This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

CM points on Shimura curves via QM-equivariant isogeny volcanoes

Frederick Saia
Abstract.

We study CM points on the Shimura curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, parametrizing abelian surfaces with quaternionic multiplication and extra level structure. A description of the locus of points with CM by a specified order is obtained for general level, via an isogeny-volcano approach in analogy to work of Clark and Clark–Saia in the D=1D=1 case of modular curves. This allows for a count of all points with CM by a specified order on such a curve, and a determination of all primitive residue fields and primitive degrees of such points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. We leverage computations of least degrees towards the existence of sporadic CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

1. Introduction

The restriction of the study of torsion of elliptic curves over number fields to the case of complex multiplication (CM) has seen considerable recent progress. In particular, work of Clark and Clark–Saia [Cl22, CS22], continuing a program of research in this area from the perspective of CM points on modular curves (see, e.g., [CCS13, BC20, CGPS22]), approaches the study of the CM locus on the modular curves X0(M,N)/X_{0}(M,N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X1(M,N)/X_{1}(M,N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} via a study of CM components of isogeny graphs of elliptic curves over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}}. For KK an imaginary quadratic field and Δ=f2ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K} the discriminant of the order 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) of conductor ff in KK, let jΔX(1)/j_{\Delta}\in X(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the closed point corresponding to elliptic curves with CM by the order of discriminant Δ\Delta. The work of [Cl22, CS22] results, for instance, in a description of all points in the fiber of the natural map X0(M,N)/X(1)/X_{0}(M,N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} over jΔj_{\Delta}. This description provides the list of residue fields of Δ\Delta-CM points on the first curve, along with a count of closed points in this fiber with each specified residue field.

In this paper, we study the Shimura curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} parametrizing abelian surfaces with quaternionic multiplication (QM) by the indefinite quaternion algebra BB over \mathbb{Q} of discriminant DD, along with certain specified level structure. Our main result allows for a similar description of the CM loci on these curves.

In particular, we show that if xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has CM by the order 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) of conductor ff in the imaginary quadratic field KK, then the residue field (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) is either a ring class field K(f)K(f^{\prime}) for some ff^{\prime} with ffNff\mid f^{\prime}\mid Nf, or is isomorphic to an index 22 subfield of such a field K(f)K(f^{\prime}). The ramification index of xx with respect to the natural map from X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) to X0D(1)X_{0}^{D}(1) is always 11 when the CM order has discriminant f2ΔK=Δ<4f^{2}\Delta_{K}=\Delta<-4. In general, this index is at most 33. The work of this paper culminates in a determination of the residue fields and ramification indices of all CM points on X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N), and putting together the casework based on the quaternion discriminant, level and CM order gives a result of the following form.

Theorem 1.1.

There exists an algorithm which, given as input

  • an indefinite quaternion discriminant DD over \mathbb{Q},

  • a positive integer NN coprime to DD and

  • an imaginary quadratic discriminant Δ=f2ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K},

returns as output the complete list of tuples (is_fixed,f,e,c)(\texttt{is{\_}fixed},f^{\prime},e,c), consisting of

  • a boolean is_fixed,

  • a positive integer ff^{\prime} (necessarily with fff\mid f^{\prime}),

  • an integer e{1,2,3}e\in\{1,2,3\} and

  • a positive integer cc

such that there exist exactly cc closed 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM points xx on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with the following properties:

  • the residue field of xx over KK is K(x)K(f)K(x)\cong K(f^{\prime}), the ring class field of conductor ff^{\prime} associated to KK,

  • (x)K(f)\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong K(f^{\prime}) if is_fixed is False,

  • [K(f):(x)]=2[K(f^{\prime}):\mathbb{Q}(x)]=2 if is_fixed is True and

  • xx has ramification index ee with respect to the natural map to X0D(1)/X_{0}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

This algorithm, outlined in Algorithm 8.2, has been implemented, and is publicly available at [Rep] along with [Magma] code for all other computations described in this paper.

The outline towards developing this algorithm is as follows: in §2 we provide relevant background and prior results on CM points on the Shimura curves of interest. This includes results on concrete decompositions of QM abelian surfaces with CM as products of CM elliptic curves. The main result here is Theorem 2.13. In §3 and §4, we then consider QM-equivariant isogenies and the QM-equivariant \ell-isogeny graph 𝒢D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{\ell}. We prove in Theorem 4.5 that a CM component of this graph for a prime \ell and quaternion discriminant DD has the structure of an \ell-volcano for CM discriminant Δ<4\Delta<-4. We handle the slight deviation from the structure of an \ell-volcano in the Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\} case in Proposition 5.3.

We study the action of Gal(¯/)\text{Gal}\left(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}\right) on such components in §5, allowing for an enumeration of closed point equivalence classes of paths in these graphs and hence a description the CM locus on a prime-power level Shimura curve X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}} as provided in §6. The algebraic results of §7 then feed into a description of the CM locus on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for general level NN coprime to DD provided in §8, which provides the algorithm mentioned in Theorem 1.1.

The ability to transition to information about the 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM locus on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is explained in §9, in which we prove the following result. While this does not determine the list of residue fields of CM points on X1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N) in the vein of Theorem 1.1, it allows us to count all CM points on X1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N) of specified degree and list their corresponding CM orders. Otherwise put, this is enough data to determine, for a fixed discriminant DD and degree dd, all levels NN such that there exists a QM abelian surface (A,ι)(A,\iota) and a torsion point PA(¯)P\in A(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}) of order NN such that the induced point [A,ι,P]X1D(N)[A,\iota,P]\in X_{1}^{D}(N) has residue field of degree dd.

Theorem 1.2.

Suppose that xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is a point with CM by the imaginary quadratic order of discriminant Δ\Delta. Let π1:X1D(N)/X0D(N)/\pi_{1}:X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and π0:X0D(N)/\pi_{0}:X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the natural morphisms. The following hold:

  1. (1)

    The scheme-theoretic fiber of π1\pi_{1} over xx consists of a single closed point.

  2. (2)

    If any of the following hold:

    • Δ<4\Delta<-4,

    • xx is ramified with respect to π0\pi_{0} or

    • N3N\leq 3,

    then π1\pi_{1} is unramified over xx.

  3. (3)

    If N4N\geq 4 and xx is unramified with respect to π0\pi_{0}, then in the Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\} case we have

    eπ1(x)={2 if Δ=4,3 if Δ=3, and fπ1(x)={ϕ(N)/4 if Δ=4,ϕ(N)/6 if Δ=3,e_{\pi_{1}}(x)=\begin{cases}2\quad&\textnormal{ if }\Delta=-4,\\ 3\quad&\textnormal{ if }\Delta=-3,\end{cases}\quad\textnormal{ and }\quad f_{\pi_{1}}(x)=\begin{cases}\phi(N)/4\quad&\textnormal{ if }\Delta=-4,\\ \phi(N)/6\quad&\textnormal{ if }\Delta=-3,\end{cases}

    for the ramification index and residue degree of xx, respectively, with respect to π1\pi_{1}.

We define a primitive residue field (respectively, a primitive degree) of an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} to be one that does not properly contain (respectively, does not properly divide) that of another 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on the same curve. Our work allows for a determination of all primitive residue fields and primitive degrees of 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, as discussed in §8.4. An abridged version of our main result on primitive residue fields and degrees is as follows, with Theorem 8.3 providing the complete result:

Theorem 1.3.

Suppose that KK splits BB, let ff be a positive integer, and let NN be a positive integer relatively prime to DD with prime-power factorization N=1a1rarN=\ell_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{a_{r}}. One of the following occurs:

  1. (1)

    There is a unique primitive residue field LL of 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, with LL an index 22, totally complex subfield of a ring class field K(Hf)K(Hf) for some HNH\mid N.

  2. (2)

    There are exactly 22 primitive residue fields of such points, with one of the same form as LL in part (1) and the other being a ring class field of the form K(Cf)K(Cf) with C<HC<H and CNC\mid N.

Knowledge of all primitive degrees provides the ability to compute the least degree d𝔬,CM(X0D(N))d_{\mathfrak{o},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) of an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for any imaginary quadratic order 𝔬\mathfrak{o}. In §10, we discuss minimizing over orders 𝔬\mathfrak{o} to compute the least degree dCM(X0D(N))d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) of a CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and Proposition 10.1 allows one to transition from this to computations of least degrees of CM points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

A closed point xx on a curve X/X_{/\mathbb{Q}} is said to be sporadic if there are finitely many points yy on X/X_{/\mathbb{Q}} with deg(y)deg(x)\text{deg}(y)\leq\text{deg}(x). We apply our least degree computations towards the existence of sporadic CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with the following end result (see Theorem 10.9).

Theorem 1.4.

Let \mathcal{F} be the set of all 393393 pairs (D,N)(D,N) appearing in Table 1 or Table LABEL:table:unknowns_table. If (D,N)(D,N)\not\in\mathcal{F} consists of a quaternion discriminant D>1D>1 over \mathbb{Q} and a positive integer NN which is relatively prime to DD, then X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point. If (D,N)(D,N) is such a pair with

(D,N){(91,5)},(D,N)\not\in\mathcal{F}\cup\{(91,5)\},

then X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point.

