdqQ , pq ě rpSd , pq, this follows from
Remark 4.1.

For p “ 2, we have the following analogue of Corollary 4.3.

Remark 4.5. For K{F an extension of number fields of degree d, we obviously have
rpGLpdnqF , 2q ě rpAutpK{F q ˙ ResK
F GLpnqK , 2q.

In case F “ Qpiq, one can show using Remark 3.2 that equality holds only when d “ 1;
however, we will not need this.
For p “ 2, we have the following analogue of Corollary 4.4.

Lemma 4.6. For any integers n, d ą 1 such that g “ dn{2 is an integer,
rpGLpgqQpiq , 2q ě rpGLpnqQ , 2q ` rpSd , 2q

with equality only for pn, dq “ p2, 2q.

Proof. We are claiming that
Z ^ Z ^
Z ^ Z ^
Yn] Yn]
dn
dn
d
d
dn `
`
` ¨¨¨ ě n` 2
`
` ¨¨¨`
`
` ¨¨¨
4
8
2
4
2
4
X \
with equality only for pn, dq “ p2, 2q. For d “ 2, this inequality becomes n ě n2 ` 1; for
n “ 2, it becomes 2d ě 4. It thus remains to check the cases where n, d ě 3.
We may write the difference between the two sides as
ˆZ ^ Z ^˙ ˆZ ^ Z ^˙
Yn] Yn]
dn
d
dn
d
pd ´ 1qn `
´
`
´
` ¨¨¨´ 2
´
´ ¨¨¨ ;
4
2
8
4
2
4
in particular, for n ě 2 fixed, this difference increases if we increase d by 2. Using the previous
paragraph, we deduce the claim when d is even. For d odd, we may argue that
rpGLpgqQpiq , 2q ě rpGLpg ´ n{2qQpiq , 2q ě rpGLpnqQ , 2q ` rpSd´1, 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q ` rpSd , 2q
6

with strict inequality if n ą 2.



5. Abelian varieties and Sato-Tate groups
We now specialize to the cases of interest for abelian varieties.
Definition 5.1. For A an abelian variety over a number field K, let ASTpAq denote the
algebraic Sato-Tate group of A in the sense of [1, Definition 9.5]. The key properties that we
need are the following.
‚ The group scheme ASTpAq is a pointful subgroup scheme of Spp2gqQ whose connected
part is reductive. The connected part is closely related to the Mumford-Tate group
of A.
‚ There exists a torus T Ă ASTpAq˝C which acts on C2g with weights 1, ´1 each with
multiplicity g. In particular, the fixed space of ASTpAq is the zero subspace.
‚ The component group π0 pAq surjects onto GalpL{Kq for L the endomorphism field of
A; this map is a bijection whenever the Mumford-Tate group is completely explained
by endomorphisms (which holds in all cases when g ď 3 but can fail for g ě 4, as
originally shown by Mumford). Moreover, for K 1 a finite extension of K, ASTpAK 1 q
is the inverse image of GalpLK 1 {K 1 q Ď GalpL{Kq in ASTpAq.
‚ Any decomposition of Q2g into indecomposable ASTpAq-modules corresponds to a
product-up-to-isogeny decomposition of A.
‚ The group ASTpAq is a torus if and only if A is isogenous to a product of abelian
varieties with CM defined over K.
Example 5.2. Put

?
?
?
M1 :“ Qpiq, M2 :“ Qp ´2q, M3 :“ Qp ´3q, M4 :“ Qp ´6q

and let K be the compositum of these four fields. Let A be the product of four elliptic curves
E1 , . . . , E4 with CM by M1 , . . . , M4 , respectively. Then ASTpAq is a torus of dimension 3.
Remark 5.3. The Sato-Tate group of A, as studied for abelian surfaces in [2], is a maximal
compact subgroup of ASTpA, Cq; it therefore has the same component group as ASTpAq.
On one hand, this means that the argument using algebraic Sato-Tate groups in the proof of
Theorem 5.4 directly applies also to the component groups of Sato-Tate groups; on the other
hand, the conclusion of Theorem 5.4 in the case g “ 2 is a consequence of [2, Theorem 4.3],
which will save a bit of case analysis.
We prove the upper bound assertion of Theorem 1.2 by establishing the following result.
Theorem 5.4. For A an abelian variety of dimension g over a number field K, the component group of the algebraic
ś 1 Sato-Tate group of A (or equivalently, the Sato-Tate group of A)
has order dividing p pr pg,pq .
Proof. Put G “ ASTpAq. It suffices to check the claimed divisibility for the p-part of #π0 pGq;
this is immediate from Remark 3.5 (applied with n “ 2g) unless p “ 2 or p is a Fermat prime.
In light of Remark 5.3, we may assume further that g ě 3.
Note that for any fixed p, r 1 pg, pq is superadditive in g; we may thus reduce to the case
where A is indecomposable, which as noted above implies that G acts indecomposably on
V “ Q2g . Using Corollary 4.4 and Lemma 4.6, we may also deduce the claim in case G˝ does
7

not act isotypically on V (the exceptional case of Lemma 4.6 cannot occur for g ě 3). We
may thus assume hereafter that G˝ acts isotypically on V .
Let W be an irreducible G˝ -representation occurring in V , and put
D :“ EndG˝ pW q,

M :“ EndG˝ pV q,

F :“ ZpDq “ ZpMq.

