arXiv:1606.02991v2 [math.GR] 11 Oct 2016

SUBGROUPS OF SPIN(7) OR SO(7) WITH EACH
ELEMENT CONJUGATE TO SOME ELEMENT OF G2
AND APPLICATIONS TO AUTOMORPHIC FORMS

GAËTAN CHENEVIER
Laboratoire de Mathématiques d’Orsay, Université Paris-Sud, CNRS,
Université Paris-Saclay, 91405 Orsay, France,
gaetan.chenevier@math.cnrs.fr
Abstract. As is well-known, the compact groups Spin(7) and
SO(7) both have a single conjugacy class of compact subgroups
of exceptional type G2 . We first show that if Γ is a subgroup of
Spin(7), and if each element of Γ is conjugate to some element of
G2 , then Γ itself is conjugate to a subgroup of G2 . The analogous
statement for SO(7) turns out be false, and our main result is a
classification of all the exceptions. They are the following groups,
embedded in each case in SO(7) in a very specific way: GL2 (Z/3Z),
SL2 (Z/3Z), Z/4Z × Z/2Z, as well as the nonabelian subgroups
of GO2 (C) with compact closure, similitude factors group {±1},
and which are not isomorphic to the dihedral group of order 8.
More generally, we consider the analogous problems in which the
Euclidean space is replaced by a quadratic space of dimension 7
over an arbitrary field.
This type of questions naturally arises in some formulation of
a converse statement of Langlands’ global functoriality conjecture,
to which the results above have thus some applications. Moreover,
we give necessary and sufficient local conditions on a cuspidal algebraic regular automorphic representation of GL7 over a totally
real number field so that its associated ℓ-adic Galois representations can be conjugate into G2 (Qℓ ).

Date: October 12, 2016.
Pendant la rédaction de ce travail, l’auteur a été financé par le C.N.R.S. et a
reçu le soutien du projet ANR-14-CE25 (PerCoLaTor). The author thanks Wee
Teck Gan, Philippe Gille and Gordan Savin for their remarks.
1

2

Introduction
For n ≥ 1, let Spin(n) denote the Spin group of the standard Euclidean
space Rn and SO(n) its special orthogonal group. As is well-known
there is a unique conjugacy class of compact subgroups of Spin(7) (resp.
SO(7)) which are connected, semisimple, and whose root system is of
type G2 . We shall call such a subgroup a G2 -subgroup.
Theorem A. Let Γ ⊂ Spin(7) be a subgroup such that each element of
Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup. Then Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup.
This perhaps surprising result has a very simple proof. Indeed, let
W be a spin representation of Spin(7), an 8-dimensional real vector
space, and let E be its standard 7-dimensional real representation,
which factors through SO(7). If H is a G2 -subgroup of Spin(7), then
we have an isomorphism of R[H]-modules
W ≃ 1 ⊕ E.
As a consequence, if Γ is as in the statement of Theorem A, we must
have the equality det(t − γ|W ) = (t − 1) det(t − γ|E ) for all γ ∈ Γ.
But this implies that the (necessarily semisimple) R[Γ]-modules W and
1 ⊕ E are isomorphic. In particular, Γ fixes a nonzero vector in W . We
conclude as the G2 -subgroups of Spin(7) are well-known to be exactly
the stabilizers of the nonzero elements of W .
Theorem A admits a generalization over an arbitrary field, that we
prove in § 3. Let k be a field and E a 7-dimensional nondegenerate (or
even “regular”, see §1.1) quadratic space over k. If C is an octonion kalgebra whose quadratic subspace of pure octonions is isometric to E,
then the automorphism group of C naturally embeds both in Spin(E)
and in SO(E) (§ 2.5). We call such a subgroup of Spin(E) or SO(E)
a G2 -subgroup. These subgroups may not exist, but in any case they
are all conjugate (by the action of SO(E), see Proposition 2.11). When
k = R and E is Euclidean they are exactly the subgroups introduced
above. When k is algebraically closed, they also do exist and coincide
with the closed connected algebraic subgroups which are simple of type
G2 (see Proposition 2.12).
Theorem B. Let k be a field, E the quadratic space of pure octonions
of some octonion k-algebra, W a spinor module for E, and Γ a subgroup
of Spin(E). Assume that the k[Γ]-module W is semisimple. Then the
following assertions are equivalent:
(a) each element of Γ is contained in a G2-subgroup of Spin(E),
(b) for each γ ∈ Γ we have det(1 − γ|W ) = 0,
(c) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of Spin(E).

3

This theorem is Corollary 3.5 of Theorem 3.4, of which Theorem A is
the special case k = R (see Remark 3.9). Note that Theorem A also
follows from the case k = C of Theorem B by standard arguments from
the theory of complexifications of compact Lie groups (see §5).
The naive analogue of Theorem A to SO(7) turns out that to be false.
Let us introduce three embeddings that will play some role in the correct statement. We fix a complex nondegenerate quadratic plane P ,
denote by GO(2) the unique maximal compact subgroup of the Lie
group of orthogonal similitudes of P , and by O(2)± ⊂ GO(2) the subgroup1 of elements with similitude factor ±1. Recall that E is the
standard 7-dimensional real representation of SO(7). Then:
— there is a group homomorphism α : Z/4Z × Z/2Z → SO(7), unique
up to conjugacy, such that the associated representation of Z/4Z ×
Z/2Z on E ⊗ C is the direct sum of its 7 nontrivial characters;
— there is a morphism β : GL2 (Z/3Z) → SO(7), unique up to conjugacy, such that the representation of GL2 (Z/3Z) on E ⊗ C is the direct
sum of its 4 nontrivial irreducible representations of dimension ≤ 2;
— there is a group morphism γ : O(2)± → SO(7), unique up to conjugacy, such that the representation of O(2)± on E ⊗ C is isomorphic to
the direct sum of P , P ∗ and of the three order 2 characters of O(2)± .
In each of these cases, if Γ ⊂ SO(7) denotes the image of the given
morphism, we prove in §4.6 that each element of Γ belongs to a G2 subgroup of SO(7). Let D8 denote the dihedral group of order 8.
Theorem C. Let Γ be a subgroup of SO(7) such that each element
of Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup. Then exactly one of the following
assertions holds:
(i) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(7),
(ii) Γ is conjugate in SO(7) to one of the groups
α(Z/4Z × Z/2Z), β(GL2 (Z/3Z)), β(SL2 (Z/3Z)) or γ(S),
where S ⊂ O(2)± is a nonabelian subgroup, nonisomorphic to
D8 , and whose similitude factors group is {±1}.
Let us discuss the main steps of the proof of this theorem, which turned
out to be much harder than the one of Theorem A. Let Γ be a subgroup
of SO(7). We view E as a (semisimple) representation of Γ. We first
show in §4.1 that each element of Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of
SO(7) if, and only if, we have a R[Γ]-linear isomorphism
1The

group O(2)± is isomorphic to the quotient of µ4 × O(2) by the diagonal
order 2 subgroup, the similitude factor being the square of the factor µ4 .

4

(∗)

Λ3 E ≃ E ⊕ Sym2 E.

It is an exercise to check that the images of α, β and γ do satisfy (∗).
Note also that identity (∗) implies that Γ fixes a nonzero alternating
trilinear form f on E. In the special case E ⊗ C is irreducible, the
classification of trilinear forms given in [CH88] shows that the stabilizer
of f is a G2 -subgroup, and we are done. For reducible E⊗C, we proceed
quite differently (and do not rely on any classification result).
Our starting point is the following necessary and sufficient condition
e ⊂ Spin(7) denote the
for Γ to belong to a G2 -subgroup of SO(7). Let Γ
inverse image of Γ under the natural surjective morphism Spin(7) →
SO(7). We show that Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(7) if, and
e of the spin representation W of Spin(7)
only if, the restriction to Γ
contains an order 2 character (Corollary 3.8). Our strategy to prove
e
Theorem C is then to analyze the simultaneous structure of the C[Γ]modules E ⊗ C and W ⊗ C, when the identity (∗) holds.

We argue by descending induction on the maximal dimension of a Γstable isotropic subspace of the complex quadratic space E, an invariant
that we call the Witt index of Γ (see §1.8). This invariant can only
increase when we replace Γ by a subgroup. Moreover, for a given
Witt index we also argue according to the possible dimensions (and
selfduality) of the irreducible summands of E ⊗ C. This forces us to
study in details quite a number of special cases, which is somewhat
unpleasant, but leads naturally to the discovery the counterexamples
α, β and γ above. Several exceptional properties of low dimensional
spinor modules play a role along the proof.
Our arguments apply more generally to the special orthogonal group of
a 7-dimensional regular quadratic space over an arbitrary algebraically
closed field k, that we assume for this introduction to have characteristic 6= 2. We define in §4.6 a natural analogue O±
2 (k) of the group
±
O(2) , as well as analogues of the morphisms α, β and γ above (the
morphism β is actually only defined if the characteristic of k is 6= 3).
Our main theorem is then the following (see Theorem 4.18).

Theorem D. Let k be an algebraically closed field, E a 7-dimensional
nondegenerate quadratic space over k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup. Assume that each element of Γ has the same characteristic polynomial as
some element of some G2 -subgroup of SO(E), and that Γ satisfies the
“semisimplicity” assumption denoted by (S) in §4.14.
Then the same conclusion as the one of Theorem C holds, with SO(7)
replaced by SO(E), and O(2)± replaced by O±
2 (k).
We refer to loc. cit. for a discussion of assumption (S). Let us simply
say here that (S) holds if the k[Γ]-module E is semisimple and if the

5

characteristic of k is either 0 or > 13. The special case k = C of
Theorem D is actually equivalent to Theorem C (see §5).
Let us end this group theoretic discussion by raising some natural questions. Let G be a group and H a subgroup of G. Denote by P(G, H)
the following property of (G, H): for all subgroup Γ of G, if each element of Γ is conjugate to an element of H, then Γ is conjugate to a
subgroup of H. We have explained that P(Spin(7), G2) holds and that
P(SO(7), G2) does not.
Questions: Can we classify the couples (G, H), with G a compact connected Lie group and H a closed connected subgroup, such that P(G, H)
holds ? Are there “remarkable” couples of finite groups (G, H) such that
P(G, H) holds ?
For instance, one can show2 that for integers a ≥ b ≥ 1, the property
P(SO(a + b), SO(a) × SO(b)) holds if, and only if, we have b = 1 and
a ∈ {1, 3}. As another example, if Sn denotes the symmetric group of
{1, . . . , n}, then3 P(Sn+1 , Sn ) holds if, and only if, we have n ≤ 3.
Applications to automorphic and Galois representations
Our original motivation for studying property P above is that it naturally arises in some formulation of a converse statement of Langlands’
functoriality conjecture. Before focusing on the specific case of our
study, we first briefly give the general context, assuming some familiarity of the reader with Langlands philosophy [Lan70, Lan71] and
automorphic forms [Cor77].
Let F be a number field, G (resp. H) a connected semisimple linb (resp. H)
b a complex
ear algebraic group defined and split over F , G
semisimple algebraic group dual to G (resp. H) in the sense of Langb (resp. H),
b
lands, G (resp. H) a maximal compact subgroup of G
ρ : H → G a continuous homomorphism, and π a cuspidal tempered
automorphic representation of G(AF ). Assume that for all but finitely
many places v of F , the Satake parameter c(πv ) of πv , viewed as a
well-defined conjugacy class in G, is the conjugacy class some element
in ρ(H). If P(G, ρ(H)) holds, then we may expect the existence of a
cuspidal tempered automorphic representation π ′ of H(AF ) such that
for almost all finite places v of F , the G-conjugacy class of ρ(c(πv′ ))
coincides with c(πv ).
2Hints:

consider subgroups Γ of the form SO(a + b − c) × SO(c) with c = 0, 1, 3
to show that P(SO(a + b), SO(a) × SO(b)) implies b = 1 and a ∈ {1, 3}. To check
P(SO(4), SO(3)), observe that if V is the restriction to SO(3) of the tautological
4-dimensional real representation of SO(4), then we have an isomorphism V ⊕ V ∗ ≃
1 ⊕ 1 ⊕ Λ2 V (a similar observation proves P(SU(4), SU(3)) as well).
3 Hint: for n = 4, 5 consider for Γ the subgroup of the alternating subgroup of
Sn+1 preserving {n, n + 1} (we have Γ ≃ Sn−1 ).

6

Indeed, here is a heuristical argument using the hypothetical Langlands
group [Lan79, Kot84, Art02]. Fix a finite set S of places of F such
that for v ∈
/ S then v is finite and πv is unramified, and let LF,S be
the Langlands group of F unramified outside S. Following Kottwitz,
this is a compact topological group, equipped for each v ∈
/ S with a
distinguished conjugacy class Frobv . Langlands associates to π some
continuous morphism φ : LF,S → G, whose image has a finite centralizer
in G, such that4 the G-conjugacy class of φ(Frobv ) is c(πv ) for each
v∈
/ S. The expected density (even equidistribution!) of ∪v∈S
/ Frobv in
LF,S implies that any element in φ(LF,S ) is conjugate to some element
in ρ(H), so that we have φ = ρ ◦ φ′ for some continuous morphism
φ′ : LF,S → H, by property P(G, ρ(H)). In turn, φ′ is associated to
some cuspidal tempered automorphic representation π ′ of H(AF ).
Of course, the properties P(Spin(7), G2 ) and P(SO(7), G2) studied before correspond to the special cases where H is of type G2 and G is
either PGSp6 or Sp6 . As a first application, Theorems A & C thus provide interesting conjectures in this context. We postpone the discussion
of the case G = PGSp6 , about which more can be said, to the end of
this introduction (see Theorem G). Note that although P(SO(7), G2 )
does not hold, the argument above still shows that the existence of π ′
is expected to hold in the case G = Sp6 , because none of the exceptions
in the statement of Theorem C has a finite centralizer in G ≃ SO(7)
(their Witt index is nonzero).
When one knows how to associate to π a compatible system of ℓ-adic
Galois representations, which requires at least some assumptions on
the Archimedean components of π, the absolute Galois group of F
may be used as a substitute of the hypothetical Langlands group.
This allows us to prove the following theorem (Corollary 6.8). We
denote by WM the Weil group of the local field M, G2 a fixed split
semisimple group over Q of type G2 , and if k is an algebraically closed
field of characteristic 0 we fix an irreducible polynomial representation
ρ : G2 (k) → GL7 (k).
Theorem E. Let F be a totally real number field and π a cuspidal automorphic representation of GL7 (AF ) such that πv is algebraic regular
for each real place v of F . The following properties are equivalent:
(i) for all but finitely many places v of F , the Satake parameter of
πv is the conjugacy class of an element in ρ(G2 (C)),
(ii) for any finite place v of F , there exists a continuous morphism
φv : WFv × SU(2) → G2 (C), unique up to G2 (C)-conjugacy,
such that ρ◦φv is isomorphic to the Weil-Deligne representation
attached to πv by the local Langlands correspondence [HT01].
4As

pointed out by Langlands long ago, note that these properties of φ may
however not determine it uniquely up to G-conjugacy in general (see e.g. [Lar94]).

7

We refer to §6 for the unexplained terms of this statement. A key
ingredient in the proof of this theorem is the following result, which is
perhaps the main application of this paper (Corollary 6.5).
Theorem F. Let F be a totally real number field and π a cuspidal
automorphic representation of GL7 (AF ) satisfying assumption (i) of
Theorem E, and such that πv is algebraic regular for each real place v
of F . Let E be a coefficient number field for π, ℓ a prime and λ a place
of E above ℓ. Then there exists a continuous semisimple morphism
reπ,λ : Gal(F /F ) −→ G2 (Eλ ),

unique up to G2 (Eλ )-conjugacy, satisfying the following property: for
each finite place v of F which is prime to ℓ, and such that πv is unramified, the morphism reπ,λ is unramified at v and we have the relation
det(t − ρ(e
rπ,λ (Frobv ))) = det(t − c(πv )), where c(π) is the Satake parameter of πv viewed as a semisimple conjugacy class in GL7 (E).
The proof of this theorem uses the existence and properties of the
compatible system of 7-dimensional ℓ-adic Galois representations associated to π [HT01, Shi11, CH13, BC11] and Theorem D. We show that
we are not in the exceptional cases of Theorem D using the knowledge
of the Hodge-Tate numbers of those representations. The uniqueness
assertion is a consequence of a result of Griess [Gri95].
As promised earlier, we now go back to property P(G2, Spin(7)). After
the first version of this paper appeared on the arXiv, some discussions
with Gan and Savin led to the conclusion that enough is known to
prove unconditionally the conjecture mentioned above concerning the
Langlands functorial lifting between G2 and PGSp6 , using works of
Arthur [Art13], Ginzburg-Jiang [GJ01] and Xu [Xu14]. We are grateful to them to let us include this result in this paper: see Theorem 6.13.
c2 = G2 (C) and PGSp
\ 6 = Spin7 (C).
Recall that we may take G

Theorem G. Let F be a number field and π a cuspidal automorphic
representation of PGSp6 (AF ). Assume that π is tempered, or more
generally, that π is nearly generic (see §6.12). Then the following properties are equivalent:
(a) for all but finitely many places v of F , the Satake parameter
c(πv ) is the conjugacy class of an element of a G2 -subgroup of
Spin7 (C),
(b) there exists a cuspidal automorphic representation π ′ of G2 (AF )
such that for all but finitely many finite places v of F , the image
in Spin7 (C) of the Satake parameter c(πv′ ) is conjugate to c(πv ).

8

Contents
Introduction
1. Preliminaries on quadratic spaces and spinors
2. Octonion algebras and G2 -subgroups
3. Proof of Theorems A & B
4. Proof of Theorem D
5. Proof of Theorem C
6. Automorphic and Galois representations
Appendix A. Some basic facts about restrictions and extensions
of cusp forms
References

2
8
15
22
26
52
53
62
66

1. Preliminaries on quadratic spaces and spinors
1.1. Regular quadratic spaces. Let k be a field. A quadratic space
over k is a finite dimensional k-vector space V equipped with a quadratic map q : V → k [Bou59, §3 no.4]. By definition, the map
βV (x, y) := q(x + y) − q(x) − q(y), V × V → k, is a symmetric kbilinear form, and we have q(λv) = λ2 q(v) for all v ∈ V and λ ∈ k.
We refer to Bourbaki [Bou59, §3, §4] and Knus [Knus88, Ch. 1] for
the basic notions concerning quadratic spaces (isometries, orthogonal
sums, base change, etc...).
A quadratic space V over k will be called nondegenerate if the bilinear
form βV is a perfect pairing. If the characteristic of k is 2, then βV is
alternate, thus dim V has to be even if V is nondegenerate. It will be
convenient to say that a quadratic space V over k is regular if either V
is nondegenerate, or if we are in the following situation: dim V is odd,
the characteristic of k is 2, the kernel of βV is one dimensional and q
is not identically zero on it.5
If I is a finite dimensional k-vector space, we denote by I ∗ its dual
vector space and by H(I) the quadratic space I ⊕ I ∗ with q(x + ϕ) =
ϕ(x) (“hyperbolic quadratic space over I”). This is a nondegenerate
quadratic space.
The isometry group of a quadratic space V , denoted O(V ), is the subgroup of elements g ∈ GL(V ) such that q ◦ g = g. When V is regular,
there is a well-defined subgroup SO(V ) ⊂ O(V ) of proper isometries:
when 2 ∈ k × or dim V is odd, we set SO(V ) = O(V ) ∩ SL(V ), and
in the remaining case (dim V even and 2 6∈ k × ) SO(V ) is an index 2
subgroup of O(V ) defined as the kernel of the Dickson invariant of V
5We

warn the reader that there does not seem to be any standard terminology
for these classical notions. Several authors, such as Knus, use the term nonsingular
for nondegenerate. Moreover, V is 12 −regular is the sense of [Knus88, Knus91] if
and only if dim V is odd and V is regular in our sense.

9

[Knus88, Ch. 6 p.59]. We also denote by GO(V ) ⊂ GL(V ) the subgroup of orthogonal similitudes of the quadratic space V , and when V
is regular, by GSO(V ) its subgroup of proper similitudes (see e.g. the
end of §II.1 in [CL14]).
1.2. Clifford algebras, Spin groups, and their relatives. Let V
be a quadratic space over k. Recall that the Clifford algebra C(V )
of V is a k-superalgebra [Bou59, §9] [Knus88, Ch. 4] [Del99]. It is
equipped with a canonical injective morphism k ⊕ V → C(V ), that we
shall always view as an inclusion. The Clifford group of V , denoted
Γ(V ), is the supergroup6 of homogeneous elements in C(V )× normalizing V . The normal subgroup of even elements in Γ(V ) is the general
spin group of V and denoted GSpin(V ). The superaction of Γ(V ) on
V , given by (γ, v) 7→ (−1)p(γ) γvγ −1 , defines a group homomorphism
πV : Γ(V ) −→ O(V ),
whose kernel is by definition the group of invertible homogeneous elements in the supercenter Z(V ) of C(V ). Following Chevalley, recall
that C(V ) is equipped with a unique anti-involution x 7→ xt fixing V
pointwise (hence preserving parity). It thus preserves Γ(V ) as well. If
γ ∈ Γ(V ), the element ν(γ) := γγ t belongs to Z(V )×
0 , which gives rise
to a group homomorphism
νV : Γ(V ) → Z(V )×
0.
The kernel of νV is the so-called pin supergroup of V and denoted
Pin(V ). The subgroup of even elements in Pin(V ) is the spin group of
V , denoted Spin(V ). We have νV (λ) = λ2 for all λ ∈ k × .
Assume from now on that V is regular. If dim V is even (resp. odd)
then C(V ) (resp. C(V )0 ) is a central simple k-algebra [Bou59, §4]
[Knus88, Ch. 4 Thm. 8]; in particular we have Z(V )0 = k in both
cases. Applying the Skolem-Noether theorem, we can show that the
homomorphism πV is surjective [Knus88, Prop. 6 Ch. 6] and induces
an exact sequence
(1.1)

π

V
1 −→ k × −→ GSpin(V ) −→
SO(V ) −→ 1.

Moreover, νV : GSpin(V ) −→ k × induces a homomorphism νV :
2
SO(V ) → k × /k × called the spinor norm. We have thus an exact
sequence
(1.2)

π

ν

2

V
V
k × /k × ,
1 −→ µ2 (k) −→ Spin(V ) −→
SO(V ) −→

where µ2 (k) ⊂ k × is the subgroup of square roots of 1.
6A

Z/2Z.

supergroup is a group G equipped with a group homomorphism p : G →

10

Let U, V be quadratic spaces over k with U nondegenerate and V regular. Then W = U⊥V is regular and the natural k-superalgebra iso∼
morphism C(U) ⊗gr C(V ) → C(U⊥V ) induces a group homomorphism
(1.3)

ρU ;V : GSpin(U) × GSpin(V ) → GSpin(U⊥V )

which satisfies νW ◦ ρU ;V (g, g ′) = νU (g)νV (g ′), πW ◦ ρU ;V = πU ⊕ πV
[Knus91, Ch. IV §(6.5)]. By (1.1), the image of πW ◦ ρU ;V is thus
SO(U) × SO(V ), and the kernel of ρU ;V is the subgroup of k × × k ×
whose elements (λ, λ′ ) satisfy λλ′ = 1.
Remark 1.3. Most of the constructions of §1.1 and §1.2 can be adapted
in order to make sense over an arbitrary commutative ring k: see e.g.
[Knus91], [CL14, Ch. I §1] and [CF15]. That being done, each group
of the form G(V ) associated above to a regular quadratic space V over k
appears as the group of k-points of a natural corresponding affine group
scheme of finite type over k. We shall not need this point of view in the
sequel, but in a few places, and when the field k is algebraically closed,
it will be convenient to see G(V ) as a (reduced) linear algebraic group
over k in the classical sense [Hum81]; it is indeed immediate from the
definitions above that each G(V ) does have a linear algebraic group
structure. As is well-known, the algebraic groups SO(V ), Spin(V ) and
GSpin(V ) are connected and reductive if dim V > 1 (see e.g. [CF15]).
Notations: Let n ≥ 0 be an integer. We respectively denote by
On (k), SOn (k), GOn (k), GSOn (k), Γn (k), Spinn (k) and GSpinn (k) the
groups O(V ), SO(V ), GO(V ), GSO(V ), Γ(V ), Spin(V ) and GSpin(V )
with

H(k r )
if n = 2r,
V =
r
H(k )⊥k if n = 2r + 1.

