![Arxiv:1811.09838V2 [Math.AG] 14 Dec 2020 2010 Pedxa Ntedcyo Ore Rnfr and Transform Fourier of Decay the on Results Algebro-Geometric A](http://data.docslib.org/img/f9c2c50eaff3e4c41658486b50fb0ae3-1.webp)
arXiv:1811.09838v2 [math.AG] 14 Dec 2020 2010 pedxA ntedcyo ore rnfr and transform Fourier of decay the On results algebro-geometric A. main the Appendix of H Proof and F Theorems 5. of Proof G Theorem 4.2. of Proof results 4.1. analytic Main morphisms of convolutions 4. of Properties m property 3. and (FRS) language, The Denef-Pas the language, 2.3. Presburger The 2.2. transform Fourier Non-commutative 2.1. Preliminaries 2. Acknowledgements 1.6. Conventions paper the 1.5. of Structure directions 1.4. and questions Future results main the 1.3. of discussion Further 1.2. results Main 1.1. Introduction 1. References NSNUAIYPOETE FCNOUIN FALGEBRAIC OF CONVOLUTIONS OF PROPERTIES SINGULARITY ON ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics TYGAE N OA .HNE WT NAPNI ON IHG WITH JOINT APPENDIX AN (WITH HENDEL I. YOTAM AND GLAZER ITAY opim ihipoe mohespoete.Mr preci More ϕ properties. smoothness improved with morphisms e nltcse,w lopoetefloigrsl nmoti in result following the morp prove also of we families step, on analytic obtains key bounds one Uniform times, many singularities. finitely rational itself with it convolving by > ǫ convolution sacleto fmtvcfntos and functions, motivic of collection a is Abstract. nalgebraic an : X uhthat such 0 → G Kozma) ϕ hc sdmnn hnrsrce oec emtial irr geometrically each to restricted when dominant is which Let K ∗ gop ie w leri morphisms algebraic two Given -group. ψ f K Q : p X eafil fcaatrsi zero, characteristic of field a be is OPIM H EEA CASE GENERAL THE - MORPHISMS × L Y 1+ → ǫ o any for G by 40,1E8 39 piay,1G5 40,2G5(second 20G15 14G05, 11G25, (primary), 03C98 14E18, 14B05, ϕ p ∗ ψ ag enough. large ( ,y x, f Q p Contents = ) is L ϕ 1 ( 1 x o any for ) X · ψ ( and ϕ y .W hnso htti prto yields operation this that show then We ). : i nerto;if integration; vic p X im r ie swl.Mroe,a a as Moreover, well. as given are hisms Y L a opimwt eue br of fibers reduced with morphism flat a ag nuh hni atteeexists there fact in then enough, large → ey eso htfraymorphism any for that show we sely, p esmooth be itgaiiy(on ihGady with (joint -integrability G and tvcfntos11 functions otivic ψ dcbecmoetof component educible K : Y { vreis n let and -varieties, f Q → p : G Q edfietheir define we , p n D KOZMA) ADY → C } p ∈ primes G X ary). be , 20 19 16 15 13 12 25 22 9 9 9 8 8 8 6 3 2 ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 2
1. Introduction
In this paper we continue the investigation of the algebraic convolution operation, which was initi- ated in [GH19]. Namely, we study the following operation:
Definition 1.1. Let X and X be algebraic varieties, G an algebraic group and let ϕ : X G 1 2 1 1 → and ϕ : X G be algebraic morphisms. We define their convolution by 2 2 → ϕ ϕ : X X G 1 ∗ 2 1 × 2 → ϕ ϕ (x ,x )= ϕ (x ) ϕ (x ). 1 ∗ 2 1 2 1 1 · 2 2 In particular, the n-th convolution power of a morphism ϕ : X G is → ϕ∗n(x ,...,x ) := ϕ(x ) . . . ϕ(x ). 1 n 1 · · n The convolution operation as above can be viewed as a geometric version of the classical convolution as follows. Firstly, recall that given f ,f L1(Rn), their convolution is defined by 1 2 ∈
(f1 f2)(x)= f1(t)f2(x t)dt, ∗ ˆRn − and it has improved smoothness properties, e.g. if f Ck(Rn) and f Cl(Rn), then (f f )′ = f ′ f = f f ′ and therefore f f • 1 ∈ 2 ∈ 1 ∗ 2 1 ∗ 2 1 ∗ 2 1 ∗ 2 ∈ Ck+l(Rn). In particular, if f is smooth, then f f is smooth for every f L1(Rn). • 1 1 ∗ 2 2 ∈ Now, for morphisms ϕ : X G for i = 1, 2 as before, consider the functions i i → F : G Schemes by F (g)= ϕ−1(g). ϕi → ϕi i Given a finite ring A, we naturally get maps (ϕ ) : X (A) G(A) and (ϕ ϕ ) : X (A) X (A) i A i → 1∗ 2 A 1 × 2 → G(A) from finite sets to the finite group G(A), and furthermore,
(ϕ ϕ )−1(s)= (ϕ )−1(g) (ϕ )−1(g−1s). 1 ∗ 2 A 1 A × 2 A g∈]G(A) In particular, if we set F : G(A) Z to be the function counting the size of the fibers, | (ϕi)A | → ≥0 i.e. F (g)= (ϕ )−1(g) , we see that the algebraic convolution operation commutes with count- | (ϕi)A | | i A | ing points over finite rings:
F F (s)= F (g) F (g−1s)= F (s). | (ϕ1)A | ∗ | (ϕ2)A | | (ϕ1)A | · | (ϕ2)A | | (ϕ1∗ϕ2)A | g∈XG(A) It is thus natural to ask whether analogously to the analytic convolution operation, the algebraic convolution operation improves smoothness properties of morphisms:
Question 1.2. Let ϕ : X G for i = 1, 2 be two morphisms from varieties X and X to an i i → 1 2 algebraic group G, and assume that ϕ1 satisfies a singularity property S. (1) When does ϕ ϕ have property S as well? 1 ∗ 2 (2) Which singularity properties can one obtain after finitely many self-convolutions of ϕ1?
Concerning (1), the following proposition shows that the convolution operation preserves singularity properties of morphisms in the following sense:
Proposition 1.3 ([GH19, Proposition 3.1]). Let X and Y be varieties over a field K, let G be an algebraic group over K and let S be a property of morphisms that is preserved under base change ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 3 and compositions. If ϕ : X G is a morphism that satisfies the property S, the natural map → i : Y Spec(K) has property S and ψ : Y G is arbitrary, then ϕ ψ and ψ ϕ has property S. K → → ∗ ∗ The rest of this paper is devoted to the study of the second part of Question 1.2, and generalizes the results from [GH19] in which the case where G = V is a vector space was dealt with. If ϕ is not smooth, then one in general can not guarantee that some convolution power of ϕ will be smooth (e.g. ϕ : A1 (A1, +) via x x2, see Proposition 3.9 for a more general statement). → 7→ However, it is possible to achieve other singularity properties as in Theorems A and B in the next section. From here henceforth let K denote a field of characteristic 0. The following property plays a key role in this paper:
Definition 1.4 (The (FRS) property). Let X and Y be smooth K-varieties. We say that a morphism ϕ : X Y is (FRS) if it is flat and if every fiber of ϕ is reduced and has rational → singularities (for rational singularities see Definition 2.10).
The (FRS) property was first introduced in [AA16], where it was proved that for any semi-simple algebraic group G the commutator map [ , ] : G G G is (FRS) after 21 self-convolutions. This · · × → was then used to show in [AA16] and [AA18] that if Γ is a compact p-adic group or an arithmetic group of higher rank then its representation growth is polynomial and does not depend on Γ. Explicitly, for Γ as above and every c> 40 it holds that
r (Γ) := # irreducible n-dimensional C-representations of Γ up to equivalence = o(nc). n { } It was furthermore proved in [AA18], based on works of Denef [Den87] and Mustat¸˘a[Mus01], that each individual fiber of an (FRS) morphism has good asymptotic point count over finite rings of the form Z/pkZ (either in p or in k, see [AA18, Theorem A] and [Gla19, Theorem 1.4]). In an upcoming work, we prove a version of this result which is uniform as the fiber varies. This allows one to interpret Question 1.2(2) with respect to the (FRS) property in a probabilistic way: given ϕ : X G, then the (FRS) property of ϕ∗n can be reformulated in terms of uniform → L∞-boundedness after n steps, of a family of random walks on G(Z/pkZ) , which is obtained { }p,k by pushing forward the family of uniform probability measures on X(Z/pkZ) under ϕ. In { }p,k particular, the results and methods of this paper are used in [GH] to investigate families of random walks on compact p-adic groups which are induced by words1. For a precise discussion of this probabilistic interpretation see [GH, Section 9], and for further discussion of the (FRS) property and its implications see [GH19, Section 1.3] or [AA18, AA16].
1.1. Main results.
1.1.1. Algebro-geometric results.
Definition 1.5. We say that a K-morphism ϕ : X Y is strongly dominant if it is dominant → when restricted to each geometrically irreducible component of X.
In this paper we verify a conjecture of Aizenbud and Avni (see [GH19, Conjecture 1.6]), showing that every strongly dominant morphism into an algebraic group becomes (FRS) after finitely many self-convolutions:
1 r By a word w we mean an element of the free group on r generators. Such w induces a map wG : G → G on any group G. If G is an algebraic group, wG is an algebraic morphism and we can use algebraic geometry to study it. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 4
Theorem A (Theorem 5.1). Let X be a smooth K-variety, G be a connected algebraic K-group and let ϕ : X G be a strongly dominant morphism. Then there exists N N such that for any → ∈ n > N, the n-th convolution power ϕ∗n is (FRS).
Note that by [AA16, Theorem 3.4] and [Rei, Theorem 1.11], Theorem A implies the following:
Corollary 1.6. Let F be a local field of characteristic 0. Let X be a smooth F -variety, G be a connected algebraic F -group and let ϕ : X G be a strongly dominant morphism. Then there exists → N N such that for every n > N and any smooth2, compactly supported measure µ on X(F ), the ∈ ∗n n-th convolution power τ of the pushforward τ := ϕ∗(µ) has continuous density.