The appearance of the pair (91,5)(91,5) in this result comes down to the fact that while X091(5)/X_{0}^{91}(5)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point of degree 22, the curve X191(5)/X_{1}^{91}(5)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has 44 as the least degree of a CM point. See Theorem 10.9 (4) for details.

Our work determining residue fields of CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} can be viewed as a generalization of prior work on the Diophantine arithmetic of Shimura curves via an alternate approach (specifically work of Jordan [Jor81] and González–Rotger [GR06] – see Theorem 2.8). Of course, our results are aimed towards better understanding the torsion of low-dimensional abelian varieties over number fields, via restriction to a case with extra structure. On this point, the question of which number fields admit abelian surfaces with certain specified rational torsion subgroups is closely related to our results, just as in the classical modular curve case. A result of Jordan (see Theorem 2.6) clarifies this relationship.

Unlike the modular curves X0(N)/X_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, the curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for D>1D>1 have no cusps. For this reason, understanding the CM points on Shimura curves may be of even greater interest, as they provide the most accessible examples of low-degree points and could afford techniques (see, e.g., [BT07]) for computing models in the absence of techniques involving expansions around cusps.

Additionally, while our approach is in analogy to that of [Cl22] and [CS22] in the modular curve case, there are interesting deviations arising in this work due to technical differences in the D>1D>1 case. Namely, while the field of moduli (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) of any CM point xX(1)/x\in X(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a real embedding, a result of Shimura [Sh75, Thm. 0] states that XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no real points for D>1D>1. This fact also opens the door for the potential of Hasse principle violations by Shimura curves, which has been a subject of significant study (see, e.g., [Cl09, CSt18, RSY05, SS16]). If one aims to study the Hasse principle for Shimura curves over some fixed number field (respectively, over a fixed degree), then studying the CM points rational over that field (respectively, over number fields of that degree) seems to be a natural initial point of investigation, and so our results may be of interest in that direction.

Acknowledgments

We thank Pete L. Clark for initially suggesting this project, which served as the author’s main Ph.D. thesis work. We are very grateful for Clark’s excellent advising, and for innumerable helpful conversations. We also thank Dino Lorenzini, Oana Padurariu, Ciaran Schembri and John Voight for helpful comments and encouragement. Much gratitude goes as well to the anonymous referee for a careful reading of, and detailed feedback on, earlier versions of this work. This feedback led to many expository and mathematical improvements, including a strengthening of our results on sporadic points.

We would also like to thank the Simons Foundation for access to the [Magma] computational algebra system, with which all computations described in this paper were performed, as well as the Georgia Advanced Computing Resource Center at the University of Georgia for access to the high-performance computing cluster, which we used for various computations described in §10. Partial support for the author was provided by the Research and Training Group grant DMS-1344994 funded by the National Science Foundation.

2. Background

2.1. Shimura curves

The main source here is the foundational work of Shimura [Sh67], while for the background material on quaternion algebras and quaternion orders we recommend the classic [Vig80] as well as the modern treatment in [Voi21]. Throughout, we let B/B/\mathbb{Q} denote the indefinite quaternion algebra of discriminant DD over \mathbb{Q}. We denote by Ψ\Psi an isomorphism

Ψ:BM2().\Psi:B\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}\mathbb{R}\xrightarrow{\sim}M_{2}(\mathbb{R}).

As BB is indefinite, the discriminant DD is the product of an even number of distinct rational primes, namely those at which BB is ramified. We will let 𝒪\mathcal{O} denote a maximal order in BB, which is unique up to conjugation. We will also fix, following [Voi21, §43.1], an element μ𝒪\mu\in\mathcal{O}, satisfying μ2=D\mu^{2}=-D, which induces the involution

αα:=μ1αμ\alpha\mapsto\alpha^{*}:=\mu^{-1}\alpha\mu

on 𝒪\mathcal{O}. We refer to μ\mu as a principal polarization on 𝒪\mathcal{O}.

We start by defining the moduli spaces we are considering and discussing the moduli interpretations of those families of particular interest to us in this study. Let 𝒪1\mathcal{O}^{1} denote the units of reduced norm 11 in 𝒪\mathcal{O}, which we realize as embedded in SL2()\text{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) via Ψ\Psi. The subgroup ΓD(1):=Ψ(𝒪1)SL2()\Gamma^{D}(1):=\Psi(\mathcal{O}^{1})\subset\text{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) is discrete, and it is cocompact if and only if D>1D>1. Via the action of this subgroup on the upper-half plane \mathbb{H} we define over \mathbb{C} the Shimura curve

XD(1):=ΓD(1)\.X^{D}(1):=\Gamma^{D}(1)\backslash\mathbb{H}.

For D=1D=1 we have BM2()B\cong M_{2}(\mathbb{Q}), which recovers the familiar modular curve setting. We are interested in the D>1D>1 case, and so moving forward we make this assumption on DD. This impies that XD(1)X^{D}(1) is a compact Riemann surface. For any zz\in\mathbb{H}, we get a rank 44 lattice Λz\Lambda_{z} via the action of 𝒪\mathcal{O} on (z,1)2(z,1)\in\mathbb{C}^{2} via the embedding Ψ\Psi above:

Λz:=𝒪(z1)2.\Lambda_{z}:=\mathcal{O}\cdot\begin{pmatrix}z\\ 1\end{pmatrix}\subseteq\mathbb{C}^{2}.

From this we obtain a complex torus

Az:=2/ΛzA_{z}:=\mathbb{C}^{2}/\Lambda_{z}

of dimension 22, which comes equipped with an 𝒪\mathcal{O}-action ιz:𝒪End(Az)\iota_{z}:\mathcal{O}\hookrightarrow\text{End}(A_{z}). We require some rigidification data, namely a Riemann form, in order to recognize AzA_{z} as an abelian surface. It turns out that we always obtain such data in this setting ([Voi21, Lemma 43.6.23]); there is a unique principal polarization λz,μ\lambda_{z,\mu} on AzA_{z} such that the Rosati involution on End0(A):=End(A)\text{End}^{0}(A):=\text{End}(A)\otimes\mathbb{Q} agrees with the involution induced by the polarization μ\mu on Ψ(𝒪)\Psi(\mathcal{O}).

Definition 2.1.

An (𝒪,μ)(\mathcal{O},\mu)-QM abelian surface over FF is a triple (A,ι,λ)(A,\iota,\lambda) consisting of an abelian surface AA over FF, an embedding ι:𝒪End(A)\iota:\mathcal{O}\hookrightarrow\text{End}(A) which we will refer to as the quaternionic multiplication (QM) structure, and a polarization λ\lambda on AA such that the following diagram is commutative

B{B}End0(A){\text{End}^{0}(A)}B{B}End0(A){\text{End}^{0}(A)}ι\scriptstyle{\iota}\scriptstyle{{\dagger}}ι\scriptstyle{\iota}

where {\dagger} denotes the Rosati involution corresponding to λ\lambda. An isomorphism of QM-abelian surfaces (A,ι,λ)(A,\iota,\lambda) and (A,ι,λ)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime},\lambda^{\prime}) is an isomorphism f:AAf:A\rightarrow A^{\prime} of abelian surfaces such that fι=ιff\circ\iota=\iota^{\prime}\circ f and such that fλ=λf^{*}\lambda^{\prime}=\lambda.

With this definition, we have moreover ([Voi21, Main Thm. 43.6.14]) that XD(1)X^{D}(1) is the coarse moduli space of (𝒪,μ)(\mathcal{O},\mu)-QM abelian surfaces over \mathbb{C}, with the association z[(Az,ιz,λz,μ)].z\mapsto[(A_{z},\iota_{z},\lambda_{z,\mu})].

Remark 2.2.

For an abelian variety AA over a field FF, by End(A)\text{End}(A) we mean the ring of endomorphisms defined over FF. For an extension FLF\subseteq L, we will write ALA_{L} for the base change of AA to LL and End(AL)\text{End}(A_{L}) for the ring of endomorphisms rational over LL.

More generally, if ΓΓD(1)SL2()\Gamma\leq\Gamma^{D}(1)\subseteq\text{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{R}) is an arithmetic Fuchsian group, we can consider the curve Γ\\Gamma\backslash\mathbb{H}, and for ΓΓ\Gamma^{\prime}\leq\Gamma there is a corresponding covering of curves Γ\Γ\\Gamma^{\prime}\backslash\mathbb{H}\rightarrow\Gamma\backslash\mathbb{H}. Our focus will be on the families of Shimura curves X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) and X1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N), for NN a positive integer with gcd(D,N)=1\text{gcd}(D,N)=1, with XD(1)=X0D(1)=X1D(1)X^{D}(1)=X^{D}_{0}(1)=X^{D}_{1}(1) being a special case of each.

With setup following the careful exposition of [Buz97, §1], let

R:=limgcd(m,D)=1/mR:=\varprojlim_{\text{gcd}(m,D)=1}\mathbb{Z}/m\mathbb{Z}

and fix an isomorphism κ:BRM2(R)\kappa:B\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}R\rightarrow M_{2}(R). This map κ\kappa induces, for mm relatively prime to DD, a map

𝒪^M2(m).\mathcal{O}\otimes\widehat{\mathbb{Z}}\rightarrow M_{2}\left(\mathbb{Z}_{m}\right).