In this latter case, k is viewed as a quadratic space with q(x) = x2 . In
both cases, V is regular. When k is algebraically closed, it is the unique
regular quadratic space of dimension n over k up to isometry. Moreover,
when k = R, we shall also denote respectively by O(n), SO(n) and
Spin(n) the corresponding groups with V the standard Euclidean space
Rn of dimension n. They are compact Lie groups in a natural way.
1.4. Spinor modules. Let V be a regular quadratic space over k. We
say that the even Clifford algebra of V is trivial if either dim V = 2r +1
is odd and we have a k-algebra isomorphism C(V )0 ≃ M2r (k), or
dim V = 2r is even and we have a k-algebra isomorphism C(V )0 ≃
M2r−1 (k) × M2r−1 (k). Assuming that V has a trivial even Clifford algebra, we can then define a spinor module for V as follows. Again, there
are two cases:
Case (a). If dim V = 2r is even, then we have a graded algebra isomorphism C(V ) ≃ M2r−1 |2r−1 (k). A spinor module for V is a supermodule

11

W for the k-superalgebra C(V ) such that the associated graded morphism C(V ) → End(W ) is an isomorphism. Such a module W is
simple of dimension 2r−1 |2r−1, and its restriction to the even algebra
C(V )0 ≃ End(W0 ) × End(W1 ) is the direct-sum of two nonisomorphic
simple modules W = W0 ⊕ W1 called half-spinor modules for V . The
k-linear representations of the groups GSpin(V ) and Spin(V ) obtained
by restriction of those modules W and Wi are respectively called spin
and half-spin representations.
Case (b). If dim V = 2r + 1 is odd, a spinor module for V is a simple
module for the (matrix) k-algebra C(V )0 . The restriction to GSpin(V )
or Spin(V ) of a spinor module for V is by definition a spin representation.
Any hyperbolic quadratic space, or more generally any regular quadratic space containing a subspace of codimension ≤ 1 which is hyperbolic, has a trivial even Clifford algebra. However, the converse
does not hold: if k = R and V is positive definite, it is well-known
that V has a trivial even Clifford algebra if, and only if, we have
dim V ≡ −1, 0, 1 mod 8 [Del99, table p. 103].
Lemma 1.5. Let V be a nondegenerate quadratic space of even dimension, e ∈ V an element such that q(e) 6= 0, O(V )e the stabilizer of e in
O(V ), SO(V )e = SO(V ) ∩ O(V )e , and GSpin(V )e the inverse image of
SO(V )e in GSpin(V ) under the map πV .
(i) The orthogonal E of e in V is a regular quadratic subspace,
and the natural map O(V )e → O(E) induces a bijection a :
∼
SO(V )e → SO(E).
(ii) The natural map b : C(E) → C(V ) is injective and induces a
group isomorphism GSpin(E) → GSpin(V )e . Furthermore, we
have the equality πV ◦b = a−1 ◦πE of maps GSpin(E) → SO(V ).
(iii) If V has a trivial even Clifford algebra, then so does E, and the
restriction to b : C(E)0 → C(V )0 of a half-spinor module for V
is a spinor module for E.
Proof. When 2 is invertible in k, then V = ke⊥E and the lemma is
fairly standard. By lack of reference, we provide a proof which works
in characteristic 2 as well. We may and do choose a nondegenerate
hyperplan H ⊂ E. Denote by H ⊥ the orthogonal of H inside V . We
have dim H ⊥ = 2, V = H ⊕ H ⊥ , e ∈ H ⊥ , and E = H ⊕ ke.
The first statement of assertion (i) is immediate from the definitions.
The second one is clear when 2 ∈ k × . If k has characteristic 2, the surjectivity of the natural map O(V )e → O(E) = SO(E) is a consequence
of the Witt theorem (which is due to Arf in characteristic 2 [Bou59, §4
no. 3 Thm. 1]). The kernel of this map is (1 × O(H ⊥ )) ∩ O(V )e , which

12

is easily checked to be the group of order 2 generated by the improper
e, which proves (i).
isometry x 7→ x − β(x,e)
q(e)
The map b of the statement is the one induced by applying the “Clifford
functor” to the inclusion E → V , it is injective by [Bou59, §9 no. 3
Cor. 3]. Let γ ∈ GSpin(E). We have b(γ) ∈ C(V )×
0 and we claim
that b(γ) ∈ GSpin(V ). By surjectivity of πV in the sequence (1.1), we
may choose h ∈ GSpin(V )e such that πV (h) = a−1 ◦ πE (γ). If we can
show that the even element λ := b(γ)−1 h ∈ C(V )×
0 is a scalar, then
−1
(ii) follows at once. The relation πV (h) = a ◦ πE (γ) asserts that
λ commutes with E = H ⊕ ke. The natural isomorphism of graded
∼
algebras C(H) ⊗gr C(H ⊥ ) → C(V ) identifies the supercentralizer of H
in C(V ) to C(H ⊥ ). It follows that λ is identified with an element of
the graded quaternion algebra C(H ⊥ ) which is even and commutes with
some nonzero odd element e ∈ H ⊥ = C(H ⊥ )1 (we have e2 = q(e) 6= 0).
But the commutator of such an element is k[e], and k[e] ∩ C(H ⊥ )0 = k,
which proves λ ∈ k ∗ and assertion (ii).
The map b induces a k-algebra morphism C(E)0 → C(V )0 . If V has
trivial even Clifford algebra, then C(V )0 is isomorphic to a direct product A1 × A2 of two matrix k-algebras Ai , each of them being of rank
2dim V −2 = 2dim E−1 . On the other hand, as E is regular the k-algebra
C(E)0 is central and simple of rank 2dim E−1 as well. It follows that
each projection C(E)0 → Ai is an isomorphism, which proves (iii). 
For later use, we end this paragraph by stating two classical results.
Proposition 1.6. Let I be a finite dimensional k-vector space, V =
H(I) the hyperbolic quadratic space over I and ρI : GL(I) → SO(H(I))
the natural homomorphism defined by (ρI (g)|I , ρI (g)|I ∗ ) = (g, tg −1 ).
Then the exterior superalgebra Λ I is in a natural way a spinor module
for V . Moreover, there is a natural homomorphism
ρeI : GL(I) → GSpin(H(I))

such that πV ◦ ρeI = ρI , νV ◦ ρeI = det, and such that the restriction
of the spin representation Λ I to ρeI is the canonical representation of
GL(I) on Λ I.
Proof. The assertion on the exterior algebra is well-known, and proved
e.g. in [Bou59, §9 no 4] or [Knus91, Ch. IV Prop. 2.1.1]. The other
assertions are proved in [Knus91, Ch. IV §6.6].


Proposition 1.7. Let U, V be regular quadratic spaces over k with
dim U even and dim V odd. If U and V have a trivial even Clifford

13

algebra, then so does the regular quadratic space U⊥W . Moreover, the
restriction to the canonical k-algebra morphism
C(U)0 ⊗ C(V )0 −→ C(U⊥V )0
of a spinor module for U⊥V is isomorphic to the (external) tensor
product of a spinor module for U and of a spinor module for V .
Proof. Set R = C(U)0 , S = C(V )0 and T = C(U⊥V )0 . We have a
natural injective k-algebra homomorphism R ⊗ S → T . Write dim U =
2a and dim V = 2b + 1. The we have R ≃ M2a−1 (k) × M2a−1 (k),
S ≃ M2b (k), and T is central simple of dimension 22a+2b . As T contains
a+b
R ⊗ S, which contains a k-algebra isomorphic to k 2 , we have T ≃
M2a+b (k). We conclude using the following elementary fact: if p and q
are integers, there is a unique GLp+q (k)-conjugacy class (resp. GLpq (k)conjugacy class) of k-algebra morphisms Mp (k) × Mq (k) → Mp+q (k)
(resp. Mp (k) ⊗ Mq (k) → Mpq (k)).

1.8. The Witt index of a representation in O(V ). In this paragraph, we assume that V is a nondegenerate quadratic space over the
field k, that Γ is a group and that ρ : Γ → O(V ) is a group homomorphism.
Definition 1.9. The Witt index of ρ is the maximal dimension of a
subspace I ⊂ V which is both totally isotropic (i.e. q(I) = 0) and stable
by ρ(Γ). When ρ is the inclusion of a subgroup Γ of O(V ) we define
the Witt index of Γ as the one of ρ.
Denote by Irr(X) the set of isomorphism classes of the irreducible constituents of the k[Γ]-module X. As V is isomorphic to V ∗ , the duality
functor induces an action of Z/2Z on Irr(V ) (the “duality” action).
Proposition 1.10. Assume k is algebraically closed of characteristic
6= 2 and that V is semisimple as a k[Γ]-module. Fix Φ ⊂ Irr(V ) a set
of representatives for the duality action. There exists a decomposition
(1.4)

V = (I ⊕ J) ⊥ W

where I, J and W are Γ-stable subspaces of V such that:
(i) W is the orthogonal direct sum of nonisomorphic irreducible
selfdual k[Γ]-modules,
(ii) I and J are totally isotropic, and we have Irr(I) ⊂ Φ.
For any such decomposition, βV induces a Γ-equivariant isomorphism
∼
I → J ∗ and the dimension of I is the Witt index of ρ. Morever, the
isomorphism class of the k[Γ]-module I does not depend on the choice of
the decomposition (1.4), and the isomorphism class of the k[Γ]-module
W depends neither on the choice of (1.4) nor on the choice of Φ.

14
Proof. (This is presumably well-known so we use a small font.) Assume first that there is
a Γ-stable totally isotropic subspace I ⊂ V such that I ⊥ = I (so that dim I = dim2 V is the
Witt index of ρ). We want to show the existence of a decomposition (1.4) satisfying (i)
and (ii). As V is semisimple we may find a Γ-stable subspace F ⊂ V such that V = I ⊕ F .
∼
The perfect pairing βV induces a k[Γ]-linear isomorphism I → F ∗ , x 7→ (y 7→ βV (x, y)).
This shows that for x ∈ F , there exists a unique element u(x) ∈ I such that βV (x, y) =
βV (u(x), y) for all y ∈ F . The map u : F → I is k[Γ]-linear. Observe that for all x ∈ F
we have
1
1
u(x)
) = q(x) − βV (u(x), x) = (βV (x, x) − βV (u(x), x)) = 0.
q(x −
2
2
2
As a consequence, the subspace J = {x − u(x)
, x ∈ F } is totally isotropic, Γ-stable,
2
and satisfies I ⊕ J = V . This shows the existence of a decomposition (1.4) satisfying
(i) and (ii) except perhaps Irr(I) ⊂ Φ. As V is semisimple, we may find a k[Γ]-module
decomposition I = I0 ⊕ I1 (resp. J = J0 ⊕ J1 ) where I0 (resp. J0 ) is the sum of the
irreducible nonselfdual subrepresentations of I (resp. J) whose isomorphism class do not
(resp. do) belong to Φ. By construction, any k[Γ]-linear morphism J0 → I1∗ is zero, so
we have βV (J0 , I1 ) = 0, and βV induces an isomorphism I0∗ → J0 . As a consequence,
I ′ = J0 ⊕ I1 is a Γ-stable totally isotropic subspace of V of dimension dim2 V , hence such
that I ′⊥ = I ′ , which satisfies furthermore Irr(I ′ ) ⊂ Φ. We conclude the proof by applying
to I ′ instead of I the previous argument.
We now claim the existence of a decomposition (1.4) satisfying (i), (ii) and such that
dim I is the Witt index of ρ. Let I be a Γ-stable totally isotropic subspace of V . By the
semisimplicity assumption, we may choose a Γ-stable subspace V ′ ⊂ I ⊥ such that we have
I ⊥ = I ⊕ V ′ . This forces V ′ to be a nondegenerate subspace of V . By construction, we
⊥
have I ⊥ ∩ V ′ = I. The previous paragraphs apply thus to the representation of Γ on
⊥
′⊥
V
and show the existence of a Γ-stable subspace J such that V ′ = I ⊕ J satisfying (ii).
′
Replacing V by V , we may thus assume that V has no nonzero Γ-stable totally isotropic
subspace. We have to show that V is the direct sum of nonisomorphic irreducible selfdual
k[Γ]-modules.
∼

Let U ⊂ V be any Γ-stable subspace. The isomorphism βV : V → V ∗ induces a Γequivariant morphism U → U ∗ whose kernel is U ∩U ⊥ . This later space is totally isotropic
and Γ-stable, hence zero by assumption. It follows that each Γ-stable subspace of V is
nondegenerate, and in particular, selfdual as a k[Γ]-module. Assume that there are Γstable, orthogonal, subspaces U, U ′ ⊂ V such that U and U ′ are isomorphic and irreducible
as k[Γ]-modules. Choose a k[Γ]-linear isomorphism f : U → U ′ . Both βV and βV ◦f define
nondegenerate and Γ-invariant symmetric bilinear forms on U . As U is irreducible and
char k 6= 2, there is a unique such form up to a scalar, so there is λ ∈ k× such that we
have q(u) = λ q(f (u)) for all u ∈ U . As k is algebraically closed, there is µ ∈ k× such that
λ = −µ2 . It follows that {u + µf (u), u ∈ U } ⊂ U ⊕ U ′ ⊂ V is a Γ-stable totally isotropic
subspace, a contradiction. This proves the claim.
We now prove the last assertions regarding an arbitrary decomposition (1.4) satisfying (i)
and (ii). Observe that the k[Γ]-module W is isomorphic to the direct sum of the irreducible
selfdual representations of Γ which occur in V with an odd multiplicity. In particular, its
isomorphism class does not depend on the choice of (1.4) or Φ. As a consequence, the
isomorphism class of I ⊕I ∗ has the same property, and the one of I is uniquely determined
by Φ. In particular, dim I does not depend either on the choice of (1.4). This concludes
the proof, as we have shown the existence of a decomposition (1.4) satisfying (i), (ii) and
such that dim I is the Witt index of ρ.


Corollary 1.11. Under the assumptions of Proposition 1.10, the O(V )conjugacy class of ρ only depends on the isomorphism class of the k[Γ]module V . If furthermore dim V is odd, the same assertion also holds
with O(V ) (= {±1} × SO(V )) replaced by SO(V ).

15
Proof.
For i = 1, 2 let Vi be a nondegenerate quadratic space over k (algebraically
closed of characteristic 6= 2) and ρi : Γ → O(Vi ) a group homomorphism. We assume
that the k[Γ]-modules Vi are semisimple and isomorphic. We have to show that there is
an isometry u : V1 → V2 such that ρ2 (γ) ◦ u = u ◦ ρ1 (γ) for all γ ∈ Γ. By Proposition
1.10, we may assume that we have Vi = H(Ii )⊥Wi , where Ii , Ii∗ and Wi are preserved by
ρi (Γ) and the Wi have Witt index 0. By that proposition, we have W1 ≃ W2 and I1 ≃ I2
∼
as k[Γ]-modules. Any k[Γ]-equivariant isomorphism I1 → I2 induces a Γ-equivariant
∼
isometry H(I1 ) → H(I2 ). We may thus assume Vi = Wi for each i. In this case, the
isotypical components of the Vi are nondegenerate, so we may even assume that each Vi is
irreducible. This implies that the Γ-invariants of (Sym2 Vi )∗ have dimension 1. It follows
∼
that if u is any k[Γ]-linear isomorphism V1 → V2 , there is λ ∈ k× such that λu is an
∼
isometry V1 → V2 .


Remark 1.12. Assume more generally that ρ is a morphism Γ →
GO(V ), with similitude factor µ. Then the considerations of this paragraph extend verbatim to this setting if one replaces the duality functor
X 7→ X ∗ on k[Γ]-modules by the functor X 7→ X ∗ ⊗ µ.

2. Octonion algebras and G2 -subgroups
2.1. The Clifford algebra of an octonion algebra. Let C be an
octonion k-algebra. Recall that this is a nondegenerate 8-dimensional
quadratic space over k equipped with an element e ∈ C and a kbilinear map C × C → C, (x, y) 7→ xy, such that for all x, y ∈ C we
have q(xy) = q(x)q(y) and xe = ex = x [BS59] [SV00, Ch 1].
In order to discuss some features of the spin representations of the
group Spin(C), let us recall the description of the Clifford algebra of
C given in [SV00, §3.6 p. 61] and [KPS94, Prop. 4.4 ]. Consider
the k-supervector space C with C0 = C1 = C (so that dim C = 8|8).
If x ∈ C, denote by ℓ(x) the odd endomorphism of C sending (a, b)
to (xb, xa), where x 7→ x := x − βC (x, e)e is the canonical involutive
automorphism of C [BS59]. Then we have ℓ(x) ◦ ℓ(x) = q(x) Id, so the
k-linear map ℓ : C → End(C) extends to a k-superalgebra morphism
(2.1)

ℓC : C(C) → End(C).

This is an isomorphism as the left-hand side is central simple and both
k-algebras have the same dimension.
Scholium 2.2. If C is an octonion k-algebra then ℓC is an isomorphism
of Z/2Z-graded k-algebras. In particular, C has a trivial even Clifford
algebra, and C (resp. each copy of C in it) is in a natural way a spinor
module (resp. half-spinor modules) for C.
View C as a nondegenerate quadratic space for the quadratic form q⊥q
(orthogonal sum). Let v, w ∈ C be two nonisotropic elements and

16

consider their product γv,w := v ⊗ w ∈ GSpin(C). We have for all
a, b ∈ C the formula
(2.2)

ℓC (γv,w )(a, b) = (v(wa), v(wb)).

In particular, ℓC (γv,w ) is a similitude of C of factor q(v)q(w) = νC (γv,w ).
Recall that the Cartan-Dieudonné theorem [Die98, Prop. 8 & Prop.
14] asserts that the nonisotropic elements of C generate Γ(C), which
implies that the elements of the form γv,w generate GSpin(C).
Scholium 2.3. For i = 0, 1, the space Ci = C viewed as a half-spinor
module for C defines a morphism ρC;i : GSpin(C) → GSO(C) with
similitude factor νC .
Define a group homomorphism
τC : GSpin(C) → SO(C) × GSO(C) × GSO(C)
by the formula τC (γ) = (πC (γ), ρC;0 (γ), νC (γ)−1 ρC;1 (γ)) (note the scalar
factor νC (γ)−1 in the last component). Following [SV00], we say that
a triple (t1 , t2 , t3 ) ∈ SO(C) × GSO(C) × GSO(C) is related if we have
t1 (xy) = t2 (x)t3 (y)

∀x, y ∈ C.

As is shown in [SV00, Thm. 3.2.1 (i) & (iii)], the subset GRT(C)
of related triples is a subgroup of SO(C) × GSO(C) × GSO(C). The
following proposition is a modest variant of [SV00, Prop. 3.6.3].
Proposition 2.4. Let C be an octonion k-algebra. The morphism
∼
τC induces an isomorphism GSpin(C) → GRT(C). It restricts to an
isomorphism between Spin(C) and the subgroup of all related triples in
SO(C)3 .
Proof. The kernel of τC is trivial as ker ℓC = 0. By [SV00, Thm. 3.2.1]
assertion (iii) and formula (2.2), we have τC (γv,w ) ∈ GRT(C), hence
ImτC ⊂ GRT(C). The same theorem shows that the first projection
pr1 : GRT(C) → SO(C), (t1 , t2 , t3 ) 7→ t1 , is surjective, and that ker pr1
is the subgroup of elements of the form (1, mλ , mλ−1 ) where λ ∈ k ×
and mλ : x 7→ λx. But this kernel is exactly τC (k × ) and the map
pr1 ◦ τC = πC is surjective. This proves Im τC = GRT(C) and the last
assertion follows.

2.5. The automorphism group of an octonion algebra. Let C be
an octonion k-algebra. We denote by G2 (C) the automorphism group
of the octonion k-algebra C. By [SV00, Cor. 2.2.5], G2 (C) ⊂ O(C) is
actually a subgroup of SO(C). We shall denote by
iC : G2 (C) −→ SO(C)

17

this inclusion. Consider the “diagonal” group homomorphism ιC :
G2 (C) → SO(C) × SO(C) sending an automorphism φ of C to (a, b) 7→
(φ(a), φ(b)) (an even k-linear automorphism of C). The isomorphism
×
(2.1) allows to define a map eiC := ℓ−1
C ◦ ιC : G2 (C) → C(C)0 .
Proposition 2.6. The map eiC is a group homomorphism G2 (C) →
Spin(C) such that πC ◦ eiC = iC .

Proof. Observe that for x ∈ C and φ ∈ G2 (C), we have the relation
ιC (φ)ℓC (x)ιC (φ)−1 = ℓC (φ(x)). It follows that eiC (φ) := ℓ−1
C ◦ ιC (φ) is
e
an element of GSpin(C) which satisfies πC (iC (φ)) = iC (φ). We have
νC (eiC (φ)) = 1 as the Chevalley anti-involution of C(C) corresponds via
ℓC to the adjonction on End(C ⊕ C) with respect to βC⊕C by [KPS94,
Prop. 4.4].

The subspace P ⊂ C of pure octonions is defined as the orthogonal of
the unit element e for the bilinear form βC . As q(e) = 1 6= 0, we are
in the context of Lemma 1.5. In particular, P is a regular quadratic
subspace of C of dimension 7 and we have natural isomorphisms a :
∼
∼
SO(C)e → SO(P ) and b : GSpin(P ) → GSpin(C)e satisfying πC ◦ b =
a−1 ◦ πP . As G2 (C) preserves e by definition, we get natural injective
morphisms
jC := a ◦ iC : G2 (C) −→ SO(P ) and ejC = b−1 ◦eiC : G2 (C) −→ Spin(P )

satisfying πP ◦ ejC = jC . By Lemma 1.5 (iii), a half-spinor module for
C restricts via b to a spinor module for P , and we shall denote by
ρC := ρC;0 ◦ b : GSpin(P ) −→ GSO(C)

the (canonical) associated spin representation of GSpin(P ).
Proposition 2.7. Let C be an octonion algebra over k, P ⊂ C the 7dimensional quadratic space of pure octonions, ejC : G2 (C) −→ Spin(P )
be the canonical morphism, and ρC : GSpin(P ) −→ GSO(C) the canonical spin representation of GSpin(P ). Then:
(a) ρC ◦ ejC coincides with the canonical morphism iC : G2 (C) →
SO(C);
(b) the action of GSpin(P ) on the set Q = {v ∈ C, q(v) 6= 0},
defined by (γ, v) 7→ ρC (γ)v, is transitive;

(c) the stabilizer of the unit element e ∈ Q in GSpin(P ) is iC (G2 (C)),
and the stabilizer of ke ⊂ C in GSpin(P ) is k × × iC (G2 (C)).
Proof. Assertion (a) is obvious from the definitions. To show (b),
observe first that the action of the statement is well-defined as we
have ρC (GSpin(P )) ⊂ GSO(C). In [SV00, Lemma 3.4.2], the authors

18

show that for any v ∈ C such that q(v) 6= 0, there is a related triple
(t1 , t2 , t3 ) ∈ GRT(C) such that t1 ∈ SO(C)e and t2 (e) = v. This is
exactly assertion (b), by Proposition 2.4. Moreover, they also show in
Proposition 3.4.1 loc. cit. that for an element (t1 , t2 , t3 ) in GRT(C)
such that t1 ∈ SO(C)e , we have t2 (e) ⊂ ke if, and only if, we have
t1 ∈ G2 (C). It follows that the stabilizer of e ∈ Q in GSpin(P ) is
included in k × · ejC (G2 (C)). But this stabilizer contains ejC (G2 (C)) by
(a), and intersects k × trivially by construction, which proves (c). 
Example 2.8. Assume k = R and C is the Euclidean (Cayley-Graves’)
octonion R-algebra. Then Spin(P ) is isomorphic to the compact Lie
group Spin(7), the map GSpin(P ) → Spin(P ) is surjective, and SO(C)
is isomorphic to SO(8). The spin representation Spin(P ) → SO(C)
defines a group homomorphism Spin(7) → SO(8). The proposition
asserts that Spin(P ) acts transitively on the Euclidean unit sphere S
(≃ S7 ) of C, and the stabilizers of this action form a conjugacy class
of compact connected subgroups of Spin(P ) of type G2 . See [Ada96,
Thm. 5.5] for another proof of this classical result. Let us add that any
compact connected subgroup H ⊂ Spin(P ) which is of type G2 fixes
a point in S (hence belongs to the aforementioned conjugacy class).
Indeed, there is up to isomorphism a unique nontrivial irreducible complex representations of H of dimension ≤ 8, which is the 7-dimensional
representation defined by πP on P ⊗C (and thus defined over R), so the
natural representation of H on C contains the trivial representation.
In the next paragraph, we prove more a general result along those lines,
which applies to an arbitrary field k.
2.9. G2 -subgroups of SO(P ) and Spin(P ) with dim P = 7.
Definition 2.10. Let P be a regular quadratic space of dimension 7
over a field k and let Γ be a subgroup of SO(P ) (resp. Spin(P )). We
say that Γ is a G2 -subgroup if there exists an octonion k-algebra C and
an isometric embedding of P ֒→ C onto the space of pure octonions of
C, such that we have Γ = jC (G2 (C)) (resp. Γ = ejC (G2 (C))).
Note that there may be no such subgroup in general, i.e. no octonion kalgebra with pure subspace isometric to P . They do exists, for instance,
if P is the orthogonal of an element of norm 1 in H(k 4 ) (hence if k is
algebraically closed), as H(k 4 ) may be endowed with a structure of
split octonion k-algebra. In other words, SO7 (k) and Spin7 (k) have
G2 -subgroups.

Proposition 2.11. Let P be a regular quadratic space of dimension 7
over k, the set of G2 -subgroups of SO(P ) (resp. Spin(P )) form a single
SO(P )-conjugacy class (resp. GSpin(P )-conjugacy class).

19

Proof. For i = 1, 2, consider an octonion k-algebra Ci , with neutral
∼
element ei , and an isometry µi : P → e⊥
i . We show first that Ci are
isomorphic as octonion k-algebras. By [BS59, Assertion (2.3)], it is
enough to show that they are isometric as quadratic spaces. This is
obviously true if char k 6= 2 as we have Ci ≃ P ⊥h1i. If char k = 2, and
if H is a nondegenerate hyperplane of P , then Ci is isometric to the
orthogonal sum of H and of a 2-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k which represents 1. We conclude from the triviality of the
Arf invariant of Ci , which in turn follows from the isomorphism (2.1).
Unravelling the definitions, the SO(P ) case of the statement is now
obvious. In the Spin(P ) case, it remains to show the following fact: let
α ∈ SO(P ) and C(α) be the associated even automorphism of C(P )
defined by functoriality of the Clifford algebra construction, then C(α)
is an inner automorphism defined by some element in GSpin(P ). But
this follows from the Skolem-Noether theorem as: C(P )0 is a matrix
k-algebra (Scholium 2.2), C(α) acts trivially on the center Z of C(P )
(as α belongs to SO(P )), and the k-algebra C(P ) is generated by C(P )0
and Z.