It is easy to see that one cannot give a universal bound (i.e. independent of the map) on the number of convolutions needed in order to obtain an (FRS) morphism. For example, the morphism ϕ(x) = xn requires n + 1 self convolutions in order to become an (FRS) morphism. For other properties as below, an upper bound depending only on dimG can be given:
Theorem B (see Propositions 3.7 and 3.8). Let m N, let X ,...,X be smooth K-varieties, let ∈ 1 m G be a connected algebraic K-group, and let ϕ : X G m be a collection of strongly dominant { i i → }i=1 morphisms. (1) For any 1 i, j m the morphism ϕ ϕ is surjective. ≤ ≤ i ∗ j (2) If m dimG then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat. ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (3) If m dimG + 1 then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with reduced fibers. ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (4) If m dimG + 2 then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with normal fibers. ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (5) If m dimG + k, with k> 2, then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with normal fibers which are regular ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m in codimension k 1. − Furthermore, these bounds are tight.
It is a consequence of [Elk78] and [AA16, Corollary 2.2], that the (FRS) property is preserved under small deformations. This allows us to extend our main result, Theorem A, to families of morphisms (thus generalizing [GH19, Theorem 7.1]):
Theorem C. Let K and G be as in Theorem A, let Y be a K-variety, let X be a family of varieties over Y , and let ϕ : X G Y be a Y -morphism. Denote by ϕ : X G the fiber of ϕ at y Y . → × y y → ∈ Then, e e e e e e (1) The set Y ′ := y Y : X is smooth and ϕ : X G is strongly dominant is con- { ∈ y y y → } structible. (2) There exists N N such thate for any n > N, ande anyen points y ,...,y Y ′, the morphism ∈ 1 n ∈ ϕ ϕ : X X G is (FRS). y1 ∗···∗ yn y1 ×···× yn → As a consequence,e e we deducee the followinge theorem: Theorem D (See [GH19, Definition 7.7] for the definition of complexity). Let G be an algebraic K-group. For any dimG < D N, there exists N(D) N such that for any n > N(D) and n ∈ ∈ strongly dominant morphisms ϕ : X G n of complexity at most D where X n are smooth { i i → }i=1 { i}i=1 K-varieties, the morphism ϕ ϕ is (FRS). 1 ∗···∗ n 2See Definition 1.7 for the case where F is a non-Archimedean local field. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 5
1.1.2. Model-theoretic/analytic results. The heart of the proof of Theorems A and C lies in proving the model theoretic statements Theorems E, F, G and H, which are interesting on their own merits. We briefly explain this connection. Let denote the first order Denef-Pas language (see Section 2.2) and let Loc denote the collection LDP of all non-Archimedean local fields. We also use the notation F Loc to denote “F Loc ∈ > ∈ with large enough residual characteristic”. Given an algebraic Q-variety X, its ring of -motivic LDP functions (X) and the notion of an -motivic measure can be defined (e.g. see [GH19, Definitions C LDP 3.7 and 3.12]), building on the usual definition of the ring of motivic functions attached to an -definable set (see Definition 2.8). Any affine algebraic Q-variety X can be identified with an LDP -definable set by choosing some Z-model X of X. Roughly speaking, a motivic function f on a LDP Q-variety X is a collection f of functions f : X(F ) C, which is locally (on open affine { F }F ∈Loc> F → subsets) determined by a collection of -formulase as in Definition 2.8. For a smooth Q-variety LDP X, a collection of measures µ = µF F ∈Loc> on X(F ) F ∈Loc> is a motivic measure on X if there {l } { } exists an open affine cover X = Uj, such that µF Uj (F ) = (fj)F ωj F , where fj (Uj ) and ωj is j=1 | | | ∈C a non-vanishing top differential formS on Uj. An important property of the class of motivic functions is that it is preserved under integration (see [CL08, Theorem 10.1.1] and [CGH14, Theorem 4.3.1]). The (FRS) property of a morphism ϕ : X G has an equivalent analytic characterization in → terms of continuity of the pushforward measures ϕ (µ ), where µ is a certain collection ∗ F { F }F ∈Loc> of smooth, compactly supported measures on X(F ) (see Theorem 2.12 and Proposition { }F ∈Loc> 5.4). Since the collection µ can be chosen to be motivic, and since the pushforward of a motivic { F } measure is motivic, Theorem A can be reduced to statements about motivic functions. These statements are Theorems E and F. Theorem E. Let h (An ) be a motivic function and assume that h L1(F n) for every F ∈ C Q F ∈ ∈ Loc . Then there exists ǫ> 0, such that h L1+ǫ(F n) for every F Loc . > F ∈ ∈ > Definition 1.7. Let X be an analytic variety over a non-Archimedean local field F , with ring of integers . OF (1) A measure µ on X is called smooth if for every x X there exists x U X and an ∈ ∈ ⊆ analytic diffeomorphism ψ : U dimX , such that ψ (µ) is a Haar measure on dimX . → OF ∗ OF (2) Let f : X C be a function on X and s R . We say that f is locally-Ls, and write → ∈ >0 f Ls (X), if for every open compact U X, and for every (or equivalently for some ∈ Loc ⊆ positive) smooth measure µ on U, we have f Ls(U, µ). ∈ Theorem F. Let X be a smooth Q-variety and let h (X). Assume that h L1 (X(F )) for ∈ C F ∈ Loc every F Loc . Then there exists ǫ> 0 such that h L1+ǫ(X(F )) for every F Loc . ∈ > F ∈ Loc ∈ > Theorems E and F can be generalized to statements about families of functions, which can be used to deduce Theorem C. These are Theorems G and H:
n Theorem G (Theorem 4.2). Let h (AQ Y ) be a family of motivic functions parameterized ∈ C × 1 n by a Q-variety Y , and assume that for every F Loc> we have hF F n×{y} L (F ) for every ∈ | ∈ 1+ǫ n y Y (F ). Then there exists ǫ> 0, such that for every F Loc we have h n L (F ), ∈ ∈ > F |F ×{y} ∈ for every y Y (F ). ∈ Theorem H. Let ϕ : X Y be a smooth morphism of smooth algebraic Q-varieties. Let h (X) → ∈C be a motivic function, and assume that for every F Loc we have h L1 (X (F )) for ∈ > F |Xy(F ) ∈ Loc y every y Y (F ). Then there exists ǫ > 0, such that for every F Loc we have h ∈ ∈ > F |Xy(F ) ∈ L1+ǫ(X (F )) for every y Y (F ). Loc y ∈ ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 6
1.2. Further discussion of the main results. In [GH19] we proved Theorems A, C and D in the case where G is a vector space. The proof of Theorem A can be divided into four parts: (1) Reduction to the case when K = Q (Proposition 5.2, cf. [GH19, Section 6]). (2) Reduction to an analytic statement (Proposition 5.4, cf. [GH19, Proposition 3.16]). (3) Reduction to a model theoretic statement: (a) Reduction of (2) to Theorem F. (b) Further reduction to Theorem E. (4) Proof of Theorem E (the stronger Theorem G is proved in Section 4). The proof of the first two parts is essentially the same as in [GH19]. Let µ = µ be a { F }F ∈Loc motivic measure on X such that µ is smooth, non-negative and supported on X( ) for every F OF F Loc. Such a measure exists by [GH19, Proposition 3.14]. The reduction to Proposition 5.4 ∈ implies that in order to deduce Theorem A, we need to find N N, such that for F Loc the ∈ ∈ > measure ϕ∗N (µ . . . µ ) has continuous density with respect to the normalized Haar measure ∗ F × × F on G( ). OF The difference between this paper and [GH19] lies in (3) and (4). In [GH19], the decay properties of the Fourier transform of ϕ∗(µF ) were studied ([GH19, Theorem 5.2]), and were used to deduce that after sufficiently many self-convolutions we obtain a measure with continuous density ([GH19, Corollary 5.3]). A key ingredient in the proof was the fact that the Fourier transform is well behaved with respect to motivic functions3. If one wishes to use the line of proof of [GH19] in the general case, then a non-commutative Fourier transform must be used and this adds a serious complication. Due to this issue, we take a different approach, showing that given a motivic measure σ = σ on G, such that σ is supported { F }F ∈Loc F on G( ) and has an L1-density with respect to the normalized Haar measure on G( ), then OF OF there exists ǫ > 0 such that σ has L1+ǫ-density for every F Loc . This is Corollary 4.1 and F ∈ > it immediately follows from Theorem F. Taking σ := ϕ∗(µ) for µ as above, and applying Young’s convolution inequality yields the existence of an N(ǫ) N such that ϕ∗N(ǫ)(µ . . . µ ) has ∈ ∗ F × × F continuous density as required. Since, locally, any smooth variety admits an ´etale morphism to an affine space, and using the 1+ǫ fact that ´etale morphisms preserve the LLoc property of functions on F -analytic manifolds (see Lemma 4.5), it follows that Theorem F can be reduced to an analogous claim about vector spaces, i.e. Theorem E.
Remark 1.8. Note that after the reduction to Theorem E, we are again in the realm of vector spaces, for which it is tempting to use the results of [GH19]. In other words, a possible naive approach for proving Theorem E is to use [GH19, Theorem 5.2] to show that the Fourier transform (h )(y) of |F F | functions h as in Theorem E, decays faster than y α for some α< 0, and then answer the following | | general analytic question:
Question 1.9. Let F be a local field, and let h be any compactly supported, L1-function on F n whose Fourier transform (h)(y) decays faster than y α for some α< 0. Is there an ǫ> 0 such that h |F | | | is L1+ǫ?
3Furthermore, Cluckers and Loeser formulated the commutative Fourier transform in a motivic language, and intro- duced a class of motivic exponential functions, which is preserved under Fourier transform, see [CL10, Section 7] and [CH18, Section 3.4]. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 7
This is false, as an example given in Appendix A demonstrates. In particular, we see that the above naive approach cannot work, and it is indeed necessary to restrict our attention to the class of motivic functions.