We get from here a map

um:𝒪1GL2(m).u_{m}:\mathcal{O}^{1}\rightarrow\text{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}_{m}).

The curve X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) can then be described as the Shimura curve corresponding to the compact, open subgroup

Γ0D(N):=Ψ(uN1({(abcd)GL2(N)c0(modN)}))ΓD(1).\Gamma_{0}^{D}(N):=\Psi\left(u_{N}^{-1}\left(\left\{\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\ c&d\end{pmatrix}\in\text{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}_{N})\mid c\equiv 0\pmod{N}\right\}\right)\right)\leq\Gamma^{D}(1).

That is, X0D(N)()=Γ0D(N)\.X_{0}^{D}(N)(\mathbb{C})=\Gamma^{D}_{0}(N)\backslash\mathbb{H}. Equivalently, fixing a level NN Eichler order 𝒪N\mathcal{O}_{N} in BB, the curve X0(N)X_{0}(N) can be described, in the manner mentioned above, as that associated to the arithmetic group of units of reduced norm 11 in 𝒪N\mathcal{O}_{N}. The Shimura curve X1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N) corresponds to the compact, open subgroup

Γ1D(N):=Ψ(uN1({(abcd)GL2(N)c0 and d1(modN)}))ΓD(1).\Gamma_{1}^{D}(N):=\Psi\left(u_{N}^{-1}\left(\left\{\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\ c&d\end{pmatrix}\in\text{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}_{N})\mid c\equiv 0\text{ and }d\equiv 1\pmod{N}\right\}\right)\right)\leq\Gamma^{D}(1).

It follows from a celebrated result of Shimura [Sh67, Main Thm. I] that the curve X0D(N)X^{D}_{0}(N) has a canonical model X0D(N)/{X^{D}_{0}(N)}_{/\mathbb{Q}}, i.e., such that

X0D(N)/X0D(N),{X^{D}_{0}(N)}_{/\mathbb{Q}}\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}\mathbb{C}\cong X^{D}_{0}(N),

and similarly for the curve X1D(N)X^{D}_{1}(N).

Because we are assuming that NN is relatively prime to DD, the notion of “level NN-structure” is group-theoretically just as in the modular curve case. In particular, the natural modular map X1D(N)/X0D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is a (/N)×/{±1}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})^{\times}/\{\pm 1\}-cover. Hence, it is an isomorphism for N2N\leq 2 and it has degree ϕ(N)/2\phi(N)/2 for N3N\geq 3, where ϕ\phi denotes the Euler totient function. We now recall moduli interpretations for these families of Shimura curves as provided in, for example, [Buz97, §3].

Definition 2.3.

Suppose that (A,ι,λ)(A,\iota,\lambda) and (A,ι,λ)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime},\lambda^{\prime}) are (𝒪,μ)(\mathcal{O},\mu)-QM abelian surfaces over FF, we will call an isogeny φ:AA\varphi:A\rightarrow A^{\prime} of the underlying abelian surfaces a QM-cyclic NN-isogeny if φ(λ)=λ\varphi^{*}(\lambda^{\prime})=\lambda and both of the following hold:

  • The isogeny φ\varphi is QM-equivariant. That is, for all α𝒪\alpha\in\mathcal{O} we have

    ι(α)φ=φι(α).\iota^{\prime}(\alpha)\circ\varphi=\varphi\circ\iota(\alpha).
  • The kernel ker(φ)\text{ker}(\varphi) is a cyclic 𝒪\mathcal{O}-module with

    ker(φ)/N×/N.\text{ker}(\varphi)\cong\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}.

For example, a QM-cyclic 11-isogeny is the same as an isomorphism of QM abelian surfaces.

Proposition 2.4.

The Shimura curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is isomorphic to the coarse moduli scheme associated to any of the following moduli problems:

  1. (1)

    Tuples (A,ι,λ,Q)(A,\iota,\lambda,Q), where (A,ι,λ)(A,\iota,\lambda) is an (𝒪,μ)(\mathcal{O},\mu)-QM abelian surface and QA[N]Q\leq A[N] is an order N2N^{2} subgroup of the NN-torsion subgroup of AA which is also a cyclic 𝒪\mathcal{O}-module.

  2. (2)

    QM-cyclic NN-isogenies φ:(A,ι,λ)(A,ι,λ)\varphi:(A,\iota,\lambda)\rightarrow(A,\iota^{\prime},\lambda^{\prime}) of (𝒪,μ)(\mathcal{O},\mu)-QM abelian surfaces.

The curve X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has the following moduli interpretation: triples (A,ι,λ,P)(A,\iota,\lambda,P), where (A,ι,λ)(A,\iota,\lambda) is a QM abelian surface and PA[N]P\in A[N] is a point of order NN.

These interpretations hold for any choice of principal polarization μ\mu of 𝒪\mathcal{O}. That is, if μ\mu and μ\mu^{\prime} are two such polarizations then they both induce the same coarse moduli scheme X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} up to isomorphism (as discussed, for example, in [Rot04, §6]). Of course, the exact moduli interpretation does depend on μ\mu, and we refer to [Rot04, Prop. 4.3] for more on how the corresponding spaces fit into the moduli space of principally polarized abelian surfaces. Because a principal polarization λ\lambda on a pair (A,ι)(A,\iota) is canonically determined from a fixed μ\mu, moving forward we will suppress polarizations and refer simply to QM abelian surfaces (A,ι)(A,\iota). By the same point, the condition on the polarizations in the definition of a QM-cyclic NN-isogeny is redundant; it follows from the QM-equivariant condition.

Letting 𝒪N\mathcal{O}_{N} denote an Eichler order of level NN in BB, the curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has the equivalent interpretation of parametrizing pairs (A,ι)(A,\iota) where A/A/\mathbb{C} is a QM abelian surface and ι:𝒪NEnd(A)\iota:\mathcal{O}_{N}\hookrightarrow\text{End}(A). (We just stated that we would no longer remark on polarizations, but we note that the polarization corresponding to such an ι\iota will not be principally polarized, but (1,N)(1,N)-polarized in general.) That said, interpretations (1)(1) and (2)(2) in Proposition 2.4 will be the primary ones used in our study – see Remark 2.9 for related comments. Thus, we will mainly speak of QM by maximal quaternion orders, and it will benefit us to spell out the connection between interpretations (1)(1) and (2)(2) here. Let (A,ι)(A,\iota) be a QM abelian surface. The NN-torsion of AA is acted on by ι(𝒪)\iota(\mathcal{O}), and the corresponding representation factors through 𝒪/NM2(/N)\mathcal{O}\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}}\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}\cong M_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}). The resulting map must then be equivalent to

M2(/N){M_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})}End(A[N])M4(/N){\textnormal{End}(A[N])\cong M_{4}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})}(abcd){\begin{pmatrix}a&&b\\ c&&d\end{pmatrix}}(a0b00a0bc0d00c0d).{\begin{pmatrix}a&&0&&b&&0\\ 0&&a&&0&&b\\ c&&0&&d&&0\\ 0&&c&&0&&d\end{pmatrix}.}

This can be viewed as a case of Morita equivalence, but it is worth being explicit here: let e1e_{1} and e2e_{2} denote the standard idempotents in M2(/N)M_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}),

e1=(1000),e2=(0001).e_{1}=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\ 0&0\end{pmatrix},\qquad e_{2}=\begin{pmatrix}0&0\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix}.

We then have A[N]=e1A[N]e2A[N]A[N]=e_{1}\cdot A[N]\oplus e_{2}\cdot A[N], and M2(/N)M_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}) acts on this direct sum in precisely the way noted by the above map.

Any proper, nontrivial, 𝒪\mathcal{O}-stable subgroup QA[N]Q\leq A[N] must then have order N2N^{2} (this justifies our definition of QM-cyclic isogenies, along with the equivalence of the moduli interpretations presented above). Further, such a subgroup QQ is determined by a cyclic order NN subgroup of A[N]A[N]: we have Q=e1(Q)e2(Q)Q=e_{1}(Q)\oplus e_{2}(Q) where each summand is cyclic of order NN, and conversely Q=𝒪ei(Q)Q=\mathcal{O}\cdot e_{i}(Q) for i=1,2i=1,2.