Proposition 2.12. Let P be a regular quadratic space of rank 7 over
an algebraically closed field k, and let Γ ⊂ SO(P ) (resp. Γ ⊂ Spin(P ))
be a subgroup. The following properties are equivalent:
(i) Γ is a G2 -subgroup,
(ii) Γ is a closed connected subgroup, which is a simple linear algebraic group of type G2 .
Proof.
If C is an octonion k-algebra, its automorphism group G2 (C) has a unique
structure of linear algebraic group such that the morphism iC : G2 (C) → SO(C) is a closed
immersion. By [SV00, Thm. 2.3.5], it is connected, simple, of type G2 and the morphism
jC : G2 (C) → SO(P ) is a closed immersion as well. The morphism ejC : G2 (C) → Spin(P )
defined above, which is a morphism of algebraic groups, satisfies πP ◦ ejC = jC , hence is a
closed immersion as well. This proves (i) ⇒ (ii).
Before proving (ii) ⇒ (i) let us recall some properties of the (finite dimensional, algebraic) linear representations of reductive groups over a field k of arbitrary characteristic,
following [Hum81, Ch. XI] and [Hum06, Chap. 2 & 3] (see also [Jan03]). Let G be a
semisimple algebraic group over k. If λ is a dominant weight of G, the category of linear
representations of G equipped with an extremal vector of weight λ has an initial object
denoted V (λ) and called the Weyl module of λ. The Weyl-module V (λ) has a unique
irreducible quotient L(λ), and any irreducible representation of G is isomorphic to a V (λ)
for a unique dominant weight λ. If k has characteristic 0, we have V (λ) = L(λ), but not
in general. Nevertheless, the dimension of V (λ) is independent of the characteristic of k,
and given by the classical “Weyl dimension formula”.
The following lemma is well-known in characteristic 0, by lack of a reference we provide a
proof in arbitrary characteristic.

20
Lemma 2.13. Let k be an algebraically closed field and G a connected linear algebraic
group over k of which is simple of type G2 . Let ω1 (resp. ω2 ) be the fundamental weight
of G which is a short (resp. long) root. Let V be an irreducible, nontrivial, linear representation of G of dimension ≤ 11. Then we have:
(i) (char k 6= 2, 3) dim V = 7 and V ≃ V (ω1 ) = L(ω1 ),
(ii) (char k = 3) dim V = 7 and we have either V ≃ V (ω1 ) = L(ω1 ) or V ≃ L(ω2 ),
and in the latter case G → GL(V ) is not a closed immersion.
(iii) (char k = 2) dim V = 6 and V ≃ L(ω1 ).
Moreover there is up to a scalar a unique quadratic form on the 7-dimensional vector space
V (ω1 ) which is preserved by G and such that the resulting quadratic space over k is regular.

Proof. Denote by α1 (resp. α2 ) the simple short (resp. long) root of G and by W its
Weyl group. We have hωi , α∨
j i = δi,j , ω1 = 2α1 + α2 and ω2 = 3α1 + 2α2 . Let X be the
set of nonzero
dominant
weights
µ of G such that |W · µ| < |W | = 12. Observe that we
`
have X = i=1,2 Z>0 ωi and |W · µ| = 6 for each µ ∈ X. If µ is a weight of V , then so is
w · µ for all w ∈ W ; as a consequence, if λ denotes the dominant weight of G such that
V ≃ V (λ), then the dominant weights of V are in {λ, 0}. If k has characteristic zero, then
as a general fact, a dominant weight µ occurs in V (λ) if, and only if, µ ≺ λ, i.e. λ − µ is
a sum of positive roots. As 0 ≺ ω1 ≺ ω2 , this implies λ = ω1 . We have dim V (ω1 ) = 7.
Assume from now on that k has prime characteristic p. The analysis above and Steinberg
tensor product theorem show that λ is p-restricted (as dim V (λ) < 62 = 36): we have
hλ, α∨ i < p for each simple root α. But then [Jan03, Chap. 2, Prop. 2.11] shows
that λ − nα is a weight of V (λ) for each simple root α and each integer n such that
0 ≤ n ≤ hλ, α∨ i. The relations 2ω1 = ω2 + α1 and 2ω2 = 3ω1 + α2 implies thus λ = ωi
with i = 1, 2. By [Spr68, Cor. 4.3 & Table 1], we have V (ωi ) = L(ωi ) if p > 3. As
dim V (ω2 ) = 12 (in fact, V (ω2 ) is the adjoint representation of G) this excludes the case
i = 2 if char p > 3, hence prove assertion (i).
If p = 3, the same reference shows L(ω1 ) = V (ω1 ), dim L(ω2 ) = 7, that V (ω2 ) is an
extension of L(ω2 ) by L(ω1 ), and that L(ω2 ) is isomorphic to the restriction of L(ω1 ) via
the inseparable isogeny G → G. If p = 2, then V (ω2 ) (which is the adjoint representation
of G) is actually irreducible, hence we must have V ≃ L(ω1 ). This shows (ii) and (iii).
We now prove the last assertion. View G as a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ), with P regular of
dimension 7 over k. We have P ≃ V (ω1 ) by [SV00, §2.3]; these authors prove in particular
that P is irreducible, except in characteristic 2 in which case the only invariant subspace
is the kernel of βP : see Thm. 2.3.3 loc. cit. The last statement follows in a standard way
from this irreducibility property if char k 6= 2.
Assume char k = 2, set P = V (λ1 ), and let q1 , q2 : P → k be two G-invariant quadratic
forms on P which both gives the vector space P a structure of regular quadratic space,
say P1 and P2 . Then the unique G-invariant line L in P must be ker βP1 = kerβP2 .
Replacing q2 by some scalar multiple if necessary we may assume that q1 and q2 coincide
on this line. Then q1 − q2 factors through a G-invariant quadratic form on P/L. As P/L
is an irreducible G-module, the kernel of βP1 − βP2 is either L or P . Assume it is L.
Then P/L is a nondegenerate quadratic space for q1 − q2 . As G is simply connected, we
thus have an injective algebraic group morphism G → Spin(P/L) ≃ Spin6 (k). But the
halfspinor modules of H(k3 ) have dimension 4 < 6, hence are trivial as G-modules by (iii),
a contradiction. It follows that βP1 = βP2 , i.e. q1 − q2 is a Frobenius semilinear form.
As P has no G-invariant subspace of dimension 6, and as k is perfect, this must be the 0
form, and we are done.


21
We now prove (ii) ⇒ (i) of Proposition 2.12. Let G be a simple algebraic group of type
G2 . Let ρ : G → SO(P ) be algebraic group homomorphism that is furthermore a closed
immersion. If we can prove that the representation P of G is isomorphic to V (ω1 ), then
the last assertion of Lemma 2.13 shows that ρ is unique up to conjugation, hence that
ρ(G) is a G2 -subgroup by Proposition 2.11. By Lemma 2.13 (i) and (ii), we are done if
char k 6= 2. If char k = 2, then Lemma 2.13 (iii) shows that ω1 is a highest weight of P ,
hence we have a nonzero morphism f : V (ω1 ) → P . If f is not an isomorphism, then P
has a subrepresentation P ′ isomorphic to L(ω1 ), and P = P ′ ⊥ ker βP . The space P ′ is
thus nondegenerate, but this is absurd as by last paragraph of the proof of Lemma 2.13,
there is no nontrivial algebraic group homomorphism G → SO6 (k).
Assume now that G is a closed subgroup of Spin(P ). Consider the central isogeny πP :
Spin(P ) → SO(P ). Then G′ = πP (G) is a G2 -subgroup by the previous paragraph. We
have seen that the morphism πP : Spin(P ) → SO(P ) admits a section j over such a
subgroup G′ , so that we have a direct product πP−1 (G′ ) = µ2 (k) × j(G′ ). But we have an
inclusion G ⊂ πP−1 (G′ ), and the projection of G on the finite µ2 (k) factor is necessarily
trivial as G is simple, so we have G ⊂ j(G′ ) and then G = j(G′ ).


2.14. Polynomials of type G2 .
Definition 2.15. Let k be a field and P (t) ∈ k[t]. We say that the
polynomial P is of type G2 if there are elements x, y in an algebraic
closure of k such that
P (t) = (t − 1)(t − x)(t − y)(t − xy)(t − x−1 )(t − y −1)(t − x−1 y −1).
In particular, P is a monic polynomial and t7 P (1/t) = −P (t).
Proposition 2.16. Let P be a regular quadratic space of dimension 7
over k and γ ∈ SO(P ). If γ belongs to a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ), then
the characteristic polynomial of γ is of type G2 . The converse holds if
k is algebraically closed and γ is semisimple.
Proof. We may assume that k is algebraically closed and, by Jordan
decomposition, that γ is semisimple. In this case, we have recalled
in the proof of Proposition 2.12 that the linear representation P of a
G2 -subgroup G of SO(P ) is isomorphic to the Weyl module V (ω1 ). In
particular, its weights are 0 and the six short roots of G, which are
±α1 , ±(α2 + α1 ), ±(α2 + 2α1 ) in the notations of the proof loc. cit,
which shows the first assertion. The last assertion is then an easy consequence of the fact that the conjugacy class of γ in SO(P ) is uniquely
determined by det(t − γ) (a simple special case of Corollary 1.11). 
Remark 2.17. Let P ∈ k[t] be a monic polynomial such that t7 P (1/t) =
−P (t). There is a unique monic polynomial Q ∈ k[t] of degree 3 such
that t−3 P (t) = (t − 1)Q(t + t−1 ). Write Q = t3 − at2 + bt − c with
a, b, c ∈ k (some simple universal integral polynomials in the coefficients of P ). It is not difficult to check, e.g. using the equivalence

22

between (i) and (iii) in Lemma 3.2 below, that P is of type G2 if, and
only if, we have the relation a2 = 2b + c + 4.
3. Proof of Theorems A & B
The following lemma is well-known (at least in characteristic 0).
Lemma 3.1. Let k be an algebraically closed field, V a regular quadratic space of odd dimension 2r + 1 over k, (W, ρ) a spin representation of GSpin(V ) and πV : GSpin(V ) → SO(V ) the canonical map.
For any element γ ∈ GSpin(V ), there are elements x0 , x1 , . . . , xr ∈ k ×
such that:
Q
Q
(i) det(t − ρ(γ)) = (ǫi )∈{−1,1}r (t − x0 ri=1 xǫi i ),
Q
(ii) det(t − πV (γ)) = (t − 1) ri=1 (t − x2i )(t − x−2
i ),
(iii) νV (γ) = x20 .

Proof.
Both GSpin(V ) and SO(V ) are connected linear algebraic
k-groups in a natural way [SV00, p. 40], and both πV and ρ are kgroup homomorphisms. By considering a Jordan decomposition of γ,
we may assume that γ is semisimple, in which case so is πV (γ). We
may thus assume that V = H(I)⊥ke and that πV (γ) preserves I, I ∗
and fixes e. Choose x1 , . . . , xr ∈ k × whose squares are the eigenvalues
of πV (γ) on I, then det(t − πV (γ)) is as in assertion (ii). The last exact
sequence of §1.2 shows that we may write γ = ρH(I);ke (γ ′ × 1) with
γ ′ ∈ GSpin(H(I)), and Proposition 1.7 implies that det(t − ρ(γ)) is the
characteristic polynomial of γ ′ in a spinor module for H(I). Proposition
1.6 shows that there is a unique element λ ∈ k × such that we have
γ ′ = λ · ρeI (πH(I) (γ ′ )) and det(t − ρ(γ)) = det(t − λ πV (γ) | Λ I). This
concludes the proof with x0 = λx1 · · · xr .

Polynomials of type G2 have been introduced in Definition 2.15.

Lemma 3.2. Let k be a field, V a regular quadratic space of dimension 7 with trivial even Clifford algebra, (W, ρ) a spin representation of GSpin(V ), πV : GSpin(V ) → SO(V ) the natural map, and
γ ∈ GSpin(V ). The following properties are equivalent:
(i) the characteristic polynomial of πV (γ) is of type G2 ,
(ii) ρ(γ) has an eigenvalue whose square is νV (γ),
(iii) νV (γ) is an eigenvalue of ρ(γ 2 ),
(iv) det(t − νV (γ)−1 ρ(γ 2 )) = (t − 1) det(t − πV (γ 2 )).
Moreover, if ρ(γ) ∈ GL(W ) has an eigenvalue λ such that λ2 = νV (γ),
then we have det(t − λ−1 ρ(γ)) = (t − 1) det(t − πV (γ)).

23

Proof. Note that the equivalence (ii) ⇔ (iii) and the implication (iv)
⇒ (iii) are obvious. Let K be an algebraic closure of k. By Lemma
3.1 applied to γ viewed as an element of GSpin(V ⊗k K), we may fix
x0 , x1 , x2 , x3 in K × as in that lemma.
Assume assertion (i) of Lemma 3.2 holds. Up to replacing some of
the xi , with i ≥ 1, by x−1
if necessary, we may assume that we have
i
2
2 2
x3 = x2 x1 . In particular, if we set ǫ = x1 x2 x−1
3 , then ǫ = ±1 and ǫx0 is
an eigenvalue of ρ(γ), hence assertion (ii) above holds.
Conversely, assume that ǫ ∈ {±1} and that ǫx0 is an eigenvalue of ρ(γ).
Again, up to replacing some of the xi , with i ≥ 1, by x−1
if necessary,
i
we may assume that we have x1 x2 x−1
=
ǫ.
In
particular,
we have
3
2
2 2
x3 = x2 x1 and assertion (i) holds. This shows (ii) ⇒ (i). Moreover,
−1
2 2
2
the relation ǫx1 x2 x−1
3 = 1 implies ǫx1 x2 x3 = x1 x2 , ǫx1 x2 x3 = x1 and
−1 −1
ǫx1 x2 x3 = x22 , hence the equality
det(t − x−1
0 ǫρ(γ)) = (t − 1) det(t − πV (γ)),
holds, which proves the last statement. This statement applied to γ 2
shows in turn (iii) ⇒ (iv), which concludes the proof.


Theorem 3.3. Let V be a regular quadratic space of dimension 7 over
k with trivial even Clifford algebra and (W, ρ) be a spin representation
of Spin(V ). Let Γ ⊂ Spin(V ) be a subgroup. Assume that:
(i) W is semisimple as a k[Γ]-module,
(ii) for each γ ∈ Γ, the element ρ(γ) has the eigenvalue 1,
then there is an element w ∈ W − {0} such that ρ(γ)w = w for all
γ ∈ W.

Proof. Consider E1 = W and E2 = V ⊕ k as k-linear representations
of Γ. Assumption (ii) and the last assertion of Lemma 3.1 show that for
each γ ∈ Γ, we have det(t−γ | E1 ) = det(t−γ | E2 ). The Brauer-Nesbitt
theorem7 implies thus that E1 and E2 have isomorphic semisimplification. The theorem follows as E1 is semisimple by assumption, and E2
contains the trivial representation.

7The

Brauer-Nesbitt theorem is the following statement [Bou12, §20, no 6, Thm.
2 & Cor. 1]. Let k be a field, Γ a group, and Ei a finite dimensional, semisimple,
k-linear representation of Γ for i = 1, 2. Assume we have det(t − γ | E1 ) = det(t −
γ | E2 ) for each γ ∈ Γ. Then E1 is isomorphic to E2 .

24

Theorem 3.4. Let C be an octonion k-algebra, P ⊂ C the quadratic
space of pure octonions of C, Q ⊂ C the subset of element v ∈ C such
that q(v) 6= 0, and ejC : G2 (C) → Spin(P ) the canonical morphism.
Recall that the quadratic space C itself may be endowed with a canonical
structure of a spinor module for P and denote by ρC : GSpin(P ) →
GSO(C) the associated spin representation.
Let Γ ⊂ Spin(P ) be a subgroup such that ρC (Γ) acts in a semisimple
way on the k-vector space C. The following assertions are equivalent:
(a) for each γ ∈ Γ, there is g ∈ GSpin(P ) such that gγg −1 ∈
ejC (G2 (C)),

(b) for each γ ∈ Γ, there is s ∈ Q such that ρC (γ)s = s,

(c) for each γ ∈ Γ, the element ρC (γ) ∈ GL(C) has the eigenvalue
1,

(d) there is an element g ∈ GSpin(P ) such that g Γ g −1 ⊂ ejC (G2 (C)),
(e) there is an element s ∈ Q such that ρC (γ)s = s for all γ ∈ Γ.

Proof. The equivalences (a) ⇔ (b) and (d) ⇔ (e) follow from Proposition 2.7, and the implications (e) ⇒ (b) ⇒ (c) are obvious. Assume
that assertion (c) holds. The previous theorem ensures that the trivial representation of Γ occurs in the semisimple spinor module C. To
conclude the proof it suffices to show that for any group G and any
nondegenerate quadratic space U, if we have a group homomorphism
G → O(U) whose underlying k-linear representation U is semisimple
and contains the trivial representation, then there exists a G-invariant
vector in U which is nonisotropic. But as U is semisimple, we have
U ≃ U G ⊕ W , where −G denotes G-invariants and W is some Gstable subspace of V . As the trivial representation is selfdual and W
is semisimple, we have (W ∗ )G = W G = 0. It follows that U G is a nondegenerate subspace of U. We conclude as any nonzero nondegenerate
quadratic space obviously contains some nonisotropic vector.

Given the definition of G2 -subgroups in §2.9, we get the following:
Corollary 3.5. Let P be a regular quadratic space of dimension 7 over
a field k such that Spin(P ) possesses G2 -subgroups. Let Γ ⊂ Spin(P )
be a subgroup acting in a semisimple way on a spinor module W for
P . The following assertions are equivalent:
(i) each element of Γ belongs to some G2 -subgroup of Spin(P ),
(ii) each element of Γ has the eigenvalue 1 in W ,
(iii) there is a G2 -subgroup of Spin(P ) containing Γ.

25

Corollary 3.6. Let k be a perfect field of characteristic 2 and P a
regular quadratic space of dimension 7 over k such that SO(P ) possesses
G2 -subgroups. Let Γ ⊂ SO(P ) whose inverse image in Spin(P ) acts in
a semisimple way on a spinor module for P . The following assertions
are equivalent:
(i) each element of Γ belongs to some G2 -subgroup of SO(P ),
(ii) for each γ ∈ Γ, then det(t − πP (γ)) is of type G2 ,
(iii) there is a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ) containing Γ.
Proof. The map πP : Spin(P ) → SO(P ) is surjective by the exact
sequence (1.2). Moreover, an element γ of Spin(P ) possesses the eigenvalue 1 = ±1 in a spinor module for P if, and only if, det(t−πP (γ)) is of
type G2 , by Lemma 3.2. The corollary follows thus from Corollary 3.5
applied to πP−1 (Γ).

Corollary 3.7. Let k be an algebraically closed field, P be a regular
quadratic space over k, and Γ ⊂ SO(P ) a subgroup whose inverse image
in Spin(P ) acts in a semisimple way on a spinor module for P . Assume
that:
(i) the characteristic polynomial of each element of Γ is of type G2 ,
(ii) Γ is a Zariski closed and connected subgroup of SO(P ).
Then there is a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ) containing Γ.
Proof. Let G denote the connected component of the identity of the
inverse image of Γ in Spin(P ). This is a connected linear algebraic
subgroup of Spin(P ) such that πP (G) = Γ, as Γ is irreducible as a
variety. It is enough to show that G is contained in a G2 -subgroup
of Spin(P ). By Lemma 3.2, for each element g ∈ G, the element g 2
has the eigenvalue 1, acting on a spinor module W for P . But as G is
connected, any semisimple element of G is a square, as tori are divisible
as groups. As G has a Zariski-dense subset consisting of semisimple
elements, it follows that det(1 − g|W ) = 0 for all g ∈ G. We conclude
by Corollary 3.5.

In the following corollary, we denote by −1 ∈ Spin(E) the generator of
the natural central subgroup µ2 (k).
Corollary 3.8. Let k be an algebraically closed field, P be a regular
quadratic space over k, and Γ ⊂ SO(P ) a subgroup whose inverse image
e in Spin(P ) acts in a semisimple way on a spinor module W for P .
Γ
Then Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ) if, and only if, there
e → k × which occurs in the restriction
is a group homomorphism β : Γ
e and satisfies β 2 = 1.
of W to Γ

26

Proof. Under the assumption on k, there exists G2 -subgroups and
we have πP (Spin(P )) = SO(P ). We already explained in the last paragraph of the proof of Proposition 2.12 that the inverse image in Spin(P )
of a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ) has the form µ2 (k) × H where H is a G2 subgroup of Spin(P ). Note that the generator −1 of µ2 (k) acts by −id
on W . If Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(P ), the existence of
the character β as in the statement follows e.g. from Proposition 2.7.
e
Conversely, if there is a character β as in the statement, and if Γ1 ⊂ Γ
e = µ2 (k) × Γ1 and Corollary 3.5
denotes the kernel of β, then we have Γ
1
applied to Γ concludes the proof.

Remark 3.9. Let k = R as in Example 2.8. Then any subgroup
Γ ⊂ Spin(7) acts in a semisimple way on the Euclidean space C (see
e.g. the proof of Proposition 4.16 (i) below). Corollary 3.5 thus asserts
that if an arbitrary subgroup Γ ⊂ Spin(7) has the property that each
element γ ∈ Γ fixes a point of the unit sphere S7 (or equivalently,
belongs to some G2 -subgroup of Spin(7)), then Γ itself has a fixed
point in this sphere (or equivalently, is included in some G2 -subgroup
of Spin(7)). Moreover, if Γ′ ⊂ SO(7) is a compact connected subgroup,
and if the characteristic polynomials of the elements of Γ′ are all of type
G2 , then Corollary 3.7 shows that Γ′ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of
SO(7).
4. Proof of Theorem D
4.1. Basic identities and the irreducible case. Let k be a field and
Γ a group. We shall denote by Rk (Γ) the Grothendieck ring of finite
dimensional k-linear representations of Γ. If X is a finite dimensional
k-linear representation of Γ, we denote by [X] its class in Rk (Γ). The
Adams endomorphism ψ 2 of the additive group of Rk (Γ) is defined by
ψ 2 [X] = [X ⊗ X] − 2[Λ2 X] = [Sym2 X] − [Λ2 X] for all X as above. We
denote by 1 the trivial representation, as well as its class in Rk (Γ).
Lemma 4.2. Let E be a 7-dimensional regular quadratic space over a
field k, with trivial even Clifford algebra, and let W a spin representation of GSpin(E). The representation W ⊗ W ⊗ νE−1 of GSpin(E)
factors via πE through a representation of SO(E) and we have
[(Sym2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ] = [Λ3 E] + 1

and

[(Λ2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ] = [Λ2 (1 ⊕ E)]

in Rk (SO(E)), as well as the following relation in Rk (GSpin(E)):
ψ 2 [W ] ⊗ νE−1 − ψ 2 (1 + [E]) = [Λ3 E] − [E] − [Sym2 E].
If furthermore char k 6= 2 then we have k[GSpin(E)]-module isomorphisms (Sym2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ≃ 1 ⊕ Λ3 E and (Λ2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ≃ Λ2 (1 ⊕ E).

27

Proof. The second identity is a consequence of the first two ones and
of the natural isomorphisms Λ2 (E ⊕ k) ≃ Λ2 E ⊕ E and Sym2 (E ⊕ k) ≃
Sym2 E ⊕ E. To check the first two displayed equalities, it is enough to
check that the characteristic polynomial of any element of GSpin(E)
is the same on both representations in the two cases, by the BrauerNesbitt theorem. We omit the details, but this follows at once from the
formulas given in Lemma 3.1 (see Remark 4.3 for another argument).
To prove the last assertion, we may and do assume that k is algebraically closed. Assume char k 6= 2. It is well-known that the k[SO(E)]modules Λi E are then irreducible for 0 ≤ i ≤ 3 (see e.g. the tables
in [Lub01]). Recall from §2.1 that W may be given a structure of
a nondegenerate quadratic space over k such that GSpin(E) acts by
orthogonal similitudes of factor νE . In particular, we have an isomorphism W ≃ W ∗ ⊗ νE , and both representations (Sym2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 and
(Λ2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 of are selfdual (for the first one it also uses 2 ∈ k ∗ ). As
Λi E is irreducible and selfdual for 0 ≤ i ≤ 3, the (proven) first two
displayed equalities of the statement imply (Sym2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ≃ 1 ⊕ Λ3 E
and (Λ2 W ) ⊗ νE−1 ≃ E ⊕ Λ2 E.

Remark 4.3. Let E be a regular quadratic space of odd dimension
with trivial even Clifford algebra, and W a spinor module for E. Then
GSpin(E) acts by conjugation on C(E)0 ≃ End W . This action factors through its quotient SO(E) and is induced by the obvious action of the latter on C(E) (defined by functoriality of the Clifford
construction). This action preserves the canonical filtration of C(E)
whose associated graded k-algebra is the exterior algebra Λ E. In
particular, P
we obtain a more conceptual explanation of the identity
[End W ] = 0≤2i<dim E [Λ2i E] in Rk (SO(E)).
Proposition 4.4. Let E be a 7-dimensional regular quadratic space
over a field k, K an algebraic closure of k, and (W, ρ) a spin representation of GSpin(E ⊗k K). Let Γ ⊂ SO(E) be a subgroup and set
e := π −1 (Γ) ⊂ GSpin(E). The following properties are equivalent:
Γ
E
(i) for all γ ∈ Γ, the polynomial det(t − γ | E) is of type G2 ,

e ρ(γ) has an eigenvalue whose square is ν(γ),
(ii) for all γ ∈ Γ,

e
(iii) the equality ψ 2 [W ] ⊗ νE−1 = 1 + ψ 2 [E ⊗k K] holds in RK (Γ),
(iv) the equality [Λ3 E] = [E] + [Sym2 E] holds in Rk (Γ).