1.2.1. Discussion of the model-theoretic results. In [Igu74, Igu75], it was shown that given a poly- nomial h Z [x , ..., x ] and 0 LDP -formula and W (ψ) = x F n : ψ(x) holds . In Theorems E and G we investigate integrals LDP F { ∈ } of the form s Ih(s, F ) := hF (x) dx, ˆF n | | where h = h : F n R is an -motivic function (note that we take the usual absolute value { F → } LDP | · | on R). This is a generalization of the last case, as Z (s, F )= I (s, F ), with h = f (x) 1 f,ψ h F | F |F · WF (ψ) and f an -definable function as before. LDP We want to find ǫ > 0 such that if I (1, F ) < (i.e. h is absolutely integrable) for F Loc , h ∞ F ∈ > then I (1 + ǫ, F ) < for F Loc . For h = f (x) 1 where f is -definable, this can h ∞ ∈ > F | F |F · WF (ψ) LDP be deduced from [BDOP13, Theorem B]. For h motivic (Definition 2.8), some complications arise; h N is now a finite sum of terms h = hi, where each hi does not have to be absolutely integrable (at j=1 least globally). In addition, eachPhi has a more complicated description than a definable function. These complications are dealt with in Section 4. The main idea in both the definable and motivic cases is to reduce Ih(s, F ) to a geometric power series (or a slight variant of such power series in the motivic case), whose convergence is easier to analyze. Let us explain the method for h = f (x) , with f definable. Let q be the size of the {| F |F }F ∈Loc> F residue field kF of F . We can write Ih(s, F ) as a sum over the level sets of hF , that is Ih(s, F ) = −ks n µk,F qF , where µk,F is the measure of the level set x F : val(fF (x)) = k . The convergence k∈Z · { ∈ } ofPIh(s, F ) then depends on the asymptotic behavior of µk,F with respect to k. By analyzing µk,F it can be shown (e.g. [BDOP13, proof of Theorem B] or [Pas89, Theorem 5.1]) that Ih(s, F ) can be written as a finite sum of expressions of the form
−n −ks−l1−...−ln (1.2) qF qF , η∈kr XF l ,...,lX, k Z 1 n ∈ σ(η, l1,...,ln, k) where σ is an -formula. Using elimination of quantifiers, and the rectilinearization Theorem LDP ([CGH14, Theorem 2.1.9]), we can write the expression appearing in (1.2) as a sum of finitely many ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 8 terms of the form
b1(s)e1+...+bl(s)el (1.3) qF , l (e1,...,eXl)∈N where b (s) are numbers depending on s. It can then be verified that the set of s R such that t ∈ (1.3) is summable is open, and does not depend on F , as required. In Section 4 we extend this result to the class of -motivic functions, by proving the more general Theorem G. LDP Integrability properties of motivic functions as above were furthermore studied in [CGH14] and [CGH18], where the Lp-integrability locus for p 1, 2, was shown to be motivic (exponential), ∈ { ∞} giving rise to Lp-integrability transfer principles between mixed characteristic and positive charac- teristic local fields (see [CGH18, Corollaries 3.2.2, 3.2.5]). We expect that such transfer principles should still hold for any p R . ∈ >0 1.3. Future questions and directions. Two interesting questions can be asked following this work. Firstly, one can try to measure how do the singularity properties of morphisms improve under the convolution operation more finely, by considering improvement of numeric singularity invariants. One especially interesting candidate for such exploration is the minimal exponent (see [Sai93, Sai, MP20b, MP20a, MP]). In the case of a divisor E on a smooth variety X, the minimal exponent
α˜E is defined as the negative of the largest root of bE(s)/(s + 1), where bE(s) is the Bernstein-Sato polynomial of E. The minimal exponent refines the log-canonical threshold lct(X, E), which equals min 1, α˜E , and further detects rational singularities - an effective integral divisor E has rational { } 1 singularities if and only ifα ˜E > 1 ([Sai93, Theorem 0.4] and [MP20b]). In the case of maps into A , the minimal exponent has deterministic behavior with respect to convolution; by a Thom-Sebastiani type result, if 0 = f ,f C[x , ..., x ] are homogeneous polynomials, thenα ˜ =α ˜ +α ˜ (see 6 1 2 ∈ 1 n f1∗f2 f1 f2 [Sai94] and [MP20b, Example 6.8]), whereα ˜fi =α ˜Ei for Ei the divisor defined by fi. The minimal exponent can be defined for an arbitrary closed subscheme Z X (See [MP] and [BMS06, Theorem ⊂ 4]). It would be very interesting to study the behavior of the minimal exponent of the fibers of a dominant morphism ϕ : X G under the convolution operation. → Secondly, one might try to generalize the main model theoretic results of this paper. For exam- ple, one might ask whether Theorem E holds when considering the more general class of motivic exponential functions (e.g. see [CGH16, Definition 2.7] or [CL10]).
1.4. Structure of the paper. In Section 2 we recall relevant preliminary material. In Section 3 we prove Theorem B. In Section 4 we prove Theorems E, F, G and H. In Section 5 we prove Theorems A, C and D. In Appendix A we provide a counter example to Question 1.9.
1.5. Conventions. Throughout the paper we use the following conventions: Unless explicitly stated otherwise, K is a field of characteristic 0 and F is a non-Archimedean • local field whose ring of integers is . OF For any K-scheme X and x X we denote by κ( x ) its residue field. • ∈ { } For a morphism ϕ : X Y of K-schemes, the scheme theoretic fiber at y Y is denoted • → ∈ by either X or Spec(κ( y )) X (if ϕ is understood we omit it from our notation). y,ϕ { } ×Y For a field extension K′/K and a K-variety X (resp K-morphism ϕ : X Y ), we denote • ′ → the base change of X (resp. ϕ) by X ′ := X Spec(K ) (resp. ϕ ′ : X ′ Y ′ ). K ×Spec(K) K K → K For a K-morphism ϕ : X Y between K-varieties X and Y , we denote by Xsm (resp. • → Xns) the smooth (resp. non-smooth) locus of X, and by Xsm,ϕ (resp. Xns,ϕ) the smooth (resp. non-smooth) locus of ϕ in X. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 9
We use F Loc to denote “F Loc with large enough residual characteristic”. • ∈ > ∈ 1.6. Acknowledgements. We thank Raf Cluckers, Ehud Hrushovski, Moshe Kamenski, Gady Kozma and Dan Mikulincer for useful conversations. We thank Shai Shechter for both useful conversations and for reading a preliminary version of this paper. We also thank the anonymous referee for valuable comments and remarks. A large part of this work was carried out while visiting Nir Avni at the mathematics department at Northwestern University, we thank them and Nir for their hospitality. We also wish to thank Nir for many helpful discussions, and for raising the question this paper answers together with Rami Aizenbud. Finally, it is a pleasure to thank our advisor Rami Aizenbud for numerous useful conversation, for his guidance, and for suggesting this question together with Nir. Both authors where partially supported by ISF grant 687/13, BSF grant 2012247 and a Minerva foundation grant.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Non-commutative Fourier transform. In this subsection we follow [App14, Sections 2.3, 4.1, 4.2]. Let G be a compact Hausdorff second countable group and let Gˆ be the set of equivalence classes of irreducible representations of G. Define the set (Gˆ) := EndC(π). We say that M π∈Gˆ a map T : Gˆ (Gˆ) is compatible if T (π) EndC(π) for any π Gˆ. We denote the space of → M ∈ ∈S compatible mappings by (Gˆ). The non-commutative Fourier transform is the map : L1(G) L F → (Gˆ), defined by L (f)(π)= f(g) π(g−1)dg, F ˆG · for each π Gˆ, where dg is the normalized Haar measure. For 1 p< , we set (Gˆ) to be the ∈ ≤ ∞ Hp linear space of all T (Gˆ) for which ∈L 1 p T := dim(π) T (π) p < , k kp · k kSch,p ∞ πX∈Gˆ 1 where T (π) := trace((T (π)T (π)∗)p/2) p is the Schatten p-norm. This gives (Gˆ) a struc- k kSch,p Hp 2 2 ture of a Banach space. In particular, T 2= dim(π) T (π) HS < , where HS is the k k π∈Gˆ · k k ∞ k · k Hilbert-Schmidt norm. This gives (Gˆ) a structureP of a complex Hilbert space with an inner H2 product T , T := dim(π) T (π), T (π) . h 1 2i · h 1 2 iHS πX∈Gˆ The restriction of to L2(G) has the following properties: F Theorem 2.1 (See e.g. [App14, Theorem 2.3.1]). (1) (Fourier expansion) For all f L2(G), we have ∈ f(g)= dim(π) trace( (f)(π)π(g)) · F πX∈Gˆ (2) (Parseval-Plancherel identity) The operator is an isometry from L2(G) into (Gˆ) so F H2 that for all f,f ,f L2(G), 1 2 ∈ 2 2 f(g) dg = dim(π) (f)(π) HS , ˆG | | kF k πX∈Gˆ ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 10
and