For our applications in §10, the genera of our Shimura curves of interest will be of use. Let ψ\psi denote the Dedekind psi function. The derivations are standard – for example, the formula for X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) can be found in [Voi21, Thm. 39.4.20]:

Proposition 2.5.
g(X0D(N))=1+ϕ(D)ψ(N)12ϵ1(D,N)4ϵ3(D,N)3,\displaystyle g(X_{0}^{D}(N))=1+\frac{\phi(D)\psi(N)}{12}-\frac{\epsilon_{1}(D,N)}{4}-\frac{\epsilon_{3}(D,N)}{3},

where

ϵ1(D,N)\displaystyle\epsilon_{1}(D,N) ={pD(1(4p))pN(1+(4p)) if 4N0 if 4N\displaystyle=\begin{cases}\displaystyle{\prod_{p\mid D}\left(1-\genfrac{(}{)}{}{0}{-4}{p}\right)\prod_{p\mid N}\left(1+\genfrac{(}{)}{}{0}{-4}{p}\right)}\quad&\text{ if }4\nmid N\\ 0&\text{ if }4\mid N\end{cases}
ϵ3(D,N)\displaystyle\epsilon_{3}(D,N) ={pD(1(3p))pN(1+(3p)) if 9N0 if 9N\displaystyle=\begin{cases}\displaystyle{\prod_{p\mid D}\left(1-\genfrac{(}{)}{}{0}{-3}{p}\right)\prod_{p\mid N}\left(1+\genfrac{(}{)}{}{0}{-3}{p}\right)}\quad&\text{ if }9\nmid N\\ 0&\text{ if }9\mid N\end{cases}

are the numbers of elliptic [1]\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{-1}]-CM and elliptic [1+32]\mathbb{Z}\left[\frac{1+\sqrt{-3}}{2}\right]-CM points on X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N), respectively. For N2N\leq 2 we have X1D(N)X0D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N)\cong X_{0}^{D}(N), and for N3N\geq 3 we have

g(X1D(N))=1+ϕ(N)ϕ(D)ψ(N)24.g(X^{D}_{1}(N))=1+\dfrac{\phi(N)\phi(D)\psi(N)}{24}.

2.2. CM points

Let (A,ι)(A,\iota) be a QM abelian surface over a number field FF, such that

End0(A)B.\textnormal{End}^{0}(A)\cong B.

If AA is nonsimple, such that AE1×E2A\sim E_{1}\times E_{2} is geometrically isogenous (i.e., isogenous over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}}) to a product of elliptic curves, then it must be the case that E1E_{1} and E2E_{2} are isogenous elliptic curves with complex multiplication (CM). In this case, AE2A\sim E^{2} where EE is a CM elliptic curve, say with corresponding imaginary quadratic CM field KK. Here it is forced that KK splits the quaternion algebra BB:

BKM2(K).B\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}K\cong M_{2}(K).

In this case in which AA is nonsimple, we refer to (A,ι)(A,\iota) as a QM abelian surface with CM and we call the induced point [(A,ι)]XD(1)/(F)[(A,\iota)]\in X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}(F) a CM point. We call a point xx on X0D(D)/X_{0}^{D}(D)_{/\mathbb{Q}} or X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} a CM point if it lies over a CM point on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

Generalizing our definition for isogenies, we call an endomorphism αEnd(A)\alpha\in\text{End}(A) QM-equivariant if αι(γ)=ι(γ)α\alpha\circ\iota(\gamma)=\iota(\gamma)\circ\alpha for all γ𝒪\gamma\in\mathcal{O}. If (A,ι)(A,\iota) has KK-CM, then the ring EndQM(A)\text{End}_{\text{QM}}(A) of QM-equivariant endomorphisms of AA is an imaginary quadratic order in KK. This means that we have some f+f\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} such that

EndQM(A)𝔬(f),\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A)\cong\mathfrak{o}(f),

where 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) denotes the unique order of conductor ff in KK. In other words, 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) is the unique imaginary quadratic order of discriminant f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}, where ΔK\Delta_{K} denotes the discriminant of KK, i.e., that of the maximal order 𝔬K=𝔬(1)\mathfrak{o}_{K}=\mathfrak{o}(1). We will call this ff the central conductor of (A,ι)(A,\iota). We will refer to [(A,ι)]XD(1)[(A,\iota)]\in X^{D}(1), or to any point in the fiber over [A,ι][A,\iota] under some covering of Shimura curves XXD(1)X\rightarrow X^{D}(1), as an 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM point when we wish to make the CM order clear. Note that the QM on AA is by definition defined over FF, so if AA is isogenous to E2E^{2} over an extension L/FL/F then EE necessarily has its CM defined over LL.

2.3. The field of moduli of a QM-cyclic isogeny

2.3.1. The field of moduli

The field of moduli of a QM abelian surface (A,ι)(A,\iota) defined over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}} is the fixed field of those automorphisms σGal(¯/)\sigma\in\text{Gal}\left(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}\right) such that (A,ι)σ:=(Aσ,ισ)(A,\iota)^{\sigma}:=(A^{\sigma},\iota^{\sigma}) is isomorphic to (A,ι)(A,\iota) over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}}. The conjugate abelian surface AσA^{\sigma} is defined as the fiber product ASpec¯Spec¯A\otimes_{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}}\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}} over σ\sigma:

Aσ{A^{\sigma}}A{A}Spec¯{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}}Spec¯,{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}\;,}σ\scriptstyle{\sigma}

and ισ\iota^{\sigma} is defined via the action of σ\sigma on endomorphisms of AA. (We are suppressing polarizations at this point, but recall this is justified as there is a unique principal polarization on AσA^{\sigma} compatible with ισ\iota^{\sigma}.) Equivalently, the field of moduli of (A,ι)(A,\iota) is the residue field (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) of the corresponding point x=[(A,ι)]x=[(A,\iota)] on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

More generally, for a QM-cyclic isogeny φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) defined over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}}, the field of moduli of φ\varphi is the fixed field of the group

H(φ):={σGal(¯/)|(Aσ,ισ)((A)σ,(ι)σ)(A,ι)(A,ι)φσφ commutes, and the vertical maps areisomorphisms}.H(\varphi):=\left\{\sigma\in\text{Gal}\left(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}\right)\;\Bigg{|}\;\leavevmode\hbox to119.18pt{\vbox to54.83pt{\pgfpicture\makeatletter\hbox{\hskip 59.5903pt\lower-27.46648pt\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.4pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\nullfont\hbox to0.0pt{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{}{}{}{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{\offinterlineskip{}{}{{{}}{{}}{{}}{{}}}{{{}}}{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-59.5903pt}{-27.36664pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{\vbox{\halign{\pgf@matrix@init@row\pgf@matrix@step@column{\pgf@matrix@startcell#\pgf@matrix@endcell}&#\pgf@matrix@padding&&\pgf@matrix@step@column{\pgf@matrix@startcell#\pgf@matrix@endcell}&#\pgf@matrix@padding\cr\hfil\hskip 19.13626pt\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-14.83072pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{${(A^{\sigma},\iota^{\sigma})}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{}}}&\hskip 19.13626pt\hfil&\hfil\hskip 52.45403pt\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-24.14851pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{${((A^{\prime})^{\sigma},(\iota^{\prime})^{\sigma})}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}&\hskip 28.45406pt\hfil\cr\vskip 18.00005pt\cr\hfil\hskip 15.93634pt\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-11.6308pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{${(A,\iota)}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}&\hskip 15.93634pt\hfil&\hfil\hskip 41.4763pt\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-13.17079pt}{0.0pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{${(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime})}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}&\hskip 17.47633pt\hfil\cr}}}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}}{{{{}}}{{}}{{}}{{}}{{}}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} {}{ {}{}{}}{}{ {}{}{}} {{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{}{{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{{{}{}}}{}{{}}{}{}{}{{{}{}}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.39998pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }{}{}{}{}{{}}{}{}{{}}\pgfsys@moveto{-21.11778pt}{11.34169pt}\pgfsys@lineto{2.08223pt}{11.34169pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}}}{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}{{{}}{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{2.28221pt}{11.34169pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@invoke{ \lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}{{}}}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-12.7502pt}{15.05554pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{$\scriptstyle{\varphi^{\sigma}}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{ {}{}{}}{}{ {}{}{}} {{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{}{{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{{}}{}{}{}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.39998pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }{}{}{}{}{{}}{}{}{{}}\pgfsys@moveto{-40.45404pt}{2.48198pt}\pgfsys@lineto{-40.45404pt}{-15.60696pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}}}{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}{{{}}{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{0.0}{-1.0}{1.0}{0.0}{-40.45404pt}{-15.80695pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@invoke{ \lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}{{}}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{ {}{}{}}{}{ {}{}{}} {{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{}{{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{{}}{}{}{}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.39998pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }{}{}{}{}{{}}{}{}{{}}\pgfsys@moveto{31.13625pt}{2.48198pt}\pgfsys@lineto{31.13625pt}{-14.71811pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}}}{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}{{{}}{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{0.0}{-1.0}{1.0}{0.0}{31.13625pt}{-14.91809pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@invoke{ \lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}{{}}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{}{ {}{}{}}{}{ {}{}{}} {{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{}{{{{{}}{ {}{}}{}{}{{}{}}}}}{{}}{}{}{}{}{}{{{}{}}}{}{{}}{}{}{}{{{}{}}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@setlinewidth{0.39998pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }{}{}{}{}{{}}{}{}{{}}\pgfsys@moveto{-24.3177pt}{-24.86664pt}\pgfsys@lineto{13.05995pt}{-24.86664pt}\pgfsys@stroke\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}}}{{}{{}}{}{}{{}}{{{}}{{{}}{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{13.25993pt}{-24.86664pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@invoke{ \lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}{{}}}}\hbox{\hbox{{\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }{{}{}{{ {}{}}}{ {}{}} {{}{{}}}{{}{}}{}{{}{}} { }{{{{}}\pgfsys@beginscope\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@transformcm{1.0}{0.0}{0.0}{1.0}{-7.71848pt}{-21.15279pt}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{{\definecolor{pgfstrokecolor}{rgb}{0,0,0}\pgfsys@color@rgb@stroke{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\pgfsys@color@rgb@fill{0}{0}{0}\pgfsys@invoke{ }\hbox{$\scriptstyle{\varphi}$} }}\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope}}} \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope \pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope{}{}{}\hss}\pgfsys@discardpath\pgfsys@invoke{\lxSVG@closescope }\pgfsys@endscope\hss}}\lxSVG@closescope\endpgfpicture}}\begin{subarray}{c}\text{ commutes, and the }\\ \text{vertical maps are}\\ \text{isomorphisms}\end{subarray}\right\}.