In particular, if Λ3 E is semisimple as a representation of Γ, and if
these properties hold, then E admits a nonzero, Γ-invariant, alternating
trilinear form.

28

Proof. The equivalences (i) ⇔ (ii) ⇔ (iii) are exactly the equivalences
(i) ⇔ (ii) ⇔ (iv) of Lemma 3.2 (plus the Brauer-Nesbitt theorem).
The equivalence between (iii) and (iv) follows from Lemma 4.2. The
last assertion comes from the fact that (Sym2 E)∗ contains the nonzero
Γ-invariant βE and from the relations in Rk (Γ) :
[(Sym2 E)∗ ] = [Sym2 E ∗ ] = [Sym2 E].

Theorem 4.5. Let E be a 7-dimensional regular quadratic space over
an algebraically closed field k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup. Assume
that the representation E of Γ is irreducible, with Λ3 E and Sym2 E
semisimple. If the characteristic polynomial of each element of Γ is of
type G2 then there is a unique G2 -subgroup of SO(E) containing Γ.
Proof. Assume first that E is an arbitrary 7-dimensional vector space
over k. The group GL(E) naturally acts on Λ3 E; if f ∈ Λ3 E, we set
Hf = {g ∈ SL(E), g · f = f }, which is a closed subgroup of SL(E).
By [CH88, Cor 2.3], if Hf acts irreducibly on E then, as an algebraic
group, Hf is simple of type G2 . It follows from Lemma 2.13 that in this
case, k has characteristic 6= 2, E is isomorphic to the representation
V (ω1 ) of Hf , and there is a structure of regular quadratic space on E
preserved by Hf .
Let now E and Γ be as in the statement. By Proposition 4.4, there
is a nonzero Γ-invariant element f ∈ Λ3 E. In particular, Hf ⊃ Γ
acts irreducibly on E, hence the discussion above applies. We have
thus char k 6= 2 and there is a nondegenerate quadratic form on E
preserved by Hf . Such a form is preserved by Γ, which acts irreducibly
on E, hence this form must be proportional to the quadratic form of
E. In other words, we have Hf ⊂ SO(E) and Hf is a G2-subgroup of
SO(E) by Proposition 2.12.
If H ⊂ SO(E) is a G2 -subgroup containing Γ, then we have H = Hf ′ for
some nonzero f ′ ∈ Λ3 E since H is conjugate to Hf . It is thus enough
to show that the form f chosen above is unique up to a scalar. Under
the assumptions we have Λ3 E ≃ E ⊕ Sym2 E as k[Γ]-modules by
Proposition 4.4. But as E is irreducible and char k 6= 2, the subspace
of Γ-invariants is trivial in E and one dimensional in Sym2 E.

4.6. Some (counter-)examples: O±
2 (k) and GL2 (Z/3Z). As we
shall see, the irreducibility assumption in Theorem 4.5 is actually necessary. We introduce now two important examples of subgroups Γ of
SO(E) (with dim E = 7) such that each element of Γ has a characteristic polynomial of type G2 , but which will turn out not to be included
in any G2 -subgroup of SO(E).

29

The group O±
2 (k)
Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 6= 2. Consider
the similitude group GO2 (k) of the quadratic space P := H(k) which
is hyperbolic of dimension 2 over k. Denote by µ : GO2 (k) → k ×
the similitude factor (so ker µ = O2 (k)) and set ǫ = det : GO2 (k) →
k × . The character ǫµ−1 has order 2 and its kernel is the subgroup
GSO2 (k) ⊂ GO2 (k) of proper similitudes, which is also the stabilizer
of each of the two isotropic lines in P . Fix such a line and denote
by χ : GSO2 (k) → k × the character defined by the action on this
line; then GSO2 (k) acts by µχ−1 on the other line and the morphism
χ × µ : GSO2 (k) → k × × k × is an isomorphism. We set
2
2
2
O±
2 (k) = {g ∈ GO2 (k), µ (g) = 1} = ker µ = ker ǫ .

The orthogonal group O2 (k) is an index 2 subgroup of O±
2 (k), and as
−1 is a square in k we have an exact sequence
1 −→ µ2 (k)

λ7→(λ,λ idP )

−→

µ4 (k) × O2 (k) −→ O±
2 (k) −→ 1

(with µn (k) = {λ ∈ k × , λn = 1}). The three characters µ, ǫ, µǫ are
±
distinct of order 2 when restricted to O±
2 (k) and, as a k[O2 (k)]-module,
the space P is irreducible and satisfies P ∗ ≃ P ⊗ ǫ ≃ P ⊗ µ.
Proposition 4.7. Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic
6= 2 and E a nondegenerate quadratic space of dimension 7 over k.
There is a unique conjugacy class of injective group homomorphisms
ρ : O±
2 (k) → SO(E)
∗
such that the k[O±
2 (k)]-module E is isomorphic to P ⊕ P ⊕ ǫ ⊕ µ ⊕ ǫµ,
where P , µ and ǫ are defined as above. For such a ρ, and any γ ∈
O±
2 (k), then det(t − ρ(γ)) is of type G2 .

Proof. The existence of such a morphism ρ : O±
2 (k) → SO(F ) with
3
3
F = H(P
)⊥k
and
k
endowed
with
the
standard
quadratic form
P 2
2
2
(xi ) 7→
i xi , is immediate from the equalities ǫ = µ = 1. The
existence part of the first assertion follows as we have F ≃ E since k is
algebraically closed, as well as the uniqueness part (up to conjugation)
by Corollary 1.11. It remains to show that for any γ ∈ O±
2 (k) then
±
det(t − ρ(γ)) is of type G2 . Set H = O2 (k) ∩ GSO2 (k) = ker ǫµ and
choose χ : H → k ∗ as in the discussion above. We have an isomorphism
E ≃ χ ⊕ µχ−1 ⊕ χ−1 ⊕ µ−1 χ ⊕ µ ⊕ µ ⊕ 1
of k[H]-modules, which shows that det(t − ρ(γ)) is of type G2 for all
γ ∈ H (recall µ2 = 1). Let γ ∈ GO2 (k) − GSO2 (k), i.e. µ(γ) 6=
ǫ(γ). A simple computation shows that we have γ 2 = µ(γ)idP and

30

det(t − γ) = t2 − µ(γ). In particular, if we have γ ∈ O±
2 (k), then the
element s := µ(γ) is ±1, ǫ(γ) = −s, and we have
det(t − ρ(γ)) = (t2 − s)2 (t − s)(t + s)(t + 1) = (t2 ± 1)2 (t + 1)2 (t − 1)
which is easily seen to be of type G2 .



A consequence of our main result (Theorem 4.18) will be that if ρ is
as in the statement of the proposition above, then ρ(O±
2 (k)) is not
contained in any G2 -subgroup of SO(E). We shall now give another
argument for this fact.
Lemma 4.8. Let ρ be as in Proposition 4.7. There is a unique conjugacy class of subgroups Γ ⊂ O±
2 (k) such that Γ ≃ Z/4Z × Z/2Z and
such that the k[Γ]-module E is the direct sum of all nontrivial characters of Γ. These subgroups are exactly the centralizers of the order 2
elements s ∈ O±
2 (k) such that µ(s) = 1 and ǫ(s) = −1.
Indeed, this follows from an inspection of the centralizers of the order
2 elements of O±
2 (k) that we leave as an exercise to the reader.
Proposition 4.9. Let Γ be a subgroup of O±
2 (k) isomorphic to Z/4Z ×
Z/2Z and as in Lemma 4.8. Then ρ(Γ) (hence a fortiori ρ(O±
2 (k))) is
not contained in any G2 -subgroup of SO(E).
Proof.
(see Proposition 4.22 for a rather different proof) Let H
be a G2 -subgroup of SO(E) and s ∈ H of order 2 (and semisimple as char k 6= 2). Then the centralizer C of s in H is isomorphic to SO(H(k 2 )) and we have a decomposition E = E4 ⊥ E3 where
E4 = ker(s + id) gives rise to the natural representation representation
of C of dimension 4 (we omit the details here). In particular, we have
det E4 = 1 as k[C]-module. On the other hand, assume that we have
′
′
s = ρ(s′ ) with s′ ∈ O±
2 (k) such that µ(s ) = 1 and ǫ(s ) = −1, and that
Γ is the centralizer of s′ . As s′ is not a square in O±
2 (k), the 4 characters
χ : Γ → k × such that χ(s′ ) = −1 are of the form ci c′ , 0 ≤ i ≤ 3, where
c has order 4, c′ has order 2, and c(s′ ) = 1 = −c′ (s′ ). In particular,
their product is c2 6= 1, a contradiction.

The group O±
2 (k) will appear in practice using the following lemma.
Lemma 4.10. Let Γ be a group, k an algebraically closed field with
char k 6= 2, Q an irreducible k[Γ]-module of dimension 2, and c : Γ →
k × a character with c2 = 1 occurring in Sym2 Q. Then there is a unique
O2 (k)-conjugacy class of morphisms Γ → O±
2 (k) whose similitude factor is c and such that the k[Γ]-module H(k) is isomorphic to Q.

31

Proof. As char k 6= 2, we have natural isomorphisms Homk (Q∗ , Q) ≃
Q ⊗ Q ≃ Sym2 Q ⊕ det Q; moreover, these k[Γ]-modules are semisimple as so is Q, by [Ser96]. By assumption, there is thus a nonzero
k[Γ]-linear map Sym2 Q → c. Such a symmetric bilinear form on Q
is necessarily nondegenerate, as Q is simple. It gives Q a structure of
nondegenerate quadratic space, necessarily isomorphic to H(k) as k is
algebraically closed. This proves the existence part of the lemma. As∼
sume there are two k[Γ]-linear isomorphisms ui : Q → H(k), i = 1, 2,
such that Γ acts as similitude of factor c on the nondegenerate quadratic form q ◦ ui . By the first line of this proof, the Γ-invariants in
Homk (Sym2 Q, c) have dimension 1, so those two forms are propor×
tional, i.e. u1 ◦ u−1
2 ∈ GO2 (k). We conclude as GO2 (k) = k · O2 (k).

Example 4.11. Consider the dihedral group D8 of order 8. Denote
by E the set of characters D8 → k × ; we have |E| = 4. There is a
unique η0 ∈ E whose kernel is the unique subgroup of D8 of order
4. We claim that there are exactly 3 conjugacy classes of morphisms
r : D 8 → O±
2 (k), distinguished by the character µ ◦ r, which can be
any element of E − {η0 }. Indeed, up to isomorphism, there is a unique
faithful 2-dimensional k[D8 ]-module J. It is irreducible and satisfies
det J = η0 . In particular, J isLselfdual and we have J ≃ J ⊗ η for all
η ∈ E, so we have Sym2 J ≃ η∈E−{η0 } η and Lemma 4.10 proves the
claim. Note however that the morphisms ρ ◦ r : D8 → SO(E), when r
varies as above, are all conjugate under SO(E) by Corollary 1.11.
The group GL2 (Z/3Z)
The natural action of GL2 (Z/3Z) on the set of lines in Z/3Z × Z/3Z,
numbered in an arbitrary way, defines a surjective morphism
GL2 (Z/3Z) → S4
with kernel (Z/3Z)× , which realizes GL2 (Z/3Z) as a central extension
of S4 by Z/2Z. This allows to view any S4 -module as a GL2 (Z/3Z)module by inflation.
Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 6= 2, 3, so that
|GL2 (Z/3Z)| ∈ k × . Up to isomorphism, the irreducible k[S4 ]-modules
are of the form 1, c, H, V and V ⊗ c, where c is the signature, H is a
2-dimensional representation inflated from a surjective homomorphism
S4 → S3 and V is 3-dimensional with determinant 1. Moreover, still
up to isomorphism, the irreducible k[GL2 (Z/3Z)]-modules with nontrivial central character are of the form P , P ∗ and P ⊗ H, where P
has dimension 2. We have det H = det P = c, H ∗ ≃ H ≃ H ⊗ c,
P ∗ ≃ P ⊗ c, V ∗ ≃ V , as well as the following identities:
(4.1) Sym2 H ≃ 1 ⊕ H,

H ⊗ V ≃ V ⊕ V ⊗ c and P ⊗ P ∗ ≃ 1 ⊕ V.

32

Proposition 4.12. Let k be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 6= 2, 3 and E a nondegenerate quadratic space of dimension
7 over k. There is a unique conjugacy class of injective morphisms
ρ : GL2 (Z/3Z) → SO(E) such that the k[GL2 (Z/3Z)]-module E is isomorphic to P ⊕ P ∗ ⊕ c ⊕ H, where P , c and H are as above. For such
a ρ, and any γ ∈ GL2 (Z/3Z), then det(t − ρ(γ)) is of type G2 .
Proof. Recall that c has order 2 and that we have det H = c and
H ∗ ≃ H, so there is a structure of nondegenerate quadratic space
on H such that S4 acts as orthogonal isometries. The existence of
ρ (of Witt index 2) follows, and its uniqueness up to conjugacy is a
consequence of Corollary 1.11. To check the last assertion we check
that assertion (iv) of Proposition 4.4 holds. Using the identities (4.1),
it is tedious but straightforward to check that in Rk (GL2 (Z/3Z)) both
elements [E] + [Sym2 E] and [Λ3 E] are equal to 3 + c + 3 [H] + 2 [P ] +
2 [P ∗] + [V ] + 2 [V ⊗ c] + 2 [H ⊗ P ].

A consequence of our main Theorem 4.18 (or even Proposition 4.20)
will be that there is no G2 -subgroup of SO(E) containing ρ(SL2 (Z/3Z))
(hence ρ(GL2 (Z/3Z)) a fortiori).
Remark 4.13. The group SL2 (Z/3Z), which is the kernel of c, is the
universal central extension of A4 by Z/2Z. Its abelianization is isomorphic to Z/3Z, and if η : SL2 (Z/3Z) −→ k × is an order 3 character,
then we have H|SL2 (Z/3Z) ≃ η ⊕ η −1 . Moreover, the restriction of P
to SL2 (Z/3Z) is, up to isomorphism, the unique two-dimensional irreducible k[SL2 (Z/3Z)]-module of determinant 1.
4.14. Assumption (S) and statement of the main theorem.
Definition 4.15. Let E be a regular quadratic space over an algee the inverse image of
braically closed field k, Γ a subgroup of SO(E), Γ
Γ under πE : Spin(E) → SO(E), and W a spinor module for E. We
shall say that Γ satisfies assumption (S) if E, Sym2 E, Λ3 E and W
e
are semisimple k[Γ]-modules.
This technical assumption (S) (where S stands for “semisimplicity”)
will be quite natural in our proof of Theorem 4.18. It is of course
satisfied if Γ is finite with 2 |Γ| ∈ k ∗ . The next proposition shows that
assumption (S) is not as strong as it may seem.

Proposition 4.16. Let E be a nondegenerate quadratic space of dimension 7 over an algebraically closed field k, and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup.
Assume that at least one of the following assumptions holds:
(i) k = C and the closure of Γ in the Lie group SO(E) is compact,

33

(ii) char k = 0 or char k > 13, and the k[Γ]-module E is semisimple,
(iii) the k[Γ]-modules E ⊗ E and Λ3 E are semisimple.
Then Γ satisfies assumption (S).
Proof. Let G ⊂ GLn (C) be a subgroup with compact closure G. A
standard argument using a Haar measure of G shows that Cn possesses
a Hermitian inner product which is G-invariant, hence G-invariant as
well. In particular the C[G]-module Cn is semisimple. Under assumpe has also a compact closure in the Lie group SO(E), which
tion (i), Γ
proves that Γ satisfies assumption (S).
Observe that the assumption on E implies char k 6= 2. By Lemma 4.2
e
we have k[Γ]-linear
isomorphisms
(4.2)

Λ2 W ≃ E ⊕ Λ2 E

and

Sym2 W ≃ 1 ⊕ Λ3 E.

We also have W ⊗ W ≃ Sym2 W ⊕ Λ2 W and E ⊗ E ≃ Sym2 E ⊕ Λ2 E.
By Serre [Ser96], the semisimplicity of W ⊗ W (resp E ⊗ E) imply
that of W (resp. E). As a consequence, assumption (iii) implies that
Γ satisfies assumption (S).

Assume that the k[Γ]-module E is semisimple. If char k = 0, a classical
result of Chevalley ensures that E ⊗n is semisimple for each integer
n ≥ 0, so assumptions (iii) and (S) are satisfied. Set p = char k and
assume p > 13. As p > 2 dim E − 2, Λ2 E and Sym2 are semisimple by
the main result of Serre [Ser94]. In particular, Λ2 W is also semisimple
by the first isomorphism of (4.2). As 8 = dim W 6≡ 2, 3 mod p, another
result of Serre [Ser96] ensures the semisimplicity of W . But by [Ser94]
again this implies that Sym2 W is semisimple as p > 2 dim W − 2. We
deduce that Λ3 E is semisimple by the second isomorphism of (4.2).
We have proved that assumption (iii) implies assumption (S).

Remark 4.17. Let ρ : O±
2 (k) −→ SO(E) be as in Proposition 4.7 (in
particular, we have char k 6= 2) and let Γ ⊂ O±
2 (k) be a subgroup. We
claim that ρ(Γ) satisfies assumption (S). Indeed, it is enough to show
that ρ(Γ′ ) satisfies (S), where Γ′ is the kernel of µǫ, as |Γ/Γ′| ∈ k × . But
this kernel is a subgroup of GSO2 (k), which acts as a direct sum of two
characters on P . It follows that E ⊗n is a direct sum of characters of Γ′
for all n ≥ 0, and we are done by Proposition 4.16 (iii).
We can now state our main theorem.
Theorem 4.18. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over the algebraically closed field k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup.
Assume that:

34

(i) Γ satisfies assumption (S),
(ii) each element of Γ has a characteristic polynomial of type G2 ,
Then exactly one of the following assertions holds:
(a) there is a G2 -subgroup of SO(E) containing Γ,
(b) char k 6= 3 and we have Γ = ρ(GL2 (Z/3Z)) or Γ = ρ(SL2 (Z/3Z)),
for some ρ : GL2 (Z/3Z) −→ SO(E) as in Proposition 4.12,
(c) we have Γ ≃ Z/2Z × Z/4Z and the k[Γ]-module E is the direct
sum of the nontrivial characters of Γ,
(d) we have Γ = ρ(Γ′ ) where ρ : O±
2 (k) −→ SO(E) is as in Propo±
′
sition 4.7, and Γ ⊂ O2 (k) is a nonabelian subgroup, nonisomorphic to D8 , and such that µ(Γ′ ) = {±1}.
In particular, we are in case (a) if the Witt index of Γ is ≤ 1.
Note that the assumption on E in the statement above implies char k 6=
2 (but when char k = 2 we can apply Corollary 3.6 instead). Observe
also that the “exceptional” cases (b), (c) and (d) do actually occur, as
is shown by Propositions 4.7 & 4.12, Lemma 4.8 and Remarks 4.13 &
4.17.
The end of this section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 4.18. From
now on and until the end of §4, the letter k will always denote an algebraically closed field of characteristic 6= 2. Note that under assumption
(S), Proposition 4.4 shows that assumption (ii) is equivalent to the
existence of a k[Γ]-module isomorphism
(4.3)

Λ3 E ≃ E ⊕ Sym2 E.

We shall study this identity and argue according to the Witt index of Γ,
which is an element in {0, 1, 2, 3}, in the decreasing order. One reason
for that is that if Γ′ ⊂ Γ is a subgroup satisfying (S), then Γ′ satisfies
the assumptions of the theorem and its Witt index is at least the one
of Γ. If Γ satisfies (b) then its Witt index is 3 if Γ ≃ SL2 (Z/3Z) and 2
if Γ ≃ GL2 (Z/3Z). If Γ satisfies (c) its Witt index is 2. If Γ satisfies
(d) then its Witt index is 3 if ǫ(Γ′ ) = 1 and 2 otherwise. This explains
the last assertion.
4.19. The case of Witt index 3.
Proposition 4.20. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup of Witt index 3 satisfying assumptions (i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. Then exactly
one of the following assertions holds:
(i) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E),

35

(ii) there is an order 2 character c and a 2-dimensional irreducible
representation J of Γ such that [E] = 1 + 2c + 2[J] in Rk (Γ),
J ≃ J ⊗ c and det J = 1,
(iii) char k 6= 3, Γ ≃ SL2 (Z/3Z) and [E] = 2[J] + 1 + c + c−1 where
J is “the” 2-dimensional irreducible representation of Γ with
determinant 1 and c±1 are the two order 3 characters of Γ.
Let us first introduce a notation. If X is a k[Γ]-module of finite dimension over k, we shall denote by h(X) the k[Γ]-module X ⊕ X ∗ .
Proof. We may assume that E = H(I)⊥k with dim I = 3 and that Γ
preserves the subspaces I and I ∗ . In particular, we have a k[Γ]-linear
isomorphism
E ≃ h(I) ⊕ 1.
e denote the inverse image of Γ under πE : Spin(E) → SO(E).
Let Γ
e is included in the natural subgroup
By Propositions 1.6 and 1.7, Γ
e → k × denotes the
ρH(I);k (ρeI (GL(I)) × k × ) of GSpin(E), and if α : Γ
×
projection on the k -factor (which is also the center of GSpin(E)),
then we have (νE )|Γe = α2 det I = 1 and W|Γe ≃ α ⊗ Λ I. If we set
c = Λ3 I = det I, we have thus cα2 = 1 and Λ2 I ≃ I ∗ ⊗ c, so we have a
e
k[Γ]-linear
isomorphism
(4.4)

W ≃ h(α ⊕ α ⊗ I).

By assumption (S) and Corollary 3.8, Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup
e → k × occurring in
of SO(E) if, and only if, there is a character β : Γ
2
W|Γe and such that β = 1. Note that W|Γe contains α as well as the
relation α2 = c−1 .
We have Λ2 I ≃ I ∗ ⊗ c, Λ2 I ⊗ I ∗ ≃ Sym2 I ∗ ⊗ c ⊕ I and E ≃ h(I) ⊕ 1. A
straightforward expansion shows that we have k[Γ]-linear isomorphisms
Λ3 E ≃ h(c ⊕ (Sym2 I ∗ ) ⊗ c ⊕ I ⊕ I ∗ ⊗ c ) ⊕ I ⊗ I ∗ ,
Sym2 E ≃ h(Sym2 I ⊕ I) ⊕ I ⊗ I ∗ ⊕ 1.
In particular, I, I ⊗ I ∗ and Sym2 I are semisimple by assumption (S).
Equation (4.3) is thus equivalent to
h(x) ≃ h(c−1 ⊗ x) with x = 1 ⊕ I ⊕ Sym2 I.
In particular, the trivial representation 1 of Γ is a summand of c−1 x,
i.e. the character c is a summand of x.
Case 1 : the k[Γ]-module I is irreducible. It follows that either c = 1
or c is a summand of Sym2 I. This second possibility implies that there
is a nonzero Γ-equivariant map I ∗ → I ⊗ c−1 . As I is irreducible, such
a map is an isomorphism, and taking determinant gives the relation
c−1 = cc−3 = c−2 . So we have c = 1 in all cases, hence α2 = 1 and Γ is
contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E).

36

Case 2 : I ≃ ⊕
of 3 characters χi : Γ → k × , i =L
1, 2, 3. We
Li χi is a sum
−1
2
−1
−1
have x ≃ 1 ⊕ i (χi ⊕ χi ⊕ cχi ), hence also c x ≃ c ⊕ i (c−1 χi ⊕
−1
c−1 χ2i ⊕ χ−1
i ). The relation h(x) ≃ h(c x) is thus equivalent to
M
M
h(1 ⊕
χ2i ) ≃ h(c−1 ⊕
c−1 χ2i ).
i

i

L
As a consequence, 1 is a summand of c−1 ⊕ i c−1 χ2i , and we have
either c = 1 or c = χ2i for some i. We conclude the proof by choosing
accordingly β = α or β = αχi , which occurs in W and satisfies β 2 = 1.
Case 3 : I ≃ χ ⊕ J with J an irreducible representation of Γ of dimension 2. We have det J = cχ−1 . The isomorphism (4.4) shows that Γ is
contained in a G2 -subgroup if, and only if, we have c = 1 or c = χ2 .
Assume c 6= 1 and c 6= χ2 . We have
x ≃ 1 ⊕ χ ⊕ χ2 ⊕ J ⊕ χ ⊗ J ⊕ Sym2 J,
so either c = χ or c is a summand of Sym2 J. In this latter case, we
have J ≃ J ∗ ⊗ c and by taking the determinant cχ−1 = c2 c−1 χ, i.e.
χ2 = 1. If follows that 1 occurs twice in x, hence twice in c−1 x as well.
As Homk[Γ] (J, J ∗ ⊗ c) has dimension 1 by irreducibility of J, it follows
that c = χ in all cases. In particular we have det J = 1 and J ∗ ≃ J.
The equation h(x) ≃ h(c−1 x) simplifies as
(4.5)

h(c2 ) ⊕ (Sym2 J)⊕2 ≃ h(c) ⊗ (1 ⊕ Sym2 J).

Subcase (a). Assume first that either c or c−1 occurs in Sym2 J. As J
is selfdual this implies J ≃ J ⊗ c, hence c has order 2, and we are in
case (ii).
Subcase (b). Assume now that c±1 does not occur in Sym2 J. As c 6= 1,
equation (4.5) shows c = c−2 , i.e. c has order 3, as well as a k[Γ]-linear
isomorphism
(4.6)

Sym2 J ⊕ Sym2 J ≃ (c ⊕ c−1 ) ⊗ Sym2 J.