f1(g) f2(g)dg = dim(π) (f1)(π), (f2)(π) HS. ˆG · hF F i πX∈Gˆ Here are some additional properties of the Fourier transform: Theorem 2.2 ([App14, Theorem 2.3.2] and [Edw72, Section 2.14]). p ˆ 1 1 (1) If 1 p 2 and f L (G), then (f) q(G), where p + q = 1 and (f) q f p. ≤ ≤ ∈1 F ∈H kF k ≤ k k (2) Let (G) := f L (G) : (f) 1 < . Then (G) consists of continuous functions, and A { ∈ kF k ∞} A −1 is a commutative Banach algebra with respect to convolution f1 f2(x)= G f1(g)f2(g x)dg. ∗ ´ The Fourier transform can be defined for probability measures as well. For a probability measure µ and any π Gˆ we define ∈ (µ)(π)(v) := π(g−1)vdµ. F ˆG Notice that if µ is absolutely continuous with respect to dg with density f , then (µ)(π) = µ F (f )(π). F µ Proposition 2.3. Let µ and µ be probability measures on G, and let π Gˆ. Then 1 2 ∈ (µ µ )(π)= (µ )(π) (µ )(π). F 1 ∗ 2 F 1 · F 2 Finally, the spaces (Gˆ) satisfy the classical H¨older’s inequality, as well as its generalization: Hp
Proposition 2.4 (Generalization of H¨older’s inequality). Let r (0, ] and let p1,...,pn (0, ] n ∈ ∞ ∈ ∞ such that 1 = 1 . Then for any collection T n , with T (Gˆ) we have n T (Gˆ). pk r k k=1 k pk k=1 k r k=1 { } ∈H ∈H P Q Proof. The Schatten norms satisfy (a generalized version of) H¨older’s inequality, that is, for any n n A1, A2, ..., An EndC(π) we have Ak Ak . Hence, ∈ k k=1 kSch,r ≤ k=1 k kSch,pk 1 n Q n Qr r Tk = dim(π) Tk(π) · k=1 r π∈Gˆ k=1 Sch,r Y X Y 1 n r r dim(π) Tk(π) Sch,p ≤ · k k k ! πX∈Gˆ kY=1 1/p n k n pk dim(π) Tk(π) = Tk < , ≤ · k kSch,pk k kpk ∞ kY=1 πX∈Gˆ kY=1 where the second inequality follows from the generalized H¨older inequality for Lp(G,ˆ v), with respect to the measure v(A)= dim(π) for A Gˆ (instead of the usual counting measure). π∈A ⊆ P Lemma 2.5. Let G be a compact group and let f Ls(G) for 1 2.2. The Presburger language, the Denef-Pas language, and motivic functions. The Pres- burger language, denoted = (+, , , , 0, 1) LPres − ≤ {≡mod n}n>0 consists of the language of ordered abelian groups along with constants 0, 1 and a family of 2- relations of congruences modulo n. We consider in this paper only the structures {≡mod n}n>0 isomorphic to Z. Definition 2.6 (See [Clu03, Definition 1] and [CL08, Section 4.1]). Let S Zn and X S Zm be ⊆ ⊂ × -definable sets. We call a definable function f : X Z S-linear if there is an -definable LPres → LPres function γ : S Z and integers ai and 0 ci Definition 2.8 (See [CGH16, Definitions 2.3-2.6]). Let n1,n2,n3 and M be natural numbers. n1 n2 n3 (1) A collection X = (XF )F ∈LocM of subsets XF F kF Z is called a definable set if ′ ⊆ × × there is an -formula φ and M N such that X = φ(F ) for every F Loc ′ . LDP ∈ F ∈ M (2) Let X and Y be definable sets. A definable function is a collection f = (fF )F ∈LocM of functions f : X Y , such that the collection of their graphs Γ is a definable F F → F { fF }F ∈LocM set. (3) Let X be a definable set. A collection h = (h ) of functions h : X R is called a F F ∈LocM F F → motivic (or constructible) function on X, if for F Loc it can be written in the following ∈ M way (for every x X ): ∈ F N N ′ N ′′ αi,F (x) 1 hF (x)= Yi,F,x qF βij,F (x) aij , | | 1 qF Xi=1 jY=1 jY=1 − where, ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 12 N,N ′ and N ′′ are integers and a are non-zero integers. • il α : X Z and β : X Z are definable functions. • i → ij → Y = ξ kri : (x,ξ) Y is the fiber over x where Y X RFri are definable • i,F,x { ∈ F ∈ i,F } i ⊆ × sets and r N. i ∈ The integer q is the size of the residue field k . • F F The set of motivic functions on a definable set X forms a ring, which we denote by (X). C The following theorem is used in the proof of the main analytic result, Theorem G. Theorem 2.9 (Uniform rectilinearization, see [CGH14, Theorem 4.5.4]). Let Y and X Y Zm be ⊆ × -definable sets. Then there exist finitely many -definable sets A Y Zm and B Y Zm LDP LDP i ⊂ × i ⊂ × and -definable isomorphisms ρ : A B over Y such that for F Loc the following hold: LDP i i → i ∈ > (1) The sets Ai,F are disjoint and their union equals XF , (2) For every i, the function ρi,F can be written as ρi,F (y,x1, ..., xm) = (y, αi,F (x1, ..., xm)+ βi,F (y)), with α being -linear, and β an -definable function from Y to Z. i LPres i LDP (3) For each y Y , the set B is a set of the form Λ Zli for a finite set Λ Zm−li ∈ F i,F,y y × ≥0 y ⊂ ≥0 depending on y, with an integer l 0 depending only on i. i ≥ 2.3. The (FRS) property. Recall that given a variety X, a resolution of singularities is a proper birational map p : X X from a smooth variety X to X. → Definition 2.10. eWe say that X has rational singularitiese if for any resolution of singularities p : X X the natural morphism Rp ( e ) is a quasi-isomorphism where Rp ( ) is the → OX → ∗ OX ∗ − higher direct image functor. e Definition 2.11 ([AA16, Section 1.2.1, Definition II]). Let ϕ : X Y be a morphism between → smooth K-varieties X and Y . (1) We say that ϕ : X Y is (FRS) at x X(K) if it is flat at x, and there exists an open → ∈ x U X such that U ϕ(x) is reduced and has rational singularities. ∈ ⊆ ×Y { } (2) We say that ϕ : X Y is (FRS) if it is flat and it is (FRS) at x for all x X(K). → ∈ The (FRS) property has the following analytic characterization: Theorem 2.12 ([AA16, Theorem 3.4]). Let ϕ : X Y be a map between smooth algebraic varieties → defined over a finitely generated field K of characteristic 0, and let x X(K). Then the following ∈ conditions are equivalent: (1) ϕ is (FRS) at x. (2) There exists a Zariski open neighborhood x U X such that for any K F Loc ∈ ⊆ ⊆ ∈ and any smooth, compactly supported measure µ on U(F ), the measure (ϕ ) (µ) has |U(F ) ∗ continuous density. (3) For any finite extension K′/K, there exists K′ F Loc and a non-negative smooth, ⊆ ∈ compactly supported measure µ on X(F ) that does not vanish at x such that (ϕ ) (µ) |X(F ) ∗ has continuous density. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 13 3. Properties of convolutions of morphisms In this section we discuss properties of the convolution operation (as defined in Definition 1.1). We first recall the following proposition from [GH19], which is a consequence of Proposition 1.3. Proposition 3.1 ([GH19, Corollary 3.3]). Let X and Y be smooth algebraic K-varieties, G be an algebraic K-group and let S be any of the following properties of morphisms: (1) Smoothness. (2) (FRS). (3) Flatness (or flatness with reduced fibers). (4) Dominance. Suppose ϕ : X G has property S and ψ : Y G is any morphism, then the maps ϕ ψ : X Y → → ∗ × → G and ψ ϕ : Y X G have the property S. ∗ × → Remark 3.2. Dominance is not preserved under base change, but is still preserved under the con- volution operation. Definition 3.3. Let ϕ : X Y be a morphism between K-schemes. → (1) The morphism ϕ is called normal at x X if it is flat at x and the fiber X is geo- ∈ ϕ(x),ϕ metrically normal at x over κ( ϕ(x) ). Likewise, ϕ is called normal if it is normal at every { } x X (see [Sta20, Definition 36.18.1]). ∈ (2) The morphism ϕ is called (FGI) if it is flat with geometrically irreducible fibers. Lemma 3.4. The following properties of morphisms are preserved under base change and compo- sition: (1) Normality between smooth K-varieties. (2) (FGI). Proof. We start by showing that these properties are preserved under base change; given a normal morphism ϕ : X Y , and a base change ϕ : X Z Z of ϕ with respect to a morphism → ×Y → ψ : Z Y , the fibers of ϕ are base change of the fibers of ϕ by a field extension, and hence they → are geometrically normal (see e.g. [Sta20, Lemmae 32.10.4]). The proof for the (FGI) property is similar. e Let ϕ : X Y and ϕ : Y Z be two normal morphisms between smooth K-varieties. By Serre’s 1 → 2 → criterion (S2 + R1) for normality (see e.g. [Sta20, Lemmas 10.151.4]) and the fact that fibers of flat morphisms between smooth varieties are Cohen-Macaulay (as they are local complete intersections), it is enough to show that the fibers of ϕ ϕ are regular in codimension 1. Let W be a codimension 2 ◦ 1 one subvariety of X , the fiber of ϕ ϕ at z Z. By flatness of ϕ , the set ϕ (W ) is of z,ϕ2◦ϕ1 2 ◦ 1 ∈ 1 1 codimension at most one in Y , and hence there exists y Y such that X W is not z,ϕ2 ∈ z,ϕ2 y,ϕ1 ∩ trivial, and y is a smooth point of Y , or equivalently, y is a smooth point of ϕ . But X W z,ϕ2 2 y,ϕ1 ∩ is of codimension at most one in X and hence, by assumption, there exists x X W such y,ϕ1 ∈ y,ϕ1 ∩ that ϕ is smooth at x. This implies that ϕ ϕ is smooth at x and hence x is a smooth point of 1 2 ◦ 1 X , so W Xsm is not empty as required. z,ϕ2◦ϕ1 ∩ z,ϕ2◦ϕ1 Now let ϕ : X Y and ϕ : Y Z be two (FGI) morphisms. In order to prove that ϕ ϕ is 1 → 2 → 2 ◦ 1 (FGI) we need the following lemma: Lemma 3.5 (See [Sta20, Lemma 5.8.12]). Let f : X X be a continuous map between topological 1 → 2 spaces, such that f is open, X2 is irreducible, and there exists a dense collection of points y X2 −1 ∈ such that f (y) is irreducible. Then X1 is irreducible. