Martin H. Weissman
Abstract:In one article, the author has defined an L-group associated to a cover of a quasisplit reductive group over a local or global field. In another article, Wee Teck Gan and Fan Gao define (following an unpublished letter of the author) an L-group associated to a cover of a pinned split reductive group over a local or global field. In this short note, we give an isomorphism between these L-groups. In this way, the results and conjectures discussed by Gan and Gao are compatible with those of the author. Both support the same Langlands-type conjectures for covering groups.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the consistency problem regarding the definition of L - groups of covers of split reductive groups. Specifically, in his previous work, the author Martin H. Weissman defined an L - group related to covering groups, and in another article, Wee Teck Gan and Fan Gao also defined a similar L - group. Although these two articles adopt different methods, they both aim to support Langlands - type conjectures.
In order to ensure that the L - groups defined in these two ways are compatible, the main goal of this paper is to establish an isomorphism relationship between these two L - groups. By proving that the L - groups constructed in these two ways are actually the same, the author hopes to unify the research in these two directions and provide support for the broader Langlands program.
### Overview of Main Content
1. **Comparison of the Two Constructions**:
- The article first reviews the construction methods of L - groups in two different literatures.
- The first method was proposed by Weissman, using the language of gerbe.
- The second method was proposed by Gan and Gao, using the more straightforward language of group extensions.
2. **Comparison of the Second Twist**:
- The focus is on comparing the "second twist" in the two constructions, which is the most significant difference between them.
- Through specific calculations and mappings, the article shows the isomorphism relationship of the two "second twist".
3. **Isomorphism of Fundamental Groups**:
- By establishing an isomorphism from the fundamental group of gerbe to the extended group in the second construction, the article proves the equivalence of the two L - groups.
4. **Independence of the Choice of Base Point**:
- Finally, the article proves that this isomorphism relationship does not depend on the choice of a specific base point, further verifying the consistency of the two constructions.
### Formula Display
Some of the key formulas involved in the article include:
- **Root System and Coroot System**:
\[
\Psi = (X, \Phi, \Delta, Y, \Phi^\vee, \Delta^\vee)
\]
where \( X = \text{Hom}(T, \mathbb{G}_m) \), \( Y = \text{Hom}(\mathbb{G}_m, T) \), \( \Phi \subset X \) is the set of roots, and \( \Delta \) is the subset of simple roots.
- **Modified Coroot**:
\[
\tilde{\alpha}^\vee = n_\alpha \alpha^\vee
\]
where \( n_\alpha \) is a positive integer such that \( n_\alpha \mid n \).
- **Extension of the First Twist**:
\[
\tilde{Z}^\vee \hookrightarrow E_1 \twoheadrightarrow \text{Gal}_F
\]
- **Extension of the Second Twist**:
\[
\tilde{Z}^\vee \hookrightarrow E_2 \twoheadrightarrow \text{Gal}_F
\]
- **Baer Sum Extension**:
\[
E = E_1 \oplus E_2
\]
Through these formulas and detailed reasoning, the article successfully establishes an isomorphism relationship between the two L - group constructions, thus solving the compatibility problem between the two different methods.