For clarity: the vertical maps above are those induced by σ\sigma, membership of σ\sigma in H(φ)H(\varphi) means that both (A,ι)(A,\iota) and (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) are isomorphic to their conjugates by σ\sigma. In other words, the field of moduli of φ\varphi is the minimal field over which φ\varphi is isomorphic to all of its Gal(¯/)\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})-conjugates. Equivalently, it is the residue field of the corresponding point [φ][\varphi] on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} (which follows from the much more general theory of [Sh66, Thm. 5.1], as exposited more specifically towards our case in [Sh67, p. 60]).

We call a field FF a field of definition for a QM-cyclic isogeny φ\varphi as above, or say that φ\varphi is defined or rational over FF, if φ\varphi and both (A,ι)(A,\iota) and (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) can be given by equations defined over FF. We then have a model φ\varphi^{\prime} over FF so that φF¯=φ\varphi^{\prime}\otimes_{F}\overline{\mathbb{Q}}=\varphi. It follows that if xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is induced by φ\varphi, then any field of definition for φ\varphi contains the field of moduli (x)\mathbb{Q}(x).

It is not generally the case that fields of moduli are fields of definition for (polarized) abelian varieties of dimension bigger than 11, and this is a source of difficulty and interest in the study of their arithmetic. For instance, Shimura proved that the generic principally polarized even-dimension abelian variety does not have a model defined over its field of moduli [Sh72]. Particular towards our interests here, a QM abelian surface (or, more generally, a QM-cyclic isogeny) need not have a model over its field of moduli. However, we have the following result of Jordan [Jor81, Thm. 2.1.3]:

Theorem 2.6 (Jordan).

Suppose that (A,ι)/¯(A,\iota)/\overline{\mathbb{Q}} is a QM abelian surface with QM by BB and with AutQM(A)={±1}\textnormal{Aut}_{\textnormal{QM}}(A)=\{\pm 1\} (equivalently, (A,ι)(A,\iota) does not have CM by Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}). Let x=[(A,ι)]X0D(1)/x=[(A,\iota)]\in X_{0}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} be the corresponding point. Then a field LL containing (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) is a field of definition for (A,ι)(A,\iota) if and only if LL splits BB.

2.3.2. The field of moduli in the CM case

Our attention in this study will primarily be aimed at determining fields of moduli, particularly in the presence of CM. We now recall prior work determining the field of moduli of a CM point on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

The answer begins with a fundamental theorem of Shimura [Sh67, Main Thm. 1]. Fixing an imaginary quadratic field KK and a positive integer ff, we let 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) denote the order in KK of conductor ff and K(f)K(f) denote the ring class field corresponding to 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f).

Theorem 2.7 (Shimura).

Let xXD(1)/x\in X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} be an 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM point with residue field (x)\mathbb{Q}(x). Then

K(x)=K(f)K\cdot\mathbb{Q}(x)=K(f)

This tells us that in this setting there are two possibilities: either (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) is the ring class field K(f)K(f), or it is an index 2 subfield thereof. In his thesis [Jor81, §3], Jordan proved when each possibility occurs in the case where xx has CM by the maximal order of KK (the f=1f=1 case). Work of González–Rotger allows for a generalization of Jordan’s result to arbitrary CM orders [GR06, §5].

To state their result, we first set the following notation: for DD a quaternion discriminant over \mathbb{Q} and KK an imaginary quadratic field splitting the quaternion algebra BB of discriminant DD over \mathbb{Q}, let

D(K):=pD,(Kp)=1p.D(K):=\prod_{p\mid D,\;\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{K}{p}=-1}p.

The assumption that KK splits BB is exactly the assumption that no prime divisor of DD splits in KK. From this we see that D(K)=1D(K)=1 if and only if all primes dividing DD ramify in KK, while D(K)>1D(K)>1 exactly when some prime dividing DD is inert in KK.

Theorem 2.8 (Jordan, González–Rotger).

Let xXD(1)/x\in X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} be an 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM point.

  1. (1)

    If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then we have (x)=K(f)\mathbb{Q}(x)=K(f).

  2. (2)

    Otherwise, [K(f):(x)]=2[K(f):\mathbb{Q}(x)]=2. In this case, (x)K(f)\mathbb{Q}(x)\subsetneq K(f) is the subfield fixed by

    σ=τσ𝔞Gal(K(f)/),\sigma=\tau\circ\sigma_{\mathfrak{a}}\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(f)/\mathbb{Q}),

    where τ\tau denotes complex conjugation and σ𝔞Gal(K(f)/K)\sigma_{\mathfrak{a}}\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(f)/K) is the automorphism associated via the Artin map to a certain fractional ideal 𝔞\mathfrak{a} of 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) with the property that

    B(ΔK,NK/(𝔞)).B\cong\genfrac{(}{)}{}{0}{\Delta_{K},N_{K/\mathbb{Q}}(\mathfrak{a})}{\mathbb{Q}}.

    More specifically, 𝔞\mathfrak{a} is such that

    ωD(K)(xσ𝔞)=τ(x),\omega_{D(K)}(x^{\sigma_{\mathfrak{a}}})=\tau(x),

    where ωD(K)\omega_{D(K)} denotes the Atkin–Lehner involution on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} corresponding to D(K)D(K).

Remark 2.9.

In fact, González–Rotger provide a generalization of Jordan’s result to all CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for squarefree NN. We state their result only for trivial level N=1N=1 in part because it is all we will need, but moreover because some translation would be needed for the statement of their result as in their work to the conventions of this work. In comparing our work to [GR06], the definition of an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} that they work with is different from ours; whereas our definition is that a CM point has 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM for an imaginary quadratic order 𝔬\mathfrak{o} if it lies over an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, their definition is that xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM if it corresponds to a normalized optimal embedding of 𝔬\mathfrak{o} into an Eichler order of level NN in BB. The definition used in [GR06] provides a pleasantly uniform result similar to Jordan’s N=1N=1 case, with every 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM point xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} having field of moduli (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) with K(x)K(f)K\cdot\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong K(f). It will not be the case in our work, for level N>1N>1, that all 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM points have the same residue field. While our set of KK-CM points on X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) is the same as that as defined in [GR06], the specific orders we attach may not agree.

The convention used in González–Rotger is common in the literature, appearing in the work of Rotger and his collaborators and also in recent work of Padurariu–Schembri [PS23] in which the authors compute rational points on all Atkin–Lehner quotients of geometrically hyperelliptic Shimura curves. The difference in convention one takes is motivated by which moduli problem one chooses for the course moduli scheme X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N): our choice of working with maximal orders results in having natural modular maps from X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) to X0D(1)X_{0}^{D}(1) for all NN, while working with Eichler orders of level NN naturally situates X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) as the base Shimura curve. Because we want to work with general level, we work with maximal orders. A main difference between our work and that of [GR06], beyond the generalization from squarefree NN to all positive integers NN, is that we consider not just the CM points on a fixed curve X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) but the fiber of the covering X0D(N)/XD(1)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} over any CM point.

2.4. Decompositions of QM abelian surfaces with CM

Restricting to the case of a QM abelian surface (A,ι)(A,\iota) with CM over \mathbb{C}, we have seen that in fact AA is isogenous to a square of an elliptic curve with CM. Through a correspondence between QM abelian surfaces with CM and equivalance classes of certain binary quadratic forms, Shioda–Mitani [SM74, Thm. 4.1] proved the following strengthening of this fact:

Theorem 2.10 (Shioda–Mitani).

If (A,ι)/(A,\iota)/\mathbb{C} is a QM abelian surface with KK-CM for an imaginary quadratic field KK, then there exist KK-CM elliptic curves E1,E2E_{1},E_{2} over \mathbb{C} such that

AE1×E2.A\cong E_{1}\times E_{2}.

The number of distinct decompositions of a given AA as above is finite, resulting from finiteness of the class number of any imaginary quadratic order in KK. This theorem was generalized to higher dimensional complex abelian varieties isogenous to a power of a CM elliptic curve independently by Katsura [Kat75, Thm.] and Lange [La75], and Schoen later provided a simple proof as well [Sc92, Satz 2.4]. A generalization from \mathbb{C} to an arbitrary field of definition FF is a result of Kani [Kan11, Thm. 2]:

Theorem 2.11 (Kani).