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 14 ′ Now let z Z, set K = κ( z ) and denote X := (Y ) ′ , X := (X ) ′ , and f := ϕ : ∈ { } 2 z,ϕ2 K 1 z,ϕ2◦ϕ1 K 1|X1 X X . Notice that f is flat as a base change of a flat map, and thus open. Moreover, by our 1 → 2 assumption, X2 is irreducible and all the fibers of f are irreducible. Since f satisfies the conditions of the above lemma, we deduce that X1 is irreducible, as required. As a consequence, we arrive at the following: Corollary 3.6. Proposition 3.1 holds if the property S is either normality or (FGI). Proposition 3.7. Let m N, let X ,...,X be smooth K-varieties, let G be a connected algebraic ∈ 1 m K-group, and let ϕ : X G m be a collection of strongly dominant morphisms. { i i → }i=1 (1) For any 1 i, j m the morphism ϕ ϕ is surjective. ≤ ≤ i ∗ j ns,ϕ ∗...∗ϕm ns,ϕ1 ns,ϕm (2) We have (X . . . X ) 1 X . . . Xm , and in particular the non-smooth 1 × × m ⊆ 1 × × locus of ϕ . . . ϕ is of codimension at least m in X . . . X . 1 ∗ ∗ m 1 × × m (3) If m dimG then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat. ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (4) If m dimG + 1 then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with reduced fibers. ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (5) If m dimG + 2 then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with normal fibers (i.e. it is a normal morphism). ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (6) If m dimG + k, with k> 2, then ϕ . . . ϕ is flat with normal fibers which are regular ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m in codimension k 1. − Proof. (1) Follows from the fact that every two open dense sets U1,U2 G satisfy U1 U2 = G. ⊆ sm,ϕi · (2) This holds since smoothness is preserved under convolution and Xi is of codimension at least 1 for any 1 i m. ≤ ≤ (3) It is enough to show that every fiber of ϕ ... ϕ is of co-dimension dimG (cf. [Har77, 1 ∗ ∗ m III, Exercise 10.9]). Since (X . . . X )ns,ϕ1∗...∗ϕm is of codimension at least m and the 1 × × m irreducible components of any fiber of ϕ ... ϕ are of codimension at most dim G, it is 1 ∗ ∗ m sufficient to choose m dimG to guarantee that any irreducible component of a given fiber ≥ of ϕ ... ϕ contains a smooth point of ϕ ... ϕ and hence is of codimension dimG. 1 ∗ ∗ m 1 ∗ ∗ m (4) Let m dimG + 1 and let Z be a fiber of ϕ ... ϕ . By (2) and (3) it follows that ≥ 1 ∗ ∗ m (X . . . X )ns,ϕ1∗...∗ϕm Z is of codimension at least m dimG in Z. In particular Z 1 × × m ∩ − is generically reduced (by e.g. [Har77, III, Theorem 10.2]), and since ϕ . . . ϕ is flat, it 1 ∗ ∗ m follows that Z is reduced as well (see e.g. [Sta20, Lemma 10.151.3]). (5) Similar to the proof of (4), where we now use Serre’s criterion (S2 + R1) for normality. (6) Follows from the proof of (4). Proposition 3.8. The bounds in Proposition 3.7 are tight. Proof. Let G = (Am, +) and consider the map ϕ : Am G, defined by → 2 2 2 2 ϕ(x1,...,xm) = (x1, (x1x2) , (x1x3) ,..., (x1xm) ). Notice that the fibers of ϕ are zero dimensional except the fiber over 0, which is (m 1)-dimensional. − Now, (ϕ∗d)−1(0) contains the d(m 1)-dimensional subvariety ϕ−1(0) . . . ϕ−1(0). As long as − × × d times d(m 1) >m(d 1), or equivalently d But since ϕ is not smooth at ϕ−1(0), the morphism ϕ∗(m+k) is not smooth at ϕ−1(0) . . . ϕ−1(0), × × m+k times so (ϕ∗(m+k))−1(0) is not regular in codimension k. In particular, (ϕ∗m)−1(0) is not reduced and | {z } (ϕ∗(m+1))−1(0) is not normal. We conclude the section with the following observation: Proposition 3.9. Let ϕ : X G be a morphism from a smooth algebraic K-variety X to an → algebraic K-group G. Assume that ϕ is not smooth at x X(K) with ϕ(x) in the center of G(K). ∈ Then for any t N we have that ϕ∗t : Xt G is not smooth at (x, ..., x). ∈ → Proof. Write m : Gt G for the multiplication map. Since ϕ(x) is central, the following holds for → any Y , ..., Y T (X): 1 t ∈ x dϕ∗t (Y , ..., Y )= dm (dϕ , ..., dϕ )(Y , ..., Y ) (x,...,x) 1 t (ϕ(x),...,ϕ(x)) ◦ x x 1 t t = dϕ (Y ) Im(dϕ ), x i ⊆ x Xi=1 ∗t so dϕ(x,...,x) is not surjective. We therefore see that by convolving a non-smooth morphism sufficiently many times, we may achieve certain singularity properties as in Proposition 3.1 and in Theorem A, but one can not hope in general to obtain a smooth morphism. That said, the following example shows that such a situation might still occur. Example 3.10. Let G = U3(C) be the group of upper triangular unipotent matrices with complex values and consider the morphism ϕ : A3 G given by C → 1 x 1 x x 1 − 1 3 ϕ(x1,x2,x3)= 0 1 x2 . 0 0 1 Note that ϕ is not smooth at (0,x , 0) for any x C, but ϕ∗2 is already a smooth morphism: 2 2 ∈ 1 x1 + y1 2 (x1x3 + y1y3 + (x1 1)y2) ∗2 − − ϕ (x1,x2,x3,y1,y2,y3)= 0 1 x2 + y2 . 0 0 1 4. Main analytic results In this section we prove Theorems E, F, G, and H. In [GH19, Theorem 5.2] we have shown that given a compactly supported motivic function h ∈ (An ), with h integrable for every F Loc , then (h )(y) decays faster than y α for some α C Q | F | ∈ > F F | | ∈ R . We deduced that any compactly supported motivic measure µ = µ on F n <0 { F }F ∈Loc> { }F ∈Loc> has a continuous density after enough self-convolutions. Using the analytic criterion for the (FRS) property (Theorem 2.12), we were then able to prove Theorem A in the case where G is a vector space. If G is not abelian, a problem arises as the non-commutative Fourier transform is not as well behaved with respect to the class (G) of motivic functions. Thus, a direct generalization of the C proof given in [GH19, Theorem 5.2] by bounding the decay rate of the Fourier transform is harder. Hence, we would like to show that compactly supported, L1, motivic functions become continuous after sufficiently many self convolutions, without having to estimate the decay rate of their Fourier ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 16 transform. Theorems E and F solve this problem. Indeed, Theorem F easily implies the following corollary: Corollary 4.1. Let G be an algebraic Q-group, and let µ be a motivic measure on G, such that µF is supported on G( ) and is absolutely continuous with respect to the Haar measure ν on G( ) OF F OF with density f . Then there exists ǫ> 0 such that f L1+ǫ(G( ),ν ) for every F Loc . F F ∈ OF F ∈ > Notice that in the setting of Corollary 4.1, since f L1+ǫ(G( ),ν ) for every F Loc , F ∈ OF F ∈ > then after enough self-convolutions it will have a continuous density (see Lemma 2.5), as desired. Corollary 4.1 will be used in Section 5 to deduce Theorem A. 4.1. Proof of Theorem G. We now prove Theorem G (which directly implies Theorem E): n Theorem 4.2 (Theorem G). Let h (AQ Y ) be a family of motivic functions parameterized ∈ C × 1 n by a Q-variety Y , and assume that for every F Loc> we have hF F n×{y} L (F ) for every ∈ | ∈ 1+ǫ n y Y (F ). Then there exists ǫ> 0, such that for every F Loc we have h n L (F ), ∈ ∈ > F |F ×{y} ∈ for every y Y (Q). ∈ In order to prove Theorem 4.2 we show the following proposition: ′ Proposition 4.3. Let Y VFn be an -definable set, and let h (VFn Y ) be a motivic ⊂ LDP ∈ C × function. Then for every F Loc the integral h (x,y) 1+ǫ dx can be written as a finite sum ∈ > F n | F | of terms of the form ´ 1+ǫ N˜ 2 d1 ds s ( +d )e +...+( +d )es B c (ξ,~ y, λ)q 1+ǫ i1 1 1+ǫ is ebij , F,ξ,y~ i,F F j N˜ s i=1 j=1 ~ 1 λ∈Λy (e1,...,es)∈Z≥0 ξ∈XkF X X X Y ˜ where N˜ , N˜ ,s and b are non-negative integers, B RFN1+r Y is an -definable set, Λ are 1 2 ij ⊆ × LDP y finite Presburger sets depending on y, ci are motivic functions and di, dij are integers (both sides of the equation might be infinite for certain values of y and ǫ). Proof. By Definition 2.8, hF (x,y) can be written as N N1 N2 αi,F (x,y) 1 hF (x,y)= Yi,F,x,y qF βij,F (x,y) aij , | | 1 qF Xi=1 jY=1 jY=1 − ′ for (x,y) F n Y (F ) F n F n . By quantifier elimination (see [Pas89, Theorem 4.1] or [CL08, ∈ × ⊆ × N3 Theorem 2.1.1] for a reformulation more suitable to our needs), there exists a collection gi i=1 of n r { } polynomials g Z[x ,...,x ,y ,...,y ′ ], such that each Y VF Y RF can be defined by a i ∈ 1 n 1 n i ⊆ × × finite disjunction of formulas of the form χ(ac(g (x,y)),..., ac(g (x,y)), ξ~′) θ(val(g (x,y)),..., val(g (x,y))), 1 N3 ∧ 1 N3 where ξ~′ RFr, χ is an formula and θ is an formula. Define the following level sets ∈ LRes LPres (parameterized by the value group variables ~m, ~n,~k and the residue field variables ξ~): A (y) := x VFn : (α (x,y), β (x,y)) = (m ,n ) for all 1 i N, 1 j N , ~m,~n { ∈ i ij i ij ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ 1} A′ (y) := x VFn : (ac(g (x,y)), val(g (x,y))) = (ξ , k ) for all 1 i N . ξ,~ ~k { ∈ i i i i ≤ ≤ 3} Clearly, for every y Y (F ) the functions α and β are constant on each A (y) and Y ∈ i,F ij,F ~m,~n,F | i,F,x,y| is constant on each A′ (y). Furthermore, using the disjointness of the VG and RF sorts there ξ,~ ~k,F ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 17 ˆ N3 N ′ exists a finite partition Z = ′ D ′ such that each Y is constant on A (y) for i =1 i i,F,x,y ξ,~ ~k,F | | ~ k∈Di′ ′ ~ ~ S 1+ǫ n S each i . Set aF (~m, ~n, k, ξ,y)= ′ dx. Integrating hF over F we get, A ~m,~n(y)∩A (y) ´ ~k,ξ~ | | (4.1) 1+ǫ Nˆ N N1 1+ǫ ~ ~ ~ mi hF (x,y) dx = aF (~m, ~n, k, ξ,y) ci,i′,F (ξ,y) qF nij , ˆ n F | | N ′ · · · ξ~∈k 3 i =1 N(N1+1) i=1 j=1 XF X (~m, ~n) XZ X Y ∈ ~k D ′ ∈ i ~ N2 1 ~ where ci,i′,F (ξ,y)= Yi,F,x,y j=1 aij depends only on ξ and y (as explained above). | | · 1−qF Using [BDOP13, Theorem 4.1]Q repeatedly, as was done in [Pas89, proof of Theorem 5.1] and [BDOP13, proof of Theorem B], we can write aF (~m, ~n,~k, ξ,y~ ) as a finite sum of terms of the form −n −l1−...