By Schur’s lemma, D is a division algebra, M is a matrix ring over D, and T :“ imagepG˝ Ñ
M ˆ q is a torus which splits over F . If we define H :“ kerpG Ñ OutpG˝ qq, we obtain an
induced injective morphism H{G˝ ãÑ M ˆ {T . Meanwhile, since V is G˝ -isotypical, G{H acts
faithfully on the set of isomorphism classes of G˝ -constituents of W bQ Q; this implies that
the map G Ñ AutpF {Qq induces an injective morphism G{H ãÑ AutpF {Qq.
Define the following positive integers:
a :“ rF : Qs;

b :“ rankF D “ the G˝ -multiplicity of W bF F ;
c :“ rankD M “ the G˝ -multiplicity of W in V ;
2g
d :“
“ the Q-dimension of a G˝ -constituent of V bQ Q.
abc
In this notation, G{H injects into Sa while H{G˝ injects into a subgroup of a twisted form
of GLpbcqF . In light of Remark 3.4, it follows that the p-adic valuation of #π0 pGq is at most
(5.1)

rpAutpF {Qq, pq ` rpGLpbcqF , pq ď rpGLpabcqQ , pq.

If d ą 1, then Remark 4.1 immediately yields the desired bound (even for p “ 2). We may
thus assume hereafter that d “ 1, which implies that G˝ is abelian and hence a torus. In this
case, F must be totally imaginary; it is in fact the CM field associated to the unique simple
isogeny factor of A.
If p ą 2 is a Fermat prime, then the only way to violate the desired bound would be
to have equality in (5.1), which can only occur if F Ď Qpµp q in light of Corollary 4.3 (the
degree-p subextension of Qpµp2 q cannot be a compositum of CM fields because its degree
is odd). Since F is totally imaginary, this would force F “ Qpµp q. However, under these
conditions, we may invoke Remark 3.3: the reduction of G˝ itself always has order divisible
by p, yielding exactly the correct bound.
If p “ 2 and F X Qpµ28 q “ Q, then rpGLpnqF , 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q (see Remark 3.6) and
so we may invoke Lemma 4.6 to deduce the desired result (again assuming that g ě 3). If
instead Qpµ4 q Ď F , then Remark 4.5 gives a valuation bound which is only off by 2, and
again this discrepancy is accounted for by Remark 3.3 (the reduction of ?
G˝ itself always
has
?
1
order divisible?by 4). Otherwise, F :“ F X Qpµ8 q must equal one of Qp 2q or Qp ´2q. In
case F 1 “ Qp ´2q, Remark 3.6 implies that rpGLpnqF 1 , 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q; we thus obtain
an upper bound of
rpAutpF 1 {Qq, 2q ` rpGLpabc{2qF 1 , 2q “ 1 ` rpGLpgqQ , 2q

and again Lemma 4.6
? settles the question (for g ě 3).
In case F 1 “ Qp 2q, we must argue a bit more carefully. Since F 1 is Galois and totally
real, we must have F 1 ‰ F and rpAutpF {Qq, 2q “ 1 ` rpAutpF {F 1 q, 2q. By Remark 3.6, we
have
Yn]
rpGLpnqF , 2q “ rpGLpnqF 1 , 2q “ rpGLpnqQ , 2q `
.
2
8

Note finally that the reduction of G˝ always has order divisible by 2. From (5.1), we now
obtain an upper bound of
Z ^
bc
1
rpAutpF {F q, 2q ` rpGLpbcqQ , 2q `
2
which by Lemma 4.6 (and the fact that a ě 4) is itself bounded above by
Yg ]
Yg]
ď rpGLpgqQ , 2q `
.
rpGLpgqQ , 2q `
a
4
This gives the desired bound once more.