If A/FA/F is an abelian variety which is isogenous to EnE^{n} over FF, where E/FE/F is an elliptic curve with CM over FF, then there exist CM elliptic curves E1/F,,En/FE_{1}/F,\ldots,E_{n}/F such that we have an isomorphism

AE1×EnA\cong E_{1}\times\cdots E_{n}

over the base field FF.

Kani in fact says more, which is relevant in the case of QM abelian surfaces with CM [Kan11, Thm. 67]: fixing a KK-CM elliptic curve E/FE/F with endomorphism ring of conductor fEf_{E}, there is a bijection between the set of FF-isomorphism classes [E][E^{\prime}] of elliptic curves EE^{\prime} isogenous to EE with CM conductor fEfEf_{E^{\prime}}\mid f_{E}, and the set of FF-isomorphism classes of abelian surfaces A/FA/F isogenous to E2E^{2} with corresponding central conductor fA=fEf_{A}=f_{E}. Explicitly, this bijection sends an FF-isomorphism class [E][E^{\prime}] to the FF-isomorphism class [E×E][E\times E^{\prime}].

In order to obtain concrete decompositions of QM abelian surfaces with CM, the remaining task is to identify which such products of CM elliptic curves have potential quaternionic multiplication (that is, which can be given QM structures), and to further describe the classes of QM abelian surfaces with CM. The following result provides the number of such classes ([AB04, Thm. 6.13] interprets this count as a certain class number, or equivalently as an embedding number, and [Vig80, Cor. 5.12] provides a formula for these class numbers which we use in the N=1N=1 case).

Proposition 2.12.

Let KK be an imaginary quadratic field splitting BB, and let f+f\in\mathbb{Z}^{+}. Let bb denote the number of primes dividing DD that are inert in KK. The number of geometric 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM points on XD(1)X^{D}(1) is then 2bh(𝔬(f))2^{b}\cdot h(\mathfrak{o}(f)), where h(𝔬(f))h(\mathfrak{o}(f)) denotes the class number of the order 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f).

In his thesis, Ufer touches on this topic of taking QM structures into account. In particular, he proves the following [Uf10, Thm. 2.7.12]: with the notation of Proposition 2.12, there exists a 2b2^{b}-to-11 correspondence

{K-CM points in XD(1)(}{K-CM elliptic curves over }/.\left\{K\text{-CM points in }X^{D}(1)(\mathbb{C}\right\}\longrightarrow\left\{K\text{-CM elliptic curves over }\mathbb{C}\right\}/\cong.

Based on the proof therein, it seems that Ufer could have said more, and so we do that here with reference to his argument. As above, let bb denote the number of primes dividing DD which are inert in KK.

Theorem 2.13.

Let (A,ι)/(A,\iota)/\mathbb{C} be a QM abelian surface with CM by 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f). There is then a unique 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM curve EA/E_{A}/\mathbb{C}, up to isomorphism, such that

A/𝔬(f)×EA.A\cong\mathbb{C}/\mathfrak{o}(f)\times E_{A}.

Additionally, there is a 2b2^{b}-to-11 correspondence

{𝔬(f)-CM points on XD(1)}{𝔬(f)-CM elliptic curves over }/\left\{\mathfrak{o}(f)\text{-CM points on }X^{D}(1)\right\}\longrightarrow\left\{\mathfrak{o}(f)\text{-CM elliptic curves over }\mathbb{C}\right\}/\cong

sending a point [(A,ι)]XD(1)[(A,\iota)]\in X^{D}(1) to the class of EAE_{A}.

Proof.

Part (2) of the proof of [Uf10, Thm. 2.7.12] details the construction of a QM-structure by a maximal order 𝒪\mathcal{O} in BB on E×EE\times E^{\prime} for EE and EE^{\prime} both 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM elliptic curves. The product E×EE\times E^{\prime} with the constructed QM structure then corresponds to a CM point on XD(1)X^{D}(1) with central conductor ff.

Let E,EE,E^{\prime} be KK-CM elliptic curves. Part (3) of Ufer’s proof explains that if the abelian surface E×EE\times E^{\prime} has potential quaternionic multiplication then in fact it has 2b2^{b} non-isomorphic QM structures. Put differently but equivalently to therein: let WW be the group generated by the Atkin–Lehner involutions ωp\omega_{p} on XD(1)X^{D}(1) for pDp\mid D inert in KK. The group W×Pic(𝔬(f))W\times\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(f)) then acts simply transitively on the set of 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM points on XD(1)X^{D}(1). If [(A,ι)]XD(1)[(A,\iota)]\in X^{D}(1) is such a point, then the action of any element wWw\in W leaves [A][A] unchanged, providing the claim (this is proved by Jordan [Jor81] in the f=1f=1 case, and extended to the general case by González–Rotger [GR06, Proposition 5.6]). By the count of Proposition 2.12, Theorem 2.10 and the fact that /𝔬(f)×E/𝔬(f)×E\mathbb{C}/\mathfrak{o}(f)\times E\cong\mathbb{C}/\mathfrak{o}(f)\times E^{\prime} implies EEE\cong E^{\prime}, the claimed result follows. ∎

Corollary 2.14.

Let (A,ι)/F(A,\iota)/F be a QM abelian surface with CM by 𝔬𝔬K\mathfrak{o}\subseteq\mathfrak{o}_{K}. Suppose that we have an FF-rational isogeny AE2A\sim E^{2} to the square of an elliptic curve. Fix E1/FE_{1}/F any elliptic curve with 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM. There then exists an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM elliptic curve E2/FE_{2}/F, unique up to isomorphism over FF, such that AE1×E2A\cong E_{1}\times E_{2} over FF.

Proof.

Let ff be the central conductor of AA (i.e., such that 𝔬=𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}=\mathfrak{o}(f)). By Theorem 2.11 and the discussion of Kani’s results following this theorem statement, there exists a CM elliptic curve E2/FE_{2}/F, with endomorphism ring of conductor fE2f_{E_{2}} satisfying fE2ff_{E_{2}}\mid f, such that AE1×E2A\cong E_{1}\times E_{2} over FF. This curve E2E_{2} is unique up to isomorphism over FF. Base changing this entire picture to \mathbb{C}, we have

A/E1/×E2/.A_{/\mathbb{C}}\cong{E_{1}}_{/\mathbb{C}}\times{E_{2}}_{/\mathbb{C}}.

Now because A/A_{/\mathbb{C}} (and hence E1/×E2/{E_{1}}_{/\mathbb{C}}\times{E_{2}}_{/\mathbb{C}}, by transport of structure through our isomorphism) has QM and E1/{E_{1}}_{/\mathbb{C}} has CM conductor ff, Theorem 2.13 implies that fE2=ff_{E_{2}}=f as well. ∎

3. QM-equivariant isogenies

Our goal in the following section will be to determine the residue field of a CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for any NN coprime to DD, generalizing Theorem 2.8. A main component in accomplishing this is the study of the structure of, and the action of automorphisms on, components of certain isogeny graphs. Paths in these graphs of consideration will be in correspondence with isogenies of QM abelian surfaces which commute with their QM structures.

In this section, we prove facts about QM-equivariant isogenies needed in the proceeding section. Much of what we do in both this section and the next is in strong analogy to the case of isogenies of elliptic curves over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}} studied in recent work of Clark and Clark–Saia [Cl22, CS22]. We provide proofs here for completeness and for clarity of said analogy.

Lemma 3.1.

Let FF be a field of characteristic zero, and let (A,ι)(A,\iota) be a QM abelian surface over FF which does not have CM by an order of discriminant Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. For \ell a prime number, the number of QM-cyclic \ell-isogenies with domain (A,ι)(A,\iota) which are Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)-stable, up to isomorphism, is either 0,1,2,0,1,2, or +1\ell+1.

Proof.

Note that \ell being prime means we are counting isomorphism classes of QM-cyclic \ell-isogenies. The hypotheses on AA are equivalent to Aut(A,ι)={±1}.\textnormal{Aut}(A,\iota)=\{\pm 1\}. In this case, we have a bijective correspondence between isomorphism classes of QM-cyclic \ell-isogenies and non-trivial, proper cyclic 𝒪\mathcal{O}-submodules of A[]A[\ell]. Under this correspondence, the isogenies which are Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)-stable correspond to Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)-stable submodules.

Now we have that e1(Q)e1(A[])(/)2e_{1}(Q)\leq e_{1}(A[\ell])\cong\left(\mathbb{Z}/\ell\mathbb{Z}\right)^{2} is a cyclic subgroup of order \ell, and in this way we have a bijective correspondence between the non-trivial proper QM-stable subgroups of A[]A[\ell] and cyclic order \ell subgroups of e1(A[])e_{1}(A[\ell]). This correspondence preserves the property of being Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)-stable. We have thus reduced to the situation of the elliptic curve case, and may proceed as such: we are counting Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F)-stable cyclic order \ell subgroups of (/)2\left(\mathbb{Z}/\ell\mathbb{Z}\right)^{2}. The total number of cyclic order \ell subgroups is \ell+1, and if more than 22 such subgroups are fixed then Gal(F¯/F)\text{Gal}(\overline{F}/F) is forced to act by scalar matrices on (/)2\left(\mathbb{Z}/\ell\mathbb{Z}\right)^{2}. ∎

3.1. Compositions of QM-cyclic isogenies

The following result is in analogy with [Cl22, Prop. 3.2].