−ln (4.2) qF qF , ′ ~η∈kr n XF ~l XZ ∈ σ(~l, ~m, ~n,~k, ξ,~ ~η, y) where σ is an -formula. By quantifier elimination, the formula σ is equivalent to LDP L χ (ξ,~ ~η, ac(g′(y))) θ (~l, ~m, ~n,~k, val(g′(y))), i ∧ i i_=1 where ac(g′(y)) := ac(g′ (y)),..., ac(g′ (y)) and similarly for val(g′(y)), and each χ is an - 1 N4 i Res ′ L L formula, each θ is an -formula and g Z[y ,...,y ′ ]. Given I 0, 1 , set i LPres j ∈ 1 n ∈ { } ′ B (ξ,y~ ) := ~η RFr : 1 i L, χ (ξ,~ ~η, y) holds I(i) = 1 I { ∈ ∀ ≤ ≤ i ⇐⇒ } ~ r′ ~ and θI := I(i)=1 θi. Then for each y and ξ, we have RF = BI (ξ,y), and we can write (4.2) I∈{0,1}L as W S B (ξ,y~ ) q−n−l1−...−ln . I,F · F I∈{0,1}L ~ Zn X l X ∈ θI (~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) ′ Set N = N(N +1)+ N and θ ′ := (~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) : θ (~k D ′ ) then (4.1) can be written as a 1 3 I,i { I ∧ ∈ i } sum of finitely many expressions of the form 1+ǫ Nˆ N N1 −n−l1−...−ln mi B (ξ,y~ ) q c ′ (ξ,y~ ) q n . I,F F i,i ,F F ij N ′ L ′ · · · ξ~∈k 3 i =1 I∈{0,1} ~ ~ n+N i=1 j=1 XF X X (l, ~m, ~n, Xk) Z X Y ∈ ′ ~ ~ θI,i (l, ~m, ~n, k,y) It is enough to show that the above sum can be written as in the statement of the proposition when L ′ ˆ we fix I0 0, 1 and 1 i N. Set θ := θI ,i′ and ci = ci,i′ , and consider the sum ∈ { } ≤ 0 ≤ 0 0 0 1+ǫ N N1 (4.3) q−l1−...−ln c (ξ,y~ ) qmi n . F i,F · F · ij ′ i=1 j=1 (~l, ~m, ~n,~Xk) Zn+N X Y ∈ ~ ~ θ(l, ~m, ~n, k,y) ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 18 By uniform rectilinearization (Theorem 2.9), we have the following decomposition: L′ ′ (~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) Zn+N Y : θ(~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) = C , { ∈ × } j j[=1 ′ where for each j there exists an -definable isomorphism ρ : C B′ Y Zn+N over Y , LDP j j → j ⊂ × such that for each y Y (F ), ∈ ′ ′ ∼ s (4.4) ρ : C := (~l, ~m, ~n,~k) Zn+N : (~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) C Λ Z j = B′ j|Cj,y j,y { ∈ ∈ j} −→ y × ≥0 j,y ′ is Pres-linear (see Definition 2.6) for some integer sj 0 depending only on Cj, and a finite set L n+N ′−s′ ≥ Λ Z j depending on y. We can therefore write y ⊂ ≥0 (4.5) ρ (~l, ~m, ~n,~k)= β (~l, ~m, ~n,~k)+ γ (val(g′(y))), j|Cj,y j j n+N ′ where βj is Pres-linear and γj is Pres-definable (functions to Z ). By Theorem 2.7, we may L L ′ further assume that γ is -linear. Since the collection C L is finite, by breaking (4.3) to j LPres { j}j=1 finitely many summands, it is enough to consider 1+ǫ N N1 (4.6) q−l1−...−ln c (ξ,y~ ) qmi n . F i,F · F · ij ′ i=1 j=1 (~l, ~m, ~n,~Xk) Zn+N X Y ∈ (~l, ~m, ~n,~k,y) C ∈ j We thus may assume that ρ has the form of (4.5). j|Cj,y Fix C := C , set s′ := s′ and let y Y (F ). We can reparameterize according to (4.4) and use (4.5) j j ∈ to write the sum (4.6) as follows: N 1+ǫ T (~e,y,λ) ~ Ti(~e,y,λ) ′ (4.7) qF ci,F (ξ,y)qF Pi,λ(e1,...,es′ , val(g (y))) , ′ λ∈Λy s i=1 (e1,...,es′ )∈Z≥ X X 0 X where Pi,λ are polynomials with rational coefficients and ′ ′ s N4 s N4 ′ ′ ′ ′ T (~e, y, λ)= τ(λ)+ djej + djval(gj(y)) and Ti(~e, y, λ)= τi(λ)+ dijej + dijval(gj(y)), Xj=1 Xj=1 Xj=1 Xj=1 ′ ′ where dj, dij are integers and di, dij are rational numbers and τ(λ),τi(λ) are Z-valued affine functions in λ with rational coefficients. Now we are done as we may write (4.7) as follows (note we abuse notation by keeping the symbols dj and dij although we now possibly sum over more elements): ′ 1+ǫ d N5 d1 s′ s ( +di )e1+...+( +d ′ )e ′ c′ (ξ,~ λ, y)q 1+ǫ 1 1+ǫ is s ebij . i,F F j s′ λ∈Λy (e ,...,e ′ )∈Z i=1 j=1 X 1 Xs ≥0 X Y To prove Theorem 4.2 we further need the following easy variant of [CGH14, Lemma 2.1.8]. Lemma 4.4. Let h : Zs C be a function of the form ≥0 → N s bi1e1+...+bises aij h(e1,...,es)= ciq ej Xi=1 jY=1 ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 19 where q R , a , b , c R, the tuples (b , . . . , b , a , . . . , a ) N are mutually distinct and ∈ >1 ij ij i ∈ { i1 is i1 is }i=1 c = 0. Then for every r> 0 it holds that i 6 h(e ,...,e ) r < | 1 s | ∞ (e ,...,e )∈Zs 1 Xs ≥0 if and only bij < 0 for every i and j. n′ Proof of Theorem 4.2. We may assume that Y is affine and embedded in AQ . By choosing a Z- n′ model we may assume that Y VF is an DP-definable set. Using Proposition 4.3 the integral 1+ǫ ⊆ L F n hF (x,y) dx can be written as a sum of finitely many expressions of the form ´ | | ˜ 1+ǫ N2 d1 ds s ( +di1)e1+...+( +dis)es b ( ) B c (ξ,~ y, λ)q 1+ǫ 1+ǫ e ij . ∗ F,ξ,y~ i,F F j N˜ s i=1 j=1 ~ 1 λ∈Λy (e1,...,es)∈Z≥0 ξ∈XkF X X X Y ˜ N2 d1 We may assume the tuples (di1,...,dis, bi1, . . . , bis) i=1 are mutually distinct and thus ( 1+ǫ + { ˜ } { d ,..., ds +d , b , . . . , b ) N2 are mutually distinct for every ǫ> 0. We may furthermore assume i1 1+ǫ is i1 is }i=1 B c (ξ,~ y, λ) 0 for infinitely many local fields F Loc with residual characteristic as large F,ξ,y~ · i,F 6≡ ∈ as we like, as otherwise we may discard the i-th summand from the inner summation in ( ). Since ∗ h (x,y ) is absolutely integrable on F n y for every F Loc and y Y (F ), each summand F × { } ∈ > ∈ ( ) converges for every F Loc and y Y (F ) when we set ǫ = 0. By our assumption, for every ∗ ∈ > ∈ 1 i N˜ there exist infinitely many F Loc with y Y (F ) such that B c (ξ,~ y, λ) = 0 ≤ ≤ 2 ∈ > ∈ F,ξ,y~ · i,F 6 ~ for some ξ and λ. Using Lemma 4.4, it follows that dj + dij < 0 for every 1 j s. ˜ ≤ ≤ Since kN1 and Λ are finite for every F Loc and y Y (F ) it is enough to show that for each of F y ∈ > ∈ the following sums there exists ǫ> 0 such that it converges: ˜ 1+ǫ N2 d s ( 1 +d )e +...+( ds +d )e ~ 1+ǫ i1 1 1+ǫ is s bij ( ) ci,F (ξ, y, λ)qF ej . ∗∗ s (e1,...,es)∈Z i=1 j=1 X ≥0 X Y Using Lemma 4.4 again, we are done as there exists ǫ > 0 satisfying the finitely many conditions dj + dij < 0 . 1+ǫ i,j n o 4.2. Proof of Theorems F and H. For the proof of Theorem H we need the following lemma: Lemma 4.5. Let X and Y be smooth F -varieties, with F Loc, ω and ω be invertible top forms ∈ X Y on X and Y respectively, and let ϕ : X Y be an ´etale map. Let µ be a compactly supported → F non-negative measure on X(F ), which is absolutely continuous with respect to ω , with density | X |F f. Then ϕ∗µF is absolutely continuous with respect to ωY F with density f, and for any 1 s< , s s | | ≤ ∞ we have f L (Y (F ), ωY F ) if and only if f L (X(F ), ωX F ). ∈ | | ∈ | | e Proof. Recalle f is positive. Since ϕ is ´etale, it is quasi-finite and smooth, and we have f(y)= f(x) ωϕ,F (x), −1 · x∈ϕ X(y)(F ) e ωX where ωϕ,F (x) := ∗ (x) is an invertible function. Let B be a compact open subset of X(F ) ϕ ωY F such that supp(f) B and 1 s< . Then there exist constants c(s),C(s) > 0 such that c(s) < ⊆ ≤ ∞ ω (x)s−1 Now, since ϕ is quasi-finite it holds that sup ϕ−1(y)(F ) < M for some M N, and since s y∈Y (F ) ∈ | · | is a quasi-norm there exists d(s) > 0 such that s s s s s f(x) ωϕ,F (x) f(y) d(s) f(x) ωϕ,F (x) . −1 · ≤ ≤ −1 · x∈ϕ X(y)(F ) x∈ϕ X(y)(F ) e Since f and f are compactly supported, the following implies the claim: s s s−1 s s ∗ c(s) ef(x) ωX F < f(x) ωϕ,F (x) ωX F = f(x) ωϕ,F (x) ϕ ωY F ˆϕ−1(V ) | | ˆϕ−1(V ) · | | ˆϕ−1(V ) · | | N s s ∗ s = f(x) ωϕ,F (x) ϕ ωY F f(y) ωY F ˆUi · | | ≤ ˆV | | Xi=1 N e s s ∗ d(s) f(x) ωϕ,F (x) ϕ ωY F ≤ ˆUi · | | Xi=1 s s−1 s = d(s) f(x) ωϕ,F (x) ωX F C(s)d(s) f(x) ωX F . ˆϕ−1(V ) · | | ≤ ˆϕ−1(V ) | | Proof of Theorems F and H. Theorem F follows from Theorem H by choosing Y = Spec(Q), so it is left to prove Theorem H. Since ϕ is smooth we may assume that Y is affine and that ϕ : X Y factors