We will eventually show that we are in case (iii). As c has order 3,
observe that we have 3 ∈ k × .
Let us show that Sym2 J is irreducible. Otherwise, some character µ
of Γ occurs in Sym2 J (which is 3-dimensional and semisimple). The
relation (4.6) shows that each of the three distinct characters µ ci , i ∈
{−1, 0, 1}, occur in Sym2 J, so that we have Sym2 J ≃ µ ⊕ µc ⊕ µc−1 .
As J is selfdual and irreducible of determinant 1, those characters must
all have order 2. But Sym2 J has determinant (det J)3 = 1, so we also
have µ3 = 1: a contradiction. So Sym2 J is irreducible and equation
(4.6) implies
Sym2 J ≃ c ⊗ Sym2 J.

37

Consider the subgroup Γ0 := ker c, which is normal of index 3 in Γ.
Clifford theory8 shows that (Sym2 J)|Γ0 is a direct sum of 3 distinct
characters permuted transitively by the outer action of Γ/Γ0 ≃ Z/3Z
on Γ0 . As Γ0 is a normal subgroup of index 3 in Γ, and as dim J = 2,
note that J|Γ0 is irreducible. It follows that each of the 3 characters in
(Sym2 J)|Γ0 has order 2, the product of all of them being 1. In particular, if Γ1 denotes the kernel of the morphism Γ → GL(Sym2 J),
then we have Γ1 ⊂ Γ0 and Γ/Γ1 is an extension of Γ/Γ0 ≃ Z/3Z by
Γ0 /Γ1 ≃ (Z/2Z)2 such that the associated outer action of Z/3Z on
(Z/2Z)2 permutes transitively the three nonzero elements. It follows
that Γ/Γ1 is isomorphic to A4 (and that its irreducible k-linear representations are, up to isomorphism, Sym2 J, 1, c and c2 ).
As Γ1 acts trivially on Sym2 J, it acts by scalars of square 1 in J, so
|Γ1 | ≤ 2. As A4 has no irreducible k-linear representation of dimension
2, we have Γ1 6= 1, i.e. Γ1 ≃ Z/2Z. As E ≃ J ⊕ J ⊕ 1 ⊕ c ⊕ c−1 ,
one sees that Γ1 is central in Γ. We know from Schur that there is a
unique nontrivial central extension of A4 by Z/2Z, sometimes denoted
f4 , and which is isomorphic to SL2 (Z/3Z); moreover, such a group has
A
exactly three 2-dimensional irreducible k-linear representations, twists
of each others, which are distinguished by their determinant (which
can be any of the three characters of A4 ). As a consequence, we have
Γ ≃ SL2 (Z/3Z) and assertion (iii) holds.

Proof. Let us prove Theorem 4.18 when Γ has Witt index 3. Given
Proposition 4.20 it is enough to show that:
(1) we are in case (ii) of the proposition if, and only if, we are in case
(d) of the statement of Theorem 4.18 with ǫ(Γ′ ) = 1.
(2) we are in case (iii) if, and only if, we are in case (b) of Theorem
4.18 and Γ = ρ(SL2 (Z/3Z)).
Assertion (2) is an immediate consequence of Proposition 4.12 and Remark 4.13. Let us check assertion (1). Observe first that a subgroup
Γ′ ⊂ O ±
2 (k) acts irreducibly on P = H(k) if, and only if, it is nonabelian, as P is a 2-dimensional semisimple k[Γ′ ]-module by Remark
4.17. This shows that if we are in case (d) of the statement of Theorem 4.18 with ǫ(Γ′ ) = 1, then we are in case (ii) of the statement of
Proposition 4.20 (with c playing the role of the character µ). Assume
8By

this we mean the following classical facts. Let k be an algebraically closed
field (of arbitrary characteristic), Γ a group, c : Γ → k × a character of finite order
n, and V a finite dimensional irreducible k-linear representation of Γ such that
V ≃ V ⊗ c. Then n divides dim V (apply det), and if Γ0 denotes the kernel of c
V
then V|Γ0 is a direct sum of n irreducible representations of Γ0 of dimension dim
n ,
whose isomorphism classes are distinct and permuted transitively by the outer
action of Γ/Γ0 ≃ Z/nZ on Γ0 . Moreover, if W denotes any such representation we
have V ≃ IndΓΓ0 W .

38

conversely that we are in case (ii). As c occurs in J ⊗ J ∗ , the natural
morphism Γ → GL(J) is injective. Moreover, we have c 6= 1, det J = 1
and J ≃ J ∗ , hence c occurs in Sym2 J, and we conclude the proof by
Lemma 4.10 and Proposition 4.7. Note that ǫ(Γ′ ) = 1 implies Γ′ 6≃ D8
by the discussion in Example 4.11.


4.21. The case of Witt index 2. We shall now consider the Witt
index 2 case. If Γ is a group and P a finite dimensional k-linear representation of Γ, we shall denote by ad P ⊂ Hom(P, P ) ≃ P ∗ ⊗ P
the subspace of trace 0 endomorphisms. If dim P = 2, we natural isomorphisms P ∗ ⊗ P ≃ 1 ⊕ ad P and Sym2 P ≃ det P ⊗ ad P (recall
char k 6= 2).
Proposition 4.22. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup of Witt index 2 satisfying assumptions (i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. Then exactly
one of the following assertions holds:
(i) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E),
(ii) Γ ≃ Z/4Z × Z/2Z, and as a k[Γ]-module E is isomorphic to the
direct sum of the seven nontrivial characters of Γ,
(iii) there is an irreducible, nonselfdual, 2-dimensional representation P of Γ, as well as two distinct order 2 characters c, ǫ of Γ,
such that det P = c, P ≃ P ⊗ ǫ and [E] = [P ] + [P ∗] + c + ǫ + cǫ
in Rk (Γ).
(iv) char k 6= 3, Γ ≃ GL2 (Z/3Z), and as a k[Γ]-module E is isomorphic to the direct sum of the three 2-dimensional irreducible
representations of Γ and of its nontrivial (order 2) character.
In case (i), we have [E] = [P ] + [P ∗ ] + [ad P ] in Rk (Γ), where P ⊂ E
denotes any 2-dimensional totally isotropic subspace stable by Γ, and
P is irreducible.
Proof. Let P ⊂ E be a Γ-stable, two dimensional totally isotropic
subspace of E. We may assume that we have E = H(P )⊥V and that
Γ preserves P, P ∗ and V , with V of Witt index 0 and dimension 3.
In particular, we have a k[Γ]-linear isomorphism E ≃ h(P ) ⊕ V and
det V = 1. Set c = det P . Equation (4.3) on Γ is easily seen to be
equivalent to
(4.7)

V ⊗ (c ⊕ c−1 ⊕ ad P ) ≃ (1 ⊕ c ⊕ c−1 ) ⊗ ad P ⊕ Sym2 V,

39

e denote the inverse
both sides being semisimple k[Γ]-modules. Let Γ
image of Γ under πE : Spin(E) → SO(E). The sequence (1.3) and
e is contained in the subgroup
Proposition 1.6 show that the group Γ
ρH(P );V (f
ρP (GL(P )) × GSpin(V )) ≃ GL(P ) × GSpin(V )

of GSpin(E) such that νE = det P · νV = 1. Denote by W0 a spinor
module for V . It is well-known that the natural morphism GSpin(V ) →
GL(W0 ) is an (exceptional) isomorphism, and that we have det W0 =
νV and V = ad W0 . If W denotes a spinor module for E, it follows
e
from Propositions 1.6 and 1.7 that we have a k[Γ]-linear
isomorphism
(4.8)

W ≃ ΛP ⊗ W0 ≃ (1 ⊕ c ⊕ P ) ⊗ W0 .

e Indeed, it is
Observe that W0 is irreducible as a representation of Γ.
semisimple, being a direct summand of W . If W0 is a sum of two chare then V = ad W0 contains the trivial character. But then
acters of Γ,
we have a Γ-stable decomposition V = ke⊥V ′ with V ′ of dimension 2
and determinant 1. Such a V ′ is reducible (as it is so as a representation of SO(V ′ ) ≃ k × ), of Witt index 0, hence a sum of two order 2
characters. But these characters are necessarily equal as det V ′ = 1, a
contradiction.
We claim that the following properties are equivalent:
(a) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E).
e → k × with β 2 = 1 such that β
(b) There exists a character β : Γ
is a summand of W|Γe , or which is the same, such that W0∗ is
isomorphic to P ⊗ β,
(c) We have ad P ≃ V as k[Γ]-modules.
Indeed, given Corollary 3.8, the irreducibility of W0 and the isomorphism 4.8, it only remains to explain (c) ⇒ (b). Observe first that if
U is a two-dimensional k-vector space, viewed as a k[GL(U)]-module,
then the determinant on End U equip ad U with a structure of 3dimensional nondegenerate quadratic space over k, and the natural map
ad : GL(U)/k × → SO(ad U) is an isomorphism. Let ρi : Γ → GL(U),
i = 1, 2, be two representations such that ad ρi is semisimple and such
that adρ1 ≃ adρ2 . The last assertion of Proposition 1.10 shows that
there is some g ∈ GL(U) such that ad g adρ1 adg −1 = adρ2 , i.e.
gρ1 (γ)g −1ρ2 (γ)−1 ∈ k ∗ for all γ ∈ Γ. There is thus a unique group
homomorphism Γ → k ∗ such that ρ1 = ρ2 ⊗ χ. If det ρ1 = det ρ2 then
we have χ2 = 1. These observations apply to the representations ρi
defined by P and W0∗ , and prove the equivalence between (b) and (c).
Case 1 : P is reducible. In particular, Γ is not included in any G2 subgroup of SO(E) by the criterion (b) above. By assumption, there
exists a character χ of Γ such that P ≃ χ ⊕ cχ−1 , and we thus have

40

ad P ≃ 1 ⊕ χ2 c−1 ⊕ χ−2 c. Let n(V ) be the number of 1-dimensional
summands of V . An inspection of equation (4.7) shows the inequality
5n(V ) ≥ 9, which implies n(V ) ≥ 2, hence n(V ) = 3 as dim V = 3. So
V is a sum of 3 characters, necessarily distinct of order 2. In particular
we have Sym2 V ≃ 1 ⊕ 1 ⊕ 1 ⊕ V and equation (4.7) takes then the
form:
V ⊗(c⊕c−1 ⊕χ2 c−1 ⊕χ−2 c) ≃ (1⊕c⊕c−1 )⊗(1⊕χ2 c−1 ⊕χ−2 c)⊕1⊕1⊕1.
As V has Witt index 0, the character c±1 (resp. χ2 c−1 , χ−2 ) occurs at
most once in V , and if it does we have c2 = 1 (resp. χ2 c−1 = χ−2 c).
As the trivial representation occurs at least 4 times on the right-hand
side of the equation above, it occurs exactly 4 times on both sides. It
follows that both c and χ2 c−1 occur in V , and that we have χ2 6= 1 and
χ2 6= c. In particular, c and χ2 c−1 are distinct of order 2, χ has order 4,
we have V ≃ c ⊕ χ2 ⊕ χ2 c and E ≃ χ ⊕ χ−1 ⊕ χ c ⊕ χ−1 c ⊕ χ2 ⊕ c ⊕ cχ2 .
We are thus in case (ii) of the proposition.
Case 2 : P is irreducible and ad P is not isomorphic to V . In particular, Γ is not included in any G2 -subgroup of SO(E). We will show that
we are in case (iii) of the proposition if V is a sum of 3 characters, and
in case (iv) otherwise.
As P is irreducible, observe that for any character ǫ of Γ, the dimension
of the space Homk[Γ] (ǫ, P ⊗P ∗ ) ≃ Homk[Γ] (P ⊗ǫ, P ) is at most 1, and if it
is nonzero we have P ≃ P ⊗ ǫ and ǫ2 = 1. In particular, the semisimple
representation ad P does not contain 1. Moreover, both representations V and ad P are semisimple, 3-dimensional, multiplicity free and
with trivial determinant. As a consequence, dim Homk[Γ] (V, ad P ) is
the number of irreducible summands of V which occur in ad P , and we
have dim Homk[Γ] (V, ad P ) ≤ 1 as V and ad P are not isomorphic.
Let us show now that c is a constituent of V . Observe that 1 is a
summand of Sym2 V , hence of the right-hand side of equation (4.7)
as well. Assume that V ⊗ c±1 does not contain 1. Then there is a
nonzero Γ-equivariant morphism V → ad P . By assumption, this is
not an isomorphism, so V is reducible. It follows that Sym2 V contains at least twice the trivial representation, and again by (4.7), that
Homk[Γ] (V, ad P ) has dimension ≥ 2, which is absurd by the previous
paragraph. We conclude that V does contain c±1 , hence c itself. We
may thus write
V ≃ c ⊕ H,
2
and we have c 6= 1, c = 1, det H = c and H ∗ ≃ H ≃ H ⊗ c. Equation (4.7) reduces then to
(4.9)

1 ⊕ H ⊗ (ad P ⊕ 1) ≃ ad P ⊗ (1 ⊕ c) ⊕ Sym2 H.

Subcase (a) : H is reducible. Write H = χ1 ⊕χ2 for some distinct order
2 characters χi , with χ1 χ2 = c. Relation (4.9) becomes (χ1 ⊕ χ2 ) ⊗

41

(ad P ⊕1) ≃ (ad P ⊕1)⊗(1⊕c). It follows that 1 occurs in the left-hand
side, so some χi , call it ǫ, occurs in ad P . We have thus V = c ⊕ ǫ ⊕ ǫc
and P ≃ P ⊗ ǫ. We have the following equivalences: ad P is not
isomorphic to V , c is not a constituent of ad P , P is not isomorphic to
P ⊗ c, P is not selfdual (as we have P ∗ ≃ P ⊗ det P −1 ≃ P ⊗ c). We
are thus in case (iii) of the proposition.
Subcase (b) : H is irreducible. Observe that if H is a summand of ad P ,
then ad P ≃ H ⊕ det H ≃ V , which is not the case by assumption. The
isomorphism H ≃ H ⊗ c, and the relation c2 = 1, show that H is not
a summand of ad P ⊗ c either. Equation (4.9) shows thus that H is a
summand of Sym2 H. This equation is then equivalent to the following
system of isomorphisms:

Sym2 H ≃ H ⊕ 1

(4.10)

H ⊗ ad P ≃ (1 ⊕ c) ⊗ ad P
We claim that ad P is irreducible. Indeed, if we can write ad P =
ǫ ⊕ T for some character ǫ, we have already seen that ǫ has order
2, the relation det T = ǫ, and the isomorphisms T ≃ T ∗ ≃ T ⊗ ǫ.
By irreducibility of H, the second equation of (4.10) shows that T
is irreducible and that H ⊗ ǫ is isomorphic to T or T ⊗ c. But the
isomorphisms T ≃ T ⊗ ǫ and H ≃ H ⊗ c show H ≃ T in both cases,
which implies V ≃ ad P again: a contradiction.

Set Γ0 = ker c, it is an index 2 subgroup of Γ. The relation H ≃ H ⊗ c
and Clifford theory show that there is some character λ : Γ0 → k × such
that H ≃ IndΓΓ0 λ. As det H = c, we have H|Γ0 ≃ λ ⊕ λ−1 and λ2 6= 1.
As H ≃ H ∗ , we also have Sym2 H ≃ 1 ⊕ IndΓΓ0 λ2 . As a consequence,
we have an isomorphism H ≃ IndΓΓ0 λ2 . This forces either λ = λ2 or
λ−1 = λ2 . The first case is absurd as λ 6= 1, so λ is an order 3 character
of Γ0 (and char k 6= 3). The image of Γ → GL(H) is isomorphic to S3 ,
and its kernel is the subgroup Γ1 := ker λ ⊂ Γ0 .
As Γ0 has index 2 in Γ, and dim ad P = 3, the irreducibility of ad P
implies the irreducibility of (ad P )|Γ0 , hence of P|Γ0 as well. As P ∗ ≃
P ⊗c, it follows that we have [E] = 2 [P ]+1+λ+λ−1 in Rk (Γ0 ), with λ
of order 3 and P irreducible: we are thus in subcase (b) of Case 3. of the
proof of Proposition 4.20 (for the triple (Γ0 , P, λ) instead of (Γ, J, c)),
and in particular in case (iii) of the statement of that proposition. It
implies that Γ0 is “the” nontrivial central extension of A4 by Z/2Z, and
that is center Z(Γ0 ) is the subgroup of order 2 in SO(E) acting by ±id
on P ⊕ P ∗ and by id on V . This description shows that Z(Γ0 ) lies in
the center Z(Γ) of Γ, hence Z(Γ0 ) = Z(Γ) (≃ Z/2Z).
Let Γ2 ⊂ Γ be the kernel of the morphism Γ → GL(adP ), we have
Z(Γ) ⊂ Γ2 . The second equation of (4.10) shows H|Γ2 ≃ 1 ⊕ c, the
subspace of Γ2 -invariants in H is thus nonzero. But this subspace is

42

stable by Γ as Γ2 is a normal subgroup, it follows that Γ2 acts trivially
in H, i.e. we have Γ2 ⊂ Γ1 . The group Γ2 acts thus by scalars of determinant 1 in P , so we have Γ2 = Z(Γ). Moreover, the finite group Γ/Γ2
is isomorphic to a subgroup of SO(ad P ); it contains Γ0 /Γ2 , which is
a subgroup of index 2 isomorphic to A4 and acts irreducibly on ad P ,
hence with a trivial centralizer in SO(ad P ). As A4 has an automorphism group isomorphic to S4 , this forces Γ/Γ2 itself to be isomorphic
to S4 . We have thus proved that Γ is a central extension of S4 by
Z/2Z which does not split over A4 .
We know from Schur that, up to isomorphism, there are exactly two
central extensions G of S4 by Z/2Z which do not split over A4 : we
have either G ≃ GL2 (Z/3Z), or G is isomorphic to the group usually
f4 (see e.g. [Ser92, §9.1.3]). In any case, character theory
denoted S
shows that such a G has exactly 3 isomorphism classes of irreducible
k-linear representations which are nontrivial on the center Z/2Z: they
have the form J, J ⊗ c and J ⊗ H where dim J = 2, c is the nontrivial (order 2) character of S4 , and H is the 2-dimensional irreducible
representation of S4 (inflated from a surjective homomorphism S4 →
f4 are distinguished as follows: we
S3 ). The groups GL2 (Z/3Z) and S
have det J = c in the first case (and thus J ∗ ≃ J ⊗ c), and det J = 1
in the second (and then J ∗ ≃ J). As a consequence, we have Γ ≃
GL2 (Z/3Z) and assertion (iv) holds.

Proof. Let us prove Theorem 4.18 when Γ has Witt index 2. An
immediate consequence of Proposition 4.12 is that we are in case (iv)
of Proposition 4.22 if, and only if, we are in case (b) of the statement
of Theorem 4.18 with Γ = ρ(GL2 (Z/3Z)). It only remains to show that
we are in case (iii) of the proposition if, and only if, we are in case (d)
of Theorem 4.18 with ǫ(Γ′ ) = {±1}. But this follows from a similar
argument as the one given in the last paragraph of §4.19, by Example
4.11 and the following lemma. Note that the characters c and ǫ here
play respectively the role of the characters ǫ and ǫµ of subgroups of
O±

2 (k).
Lemma 4.23. Let Γ ⊂ O±
2 (k) be a subgroup on which both µ and ǫ are
nontrivial. Then Γ is isomorphic to D8 if, and only if, the k[Γ]-module
H(k) is both irreducible and selfdual.
Proof. We have already seen in Example 4.11 that if Γ is isomorphic to
D8 then H(k) is both irreducible and selfdual. Assume conversely that
the k[Γ]-module P = H(k) has these two properties. By irreducibility
of P , ǫµ is nontrivial on Γ, and thus ǫ, µ and ǫµ are of order 2, hence
distinct. As P is selfdual we have P ∗ ≃ P ⊗ χ for all χ in {1, ǫ, µ, ǫµ}.

43

In particular Sym2 P is isomorphic to 1 ⊕ µ ⊕ ǫµ, which implies that
|Γ| divides 8. As P is irreducible Γ is nonabelian, so we have |Γ| = 8
and P is the unique 2-dimensional irreducible representation of Γ up to
isomorphism. But if Γ was the “quaternion group” of order 8 we would
have det P = 1. So Γ is isomorphic to D8 , and we are done.

4.24. The case of Witt index 1. We shall now prove that there is
no subgroup Γ of SO(E) of Witt index 1 which satisfies assumptions
(i) and (ii) of Theorem 4.18. We start with a lemma on representations
of Witt index 0.
If V is a finite dimensional k-linear representation of Γ, we shall denote
by V Γ the subspace {v ∈ V | γv = v ∀γ ∈ Γ} of Γ-invariants in V ,
and we set t(V ) = dimk V Γ . If U, V are finite dimensional k-linear
∼
representations of Γ, the natural isomorphism U ⊗ V → Hom(U ∗ , V )
shows the equality
t(U ⊗ V ) = dimk Homk[Γ] (U ∗ , V ),
that we shall freely use below. It implies that if both U and V are
irreducible, then we have t(U ⊗ V ) ≤ 1.
Lemma 4.25. Let V be a nondegenerate quadratic space over k, Γ
a group, ρ : Γ −→ O(V ) a semisimple representation of Witt index
0, r the number of irreducible summands of the k[Γ]-module V and
c : Γ → k × a group homomorphism.
(i) We have t(Λ2 V ) = 0 and t(Sym2 V ) = r.
(ii) We have t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) ≤ r and t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) ≤

dim V
2

.

(iii) If dim V is odd and t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) 6= 0 then we have r ≥ 2.
(iv) If dim V ≤ 5 then we have t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) ≤ 2.
Assume furthermore 4 ≤ dim V ≤ 5 and t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) = 2.
(v) We have c2 = 1 and a k[Γ]-module decomposition
(4.11)

V = U ⊕ U′ ⊕ V ′
with dim U = dim U ′ = 2 and det U = det U ′ = c.

(vi) Assume r < dim V and t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ−1 ) 6= 0 for some character
χ : Γ → k × with χ 6= c. Then we have t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ−1 ) = 1, and
if r = dim V − 2 then we have U ′ ≃ U ⊗ χ in (4.11).
Proof. We may write V = ⊕i∈I Vi where the Vi are irreducible, selfdual
and pairwise distinct, and with r = |I|. For each i in I, the unique
Γ-invariant line of End Vi ≃ Vi ⊗ Vi ≃ Sym2 Vi ⊕ Λ2 Vi lies in Sym2 Vi ,
so we have t(Λ2 Vi ) = 0 and t(Sym2 Vi ) = 1. Moreover, if i ∈ I we have

44

Vi ≃ Vi∗ so t(Vi ⊗ Vj ) = 0 if i 6= j. Choose a total ordering < on I. We
have a k[Γ]-linear isomorphism
!
!
M
M
Λ2 V ≃
Λ 2 Vi ⊕
Vi ⊗ Vj ,
i∈I

i<j

as well as a similar isomorphism with each Λ2 replaced by Sym2 . This
proves assertion (i).
Let c : Γ → k × be a character and consider the sets
I(c) = {i ∈ I | t(Λ2 Vi ⊗ c−1 ) 6= 0}
J(c) = {(i, j) ∈ I × I | i < j, t(Vi ⊗ Vj ⊗ c−1 ) 6= 0}.
Recall that Λ2 Vi injects into Vi ⊗ Vi , and that t(Vi ⊗ Vj ) ≤ 1 for all i, j
by irreducibility of the Vj , so that we also have t(Λ2 Vi ⊗ c−1 ) ≤ 1. In
particular, we have the equality
(4.12)

t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) = |I(c)| + |J(c)|.

We now make a couple of simple observations.
– (O1) if i ∈ I(c) then dim Vi is even, and we have det Vi = c
cdim Vi = 1. In particular, det Vi = c if dim Vi = 2.

dim Vi
2

and

Indeed, if i ∈ I(c) then there is a nonzero alternating pairing on Vi
such that Γ acts by symplectic similitudes of factor c. Such a pairing
is necessarily nondegenerate as Vi is irreducible, so (O1) follows from
general properties of similitude symplectic groups. As a consequence,
if dim V is odd and V is irreducible, then Λ2 V does not contain any
character, which proves assertion (iii).
– (O2) If (i, j) ∈ J(c) then dim Vi = dim Vj and c2 dim Vi = 1.
Indeed, if (i, j) ∈ J(c) then there is an isomorphism Vi ≃ Vj ⊗ c.
– (O3) if i ∈ I(c) then there is no j ∈ I such that (i, j) ∈ J(c) or
(j, i) ∈ J(c) (since Vi ≃ Vi ⊗ c ≃ Vi ⊗ c−1 ).
– (O4) if (i, j) ∈ J(c) then (r, s) ∈ J(c) implies {i, j} ∩ {r, s} = ∅ or
{i, j} = {r, s} (observe that if i, j ∈ I and Vi ≃ Vj ⊗c then Vj ≃ Vi ⊗c).
It follows from those observations that we have the inequalities
P
P
dim V ≥
i∈I(c) dim Vi + 2
(i,j)∈J(c) dim Vi
≥ 2 |I(c)| + 2 |J(c)| = 2 t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ), and

r ≥ |I(c)| + 2 |J(c)| = |J(c)| + t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) ≥ t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ).
This proves assertions (ii). Assertion (iv) is a special case of assertion
(ii).