6. Lower bounds
To conclude, we establish the lower bound assertion of Theorem 1.2 by twisting powers of
CM abelian varieties.
Definition 6.1. We briefly recall [2, Definition 2.20]. Let A be an abelian variety over a
number field K, let L{K be a finite Galois extension, and let f : GalpL{Kq Ñ AutpAL q be
a 1-cocycle. Then there exists an abelian variety Af over K equipped with an isomorphism
AfL – AL such that the action of τ P GK on Af pKq – AfL pKq corresponds to the action of
f pτ qτ on ApKq – AL pKq. The isomorphism AfL – AL induces an isomorphism EndpAfL q –
EndpAL q in which corresponding elements α P EndpAfL q, β P EndpAL q satisfy the relation
(6.1)

τ pαq “ f pτ qτ pβqf pτ q´1 .

We use the twisting setup in the following setting.
Definition 6.2. Fix a prime p and a positive integer m. Let A0 be an abelian variety of
dimension g0 over some number field K, such that A0 has complex multiplication by the
ring of integers oM of a subfield M of Qpµpm q; put d “ rQpµpm q : Ms. (Note that we cannot
hope to fix the field K, because its degree over Q is related to the class number of M.) Let
G0 Ď GLpd, Mq be a subgroup of order pm stable under GalpM{Qq and identify G0 with a
subgroup of AutpAd0,KM q. Put A1 “ Adn
0 for some positive integer n; then G1 “ G0 ≀ Sn may
be identified with a subgroup of AutpA1,KM q stable under GalpKM{Kq. Let G be the image
of G1 under the map GLpdn, Mq Ñ PGLpdn, Mq.
Choose an Sn -extension L0 {K linearly disjoint from KM, so that L0 M{KM is again an
Sn -extension. Note that for a “generic” Cpm -extension L1 {L0 M, the Galois closure L2 of L1
over M will have Galois group G0 ≀ Sn . Using class field theory, we may further ensure that
L2 is also Galois over K and that there exists a 1-cocycle f : GalpL2 {Kq Ñ AutpA1,L2 q
whose restriction to GalpL2 {KMq is the preceding identification of the latter with G0 ≀ Sn Ď
AutpA1,KM q.
Put A “ Af1 and let L be the endomorphism field of A. Then KM Ď L and (6.1) implies
the existence of a surjective morphism from GalpL{KMq to G, but not in general to G1 .
Theorem 6.3. For each prime p, there exists an abelian variety A of dimension g over some
1
number field K such that the p-part of rL : Ks is at least prg,p .
Proof. Suppose first that p ´ 1 is not a power of 2 (i.e., p is odd and not a Fermat prime).
Then there exists a subfield M of Qpµp q whose index ℓ is an odd prime divisor of p ´ 1.
9

Y ]
g
then yields the desired result; note that in
Applying Definition 6.2 with m “ 1, n “ p´1
this case, there is no harm to take K to contain M, which simplifies the analysis somewhat.
Suppose next that p is a Fermat prime; we may assume that rg,p ě 1. The previous
construction breaks down because p ´ 1 admits
Y no
] odd prime divisor, so we can only apply
g
Definition 6.2 with m “ 1, M “ Qpµp q, n “ p´1 . Note that we now lose one factor of p to
the quotient map G1 Ñ G, so again we get the desired result.
Suppose finally that p “ 2. Apply Definition 6.2 with m “ 2, M “ Qpiq, n “ g; note that
in this case we may even take K “ Q. This time, we lose two factors of 2 to the quotient map
G1 Ñ G, but gain one back from the extension M{Q. This proves the claim once more. 
References
[1] G. Banaszak and K.S. Kedlaya, An algebraic Sato-Tate group and Sato-Tate conjecture, Indiana Univ.
Math. J. 64 (2015), 245–274.
[2] F. Fité, K. S. Kedlaya, V. Rotger, A. V. Sutherland, Sato-Tate distributions and Galois endomorphism
modules in genus 2, Compositio Math. 148 (2012), 1390–1442.
[3] R.M. Guralnick and M. Lorenz, Orders of finite groups of matrices, in Groups, Rings and Algebras:
Proceedings of a Conference in Honor of Donald S. Passman, Contemporary Math. 420, 2006, 141–162.
[4] M. Kirschmer, Finite symplectic matrix groups, Experiment. Math. 20 (2011), 217–228.
[5] B. Poonen, E.F. Schaefer, and M. Stoll, Twists of Xp7q and primitive solutions to x2 ` y 3 “ z 7 , Duke
Math. J. 137 (2007), 103–158.
[6] G. Rémond, Degré de définitions des endomorphismes d’une variété abélienne, preprint available at
https://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~remond/.
[7] J.-P. Serre, Bounds for the orders of the finite subgroups of Gpkq, in Group Representation Theory, EPFL
Press, Lausanne, 2007, 405–450.
[8] A. Silverberg, Fields of definition for homomorphisms of abelian varieties, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 77
(1992), 253–262.

10