as follows (where → n := dimX dimY ), − ψ π ϕ : X An Y Y → Q × → with π the projection to the second coordinate and ψ ´etale. For any y Y (F ) we can consider the n ∈ n base change ψ Xy : Xy AF y which is an ´etale F -morphism. Set f := ψ∗(h) (AQ Y ) | → ×1 { } n ∈ C × and notice that fF F n×{y} LLoc(F ). We would like to find ǫ > 0 such that for F Loc>, 1+ǫ |n ∈ ∈ f n L (F ) for any y Y (F ). F |F ×{y} ∈ Loc ∈ n 1 n Let f (AQ Y AQ) be the pullback of f by the projection to AQ Y , and consider f 1B n ∈ C 1 × × n × · ∈ (AQ Y AQ) with B = (x,y,t) : val(x) > val(t) VF Y VF, where val(x)= min val(xi) for C e× × { }⊆ × × 1≤i≤n e 1 n x = (x1, ..., xn). By Theorem G, since (fF 1B(F )) F n×{(y,t)} L (F ) for any (y,t) Y (F ) F , then · | ∈ 1+ǫ ∈n × there exists ǫ> 0 such that for F Loc> we have (fF 1B(F )) F n×{(y,t)} L (F ) for any (y,t). ∈1+ǫf n · | ∈ 1+ǫ But this implies that f n L (F ) for any y Y (F ). By Lemma 4.5, h L for F |F ×{y} ∈ Loc ∈ F |Xy(F ) ∈ Loc any y Y (F ). f ∈ 5. Proof of the main algebro-geometric results In this section we prove Theorems A, C and D. Theorem 5.1 (Theorem A). Let X be a smooth K-variety, G be a K-algebraic group and let ϕ : X G be a strongly dominant morphism. Then there exists N N such that for any n > N → ∈ the n-th convolution power ϕ∗n is (FRS). We prove Theorem 5.1 by first reducing to the case K = Q, using the same strategy as in the proof of [GH19, Proposition 6.1]. Hence we want to show the following: Proposition 5.2. It is enough to prove Theorem 5.1 for K = Q. The proof of Proposition 5.2 is very similar to the proof in the case where G is a vector space ([GH19, Proposition 6.1]). The proof of [GH19, Proposition 6.1] consists of four statements [GH19, ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 21 Lemmas 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5 and Proposition 6.3]. Lemmas 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5 of [GH19] hold if G is any algebraic group (i.e. not necessarily a vector space). [GH19, Proposition 6.3] can also be generalized to an algebraic group G, only this time one needs to use a non-commutative Fourier transform. For completeness, we prove the generalization of [GH19, Proposition 6.3], and thus finish the proof of Proposition 5.2. Proposition 5.3 (Generalization of [GH19, Proposition 6.3]). Let ϕ : X G be a morphism over → a finitely generated field K′/Q. Assume there exists N N such that the N-th convolution power ∈ ϕ∗N is (FRS) at the diagonal point (x,...,x) for each x X(K′). Then ϕ∗2N is (FRS). ∈ ′′ ′′ ′ ′′′ Proof. Let x1,...,x2N X(K ) for some finite extension K /K and let K be a finite extension ′′ ∈ ′′′ of K . Let p be a prime such that x1,...,x2N X(Zp) and K Qp (there exists infinitely many ∈ ∗N ⊆ such primes, see [GH19, Lemma 3.15]). Since ϕ is (FRS) at (xi,...,xi) for any i, there exist Zariski open neighborhoods (x ,...,x ) U XN such that ϕ∗N is (FRS) at each U . Note that i i ∈ i ⊆ i U (Z ) contains an analytic neighborhood of the form V . . . V , where x V is open in X(Z ). i p i × × i i ∈ i p By Theorem 2.12, since ϕ∗N is (FRS) at V . . . V , there exists a non-negative smooth measure i × × i µi, with supp(µi)= Vi such that the measure ϕ∗N (µ . . . µ )= ϕ (µ ) . . . ϕ (µ ) ∗ i × × i ∗ i ∗ ∗ ∗ i has continuous density with respect to the normalized Haar measure on G(Zp). Consider the non- commutative Fourier transform (ϕ (µ )) of the measure ϕ (µ ) on G(Z ). Since the density of F ∗ i ∗ i p ϕ∗N (µ . . . µ ) is continuous, it lies in L2(G(Z )). By Theorem 2.1(2), we have that (ϕ∗2N (µ ∗ i × × i p F ∗ i × . . . µ )) is in (G(ˆZ )) for any i. This implies (ϕ (µ )) (G(ˆZ )). By a generalization of × i H1 p F ∗ i ∈H2N p H¨older’s inequality (Proposition 2.4), we have 2N (ϕ∗N (µ . . . µ )) = (ϕ (µ )) (G(ˆZ )). F ∗ 1 × × 2N F ∗ i ∈H1 p Yi=1 ∗2N By Theorem 2.2 it follows that ϕ∗ (µ1 . . . µ2N ) has continuous density, and by Theorem 2.12 ∗2N × × it follows that ϕ is (FRS) at (x1,...,x2N ), as required. We can now assume that ϕ : X G is a strongly dominant Q-morphism. The following ana- → lytic statement, which is a straightforward generalization of [GH19, Proposition 3.16], is the final ingredient needed in order to prove Theorem 5.1: Proposition 5.4 (See [GH19, Proposition 3.16]). Let X be a smooth K-variety, G be an algebraic K-group, ϕ : X G be a strongly dominant morphism and let µ = µ be a motivic measure → { F }F ∈Loc on X such that for every F Loc, µ is a non-negative smooth measure and supp(µ ) = X( ) ∈ F F OF (for existence of such a measure, see [GH19, Proposition 3.14]). Assume that there exists n N ∈ such that the measure ϕ∗n(µ . . . µ ) has continuous density with respect to the normalized ∗ F × × F Haar measure on G(F ) for F Loc . Then the map ϕ∗n : X . . . X G is (FRS). ∈ > × × → Proof of Theorem 5.1. Let ϕ : X G and let µ = µ be a motivic measure on X as → { F }F ∈Loc in Proposition 5.4. By Corollary 4.1 we can find ǫ > 0 such the the density of ϕ∗(µF ) lies in L1+ǫ(G( ), λ ), where λ is the normalized Haar measure on G( ), for every F Loc . By OF F F OF ∈ > Lemma 2.5 this implies there exists N(ǫ) N such that ϕ∗N(ǫ)(µ . . . µ ) has continuous density. ∈ ∗ F × × F By Proposition 5.4 we are done. Proof of Theorems C and D. Theorem C is a direct generalization of [GH19, Theorem 1.9] (see [GH19, Section 7]). Part (1) follows from [GH19, Lemma 7.4, Lemma 7.5]. The proof of (2) is ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 22 essentially the same as the proof of [GH19, Theorem 7.1 (2)], where we replace the vector space V with G, and use Theorem A instead of [GH19, Theorem 1.7]. Theorem D easily follows from [GH19, Corollary 7.8]. One can also deduce Theorem C(2) from Theorem H (assuming K = Q). Indeed, let ϕ : X G Y → × be a Y -morphism as in Theorem C. Denote by π e : X Y and π : G Y Y the structure X → × → maps. By Theorem C(1), generic smoothness, and by Noetherian induction, we maye assumee that e e e πX is a smooth morphism, with X and Y smooth with invertible top forms ωX and ωY respectively, and that ϕy : Xy G is strongly dominant for any y Y . Let ωG be an invertible top form → e ∈ on G. Let µ = 1 e ω e F ∈Loc and consider the following family of motivic measures µy := { X(OF ) X F } e e ωXe 1 e ∗ . In order to prove Theorem C(2), it is enough by Proposition 5.4 to find an Xy(OF ) π e ωY X F F ∈Loc ǫ> 0, which is independent of y, such that (ϕ ) µ = h ω , with h L1+ǫ(G( ), ω ) y ∗ y,F y,F | G|F y,F ∈ OF | G|F for every F Loc . Indeed, if we choose N := 2N(ǫ) as in Lemma 2.5, then Part (2) follows by ∈ > Proposition 2.4. e By [AA16, Corollary 3.6]) the measure ϕ µ is absolutely continuous with respect to ω ω ∗ F | G ∧ Y |F and ϕ µ = f ω ω , with ∗ F F · | G ∧ Y |F e e ωX e fF (g,y)= ∗ ˆ esm,ϕe e−1 ϕ (ω ω ) (X ∩ϕ (g,y))(OF ) G Y F ∧ ω e = e X . ˆ esm,ϕe −1 ∗ ∗ (Xy ∩ϕey (g))(OF ) ϕ ωG π e ωY ) ∧ X F Since ϕ is strongly dominant, we further have by [AA16, Corollary 3.6] that h L1(G( ), ω ). y e y,F ∈ OF | G|F e ωX Setting η := ∗ , we get e π e ωY X ! η hy,F (g)= = fF (g,y). ˆ esm,ϕe e−1 ϕ∗ω (Xy ∩ϕy (g))(OF ) G F 1+ǫ By Theorem H, we get hy,F = fF L (G( F ), ωG ) where ǫ > 0 does not depend on |G×{y} ∈ O e | |F y. Appendix A. On the decay of Fourier transform and Lp-integrability (joint with Gady Kozma) In this appendix we construct a compactly supported function g(t) L1(R) whose Fourier transform ∈ decays faster than x α for some α< 0 but g / L1+ǫ(R) for every ǫ> 0. We consider F = R, but a | | ∈ similar construction should work for any local field F . For a number N N, and a tuple a = (a )N ∈ j j=1 where each a 1 define j ∈ {± } N 2x h (x) := a δ sinc , N,a j nj ∗ N Xj=1 where n := N 2 + (2j 1)N, and where δ is the Dirac delta distribution, and sinc(x)= sin(πx) . j − − x πx Recall that 2x N −2πinj t sinc = 1[− 1 , 1 ] and (δnj )(t)= e 1 j N. F N 2 · N N F ∀ ≤ ≤ Proposition A.1. There exists M N, such that for any ǫ > 0 and any M < N N there exist ∈ ∈ aN = (a )N , and 0 2 N 2 (1) hN,aN < 10log(N) and for every x with x > N , we have hN,aN (x) 2 . 