Proposition 3.2.

Suppose that φ=φ2φ1\varphi=\varphi_{2}\circ\varphi_{1} is a QM-cyclic isogeny, where φi:(Ai,ιi)(Ai+1,ιi+1)\varphi_{i}:(A_{i},\iota_{i})\rightarrow(A_{i+1},\iota_{i+1}) is a QM-cyclic isogeny for i=1,2i=1,2.

  1. (1)

    We have

    (φ)(φ1)(φ2).\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{1})\cdot\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{2}).
  2. (2)

    If (A2,ι2)(A_{2},\iota_{2}) does not have CM by Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}, then

    (φ)=(φ1)(φ2).\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{1})\cdot\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{2}).
Proof.

The containment of part (1) is clear. The assumption that (A2,ι2)(A_{2},\iota_{2}) does not have 3-3 or 4-4 CM is equivalent to Aut((A2,ι2))={±1}\text{Aut}((A_{2},\iota_{2}))=\{\pm 1\}, and in this case the reverse containment in part (2) follows by the same argument as in [Cl22, Prop. 3.2]. ∎

3.2. Reduction to prime power degrees

First, let us say something about rationality. Let φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) be a QM-cyclic NN-isogeny which is rational over FF, where NN has prime-power decomposition N=1a1rarN=\ell_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{a_{r}}. Letting Q=ker(φ)Q=\text{ker}(\varphi) be the kernel of this isogeny, we have that φ\varphi is isomorphic to the quotient (A,ι)(A/Q,ι)(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A/Q,\iota). (The latter pair indeed provides an 𝒪\mathcal{O}-QM abelian surface, as QQ is stable under ι(𝒪)\iota(\mathcal{O}) and 𝒪\mathcal{O} is maximal, though we are abusing notation by referring to the QM-structure on the quotient as ι\iota.) We have a decompositon Q=CDQ=C\oplus D with each of CC and DD cyclic of order NN, such that 𝒪C=𝒪D=Q\mathcal{O}\cdot C=\mathcal{O}\cdot D=Q. This cyclic subgroup CC then decomposes as

C=i=1rCiC=\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}C_{i}

where CiCC_{i}\leq C is the unique subgroup of order iai\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}. Letting Qi=𝒪CiQ_{i}=\mathcal{O}\cdot C_{i}, each QiQ_{i} is QM stable and isomorphic to (/iai)2(\mathbb{Z}/{\ell_{i}}^{a_{i}}\mathbb{Z})^{2}.

From the uniqueness of CiCC_{i}\leq C, and hence of the corresponding 𝒪\mathcal{O}-cyclic subgroup QiQQ_{i}\leq Q, we get that each QiQ_{i} is FF-rational, resulting in FF-rational QM-cyclic iai\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}-isogenies φi:(A,ι)(A/Qi,ι)\varphi_{i}:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A/Q_{i},\iota) for each ii. On the other hand, given a collection of FF-rational QM-cyclic iai\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}-isogenies with kernels QiQ_{i}, we get an FF-rational QM-cyclic NN-isogeny (A,ι)(A/Q,ι)(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A/Q,\iota) where Q=i=1rQiQ=\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r}Q_{i}.

As for fields of moduli, more towards our needs for the following section, we have the following:

Proposition 3.3.

Let N1,,Nr+N_{1},\ldots,N_{r}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} be pairwise coprime, let kk be a field of characteristic 0, and let xXD(1)/kx\in X^{D}(1)_{/k} be a closed point which does not have CM by discriminant Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. For each ii, let πi:X0D(Ni)/kXD(1)/k\pi_{i}:X_{0}^{D}(N_{i})_{/k}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/k} be the natural map, let Fi=πi1(x)F_{i}=\pi_{i}^{-1}(x), and let FF be the fiber over xx of π:X0D(N)/kXD(1)/k\pi:X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/k}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/k} where N=N1NrN=N_{1}\cdots N_{r}. Then

F=F1Speck(x)Speck(x)Fr.F=F_{1}\otimes_{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}k(x)}\cdots\otimes_{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}k(x)}F_{r}.
Proof.

This follows as in the D=1D=1 case of [Cl22, Prop. 3.5], using that X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) for D>1D>1 is a cover of XD(1)X^{D}(1) with the same corresponding subgroup of GL2(/N)/{±1}\text{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})/\{\pm 1\} as in the case of X0(N)X(1)X_{0}(N)\rightarrow X(1). ∎

It follows that if xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is a point which does not have 3-3 or 4-4-CM and N=i=1riaiN=\prod_{i=1}^{r}\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}, with πi:X0D(N)/X0D(iai)/\pi_{i}:X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} the natural maps, then

(x)=(π1(x))(πr(x)).\mathbb{Q}(x)=\mathbb{Q}(\pi_{1}(x))\cdots\mathbb{Q}(\pi_{r}(x)).

4. QM-equivariant isogeny volcanoes

Fixing a prime \ell, we describe in this section CM components of \ell-isogeny graphs of QM abelian surfaces over ¯\overline{\mathbb{Q}}. We will use the work of this section to study CM points on the curves X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}} for a+a\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} and D>1D>1, in analogy to the D=1D=1 modular curve case of [Cl22, CS22].

This study, like that of [Cl22, CS22], is motivated by the foundational work on isogeny volcanoes over finite fields by Kohel in his PhD thesis [Koh96] and by Fouquet [Fou01] and Fouquet–Morain [FM02]. We also recommend, and will refer to, a more recent, expository account of isogeny volcanoes in the finite field setting by Sutherland [Sut13].

4.1. The isogeny graph of QM abelian surfaces

Fix a prime number \ell and an imaginary quadratic field KK. In [Cl22] and [CS22], the authors consider the multigraph with vertex set that of jj-invariants of KK-CM elliptic curves, and with edges corresponding to \mathbb{C}-isomorphism classes of cyclic \ell-isogenies.

Here, we seek an analogue for abelian surfaces with QM by a fixed maximal order 𝒪\mathcal{O} of the indefinite quaternion algebra BB of discriminant DD over \mathbb{Q}, with D\ell\nmid D. We let 𝒢D\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{D} denote the directed multigraph with

  • vertex set consisting of \mathbb{C}-isomorphism classes of 𝒪\mathcal{O}-QM abelian surfaces, and

  • edges from v1=[(A1,ι1)]v_{1}=[(A_{1},\iota_{1})] to v2=[(A2,ι2)]v_{2}=[(A_{2},\iota_{2})] corresponding to \mathbb{C}-isomorphism classes of QM-cyclic \ell-isogenies φ:(A1,ι1)(A2,ι2)\varphi:(A_{1},\iota_{1})\rightarrow(A_{2},\iota_{2}).

A given vertex vv has +1\ell+1 edges emanating from it, via the correspondence of QM-stable subgroups of A1[]A_{1}[\ell] with cyclic order \ell subgroups of e1(A1[])(/)2e_{1}(A_{1}[\ell])\cong\left(\mathbb{Z}/\ell\mathbb{Z}\right)^{2} discussed in Lemma 3.1.

Because a QM structure ι\iota determines a unique principal polarization, we have dual edges via dual isogenies as in the elliptic curve case. As long as the source vertex v1v_{1} corresponds to an isomorphism class [(A,ι)][(A,\iota)] having only the single non-trivial automorphism [1][-1], we obtain a bijection between the edges from v1v_{1} to v2v_{2} and those from v2v_{2} to v1v_{1}; in this case, outward edges from v1v_{1} are in bijective correspondence with QM-stable subgroups of A1[]A_{1}[\ell] of order 2\ell^{2}. This occurs precisely when [(A,ι)][(A,\iota)] does not have CM by discriminant Δ=3\Delta=-3 or Δ=4\Delta=-4.

Our attention will be to vertices in 𝒢D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{\ell} corresponding to QM abelian surfaces with CM. For an abelian variety (A,ι)(A,\iota) with QM by 𝒪\mathcal{O} and KK-CM, recall from §2.2 that the central conductor of (A,ι)(A,\iota) is defined to be the positive integer ff such that EndQM(A)𝔬(f)𝔬K\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A)\cong\mathfrak{o}(f)\subseteq\mathfrak{o}_{K}.

Lemma 4.1.

Suppose φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) is a QM cyclic NN-isogeny, with (A,ι)(A,\iota) a QM abelian surface with KK-CM. Then

  1. (1)

    The QM abelian surface (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) also has KK-CM.

  2. (2)

    Let ff and ff^{\prime} denote the central conductors of (A,ι)(A,\iota) and (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}), respectively. Then ff and ff^{\prime} differ by at most a factor of NN:

    fNf and fNf.f\mid Nf^{\prime}\text{ and }f^{\prime}\mid Nf.
Proof.

The argument is similar to that of the elliptic curve case. In our context, we need only remember that we care specifically about those endomorphisms commuting with the QM.

Consider the homomorphism

F:End(A,ι)\displaystyle F:\textnormal{End}(A,\iota) End(A,ι)\displaystyle\longrightarrow\textnormal{End}(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime})
ψ\displaystyle\psi φψφ^.\displaystyle\longmapsto\varphi\circ\psi\circ\hat{\varphi}.