45

Assume now 4 ≤ dim V ≤ 5 and t(Λ2 V ⊗ c−1 ) = 2. We have 2 =
|I(c)| + |J(c)| by (4.12). There are three cases:
(1) |I(c)| = 2 and |J(c)| = 0. Then (O1) shows dim Vi = 2 for i ∈
I(c), c2 = 1, hence assertion (v) holds with U and U ′ irreducible
of dimension 2 and r = dim V − 2.
(2) |J(c)| = 2 and |I(c)| = 0. Then (O2) and (O4) show dim Vi =
dim Vj = 1 and L
det(Vi ⊕Vj ) = Vi ⊗Vj = c if (i, j) ∈ J(c), c2 = 1,
′
and V = V ⊕ (i,j)∈J(c) (Vi ⊕ Vj ). So assertion (v) holds with
U and U ′ reducible of dimension 2 and r = dim V .

(3) |I(c)| = |J(c)| = 1. Then (O1), (O2) and (O3) show dim Vi = 2
for i ∈ I(c) as well as dim Vi = dim Vj = 1 and det(Vi ⊕Vj ) = c if
(i, j) ∈ J(c). So assertion (v) holds with either U or U ′ reducible
(but not both) and r = dim V − 1.
Let now χ : Γ → k × be a character different from c. We have I(χ) = ∅
by (4.11) and (O1), so t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ−1 ) = |J(χ)|. By (O2) and (O4), we
have |J(χ)| ≤ 2 and if the equality holds then V contains at least 4
distinct characters, i.e r = dim V . If we have r = dim V − 2, then U
and U ′ are irreducible of determinant 6= χ in (4.11). Thus J(χ) 6= ∅ if,
and only if, we have U ≃ U ′ ⊗ χ. This proves assertion (vi).

Proposition 4.26. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k. Then there is no subgroup Γ ⊂ SO(E) of Witt index 1
satisfying assumptions (i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18.
Proof. Let Γ ⊂ SO(E) be of Witt index 1 and satisfying assumptions
(i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. There is a character
χ : Γ → k ∗ , as well as a representation Γ → SO(V ) of dimension 5
and Witt index 0, such that E ≃ χ ⊕ χ−1 ⊕ V . As V is selfdual and
det V = 1, we have Λ3 V ≃ Λ2 V , and one easily checks that equation
(4.3) is equivalent to the following identity
(4.13) Λ2 V ⊗(1⊕χ⊕χ−1 ) ≃ 1⊕χ⊕χ−1 ⊕χ2 ⊕χ−2 ⊕Sym2 V ⊕V ⊗(χ⊕χ−1 ).

Denote by r the number of irreducible constituents of V . By Lemma 4.25
(i) and (iv), we have t(Sym2 V ) = r, t(Λ2 V ) = 0 and t(Λ2 V ⊗χ±1 ) ≤ 2.
As V ⊗ χ and Λ2 V ⊗ χ are semisimple, since so are the representations
occurring in equation (4.13) by (S), and as V is selfdual, we also have
t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) = t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ−1 ) and t(V ⊗ χ) = t(V ⊗ χ−1 ). We obtain
2 t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) = 1 + r + 2 (t(χ) + t(χ2 ) + t(V ⊗ χ)).
We deduce from this identity: t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) > 0, r is odd and 1 + r +
2 t(χ2 ) ≤ 2 t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) ≤ 4. But Lemma 4.25 (iii) shows r ≥ 2. The
only possibility is thus t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) = 2, r = 3 and χ2 6= 1, which
contradicts Lemma 4.25 (v).


46

4.27. The case of Witt index 0. In order to prove Theorem 4.18, it
only remains to prove the following Theorem.
Theorem 4.28. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) a subgroup of Witt index 0 satisfying
assumptions (i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. Then Γ is
contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E).
We shall divide the proof into several parts.
Proposition 4.29. For i = 3, 4, let Vi be a nondegenerate quadratic
space over k of dimension i, set V = V3 ⊥V4 , and let Γ ⊂ SO(V ) be
a subgroup of Witt index 0 such that Γ ⊂ SO(V3 ) × SO(V4 ). Then
Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(V ) if, and only if, there is an
injective k[Γ]-linear morphism V3 → Λ2 V4 .
If the k[Γ]-module V3 has an irreducible summand of dimension ≥ 2
which injects into Λ2 V4 , then these properties are satisfied.
Proof.
Let W , W3 and W4 be spinor modules for V , V3 and V4
respectively, and write W4 = W4+ ⊕ W4− as the direct sum of its two
half-spinor modules W4± . Recall from the sequence (1.3) that we have
a natural homomorphism ρV3 ;V4 : GSpin(V3 ) × GSpin(V4 ) → GSpin(V ),
whose image is the inverse image of SO(V3 ) × SO(V4 ) under the natural
homomorphism πV : GSpin(V ) → SO(V ). We may thus view W , W3
and W4± as k[GSpin(V3 ) × GSpin(V4 )]-modules. As such, there is an
isomorphism
(4.14)

W ≃ W3 ⊗ (W4+ ⊕ W4− )

by Proposition 1.7. As is well-known, the image of the natural injective
homomorphism GSpin(V4 ) → GL(W4+ ) × GL(W4− ) is the subgroup of
elements (g + , g − ) ∈ GL(W4+ ) × GL(W4− ) such that det g + = det g − .
Moreover, as a representation of GSpin(V4 ) we have
(4.15)

det W4± = νV4

and

W4+ ⊗ W4− ≃ V4 ⊗ νV4 .

Besides, as already explained in the first paragraph of the proof of
Proposition 4.22, the natural morphism GSpin(V3 ) → GL(W3 ) is an
isomorphism, and as a representation of GSpin(V3 ) we have
(4.16)

det W3 = νV3

and

ad W3 ≃ V3 .

e = π −1 (Γ) ∩ Spin(E). We may view W, W3 , W4±1 , V, νV , V3 , νV3 ,
Set Γ
V
e and as such we have νV νV = νV = 1.
V4 , νV4 as a representations of Γ,
4
3
We set ν = νV4 |Γe , we thus have det W4± = ν and det W3 = ν −1 .
e
We claim that W , W3 and W4± are semisimple k[Γ]-modules.
We apply
for this the main result of [Ser94] as well as [Ser96, Thm. 2.4], using
char k 6= 2. Indeed, the semisimplicity of V3 and V4 implies that of

47

W3 ⊗ W3 , W3 and W4± by (4.16), (4.15) and [Ser96], which in turn
implies the semisimplicity of W by (4.14) and [Ser94].
e
Let us now check that W3 and W4± are simple k[Γ]-modules.
If W3 is
−1 −1
e → k×
reducible, then we have W3 ≃ χ⊕ν χ for some character χ : Γ
2
−2 −1
as W3 is semisimple. This implies V3 ≃ ad W3 ≃ 1 ⊕ χ ν ⊕ χ ν , a
contradiction as V3 has Witt index 0 as a representation of Γ. Assume
now that W4+ is reducible (the argument for W4− will be similar), and
write W4+ ≃ χ ⊕ χ−1 ν as above. This implies V4 ≃ χν −1 ⊗ W4− ⊕ χ−1 ⊗
W4− . Observe that the dual of χν −1 ⊗ W4− is χ−1 W4− as det W4− =
ν. It follows that V4 has Witt index 2 as a representation of Γ, a
contradiction.
By the same argument as the one given in the proof of Proposition
4.22, page 39, we obtain the equivalences between:
(a) Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(V ),
e → k × with β 2 = 1 such that β
(b) there exists a character β : Γ
is a summand of W|Γe , or which is the same, such that W3∗ is
isomorphic to W4+ ⊗ β or to W4− ⊗ β,
e
(c) we have ad W3 ≃ ad W4+ or ad W3 ≃ ad W4− as k[Γ]-modules.

e
As we have V4 ≃ W4+ ⊗ W4− ⊗ ν −1 , we obtain a natural k[Γ]-linear
2
2
+
−
−
2
2
−2
2
isomorphism Λ V4 ≃ Λ W4 ⊗Sym W4 ⊗ν ⊕Λ W4 ⊗Sym W4+ ⊗ν −2 ,
which also writes as
(4.17)

Λ2 V4 ≃ ad W4− ⊕ ad W4+ .

We are now ready to prove the proposition. Assume that Γ is contained
in a G2 -subgroup of SO(V ). Assertion (c) above, relation (4.16) and
the isomorphism (4.17) show that V3 embeds in Λ2 V4 .
Conversely, assume either that V3 embeds in Λ2 V4 ≃ ad W4+ ⊕ ad W4− ,
or that V3 has an irreducible summand of dimension ≥ 2 which injects
into Λ2 V4 . There exists in both cases a k[Γ]-submodule H of V3 of
dimension ≥ 2 such that H embeds either in ad W4+ or in ad W4− . As
both V3 and ad W4+ are semisimple of dimension 3 and determinant 1,
this implies that V3 is isomorphic either to ad W4+ or to ad W4− , thus
(c) holds.

Corollary 4.30. Let V be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic
space over k and Γ ⊂ SO(V ) a subgroup of Witt index 0 satisfying
assumptions (i) and (ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. Assume
furthermore that the k[Γ]-module V has a summand of dimension 3 (or
4) and determinant 1. Then Γ is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(V ).

48

Proof.
We have a k[Γ]-module decomposition V ≃ V3 ⊕ V4 with
dim Vi = i and det Vi = 1. As the Vi are selfdual of determinant 1 we
easily checks that equation (4.3) simplifies as
1 ⊕ Λ2 V4 ⊗ V3 ≃ V3 ⊕ Sym2 V3 ⊕ Sym2 V4 .
Let ri be the number of irreducible summands of Vi . By Lemma 4.25
(i), we have t(V3 ) = t(Λ2 V3 ) = 0 and
t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ V3 ) = r3 + r4 − 1.
In particular t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ V3 ) > 0, so there is a nonzero k[Γ]-linear morphism V3 → Λ2 V4 . If V3 is irreducible we are done by Proposition
4.29.
Consider a character ǫ : Γ → k ∗ and assume V3 ≃ ǫ ⊕ H with H
irreducible of dimension 2 and determinant ǫ. If H occurs in Λ2 V4
then we are done again by the last assertion of Proposition 4.29. We
may thus assume t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ H) = 0. We have then t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ V3 ) =
t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ ǫ) = 1 + r4 ≥ 2. But thus is a contradiction as by Lemma
4.25 (ii), we have t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ ǫ) ≤ 2, with r4 ≥ 2 if the equality holds.
We may thus assume V3 = ⊕3i=1 ǫi for some distinct characters ǫi . Then:
3
X

t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ ǫi ) = 2 + r4 ≥ 3.

i=1

If each term of the sum on the left is nonzero then V3 embeds in Λ2 V4
so we are done by Proposition 4.29, thus we may assume that one of
them is 0. If one term is ≥ 2 then it is equal to 2 and we have r4 ≥ 2
by Lemma 4.25 (ii), so the two nonzero t(Λ2 V4 ⊗ ǫi ) are equal to 2 and
we have r4 = 2, which contradicts Lemma 4.25 (vi).

Lemma 4.31. Let E be a 7-dimensional nondegenerate quadratic space
over k and Γ ⊂ SO(E) of Witt index 0 satisfying assumptions (i) and
(ii) of the statement of Theorem 4.18. Then the k[Γ]-module E has no
irreducible summand of dimension 5 and at most 1 irreducible summand
of dimension 3 and nontrivial determinant.
Proof. Assume first that we have a Γ-stable decomposition E = P ⊥V
where P has dimension 2 and V is irreducible of dimension 5. The
character c = det P satisfies c2 = 1, and if we set Γ0 = ker c then
we have a natural morphism Γ0 → SO(V ). In particular, there is a
character χ : Γ0 → k × such that P|Γ0 ≃ χ ⊕ χ−1 . As Γ0 has index
≤ 2 in Γ, and as dim V = 5 is odd, observe that V|Γ0 is irreducible. It
follows that Γ0 has Witt index 1 and satisfies assumptions (i) and (ii)
of Theorem 4.18. This impossible by Proposition 4.26.
Assume we have E ≃ ǫ⊕V ⊕V ′ with V, V ′ distinct, irreducible, selfdual,
of dimension 3. Set c = det V and c′ = det V ′ , we assume that c and

49

c′ are nontrivial, so the relation cc′ ǫ = 1 implies c 6= ǫ and c′ 6= ǫ. We
have Λ2 V ≃ V ⊗ c, Λ2 V ′ ≃ V ′ ⊗ c′ , thus
Λ3 E ≃ c ⊕ c′ ⊕ V ⊗ V ′ ⊗ (ǫ ⊕ c ⊕ c′ ) ⊕ V ⊗ c′ ⊕ V ′ ⊗ c.
Let χ ∈ {c, c′ , ǫ} be such that t(V ⊗ V ′ ⊗ χ) 6= 0. Then we have
χ2 = 1, V ≃ V ′ ⊗ χ and t(V ⊗ V ′ ⊗ χ) = 1. Taking determinant shows
c = c′ χ3 = c′ χ, so χ = ǫ. This implies t(Λ3 E) = t(V ⊗ V ′ ⊗ ǫ) ≤ 1. On
the other hand, equation (4.3) and Lemma 4.25 (i) imply t(Λ3 E) =
t(ǫ) + 3, a contradiction.

Lemma 4.32. Theorem 4.28 holds when the k[Γ]-module E contains
at least two characters.
Proof. Assume we have E ≃ ǫ1 ⊕ ǫ2 ⊕ V for some characters ǫi : Γ →
k × . As dim V = 5, V ∗ ≃ V and det V = ǫ1 ǫ2 , we have Λ3 V ≃ Λ2 V ⊗
ǫ1 ǫ2 , hence an isomorphism Λ3 E ≃ ǫ1 ǫ2 ⊗ V ⊕ Λ2 V ⊗ (ǫ1 ǫ2 ⊕ ǫ1 ⊕ ǫ2 ). If
t(ǫ1 ǫ2 ⊗V ) 6= 0, then ǫ1 ǫ2 occurs in V , and ǫ1 ⊕ǫ2 ⊕ǫ1 ǫ2 is a 3-dimensional
summand of E of determinant 1, so we are done by Corollary 4.30. We
may thus assume t(V ⊗ ǫ1 ǫ2 ) = 0, so that we have
t(Λ3 E) = t(Λ2 V ⊗ ǫ1 ) + t(Λ2 V ⊗ ǫ2 ) + t(Λ2 V ⊗ ǫ1 ǫ2 ),
and each term in the sum on the right is ≤ 2 by Lemma 4.25 (iv). On
the other hand we have t(Λ3 E) = t(E) + 2 + r where r is the number
of irreducible summands of V by Equation (4.3) and Lemma 4.25 (i).
In particular, there exists a character χ of Γ such that t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) 6= 0.
This implies r ≥ 2 by Lemma 4.25 (iii), so there even exists a character
χ of Γ such that t(Λ2 V ⊗ χ) = 2. But this implies that det V , that
is ǫ1 ǫ2 , is a summand of V by the same lemma assertion (v) (note
V ′ ≃ det V in the notations loc. cit.), which contradicts t(V ⊗ǫ1 ǫ2 ) = 0.

Lemma 4.33. Theorem 4.28 holds when the k[Γ]-module E contains
at least two irreducible summands of dimension 2.
Proof. Assume we have E ≃ P1 ⊕ P2 ⊕ V where each Pi is irreducible
of dimension 2. Set ci = det Pi . As V is selfdual of dimension 3 and
determinant c1 c2 we easily check the isomorphism
Λ3 E ≃ c1 c2 ⊕P1 ⊗c2 ⊕P2 ⊗c2 ⊕V ⊗(c1 ⊕c2 ⊕P1 ⊗c1 c2 ⊕P2 ⊗c1 c2 ⊕P1 ⊗P2 ).
By Corollary 4.30 we may assume that E has no summand of dimension
3 and determinant 1. In particular, we have c1 c2 6= 1 (consider V ),
t(V ⊗ ci ) = 0 (consider ci ⊕ Pi ) and t(V ⊗ Pi ⊗ c1 c2 ) = 0 otherwise we
have V ≃ Pi ⊗ c1 c2 ⊕ cj with j 6= i, and thus t(V ⊗ cj ) 6= 0. We obtain
t(Λ3 E) = t(V ⊗ P1 ⊗ P2 ).

50

On the other hand we have t(Λ3 E) = t(V ) + 2 + r ≥ 3, where r is the
number of irreducible summands of V . As P1 is irreducible of dimension
2 and dim V ⊗ P2 = 6, we have t(V ⊗ P1 ⊗ P2 ) = dim Homk[Γ] (P1 , V ⊗
P2 ) ≤ 3. It follows that r = 1, i.e. V is irreducible. As dim P1 ⊗ P2 =
4, we thus have 3 ≤ t(V ⊗ P1 ⊗ P2 ) = dim Homk[Γ] (V, P1 ⊗ P2 ) ≤ 1, a
contradiction.

Lemma 4.34. Theorem 4.28 holds when the k[Γ]-module E contains
exactly one irreducible summand of each dimension 1, 2 and 4.
Proof. Assume we have E ≃ ǫ⊕P ⊕V where P and V are irreducible of
respective dimension 2 and 4. Set c = det P . It is an order 2 character
of Γ as SO(P ) acts reducibly on P . By Corollary 4.30 we may assume
cǫ 6= 1. We easily check Λ3 E ≃ cǫ⊕V ⊗(ǫc⊕c⊕P ⊗ǫ)⊕Λ2 V ⊗(ǫ⊕P ).
By a standard argument (from now on) we thus get the equality
(4.18)

t(ǫ) + 3 = t(Λ2 V ⊗ ǫ) + t(Λ2 V ⊗ P ).

The number t(Λ2 V ⊗ P ) is the multiplicity of P as a submodule Λ2 V .
Λ2 V
So we have t(Λ2 V ⊗ P ) ≤ dim
= 3. As t(Λ2 V ) = 0 by Lemma 4.25
dim P
(i), the identity (4.18) implies ǫ 6= 1. The irreducibility of V implies
t(Λ2 V ⊗ ǫ) ≤ 1, so P occurs at least twice in Λ2 V . As det Λ2 V =
(det V )3 = ǫc, and ǫ 6= 1, we cannot have Λ2 V ≃ P ⊕ P ⊕ P . We have
thus Λ2 V ≃ P ⊕ P ⊕ ǫ ⊕ c.
On the other hand the character ǫ is a summand of E, hence of Λ3 E as
well by equation (4.3). As 1 does not occur in Λ2 V , the only possibility
is that ǫ is a summand of Λ2 V ⊗ P . But we have Λ2 V ⊗ P ≃ P ⊗ (P ⊕
P ) ⊕ P ⊗ (ǫ ⊕ c). As a consequence, ǫ occurs in P ⊗ P ≃ c ⊕ Sym2 P ,
hence in Sym2 P . As Sym2 P is semisimple of determinant c3 = c, we
have proved Sym2 P ≃ 1 ⊕ ǫ ⊕ ǫc.
Let Γ0 be the kernel of the natural morphism Γ → O(P ). What we
have just proved about Sym2 P implies that Γ/Γ0 is a (nonabelian)
finite group of order 8 and ǫ(Γ0 ) = 1. Moreover, Γ0 acts trivially on
Λ2 V , hence by scalars of square 1 on V , so |Γ0 | ≤ 2 and |Γ| ≤ 16. This
contradicts the inequality |Γ| ≥ 1 + 1 + (dim P )2 + (dim V )2 = 22. 
Lemma 4.35. Theorem 4.28 holds when the k[Γ]-module E contains
exactly one irreducible summand of each dimension 3 and 4.
Proof.
Assume we have E ≃ V3 ⊕ V4 with each Vi irreducible of
dimension i. Set c = det V3 = det V4 . We have an isomorphism Λ3 E ≃
c ⊕ V4 ⊗ c ⊕ V3 ⊗ V4 ⊗ c ⊕ V3 ⊗ Λ2 V4 and t(Λ3 E) = 2. We thus get
2 = t(c) + t(V3 ⊗ Λ2 V4 ).
2

Λ V4
We have t(V3 ⊗ Λ2 V4 ) ≤ dim
= 2. If c 6= 1 we obtain t(V3 ⊗
dim V3
2
2
Λ V4 ) = 2, hence Λ V4 ≃ V3 ⊕V3 . But this implies det Λ2 V4 = 1, which

51

contradicts det Λ2 V4 = (det V4 )3 = c3 = c. So we have c = det V3 = 1
and we conclude by Corollary 4.30.

Lemma 4.36. Theorem 4.28 holds when the k[Γ]-module E contains
exactly one irreducible summand of each dimension 1 and 6.
Proof. Assume we have E ≃ ǫ ⊕ V with V irreducible of dimension
6. Let us show first that ǫ has order 2. If ǫ = 1 then we have t(E ⊕
Sym2 E) = t(Λ3 E) = 3 and Λ3 E ≃ Λ3 V ⊕ Λ2 V . As t(Λ2 V ) = 0 we
obtain t(Λ3 V ) = 3. As V is selfdual, the k[Γ]-module Λ3 V embeds in
V ⊗ Λ2 V . In particular we have t(V ⊗ Λ2 V ) ≥ 3. This contradicts the
inequality dim Λ2 V = 15 < 3 dim V .
Set Γ0 = ker ǫ. As ǫ has order 2 this is a subgroup of index 2 in Γ
and E|Γ0 still satisfies assumption (i) and (ii) of Theorem 4.18. The
previous paragraph thus shows that V|Γ0 is reducible. By Clifford theory
it is thus a direct sum of two nonisomorphic irreducible 3 dimensional
representations of Γ0 . Those representations are not selfdual by the
last assertion of Lemma 4.31. We have thus V|Γ0 ≃ W ⊕ W ∗ for some
irreducible, nonselfdual, representation W of Γ0 . As a consequence, Γ0
has Witt index 3, and we are in Case 1. of the proof of Proposition
4.20, whose conclusion is det W = 1. We conclude the proof by the
following lemma.

Let I be a finite dimensional k-vector space. Define N(I) as the subgroup of O(H(I)) of elements g such that the couple of subspaces
(g(I), g(I ∗)) is either (I, I ∗ ) or (I ∗ , I). The action of N(I) on the
set with two elements {I, I ∗ } defines a group homomorphism N(I) →
Z/2Z. The map g 7→ g|I identifies the kernel of this morphism with
the group GL(I), and the inverse image of 1 ∈ Z/2Z with the set of
k-linear isomorphisms I → I ∗ . If ϕ is a symmetric isomorphism I → I ∗
and g ∈ GL(I) then ϕg −1 ϕ−1 is the adjoint of g with respect to ϕ and
ϕ has order 2 in N(I). In particular we have N(I) ≃ GL(I) ⋊ Z/2Z.
Set E = H(I)⊥k. The morphism g 7→ g⊥ det g allows to see O(H(I))
as a subgroup of SO(E).
Lemma 4.37. Let I be a vector space of dimension 3 over the algebraically closed field k and E = H(I)⊥k. Let N(I) ⊂ SO(E) be as
above and Γ a subgroup of N(I) such that Γ ∩ GL(I) ⊂ SL(I). Then Γ
is contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(E).
Proof. We have defined above natural inclusions GL(I) ⊂ N(I) ⊂
SO(E). Let H be the inverse image of GL(I) under the surjective
morphism πE : GSpin(E) → SO(E) and let W be a spinor module
for E. Recall from §1.2 and Propositions 1.6 and 1.7 that there is a
∼
natural isomorphism ǫ : k × × GL(I) → H such that the map πE ◦ ǫ :

52

k × × GL(I) → GL(I) coincides with the projection onto the second
factor and such that the restriction of W to H is isomorphic to the
representation α ⊗ Λ I where α : H → k × is the character obtained as
the composition of ǫ−1 and of the first projection k × × GL(I) → k × .
Let G be the inverse image of N(I) under πE and fix a symmetric
isomorphism ϕ : I → I ∗ . Then H has index 2 in G and we may
choose τ ∈ G − H such that the restriction to I ⊂ E of the element
πE (τ ) ∈ N(I) coincides with ϕ. By the observations preceding the
lemma there is a unique map ψ : GL(I) → k × with
τ ǫ(λ, g) τ −1 = ǫ(λψ(g), tg −1)
for all ǫ(λ, g) ∈ H, where tg is the adjoint of g with respect to ϕ. This
implies that ψ is a group homomorphism. Applying νE we obtain the
relation (det · ψ −1 )2 = 1, hence ψ = det as k is algebraically closed.
The k[H]-module isomorphism W ≃ α ⊗ Λ I shows that there are exactly 2 lines in W which are stable by H, let us call P their direct
sum. Then P is stable by G and we have a k[H]-linear isomorphism
P ≃ α ⊕ α det I. The previous paragraph shows that the outer conjugation of G on H exchanges the (distinct) characters α and α det I. As
dim I = 3, recall from §2.1 that W may be equipped with a structure
of nondegenerate quadratic space over k such that GSpin(E) acts on
W as orthogonal similitudes of factor νE . By definition, P is necessarily nondegenerate, and as neither α nor α det I has square 1 on H it
follows that the two stable lines of P are its isotropic lines, and that τ
exchanges them.
e = π −1 (Γ)∩Spin(E)
So far the group Γ did not play any role. Set now Γ
E
0
e
e
e
and Γ = H ∩ Γ. We may and will view α and I as representations of Γ.
e → O(P ), with P e0 ≃ α e ⊕α e det I.
We have a natural morphism ρ : Γ
|Γ
|Γ
|Γ
2
e
But we also have the relation α det I = νE = 1 on Γ, as well as
e0 by assumption. As a consequence, Γ
e0 acts by ±id
det I = 1 on Γ
0
e 6= Γ,
e the previous paragraph shows ρ(Γ)
e ( SO(P ), thus
on P . If Γ
e is a nondegenerate onethe kernel of any orthogonal symmetry in ρ(Γ)
e acts via an order 2 character.
dimensional subspace of P on which Γ
We conclude the proof by Proposition 2.7 (c).