0 ∞ | | | 0 |≤ |x|−N 1 1 (2) (hN,aN ) is supported on [ , ]. F 0 − N N 2 (3) (hN,aN ) N . F 0 ∞ ≤ (4) (hN,aN ) < (10 + ǫ)√N log N. F 0 1 1 + 1 ǫ 1 +ǫ (5) C1N 2 2 < (hN,aN ) N Proof. Items (1) to (3) hold for N large enough and any choice of a = (aj)j=1, by direct com- m N 3 putations. For items (4) and (5), given t N 4 m=−N 3 , we consider the complex-valued random N ∈ { } −2πinj t variable XN,t(a) := aj e , with respect to the uniform probability on the set of N-tuples j=1 · N a = (aj)j=1. By Bernstein’sP inequality, applied to the real and imaginary parts of XN,t(a), we deduce that: s2 Prob ( X s) 4exp . | N,t|≥ ≤ −4N Choosing s = (4+ ǫ)√N log N and by the union bound, we have: N 3 m −(1+2ǫ) (⋆) Prob t : XN,t(a) (4 + ǫ) N log N 8N . ∃ ∈ N 4 m=−N 3 | |≥ ≤ n o p Notice that for every 1 j N we have ≤ ≤ N N d −2πinj t −2πinj t 3 sup aje sup ( 2πinj) aje 2πN , t∈[−1,1] dt ≤ 1 1 − ≤ j=1 j=1 t∈[− N , N ] X X and therefore for any a = (a )N , and any t [ m , m+1 ]: j j=1 ∈ N 4 N 4 N N m −2πin t −2πinj 3 (m + 1) m 2π (⋆⋆) a e j a e N4 < 2πN − = . j − j N 4 N j=1 j=1 X X By (⋆) and (⋆⋆) we deduce (for N large enough): 1 1 Prob t [ , ] : X (a) < (10 + ǫ) N log N ∀ ∈ −N N | N,t | N 3 p m −(1+2ǫ) Prob t : XN,t(a) < (4 + ǫ) N log N 1 8N . ≥ ∀ ∈ N 4 m=−N 3 | | ≥ − n o p We get the following (for N large enough): Prob (h ) < (10 + ǫ) N log N kF N,a k1 1 N p N −2πinj t N −(1+2ǫ) = Prob aje dt < (10 + ǫ) N log N 1 8N . ˆ− 1 · 2 ≥ − N j=1 X p Similarly, there exists a constant C (ǫ) such that for N large enough: 2 (A.1) 1 +ǫ −(1+2ǫ) Prob (h ) < (10 + ǫ) N log N (h ) 1 1+ǫ N N −2πinj t Consider the random variable Y (a) := aje dt. By the central limit theorem it can − 1 j=1 ´N P be verified that 1+ǫ 1 N 1 N N 1 1 −2πinj t (1+ǫ) (ǫ−1) E(Y )= E aje dt > C1N 2 dt = 2C1N 2 , ˆ− 1 ˆ− 1 N j=1 N X for some 1 >C > 0. Notice that 0 Y (a) 2N ǫ. Hence, 1 ≤ ≤ 1 (ǫ−1) 1 E(Y ) 1 − 1 (ǫ+1) (A.2) Prob Y (a) 2·4l w(l) Now set w(l) := 2 and take hw(l) := h w(l) for a0 as in Proposition A.1 (for l such that w(l),a0 w(l) < M, take hw(l) = 0). Set hw(l)(x) Hl := w(l) log(w(l)) l2 ∞ · p and consider f(x) := Hl. The first property of hn,aN gives l=1 0 P H (x) (max 1, x )−1/8w(l)−1/8. | l |≤ { | |} Hence the sum converges (both pointwise and as Schwartz distributions), f is well defined and −1/8 satisfies f(x) C x and g := (f) = (Hl). By the second property of hn,aN g is | | ≤ | | F F 0 compactly supported. We will now show that it is L1 but not L1+ǫ: P ∞ ∞ ∞ 1 (10 + ǫ) w(l) log(w(l)) (10 + ǫ) g (H ) < = < . k k1 ≤ kF l k1 l2 · l2 ∞ l=1 l=1 wp(l) log(w(l)) l=1 X X X By Proposition A.1, there exists D , D R psuch that for any l large enough 1 2 ∈ >0 1 + 1 ǫ l−1 2·4l·ǫ C1w(l) 2 2 3·4l−1·ǫ (A.3) D2 2 (Hl) D1 2 > 4 (Hj) . · ≥ kF k1+ǫ ≥ l2 w(l) log(w(l)) ≥ · F j=1 X 1+ǫ p Recall that for each l, (H ) is supported on [ 1 , 1 ]. Denote S := [ 1 , 1 ) F l − w(l) w(l) l − w(l) − w(l+1) ∪ ( 1 , 1 ] and notice that since (H ) 1+ǫ is bounded by w(l)2(1+ǫ) w(l + 1) it follows that w(l+1) w(l) |F l | ≪ 1 (A.4) 1 (H ) 1+ǫ > (H ) 1+ǫ , k Sl · F l k1+ǫ 2 kF l k1+ǫ for l large enough. Notice that (Hj) Sl = 0 for any j > l. Choose l0 such that (A.3) and (A.4) F | ∞ 1+ǫ for any l l0. To show that g is not L -integrable, it is enough to show that (Hl) is not ≥ l=l0 F P ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 25 L1+ǫ-integrable. Finally, by the fact that 1+ǫ is a quasi-norm, by (A.3) and by (A.4), we have: | · | 1+ǫ 1+ǫ 1+ǫ ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ j (Hl) (Hl) = (Hl) F ≥ ˆSj F ˆSj F l=l0 j=l0 l=l0 j=l0 l=l0 X 1+ǫ X X X X 1+ǫ ∞ j−1 2−ǫ (H ) 1+ǫ (H ) ˆ j l ≥ Sj |F | − F j=l0 l=l0 X X 1+ǫ 1+ǫ ∞ j−1 ∞ > 2−(1+ǫ) (H ) 1+ǫ (H ) 2−(2+ǫ) (H ) 1+ǫ = , kF j k1+ǫ − F l ≥ kF j k1+ǫ ∞ j=l0 l=l0 j=l0 X X 1+ǫ X 1+ǫ and thus g is not L -integrable. References [AA16] A. Aizenbud and N. Avni. Representation growth and rational singularities of the moduli space of local systems. Invent. Math., 204(1):245–316, 2016. [AA18] A. Aizenbud and N. Avni. Counting points of schemes over finite rings and counting representations of arithmetic lattices. Duke Math. J., 167(14):2721–2743, 2018. [App14] D. Applebaum. Probability on compact Lie groups, volume 70 of Probability Theory and Stochastic Mod- elling. Springer, Cham, 2014. With a foreword by Herbert Heyer. [BDOP13] M. N. Berman, J. Derakhshan, U. Onn, and P. Paajanen. Uniform cell decomposition with applications to Chevalley groups. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2), 87(2):586–606, 2013. [BMS06] Nero Budur, Mircea Mustat¸ˇa, and Morihiko Saito. Bernstein-Sato polynomials of arbitrary varieties. Com- pos. Math., 142(3):779–797, 2006. [CGH14] R. Cluckers, J. Gordon, and I. Halupczok. Integrability of oscillatory functions on local fields: transfer principles. Duke Math. J., 163(8):1549–1600, 2014. [CGH16] R. Cluckers, J. Gordon, and I. Halupczok. Transfer principles for bounds of motivic exponential functions. In Families of automorphic forms and the trace formula, Simons Symp., pages 111–127. Springer, [Cham], 2016. [CGH18] Raf Cluckers, Julia Gordon, and Immanuel Halupczok. Uniform analysis on local fields and applications to orbital integrals. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B, 5:125–166, 2018. [CH18] R. Cluckers and I. Halupczok. Integration of functions of motivic exponential class, uniform in all non- archimedean local fields of characteristic zero. J. Ec.´ polytech. Math., 5:45–78, 2018. [CL08] R. Cluckers and F. Loeser. Constructible motivic functions and motivic integration. Invent. Math., 173(1):23–121, 2008. [CL10] R. Cluckers and F. Loeser. Constructible exponential functions, motivic Fourier transform and transfer principle. Ann. of Math. (2), 171(2):1011–1065, 2010. [Clu03] R. Cluckers. Presburger sets and p-minimal fields. J. Symbolic Logic, 68(1):153–162, 2003. [Den84] J. Denef. The rationality of the Poincar´eseries associated to the p-adic points on a variety. Invent. Math., 77(1):1–23, 1984. [Den87] J. Denef. On the degree of Igusa’s local zeta function. Amer. J. Math., 109(6):991–1008, 1987. [DL01] J. Denef and F. Loeser. Definable sets, motives and p-adic integrals. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 14(2):429–469, 2001. [Edw72] R. E. Edwards. Integration and harmonic analysis on compact groups. Cambridge Univ. Press, London-New York, 1972. London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, No. 8. [Elk78] R. Elkik. Singularit´es rationnelles et d´eformations. Invent. Math., 47(2):139–147, 1978. [GH] I. Glazer and Y. I. Hendel. On singularity properties of word maps and applications to probabilistc waring- type problems. arXiv:1912.12556. [GH19] Itay Glazer and Yotam I. Hendel. On singularity properties of convolutions of algebraic morphisms. Selecta Math. (N.S.), 25(1):Art. 15, 41, 2019. [Gla19] Itay Glazer. On rational singularities and counting points of schemes over finite rings. Algebra Number Theory, 13(2):485–500, 2019. ON SINGULARITY PROPERTIES OF CONVOLUTIONS OF ALGEBRAIC MORPHISMS 26 [Har77] R. Hartshorne. Algebraic geometry. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1977. Graduate Texts in Math- ematics, No. 52. [Igu74] J. Igusa. Complex powers and asymptotic expansions. I. Functions of certain types. J. Reine Angew. Math., 268/269:110–130, 1974. Collection of articles dedicated to Helmut Hasse on his seventy-fifth birthday, II. [Igu75] J. Igusa. Complex powers and asymptotic expansions. II. Asymptotic expansions. J. Reine Angew. Math., 278/279:307–321, 1975. [Mac90] A. Macintyre. Rationality of p-adic Poincar´eseries: uniformity in p. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic, 49(1):31–74, 1990. [MP] M. Mustat¸˘aand Mihnea Popa. Hodge ideals and minimal exponents of ideals. arXiv:1912.08072. [MP20a] Mircea Mustat¸˘aand Mihnea Popa. Hodge filtration, minimal exponent, and local vanishing. Invent. Math., 220(2):453–478, 2020. [MP20b] Mircea Mustat¸˘aand Mihnea Popa. Hodge ideals for Q-divisors, V -filtration, and minimal exponent. Forum Math. Sigma, 8:Paper No. e19, 41, 2020. [Mus01] M. Mustat¸˘a. Jet schemes of locally complete intersection canonical singularities. Invent. Math., 145(3):397– 424, 2001. With an appendix by David Eisenbud and Edward Frenkel. [Pas89] J. Pas. Uniform p-adic cell decomposition and local zeta functions. J. Reine Angew. Math., 399:137–172, 1989. [Rei] Andrew Reiser. Pushforwards of measures on real varieties under maps with rational singularities. arXiv:1807.00079. [Sai] Morihiko Saito. Hodge ideals and microlocal V -filtration. arXiv:1612.08667. [Sai93] Morihiko Saito. On b-function, spectrum and rational singularity. Math. Ann., 295(1):51–74, 1993. [Sai94] Morihiko Saito. On microlocal b-function. Bull. Soc. Math. France, 122(2):163–184, 1994. [Sta20] The Stacks Project Authors. Stacks Project. 2020. Itay Glazer, Department of Mathematics, Northwestern University, 2033 Sheridan Rd., Evanston IL 60208, USA. E-mail address: [email protected] Yotam Hendel, Department of Mathematics, Northwestern University, 2033 Sheridan Rd., Evanston IL 60208, USA. E-mail address: [email protected] Gady Kozma, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, the Weizmann Institute of Science, 234 Herzl St., Rehovot 76100, ISRAEL. E-mail address: [email protected]