This ends the proof of Theorem 4.28, hence of Theorem 4.18.
5. Proof of Theorem C
The existence, and uniqueness up to conjugacy, of the morphisms denoted by α, β, γ before the statement of Theorem C are consequences
of §4.6 and assertion (b) of the following lemma applied to K = SO(7)
and G = SO(E ⊗ C).

53

Lemma 5.1. Let K be a compact connected Lie group and ι : K ֒→ G
a complexification of K.
(a) If we have x, y ∈ K and g ∈ G with g ι(x) g −1 = ι(y), and if
g = ι(k) s is the polar (i.e. Cartan) decomposition of g with
respect to ι(K), then we have k x k −1 = y.
(b) Let Γ be a compact group and ρ : Γ → G a continuous group homomorphism. Then there exists a continuous group morphism
ρ′ : Γ → K such ι ◦ ρ′ is G-conjugate to ρ, and such a ρ′ is
unique up to K-conjugacy.
Proof.
(see e.g. [Ser00, p.1]) In order to prove (a), we rewrite the hypothesis as
an equality ι(kx) (ι(x)−1 s ι(x)) = ι(yk) s and conclude by the uniqueness of the polar
decomposition. Let us prove (b). The group ρ(Γ) is a compact subgroup of G and a
well-known result of Cartan asserts that the maximal compact subgroups of G are the
conjugate of ι(K). This shows the existence of ρ′ , and its uniqueness up to K-conjugacy
follows from (a).


Applying this lemma again both to the compact group SO(7) and its
G2 -subgroups we conclude that Theorem C of the introduction follows
from the case k = C of Theorem 4.18. 
6. Automorphic and Galois representations
6.1. Let F be a number field, OF its ring of integers, and AF its adèle
ring. For each place v of F we denote by Fv the associated completion
of F and Ov ⊂ Fv its ring of integers.
Let G be a connected linear algebraic group defined and reductive over
OF . We refer to [BJ79] (see also [Cog04, §3] when G = GLn ) for
the notion of cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ). Such a
representation π has, for each place v of F , a local component πv which
is irreducible and well-defined up to isomorphism. When v is a finite
place, πv is a complex smooth representation of G(Fv ). When v is an
Archimedean place, πv is a complex (gv , Kv )-module in the sense of
Harish-Chandra, where Kv is a fixed maximal compact subgroup of
the Lie group G(Fv ) and gv is the Lie algebra of G(Fv ).
Let v be a finite place of F . Recall that a complex, irreducible, smooth
representation ̟ of the locally profinite group G(Fv ) is called unramified if its underlying space has a nonzero vector invariant by the compact open subgroup G(Ov ). According to Satake and Langlands, the
set of isomorphism classes of unramified representations of G(Fv ) is in
canonical bijection with the set of conjugacy classes of semisimple eleb [Lan71, Bor79]. Here, G
b is a dual group for G in the sense
ments in G
of Langlands, namely a reductive (connected) complex linear algebraic
group whose based root datum is equipped with an isomorphism with
the dual based root datum of G. In particular we may and shall take

54

dn = GLn (C). We shall denote by c(̟) ⊂ G
b the semisimple conjuGL
gacy class associated to ̟. The unramified representation ̟ of G(Fv )
is said tempered if c(̟) is the conjugacy class of an element lying in a
b (viewed as a Lie group).
compact subgroup of G

If π is a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ), then πv is
unramified for all but finitely many finite places v of F . Let Ram(π)
denote the (finite) set of places v of F which are either Archimedean, or
such that v is finite and πv is not unramified. If S is a finite set of places
of F containing Ram(π), we say that π is S-tempered if πv is tempered
for all v ∈
/ S. We say that π is tempered if it is S-tempered for some
such S. Conjecturally, “S-tempered” implies “Ram(π)-tempered”.
Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of G(AF ), S a finite
b → GLn (C) a polynoset of places of F containing Ram(π), and ρ : G
mial representation. Following Langlands [Lan71] consider the Euler
product
Y
1
LS (s, π, ρ) =
,
−s
det(1 − qv ρ(c(πv )))
v∈S
/

where qv denotes the cardinality of the residue field of Ov . If π is Stempered, this product is well-defined and absolutely convergent in the
half plane Re s > 1. In general, Langlands has shown that LS (s, π, ρ)
is absolutely convergent for Re s big enough.
Let v be a real place of F , i.e. Fv = R. For any irreducible (gv , Kv )module ̟, the center zv of the enveloping algebra of gv acts by scalars
on ̟. The resulting C-algebra homomorphism zv → C is called the
infinitesimal character of ̟; it may be viewed according to HarishChandra and Langlands as a semisimple conjugacy class c(̟) in the
b [Lan70, Lan71, Bor79]. When G = GLn ,
complex Lie algebra b
g of G
in which case we have b
g = Mn (C), we shall say that ̟ is algebraic if
the eigenvalues of c(̟) are integers, which are then called the weights
of ̟. An algebraic ̟ is regular if its weights are distinct.

6.2. Assume F is totally real and n ≥ 1 is an odd integer. Let π be a
cuspidal automorphic representation of GLn (AF ) such that πv is algebraic regular for each real place v of F . Then there exists a number field
E ⊂ C, called a coefficient field for π, such that for each finite place v of
F the representation πv is defined over E [Clo90, §3.5]. In particular,
if πv is unramified then the characteristic polynomial det(t − c(πv )) belongs to E[t]. Let ℓ be a prime number, λ a place of E above ℓ, and Eλ
an algebraic closure of Eλ . Assume furthermore that π is selfdual, i.e.
isomorphic to its contragredient π ∨ . Then by [HT01, Shi11, CH13] we
know that there exists a continuous semisimple representation
(6.1)

rπ,λ : Gal(F /F ) −→ GLn (Eλ ),

55

unique up to isomorphism, satisfying the following property: for each
finite place v of F which is prime to ℓ, and such that πv is unramified,
the Galois representation of rπ,λ is unramified at v (see e.g. [Ser68,
§2.1]) and the characteristic polynomial of a Frobenius element Frobv
at v satisfies det(t − rπ,λ (Frobv )) = det(t − c(πv )).
6.3. We shall denote by G2 the automorphism group scheme of the
standard split octonion algebra over Z. This is a linear algebraic
group, which is split and semisimple over Z, and of type G2 . Recall that for any algebraically closed field k of characteristic 0, there
is up to isomorphism a unique 7-dimensional irreducible k-linear algebraic representation of G2 (k) (see Lemma 2.13). We shall denote by
ρ : G2 (k) → GL7 (k) such a representation.
Theorem 6.4. Let F be a totally real number field, π a cuspidal automorphic representation of GL7 (AF ) such that πv is algebraic regular
for each real place v of F , and E a coefficient field for π. Assume that
π satisfies the following condition:
(G) For all but finitely many places v of F such that πv is unramified,
then c(πv ) is the conjugacy class of an element in ρ(G2 (C)).
Then for any prime ℓ and any place λ of E above ℓ, there is a morphism
reπ,λ : Gal(F /F ) −→ G2 (Eλ ),

unique up to G2 (Eλ )-conjugacy, such that the representation ρ ◦ reπ,λ is
isomorphic to the representation rπ,λ introduced in (6.1) above.
By the Cebotarev theorem, an equivalent way to state the theorem,
but without any reference to rπ,λ , is as follows.

Corollary 6.5. Let F , π, E, ℓ and λ be as in the statement of Theorem
6.4. Then there exists a continuous semisimple morphism
reπ,λ : Gal(F /F ) −→ G2 (Eλ ),

unique up to G2 (Eλ )-conjugacy, satisfying the following property: for
each finite place v of F which is prime to ℓ, and such that πv is unramified, the morphism reπ,λ is unramified at v and we have det(t −
ρ(e
rπ,λ (Frobv ))) = det(t − c(πv )).
In this statement, the term semisimple means that the neutral component of the Zariski-closure of the image of reπ,λ is reductive. It is
equivalent to ask that for some (resp. any) faithful polynomial representation f of G2 over Eλ the representation f ◦ reπ,λ is semisimple.

Proof. (of Theorem 6.4) Assumption (G) on π implies that for all but
finitely many places v of F such that πv is unramified, the conjugacy

56

class c(πv ) ⊂ GL7 (C) is equal to its inverse c(πv∨ ). As π ∨ is a cuspidal automorphic representation of GL7 (AF ), the strong multiplicity
one theorem of Piatetski-Shapiro, Jacquet and Shalika shows that π is
selfdual, so that the discussion of §6.2 applies to π.
Consider a Galois representation rπ,λ as in (6.1). By the main theorem
of [BC11], there is a structure of non-degenerate quadratic space on
7
the underlying space V = Eλ of rπ,λ such that the image Γ of rπ,λ is
a subgroup of SO(V ). To conclude the existence of a morphism reπ,λ
such that ρ ◦ reπ,λ is isomorphic to rπ,λ it is enough to show that Γ is
contained in a G2 -subgroup of SO(V ) (§2.9).
The semisimplicity of rπ,λ implies that Γ satisfies assumption (i) of Theorem 4.18 (i.e. assumption (S)). The assumption (G) on π, Cebotarev’s
theorem and Remark 2.17 ensure that Γ satisfies as well assumption
(ii) of this theorem. So Theorem 4.18 applies, and it is enough to show
that Γ is not as in case (a), (b), (c) or (d) of its statement. By the
concrete description of these specific cases, observe that it is enough to
show that there is no open subgroup Γ′ of the profinite group Γ such
′
that the subspace of invariants V Γ ⊂ V has dimension ≥ 3 over Eλ .

Let w be a finite place of F dividing ℓ. The restriction to a decomposition group at w of the representation rπ,λ , that we may view as a
representation rw : Gal(Fw /Fw ) → GL7 (Eλ ), is known to be of HodgeTate type [Shi11, CH13]. More precisely, the Hodge-Tate weights of
rw , relative to any field embedding Fw −→ Eλ , are the weights of
the algebraic regular representation πv , for a suitable real place v of
F (depending on the choice of that field embedding). In particular,
those weights are distinct integers and only one of them is zero (note
that if k is weight then so is −k by selfduality of rπ,λ ). As a general fact, the same properties trivially hold for the restriction of rw to
Gal(Fw /L) for any finite extension Fw ⊂ L ⊂ Fw . In particular, if
L is any such extension, the multiplicity of the Hodge-Tate weight 0
for rw |Gal(Fw /L) , relative to any field embedding L → Eλ , is at most
one. But this implies that the dimension of the space of invariants of
V under rw (Gal(Fw /L)) is at most one as well, and we are done.
It only remains to justify the uniqueness assertion. But this is a consequence of a result of Griess [Gri95, Thm. 1] (see also [Lar94, Prop.
2.8]).

Remark 6.6. If rπ,λ is irreducible, which is conjectured to always be
the case but is still an open problem at the moment, we can use in
the proof above Theorem 4.5 instead of Theorem 4.18, whose proof is
much easier. The known compatibilty of rπ,λ with the local Langlands
correspondence shows that this irreducibility assumption is automatically satisfied if, for some finite place v, the representation πv is square

57

integrable (modulo the center). In the special case where πv is the
Steinberg representation for some v, Theorem 6.4 even has a shorter
proof, as already observed by Magaard and Savin in [MS14, §7]. See
also [KLS10] for some quite specific special cases of Theorem 6.4.
In the irreducible case, we can draw slightly further conclusions about
the field of definition of reπ,λ .

Corollary 6.7. Let F , π, E, ℓ and λ be as in the statement of Theorem
6.4. Assume furthermore that rπ,λ is irreducible. Then the conclusion
of Corollary 6.5 holds with G2 (Eλ ) replaced (twice) by G2 (Eλ ).

Proof. Choose reπ,λ as in Theorem 6.4 and denote by C the centralizer of the image of
reπ,λ in G2 (Eλ ). The irreducibility of rπ,λ and Schur’s lemma imply that C is central in
G2 (Eλ ), hence the equality C = {1}. Set k = Eλ , k = Eλ , Γ = Gal(Eλ /Eλ ) and G = G2 .
Then Γ naturally acts on G(k), with fixed points G(k). Let σ ∈ Γ. Observe that we have
det(t − ρ ◦ σ ◦ reπ,λ (g)) = σ(det(t − rπ,λ (g))) = det(t − rπ,λ (g)) = det(t − ρ ◦ reπ,λ (g))

for all g ∈ Gal(F /F ). The uniqueness part of the statement of Theorem 6.4 implies the
existence of an element Pσ ∈ G(k) such that we have σ ◦ reπ,λ = intPσ−1 ◦ reπ,λ (where intg
denotes the inner automorphism x 7→ gxg −1 of G(k)). As C = {1} the element Pσ is
uniquely determined by this relation. This implies that the map σ 7→ Pσ is a 1-cocycle of
Γ acting on G(k); it is continuous for the discrete topology on G(k) as we have Im reπ,λ ⊂
G(K) for some finite extension k ⊂ K ⊂ k by Baire’s theorem. The corresponding
cohomology group classifies the isomorphism classes of octonion k-algebras. But since k is
a nonarchimedean local field, there is a unique such k-algebra up to isomorphism, as any
8-dimensional non-degenerate quadratic space does represent 0 [BS59, §2,§3]. This shows
the existence of P ∈ G(k) with Pσ = P −1 σ(P ) for all σ ∈ Γ, and then that intP ◦ reπ,λ
is fixed under Γ. This shows the existence assertion. The uniqueness follows from the
uniqueness part of the statement of Theorem 6.4 and from C = {1}.


Our next application concerns the local components of a cuspidal automorphic representation π of GL7 (AF ) satisfying assumption (G) of
Theorem 6.4. We refer to [Tat79, §4] for the various notions of Weil
groups, Weil-Deligne groups and representations. Let v be a finite place
of F and WFv ⊂ Gal(Fv /Fv ) the Weil group of Fv . Recall that the local
Langlands correspondence, proved by Harris and Taylor [HT01], may
be viewed as a natural bijection ̟ 7→ L(̟) from the set of isomorphism
classes of irreducible smooth complex representations of GLn (Fv ) and
onto the set of isomorphism classes of continuous semisimple representations WFv × SU(2) → GLn (C).
Corollary 6.8. Let F be a totally real number field and π a cuspidal
automorphic representation of GL7 (AF ) such that πv is algebraic regular for each real place v of F . The following properties are equivalent:
(i) π satisfies property (G) of the statement of Theorem 6.4,
(ii) for any finite place v of F , there exists a continuous semisimple
morphism φv : WFv × SU(2) → G2 (C), unique up to G2 (C)conjugacy, such that ρ ◦ φv is isomorphic to L(πv ).

58

Proof. The nontrivial assertion is (i) ⇒ (ii). Assume (i) holds. Let v
be a finite place of F , E a coefficient field of π, ℓ a prime such that v
is not above ℓ, λ a place of E above ℓ, set k = Eλ . Let reπ,λ be given
by Theorem 6.4.

Recall that if G is a connected reductive group over k, there is a natural map from the set of G(k)-conjugacy classes of continuous morphisms r : WFv → G(k), where G(k) is equipped with the ℓ-adic
topology, onto the set of G(k)-conjugacy classes of semisimple morphisms ϕ : WFv × SL2 (k) → G(k) which are k-algebraic on the second
factor and trivial on H × 1 for some open subgroup H of (the inertia subgroup) of WFv . The morphism ϕ is a version of the so-called
Frobenius-semisimple Weil-Deligne representation associated to r; its
construction, which is standard at least in the G = GLn case, is an
application of Grothendieck’s ℓ-adic monodromy theorem and of the
Jacobson-Morosov theorem (see [Tat79, §4] and [GR10, Prop. 2.2]).
The restriction of reπ,λ to a decomposition group at v gives rise to a cone is an associated Frobeniustinuous morphism rev : WFv → G2 (k). If ϕ
semisimple representation, then ϕ = ρ ◦ ϕ
e is a Frobenius-semisimple
representation associated to ρ ◦ rv . It is convenient to choose a field
embedding σ : k −→ C whose restriction to E, which is naturally
embedded in Eλ , is the given inclusion E ⊂ C. The known compatibility of rπ,λ with the local Langlands correspondence [Shi11, CH13]
asserts that ϕ ⊗k C (where the scalar extension is made through σ) is
the complexification of L(πv ). We can thus take for φv the morphism
ϕ
e ⊗k C, restricted to WFv × SU(2). The uniqueness assertion is again
a consequence of [Gri95, Thm. 1] .

Remark 6.9. A similar application of Theorem 4.5, but arguing with
the hypothetical Langlands group instead of a Galois group as on page
6 of the introduction, shows that properties (i) and (ii) of corollary
6.8 should be equivalent without assuming F is totally real or anything about the Archimedean places of π. Moreover, those assumptions
should be equivalent to the existence of a cuspidal tempered automorphic representation π ′ of G2 (AF ) such that for all but finitely many
finite places v of F , the conjugacy class of ρ(c(πv′ )) is c(πv ) (recall that
c2 = G2 (C)).
we have c(πv′ ) ⊂ G

6.10. Examples. Examples of automorphic representations π satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 6.4 can be constructed using Arthur’s
recent results on automorphic representations of classical groups [Art13].

One method, developed by Gross and Savin [GS98], is to use an exceptional theta correspondence between anisotropic forms of G2 and
PGSp6 . This is also the point of view of Magaard and Savin in [MS14],
who give some interesting examples. Another method, that we hope to

59

pursue in the future, is to use triality for the algebraic group PGSO8
over F (or for suitable forms of it).
Let us mention that in [CR15, §8] the authors give an explicit conjectural formula for the number of cuspidal automorphic representations
π of GL7 (AQ ) satisfying assumption (G) and such that:
(i) πp is unramified for each prime p,
(ii) π∞ is algebraic of weights 0, ±u, ±v, ±(u + v) with 0 < u < v;
this is the number denoted G2 (2v, 2u) loc. cit. For instance, by [CR15,
Table 11], there should be 3 such representations with u + v ≤ 13 (each
one having Q as coefficient field), namely with
(u, v) = (4, 8), (3, 10) and (5, 8).
Some informations about the Satake parameters of these representations π, such as c(π2 ) and trace c(πp ) for p ≤ 13, have also been recently obtained by Megarbane [Meg15, Tables 8 & 9]. In particular,
it should be possible to study the images of their associated Galois
representations reπ,λ : Gal(Q/Q) → G2 (Qℓ ) given by Theorem 6.4.

Remark 6.11. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of
GL7 (AQ ) satisfying assumption (G), as well as (i) and (ii) above. The
crystalline property of the restriction of rπ,λ at a decomposition group
at a prime ℓ with λ | ℓ, as well as Minkowski’s theorem that any nontrivial number field has a ramified prime, imply that the Zariski-closure
of the image of rπ,λ is connected. In particular, in order to show the existence of reπ,λ in this case one may invoke (the much more elementary)
Corollary 3.7 instead of Theorem 4.18.
6.12. A local characterization of Langlands’ functorial lifting
between G2 and PGSp6 . In this last paragraph, we fix an injective
algebraic group morphism
c2 = G2 (C) −→ PGSp
\6 = Spin7 (C).
ρ:G

Let π be a cuspidal tempered automorphic representation of PGSp6 (AF ).
As already explained on page 6 of the introduction, if we assume the
existence of the Langlands group of the number field F then Theorem
A shows the equivalence between the following properties:
(P1) for all but finitely many places v of F , the Satake parameter
c(πv ) is the conjugacy class of an element of a G2 -subgroup of
Spin7 (C),
(P2) there exists a cuspidal automorphic representation π ′ of G2 (AF )
such that for all but finitely many places v of F , the conjugacy
class of ρ(c(πv′ )) is c(πv ).

60

As π was assumed to be tempered, note that if π ′ is as in property (P2)
then π ′ is tempered as well (see §6.1 for our convention on the meaning
of the term tempered in this paper).
It turns out that the equivalence between these properties can be
proved unconditionally. The following theorem grew out from a discussion with Wee Teck Gan and Gordan Savin, after the first version
of this paper appeared on arXiv.
Theorem 6.13. Let π be a cuspidal automorphic representation of
PGSp6 (AF ). Assume that π is tempered, or more generally that π is
nearly generic. Then π satisfies (P1) if, and only if, it satisfies (P2).
Let us first define the term nearly generic which occurs in this statement. If π is an admissible irreducible representation of GSp2g (AF )
we shall denote by res π its restriction to Sp2g (AF ). It is an admissible semisimple representations of Sp2g (AF ) : this follows from
Sp2g (Ov )

[Xu14, Lemma 2.3.1] and the equality dim πv
GSp (Ov )
= 1. Denote by
dim πv 2g

= 1 when we have

d
\
η : GSp
2g = GSpin2g+1 (C) −→ SO2g+1 (C) = Sp2g

the natural morphism. Let σ be an irreducible constituent of res π. If π
and σ are unramified at the finite place v, which holds for almost all v,
then the compatibility of the Satake isomorphism to isogenies (proved
by Satake) shows the equality
(6.2)

η(c(πv )) = c(σv ).

(see also [Xu15a, Lemma 5.2] for another proof). If π is cuspidal, then
the restriction of functions along the inclusion Sp2g (AF ) → GSp2g (AF )
shows that a nonzero quotient of res π is a direct sum of cuspidal automorphic representations, by Proposition A.1 (ii). By the equality (6.2),
all the cuspidal constituents of res π belong to a same global packet of
e ψ in the sense of Arthur [Art13, p. 45]. We shall say that
the form Π
π is nearly generic if this packet (or ψ) is generic in the sense of loc.
cit. p. 49. This condition is automatically satisfied if π is tempered
by the Jacquet-Shalika estimates. Note also that if π is tempered then
so is any constituent of res π, by the equality (6.2) and our definition
of the term tempered in §6.1. The terminology nearly generic will be
justified by Proposition 6.14.
Proof.
(of Theorem 6.13) The implication (P2) ⇒ (P1) is trivial.
Assume now that (P1) holds. Denote by (spin, W ) a spinor representation of Spin7 (C), and (st, E) its standard representation. Let S be a
finite set of places of F containing Ram(π), and such that for all v ∈
/S
then πv is unramified and c(πv ) is the conjugacy class of an element of

61

a G2 -subgroup of Spin7 (C). Recall that we have a C[H]-linear isomorphism W ≃ 1 ⊕ E over any G2 -subgroup H of Spin7 (C). It follows that
for Re s big enough we have a decomposition
LS (s, π, spin) = ζFS (s)LS (s, π, st)
where ζFS (s) = LS (s, π, 1) is the partial zeta function of F .
Let σ be a cuspidal automorphic representation of Sp6 (AF ) which is
a constituent of res π. Up to enlarging S if necessary we may assume
that σv is unramified for v ∈
/ S. Formula (6.2) shows LS (s, π, st) =
LS (s, σ, st). As π is nearly generic, the main global result of Arthur
[Art13, Thm. 1.5.2] asserts that this L-function is a finite product of
Godement-Jacquet L-functions of certain cuspidal unitary automorphic
representations of the general linear groups over F . Such an L-function
has a meromorphic continuation to C, and does not vanish at s = 1 by
a classical result of Jacquet and Shalika. It follows that LS (s, π, spin)
has a meromorphic continuation to C with a pole at s = 1, coming
from ζFS (s).
If π is globally generic (see below), this last assertion and the main
result of Ginzburg and Jiang [GJ01, Thm. 1.1] show that (P2) holds;
the sought after automorphic representation of G2 is obtained there by
an exceptional theta correspondence. In general, we reduce to this case
by Proposition 6.14 below.

Recall, following e.g. [CKPS02, §1], that a cuspidal automorphic representation π of a split reductive group H is said globally generic if there
exists an irreducible H(AF )-submodule of the space of cuspforms on
H(AF ) which is isomorphic to π, and which is generic in the traditional
sense (recalled in the appendix, before the statement of Proposition
A.2).
Proposition 6.14. Let g ≥ 1 be an integer and π a cuspidal automorphic representation of GSp2g (AF ). Then π is nearly generic if, and
only if, there exists a globally generic cuspidal automorphic representation ̟ of GSp2g (AF ) with the same central character as π, and which
is nearly equivalent to π, i.e. such that ̟v ≃ πv for all but finitely
many places v of F .
e = GSp2g . Assume first that π is nearly
Proof. Set G = Sp2g and G
generic. We denote by e
c the central character of π (a Hecke character
of F ).

Let σ be a cuspidal automorphic constituent of res π. Arthur’s theorem
[Art13, Thm. 1.5.2] and the work of Cogdell, Kim, Piatetski-Shapiro
and Shahidi [CKPS02, Thm. 7.2] show that there is a globally generic
cuspidal automorphic representation σ ′ of G(AF ) which is nearly equivalent to σ (see also [Art13, Prop. 8.3.2]). We shall denote by V a

62

generic irreducible subspace of the space of cuspforms on G(AF ) giving
rise to σ ′ .
According to Arthur, σ and σ ′ are in a same (generic) global packet;
in particular, they have the same central character (see the paragraph
before [Xu15a, Prop. 6.27]), namely the restriction c of e
c to the cene ec −→
ter of G(AF ). Denote by ρ the natural restriction map Acusp (G)
Acusp (G)c studied in Proposition A.1. By the assertion (iii) of this
proposition, this map is surjective, so there is an irreducible admissie F )-subrepresentation Ve ⊂ Acusp (G)
e ec whose image in Acusp (G)c
ble G(A
contains the space V defined above. We denote by π ′ the isomorphism
e F )-representation Ve . By Propoclass of the cuspidal automorphic G(A
sition A.2, Ve is generic as so is V , so π ′ is globally generic.
By construction, res π has a cuspidal automorphic constituent (namely
σ) which is nearly equivalent to some cuspidal automorphic constituent
e F ) → A× denote the similitude factor.
of res π ′ (namely σ ′ ). Let ν : G(A
F
By Xu’s theorem [Xu15a, Thm. 1.8], there exists a Hecke character ω
of F such that π and π ′ ⊗ ω ◦ ν belong to the same “global L-packet”
that he defines. In particular, they are nearly equivalent and have the
same central character (see [Xu15a, Thm. 1.2]). The representation
e F ) is cuspidal, globally generic, nearly equivalent
̟ := π ′ ⊗ ω ◦ ν of G(A
to π, and with central character c, and we are done.

Conversely, up to replacing π by ̟ if necessary we may assume that
π is globally generic. In order to show that π is nearly generic, it is
enough to prove that res π has a cuspidal globally generic irreducible
constituent, by [CKPS02, Thm. 7.2]. But this follows from Proposition
A.2.


Appendix A. Some basic facts about restrictions and
extensions of cusp forms
The results of this appendix are probably well known to some specialists, however we have
not been able to find their proofs in the litterature. Some of the arguments given below
already appear in some form in Labesse-Langlands’ paper [LL79, p. 49-52] and in [Xu15b,
Lemma 5.3]. Our main reference for what follows is Borel-Jacquet’s paper [BJ79].
Let F be a number field and H a reductive linear algebraic group defined over F . We set
H∞ = H(F ⊗Q R), the direct product of the Lie groups H(Fv ) for v Archimedean, and
denote by Hf the locally profinite group H(AfF ) where AfF is the F -algebra of finite adèles
of F : we have H(AF ) = H∞ × Hf . If c is a character of the center of H(AF ), we denote by
Acusp (H)c the space of cuspidal automorphic functions H(AF ) → C with central character
c and with respect to a choice of maximal compact subgroup K∞ of H∞ (in the sense of
[BJ79, §4.4]). This is an admissible, semisimple, (Lie H∞ , K∞ ) × Hf -module. For short,
a (Lie H∞ , K∞ ) × Hf -module will be called an H(AF )-gk-module.

63
e be a reductive linear algebraic group, T a torus, ν : G
e→T a
Proposition A.1. Let G
e the center of G,
e and G the kernel of ν. We assume that G,
e T and
surjective morphism, Z
e and G) are defined over the number field F , and that G is connected. Let e
ν (hence Z
c
e F ) and c its restriction to the center of G(AF ). Then
be an automorphic character of Z(A
the following assertions hold:
(i) the restriction map ρ : ϕ 7→ ϕ|G(AF ) induces an equivariant morphism ρcusp :
e ce −→ Acusp (G)c of G(AF )-gk-modules,
res Acusp (G)

e F )-gk-submodule of Acusp (G)
e ce then we have ρcusp (V ) 6= 0,
(ii) if V is a nonzero G(A

e is a split F -torus, then ρcusp is surjective.
(iii) if furthermore Z

e we have ν(Z)
e = T . We may thus
Proof. As ν is trivial on the derived subgroup of G,
e
find a torus C ⊂ Z defined over F such that ν : C → T is an isogeny. We shall denote by
e
ι:C×G→G

the isogeny (z, g) 7→ zg. For each place v of F , note that G(Fv ) is a normal subgroup
e v ) with abelian quotient. Moreover, ν(C(Fv )) is an open subgroup of finite index
of G(F
in T (Fv ), by the finiteness of the Galois cohomology group H 1 (Fv , C ∩ G) (Tate). In
e v ) induced by ι is an
particular, the image of the morphism ιv : C(Fv ) × G(Fv ) → G(F
e
open subgroup of finite index in G(Fv ). For each Archimedean place v, we choose a
ev
maximal compact subgroup Kv of G(Fv ), as well as a maximal compact subgroup K
e
e
e
of G(Fv ) containing Kv . We have thus Kv = G(Fv ) ∩ Kv . We define K∞ (resp. K∞ )
e v ) for v Archimedean. We may and do choose these
as the product of the Kv (resp. K
e ce and Acusp (G)c . If we denote
maximal compact subgroups in order to define Acusp (G)
by z(H) the C-algebra defined as the center of the complex enveloping algebra U(Lie H)
of the Lie group H, then for each Archimedean v the local isomorphism ιv defines a C∼
e v )). In particular, the natural inclusion
algebra isomorphism z(C(Fv ))⊗z(G(Fv )) → z(G(F
e
e v )).
U(Lie G(Fv )) ⊂ U(Lie G(Fv )) induces an injection z(G(Fv )) ⊂ z(G(F
e ce. There is a compact open subgroup K
ef ⊂
Let us check assertion (i). Let ϕ ∈ Acusp (G)
e
e
e
Gf such that ϕ is Kf -invariant on the right. Moreover, for any gf ∈ Gf the function
e ∞ → C, is smooth, K
e ∞ -finite on the right, z(G
e ∞ )-finite, and slowly
g∞ 7→ ϕ(g∞ × gf ), G
increasing (see [BJ79, §1.2]). Using a model over an open subset of Spec OF of the closed
e we see that Kf = K
e f ∩ Gf is a compact open subgroup of Gf . By
morphism G ⊂ G,
e f , K∞ ⊂ K
e ∞ , and z(G∞ ) ⊂ z(G
e ∞ ) (justified above), it follows
the inclusions Kf ⊂ K
that ρ(ϕ) is Kf -invariant and K∞ -finite on the right, as well as z(G∞ )-finite. It is also
e∞ is still a
trivially slowly increasing (note e.g. that the restriction to G∞ of a norm on G
norm, in the sense of [BJ79, §1.2]). Of course, ρ(ϕ) is G(F )-invariant on the left and has
central character c. We have proved that ρ(ϕ) is an automorphic form. It only remains
to check that it is cuspidal. But for any parabolic subgroup P of G defined over F , there
e such that Pe ∩ G = P , namely Pe = Z
e P . We
is a unique parabolic subgroup Pe of G
conclude as the unipotent radical of Pe and P coincide (in particular, they are included
in G), and as f is cuspidal. This shows that ρcusp is well defined. By construction, it is
(Lie G∞ , K∞ ) × Gf -equivariant.
We now prove assertion (ii). Let V be as in the statement and ϕ ∈ V − {0}. Choose
e F ) such that ϕ(g) =
g = g∞ gf ∈ G(A
6 0. Up to replacing ϕ by gf−1 · ϕ ∈ V we may assume
e v ) for v Archimedean, and as K
e∞
gf = 1. As the image ιv is an open subgroup of G(F
e ∞ by Cartan’s decomposition, we have:
meets every connected component of G
e∞ · K
e∞ = G
e∞ .
G∞ · Z

e∞ · K
e ∞ , which preserves V , we may
It follows that up to replacing ϕ by h · ϕ with h ∈ Z
assume that we have g ∈ G∞ ⊂ G(AF ). In particular, we have ρ(ϕ) 6= 0.

64
Let us now check (the main) assertion (iii). Denote by Z the center of G; we have
e ∩ G as G
e=Z
e G. Consider the subgroups G(AF ) ⊂ H1 ⊂ H2 ⊂ G(A
e F ) with H1 =
Z=Z
e F )G(AF ) and H2 = G(F
e )H2 . They are normal in G(A
e F ) (with abelian quotient), as so
Z(A
e F )∩G(AF ) ⊂ Z(AF )
is G(AF ). The assumption e
c|Z(AF ) = c and the obvious inclusion Z(A
show that there is a unique function ϕ1 : H1 → C such that ϕ1 (zg) = e
c(z)ϕ(g) for all
e F ) × G(AF ).
(z, g) ∈ Z(A
We claim that there is a unique function ϕ2 : H2 → C such that ϕ2 (γh) = ϕ1 (h) for all
e ) × G(AF ). Indeed, such a function exists if, and only if, ϕ1 is left-invariant
(γ, h) ∈ G(F
e
e ) ∩ H1 ⊂ Z(F
e )G(F ), or
under G(F ) ∩ H1 . It is thus enough to show the inclusion G(F
e
e
which is the same, the inclusion ν(G(F ) ∩ H1 ) ⊂ ν(Z(F )). It suffices to prove
(1.1)

e F )) ⊂ ν(Z(F
e )).
T (F ) ∩ ν(Z(A

e is an F -split torus so far, but we shall do so now. As the
We have not used that Z
e → T defined over F , it implies that T
morphism ν induces a surjective homomorphism Z
e are defined and split over F as well. Let Z 0 be
is F -split. Moreover, all the subtori of Z
e Up to changing C if necessary, we may thus assume
the neutral component of Z = G ∩ Z.
e = C × Z 0 . In particular, the following equalities hold
that we have Z
e F )) = ν(C(AF )), Z(A
e F )G(AF ) = C(AF )G(AF ), Z(F
e )G(F ) = C(F )G(F ).
(1.2) ν(Z(A

By the theory of elementary divisors, we may also assume that we have T = Grm for some
∼
integer r ≥ 0, as well as an isomorphism µ : Grm → C over F , and integers m1 , . . . , mr ,
m1
mr
such that we have ν ◦ µ(z1 , . . . , zr ) = (z1 , . . . , zr ). But it is well-known that if m ∈ Z
and x ∈ F × is an m-th power in Fv× for each v, then x is an m-th power in F × . This
shows (1.1), hence the existence of ϕ2 .
Let S be a finite set of places of F containing the Archimedean places. We denote by
OF,S ⊂ F the subring of S-integers. Up to enlarging S if necessary, we may assume that
e is an affine group schemes of finite type defined over OF,S , that C ⊂ Z
e⊂G
e are closed
G
subgroup schemes defined over OF,S , that ν : G → Gm is a group scheme homomorphism
∼
defined over OF,S , and that µ is a group scheme isomorphism Grm → C over OF,S . We
define again G as the kernel of µ; this is an affine group scheme of finite type over OF,S .
e v)
By definition of the adelic topology, if we have a collection of open subsets Uv ⊂ G(F
Q
Q
e v )) is an open subset of G(A
e F ) (and a similar
for each v ∈ S, then ( v∈S Uv ) × ( v∈S
G(O
/
e replaced by G). For any v ∈
e v = G(O
e v ), and we
assertion holds with G
/ S we shall set K
eS = Q
e v . Up to enlarging S if necessary, we may assume that ϕ is
shall also set K
K
v ∈S
/
G(Ov )-invariant on the right, as well as e
cv (C(Ov )) = 1, for all v ∈
/ S. We may also assume
m i ∈ O×
for
i
=
1,
.
.
.
,
r.
F,S

Define M as the maximum of the mi for 1 ≤ i ≤ r. By Hermite’s theorem, there are only
finitely many field extensions F ′ /F of degree ≤ M and which are unramified everywhere.
Up to enlarging S if necessary, we may thus assume that the following extra property
holds : if F ′ /F is such an extension which is furthermore split at all places above S,
then we have F ′ = F . In particular, for each i = 1, . . . , r, if we have x ∈ F × and
×
u ∈ A×
/ S, and such that xuv is an
F such that uv = 1 for v ∈ S, uv ∈ Ov for v ∈
mi -th power in Fv× for each v, then x is an mi -th power in F × . This property shows
e ) ∩ (C(AF )G(AF )K
e S ) ⊂ C(F )G(F ), hence G(F
e ) ∩ (Z(A
e F )G(AF )K
e S ) ⊂ Z(F
e )G(F )
G(F
by (1.2), which implies in turn the equality
(1.3)

e )Z(A
e F )G(AF )) ∩ K
e S = (Z(A
e F )G(AF )) ∩ K
eS.
(G(F

Observe moreover that for v ∈
/ S we have the inclusion
(1.4)

e v )G(Fv )) ∩ G(O
e v ) ⊂ C(Ov )G(Ov ).
(Z(F

×
e v )G(Fv ) = C(Fv )G(Fv ), and if x ∈ O×
Indeed, we have Z(F
v is an m-th power in Fv , then
x is an m-th power in O×
.
v

e S ⊂ G(A
e F ). The inclusions (1.3) and (1.4) show that
Consider the subgroup H3 = H2 K
there is a unique function ϕ3 : H3 → C such that ϕ3 (hk) = ϕ2 (h) for all h ∈ H2 and

65
e S . Note that H3 is open in G(A
e F ). Indeed, it contains the image of ιv for each
k ∈K
e v ) by the first paragraph of the proof, as well as K
e S . Define
v ∈ S, which is open in G(F
e F ) → C by ψ|H = ϕ3 and ψ(h) = 0 for h ∈
now ψ : G(A
/ H3 . This function has central
3
e S -invariant on the right, G(F
e )-invariant on the left, and satisfies ρ(ψ) = f .
character c, is K
e ce. One first observes that the K∞ -finiteness of ϕ
We claim that we have ψ ∈ Acusp (G)
implies the one of ψ|H3 , hence the one of ψ (use that ψ vanishes outside H3 and that K∞
e ∞ is easily seen to be of finite
is a subgroup of H3 ). As the normal subgroup K∞ of K
e ∞ -finiteness of ψ. Let now g ∈ G(A
e F ). Observe that the map
index, this implies the K
ψg : C∞ × G∞ → C, (z, h) 7→ ψ(gzh), is either identically 0 or a constant multiple of ψg′
c∞ (z)ϕ(g ′ h). As ιv is a smooth finite
with g ′ ∈ G(AF ). For such a g ′ we have ψg′ (z, h) = e
covering for each Archimedean v, this implies that ψ is smooth, as so are ϕ and e
c. As ϕ
e∞ , this also shows
and e
c are slowly increasing, and as C∞ × G∞ has a finite index in G
that ψ is slowly increasing. We have proved that ψ is an automorphic form.
e defined
It only remains to check that ψ is a cuspform. Let Pe be a parabolic subgroup of G
over F , and N its unipotent radical. We have N ⊂ G, hence N (AF ) ⊂ H3 , so if g ∈
/ H3 we
e ), h ∈ G(AF ), z ∈ Z(A
e F ) and k ∈ K
e S,
have ψ(N (AF )g) = 0. If g = γhzk with γ ∈ G(F
then we have
Z
Z
ψ(ng)dn = e
c(z)
ϕ(γ −1 nγh)dn,
N(F )\N(AF )

N(F )\N(AF )

which vanishes as ϕ is a cuspform and γ
subgroup of γ −1 Pe γ ∩ G of G.

−1

N γ is the unipotent radical of the F -parabolic


Let H be a linear reductive group defined and quasi-split over F . Recall that a Whittaker
datum for H is a quadruple D = (B, T, U, χ) where B is a Borel subgroup of H defined
over F , T is a maximal torus of B defined over F , U is the unipotent radical of B, and
χ : U (AF ) → C× is a continuous character which is trivial on U (F ) and nondegenerate
(see e.g [KS99, p. 54]). When H is split, it means e.g. that χ is nontrivial on the root
subgroup Uα ⊂ U for each simple root α relative to (B, T ). Recall that an irreducible
H(AF )-gk-submodule V of the space of cuspforms on H(AF ) is said generic if there exists
a Whittaker datum D = (B, T, U, χ), such that for all ϕ ∈ V − {0} the function on H(AF )
defined by
Z
D
Wϕ
(g) =
ϕ(ng)χ(n)dn
N(F )\N(AF )

D
is not identically zero. As the subspace of ϕ ∈ V with Wϕ
= 0 is a gk-submodule of
D
V , this latter condition is equivalent to ask that we have Wϕ
6= 0 for some ϕ ∈ V , by
irreducibility of V .

Proposition A.2. Keep the assumptions of Proposition A.1 and assume furthermore that
e ce be a nonzero irreducible G(A
e F )-gk-submodule.
G is quasi-split over F . Let Ve ⊂ Acusp (G)
The following properties are equivalent :
(i) Ve is generic,

(ii) ρcusp (Ve ) contains a nonzero generic irreducible G(AF )-gk-submodule.

e = (B,
e Te, U, χ) be a Whittaker datum such that
Proof. Assume first that (i) holds. Let D
e
D
e
e ∩ G, Te ∩ G, U, χ) is a Whittaker datum
for all ϕ ∈ V − {0} we have Wϕ 6= 0. Then D = (B
e
e ∞ × G(A
e f )-translate as in
for G. Choose a nonzero ϕ ∈ V . Up to replacing ϕ by some K
F
e
D
the proof of Proposition A.1 (ii), we may assume that we have Wϕ 6= 0 on G(AF ). This
implies that the cuspform f := ρ(ϕ) = ϕ|G(AF ) is nonzero and WfD 6= 0. The G(AF )-gksubmodule of ρcusp (Ve ) ⊂ Acusp (G)c generated
P by f is semisimple, hence a finite
Pdirect sum
of irreducible gk-modules Vi . Write f = i fi with fi ∈ Vi . We have WfD = i WfDi 6= 0,
so there exists i such that WfDi 6= 0, and Vi is a generic irreducible constituent of ρcusp (Ve ).

66
Assume now that ρcusp (Ve ) contains some generic irreducible G(AF )-submodule V 6= 0. Let
D
D = (B, T, U, χ) be a Whittaker datum for G such that Wϕ
is nonzero for all ϕ ∈ V −{0}.
e for G
e of the form (B,
e Te, U, χ) with B
e∩G = B
There exists a unique Whittaker datum D
and Te ∩ G = T . As we have 0 6= V ⊂ ρ(Ve ), we may find some ϕ ∈ Ve such that the
e
D
cuspform f = ρ(ϕ) = ϕ|G(AF ) is nonzero and belongs to V . It is enough to show Wϕ
6= 0.
e
D
D
But for g ∈ G(AF ) we have the identity Wϕ (g) = Wf (g), and we are done.


References
[Ada96] J. F. Adams, Lectures on exceptional Lie groups, Chicago Lectures of Mathematics (1996).
[Art02] J. Arthur, A note on the automorphic Langlands group, Canad. Math. Bull. 45,
466–482 (2002).
[Art13] J. Arthur, The endoscopic classification of representations: orthogonal and symplectic groups, Colloquium Publ. 61, Amer. Math. Soc. (2013).
[BC11] J. Bellaïche & G. Chenevier, The sign of Galois representations attached to automorphic forms for unitary groups, Compositio Math. 147, 1337-1352 (2011).
[BS59] F. van der Blij & T. A. Springer, The arithmetic of octaves and the groups G2 ,
Proc. Kon. Ak. Amsterdam 62 (= Ind. Math. 21), 406–418 (1959).
[BJ79] A. Borel & H. Jacquet, Automorphic forms and automorphic representation, dans
[Cor77] vol. I, 189–203 (1979).
[Bor79] A. Borel, Automorphic L-functions, in [Cor77] vol. II, 27–62 (1979).
[Bou59] N. Bourbaki, Éléments de mathématique, Algèbre, Chapitre 9 A, Masson, Paris
(1959).
[Bou12] N. Bourbaki, Éléments de mathématique, Algèbre, Chapitre 8, Springer Verlag,
nouvelle édition (2012).
[CF15] B. Calmès & J. Fasel, Groupes classiques, Panorama et Synthèses, S.M.F. (2015).
[CH13] G. Chenevier & M. Harris, Construction of automorphic Galois representations
II, Cambridge Journal of Mathematics, 1, 57-73 (2013).
[CL14] G. Chenevier & J. Lannes, Formes automorphes et voisins de Kneser des réseaux
de Niemeier, disponible à l’adresse http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.7616 (2014).
[CR15] G. Chenevier & D. Renard, Level one algebraic cuspforms of classical groups of
small rank, Memoirs of the A.M.S. 1121, vol. 237, 128 p. (2015).
[Clo90] L. Clozel, Motifs et formes automorphes : applications du principe de fonctorialité, in L. Clozel and J. S. Milne, eds., Automorphic forms, Shimura varieties, and
L-functions, Vol. I , Perspect. Math. 10, 77–151 (1990).
[Cog04] J. Cogdell, Lectures on L-functions, converse theorems, and functoriality for
GLn , dans Lectures on automorphic L-functions, Fields Institute Monographs,
A.M.S. (2004).
[CKPS02] J. Cogdell, H. Kim, I. Piatetski-Shapiro & F. Shahidi, Functoriality for classical groups, Publ. Math. IHÉS 99, 163–233 (2004).
[CH88] A. Cohen & A. Helminck, Trilinear alternating forms on a vector space of dimension 7, Communications in Algebra 16 (1), 1-25 (1988).
[Cor77] Automorphic forms, representations and L-functions, Part I & II, Proc. Symp.
in Pure Math. XXXIII, Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, Ore., Providence, R.I., Amer.
Math. Soc. (1977).
[Del99] P. Deligne, Notes on Spinors, in Quantum Fields and Strings: A Course for
Mathematicians, AMS (1999).

67
[Die98] J. Dieudonné, Sur les groupes classiques, Hermann, 3e édition (1998).
[GJ01] D. Ginzburg & D. Jiang, Periods and liftings: from G2 to C3 , Israel Journal of
Math. 123, 29–59 (2001).
[Gri95] R. Griess, Basic conjugacy theorems for G2 , Inventiones math. 121, 257–278
(1995).
[GR10] B. Gross & M. Reeder, Arithmetic invariants of discrete Langlands parameters,
Duke math. Journal 154, 431–508 (2010).
[GS98] B. Gross & G. Savin, Motives with Galois group of type G2 : an exceptional theta
correspondence, Compositio Math. 114, 153–217 (1998).
[HT01] M. Harris & R. Taylor, The geometry and cohomology of some simple Shimura
varieties, Annals of Math. Studies 151 (2001).
[Hum81] J. Humphreys, Linear algebraic groups, Spinger Verlag Graduate Texts in Mathematics 21, 2nd ed. (1981).
[Hum06] J. Humphreys, Modular representations of finite groups of Lie type, London
Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series 326 (1998).
[Jan03] J. C. Jantzen, Representations of algebraic groups, A.M.S. Mathematical Surveys
and Monographs 107 (2003).
[KLS10] C. Khare, M. Larsen & G. Savin, Functoriality and the inverse Galois problem
II: Groups of type Bn and G2 , Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (6) 19, 37–70 (2010).
[Knus88] M.-A. Knus, Quadratic forms, Clifford algebras and Spinors, Lecture notes,
Seminars in Mathematics 1, Campinas, 136 p. (1988).
[Knus91] M.-A. Knus, Quadratic and Hermitian Forms over Rings, Grundlehren der
mathematischen Wissenschaften, Bd. 294, Springer-Verlag (1991).
[KPS94] M.-A. Knus, R. Parimala & R. Sridharan, On compositions and triality, J. reine
angew. Math. 457, 45–70 (1994).
[Kot84] R. Kottwitz, Stable trace formula: Cuspidal tempered terms, Duke Math. J. 51,
611–650 (1984).
[KS99] R. Kottwitz & D. Shelstad, Foundations of twisted endoscopy, Astérisque 255
(1999).
[LL79] J.-P. Labesse & R. P. Langlands, L-indistinguishability for SL(2), Canadian Journal of Math. (1979).
[Lan70] R. P. Langlands, Problems in the theory of automorphic forms, Lecture Notes in
Math. 170, Springer Verlag (1970).
[Lan71] R. P. Langlands, Euler products, Yale Math. Monographs 1, Yale University Press
(1971).
[Lan79] R. P. Langlands, Automorphic representations, Shimura varieties, and motives
(Ein Märchen), dans [Cor77] vol. II, 205–246 (1979).
[Lar94] M. Larsen, On the conjugacy of element-conjugate homomorphisms, Israel Journal of Math. 88, 253-277 (1994).
[Lub01] F. Lübeck, Small degree representations of finite Chevalley groups in defining
characteristic, London Math. Soc., J. Comput. Math. 4, 135–169 (2001).
[MS14] K. Magaard & G. Savin, Computing Galois groups arising from automorphic
forms, available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.3773 (2014).
[Meg15] T. Mégarbané, Traces des opérateurs de Hecke sur les espaces de formes automorphes de SO7 , SO8 ou SO9 en niveau 1 et poids arbitraire, available at
http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.01914 (2015).

68
[Ser68] J.-P. Serre, Abelian ℓ-adic representations and elliptic curves, McGill University
Lecture notes written with the collaboration of Willem Kuyk and John Labute, W.
A. Benjamin, Inc., New York-Amsterdam (1968).
[Ser92] J.-P. Serre, Topics in Galois theory, Lecture Notes prepared by Henri Darmon,
Research Notes in Mathematics 1, Jones and Bartlett Publisher, Boston, MA, (1992).
[Ser94] J.-P. Serre, Sur la semisimplicité des produits tensoriels de représentations de
groupes, Invent. Math. 116, 513–530 (1994).
[Ser96] J.-P. Serre, Semisimplicity and tensor products of group representations: converse
theorems, Journal of Algebra 194, 496–520 (1996).
[Ser00] J.-P. Serre, Sous-groupes finis des groupes de Lie, Séminaire Bourbaki, exposé no
864 (1998-99).
[Shi11] S. W. Shin, Galois representations arising from some compact Shimura varieties,
Ann. of Math. 173, 1645–1741 (2011).
[Spr68] T. Springer, Weyl’s character formula for algebraic groups, Inventiones Math. 5,
85–105 (1968).
[SV00] T. Springer & F. Veldkamp, Octonions, Jordan algebras and exceptionnal groups,
Springer Monographs in Math. (2000).
[Tat79] J. Tate, Number theoretic background, in [Cor77] vol. II, 3–26 (1979).
[Xu15a] B. Xu, On a lifting problem on L-packets, preprint available on arXiv
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.00763, to appear in Compositio Math.
[Xu15b] B. Xu, L-packets of quasisplit GSp2n and GSO2n , preprint available on arXiv
http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.04897.
[Xu14] B. Xu, Endoscopic classification of representations of GSO(2N ) and GSp(2N ),
Ph. D. Thesis, University of Toronto (2014).