Because φ\varphi is assumed to be QM-equivariant, this restricts to a homomorphism

EndQM(A,ι)EndQM(A,ι).\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A,\iota)\longrightarrow\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}).

As in the argument in the elliptic curves case, the algebras of endomorphisms commuting with the quaternionic multiplication are isomorphic by the multiple 1NF\frac{1}{N}F of the map above. That is,

KEndQM(A,ι)EndQM(A,ι).K\cong\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A,\iota)\otimes\mathbb{Q}\cong\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime})\otimes\mathbb{Q}.

This completes part (a). Moreover, that

1NF:EndQM(A,ι)EndQM(A,ι)\frac{1}{N}F:\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A,\iota)\otimes\mathbb{Q}\rightarrow\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime})

is an isomorphism tells us that

NEndQM(A,ι)EndQM(A,ι),N\cdot\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A,\iota)\subseteq\textnormal{End}_{\text{QM}}(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}),

yielding fNff^{\prime}\mid Nf. Via the dual argument, we obtain fNff\mid Nf^{\prime}. ∎

For an imaginary quadratic field KK, we are therefore justified in defining 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell} to be the subgraph of 𝒢D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{\ell} consisting of vertices corresponding to QM abelian surfaces with KK-CM. An edge in 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell} corresponds to a class of QM-cyclic \ell-isogenies [φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)][\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime})] between QM abelian surfaces with KK-CM, and the above lemma tells us that as we move along paths in 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell}, the central conductors of vertices met have the same prime-to-\ell part. It follows that 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell} has a decomposition

𝒢K,D=(f0,)=1𝒢K,,f0D,\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell}=\bigsqcup_{(f_{0},\ell)=1}\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}},

where 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} denotes the subgraph of 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell} with vertices having corresponding central conductors of the form f0af_{0}\ell^{a} for some aa\in\mathbb{N}.

Any edge in 𝒢K,,f0\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} has vertices with corresponding central conductors ff and ff^{\prime} satisfying f/f{1,,1}f/f^{\prime}\in\{1,\ell,\ell^{-1}\}. Defining the level of a vertex in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} having central conductor ff to be ord(f)\text{ord}_{\ell}(f), we note that a directed edge can do one of three things:

  • increase the level by one, in which case we will call the edge ascending,

  • decrease the level by one, in which case we will call the edge descending, or

  • leave the level unchanged, in which case we will call the edge horizontal.

We will refer to ascending and descending edges collectively as vertical edges. For a connected component of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}, we refer to the subgraph consisting of level 0 vertices and horizontal edges between them as the surface of that component. In other words, the vertex set of the surface consists of vertices with corresponding central conductor f0f_{0}. This choice of terminology is reflective of the fact that we cannot have an ascending isogeny starting at level 0, and of fact that horizontal edges can only occur between surface vertices, as the following lemma states.

Lemma 4.2.

Suppose that there is a horizontal edge in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} connecting vertices v1v_{1} and v2v_{2}. Letting fif_{i} denote the central conductor corresponding to viv_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2, we then have f1=f2=f0f_{1}=f_{2}=f_{0}. Furthermore, the number of horizontal edges emanating from a given surface vertex in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} is 1+(ΔK)1+\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}, hence is

  • 0 if \ell is inert in KK,

  • 11 if \ell ramified in KK, and

  • 22 if \ell is split in KK.

Proof.

That f1=f2f_{1}=f_{2} is part of our definition of horizontal edges. What we must prove is that \ell does not divide f:=f1=f2f:=f_{1}=f_{2}.

The given edge corresponds to a QM-cyclic \ell isogeny

φ:(A1,ι1)(A2,ι2),\varphi:(A_{1},\iota_{1})\rightarrow(A_{2},\iota_{2}),

where (Ai,ιi)(A_{i},\iota_{i}) has central conductor ff for i=1,2i=1,2. By Theorem 2.13, we have a decomposition of these two QM abelian surfaces resulting in an isomorphic isogeny ψ\psi as below:

(A1,ι1){(A_{1},\iota_{1})}(A2,ι2){(A_{2},\iota_{2})}(E1×E1,ι1){(E_{1}\times E_{1}^{\prime},\iota_{1})}(E2×E2,ι2),{(E_{2}\times E_{2}^{\prime},\iota_{2}),}φ\scriptstyle{\varphi}\scriptstyle{\cong}\scriptstyle{\cong}ψ\scriptstyle{\psi}

where each EiE_{i} and each EiE_{i}^{\prime} is an elliptic curve with KK-CM by conductor ff for i=1,2i=1,2. Restricting ψ\psi to E1E_{1} and to E1E_{1}^{\prime}, respectively, yields isogenies of KK-CM elliptic curves

E1ψ(E1)=:EE2×E2E1ψ(E1)=:EE2×E2.\displaystyle\begin{split}E_{1}&\longrightarrow\psi(E_{1})=:E\subseteq E_{2}\times E_{2}^{\prime}\\ E_{1}^{\prime}&\longrightarrow\psi(E_{1}^{\prime})=:E^{\prime}\subseteq E_{2}\times E_{2}^{\prime}.\end{split} (1)

This provides the decomposition

E2×E2E×EE_{2}\times E_{2}^{\prime}\cong E\times E^{\prime}

The conductors of the endomorphism rings of EE and EE^{\prime}, each of which must divide ff and have the same coprime to \ell part as ff, must then have least common multiple ff. This provides that either EE or EE^{\prime} must have CM conductor ff.

The conductors of the endomorphism rings of EE and EE^{\prime} must each be in the set {f,f,1f}\{f,\ell f,\frac{1}{\ell}f\}, and must have least common multiple ff. This provides that either EE or EE^{\prime} must have CM conductor ff.

We now consider the corresponding isogeny of KK-CM elliptic curves of conductor ff from (1). In doing so, [CS22, Lemma 4.1] tells us that we must have f\ell\nmid f. There, the result is reached using the correspondence between horizontal \ell-isogenies of 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0})-CM elliptic curves over \mathbb{C} with proper 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0})-ideals of norm \ell. This also gives us the count of horizontal isogenies mentioned; we have the count in the elliptic curve case as in [CS22], and from a horizontal isogeny of elliptic curves as in (1) we generate a QM-cyclic isogeny of our QM-abelian surfaces via the QM action. ∎

Each surface vertex has 1+(ΔK)1+\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell} horizontal edges emanating from it, and therefore has (ΔK)\ell-\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell} descending edges to level 11 vertices. For vertices away from the surface, we have the following:

Lemma 4.3.

If vv is a vertex in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} at level L>0L>0. then there is one ascending vertex from vv to a vertex in level L1L-1, and the remaining \ell edges from vv are descending edges to distinct vertices in level L+1L+1.

Proof.

We will use the same type of counting argument one may use in the elliptic curve case, as in [Sut13, Lemma 6]. The action of Gal(¯/)\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}) on 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} preserves the level of a given vertex, and hence preserves the notions of horizontal, ascending, and descending for edges. As a result, the number of ascending, respectively descending, edges out of vv must be the same as for any other vertex at level LL by transitivity of this action on vertices at each level.

For L=1L=1, there are

((ΔK))2bh(𝔬(f0))=2bh(𝔬(f0))\left(\ell-\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}\right)2^{b}h(\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}))=2^{b}h(\mathfrak{o}(\ell f_{0}))

total descending vertices from surface vertices (where bb is as in Proposition 2.12). The equality above states that this is equal to the total number of level 11 vertices, and so the edges must all be to distinct level 11 vertices. For L>1L>1, the result follows inductively using the same counting argument along with the fact that

h(𝔬(Lf0))=h(𝔬(L1f0)).h(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L}f_{0}))=\ell\cdot h(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L-1}f_{0})).\qed

4.2. QM-equivariant isogeny volcanoes

For a prime number \ell, we define here the notion of an \ell-volcano. This notion for the most part agrees with that in the existing literature, with the only caveat being that in the original context of isogeny volcanoes over a finite field one has volcanoes of finite depth. In our case, working over an algebraically closed field as in [Cl22, CS22], we adjust the definition to allow for infinite depth volcanoes.

Definition 4.4.

Let VV be a connected graph with vertices partitioned into levels

V=i0Vi,V=\bigsqcup_{i\geq 0}V_{i},

such that if Vd=V_{d}=\emptyset for some dd, then Vi=V_{i}=\emptyset for all id.i\geq d. If such a dd exists, we will refer to the smallest such dd as the depth of VV and to VdV_{d} for dd the depth as the floor of VV, and otherwise we will say that the depth of VV is infinite.

Fixing a prime number \ell, the graph VV with its partioning is an \ell-volcano if the following properties hold:

  1. (1)

    Each vertex not in the floor of VV has degree +1\ell+1, while any floor vertex has degree 11.

  2. (2)

    The subgraph V0V_{0}, which we call the surface, is regular of degree 0,10,1 or 22.

  3. (3)

    For 0<i<d0<i<d (colloquially: “below the surface” and “above the floor”), a vertex in ViV_{i} has one ascending edge to a vertex in Vi1V_{i-1}, and \ell descending edges to distinct vertices in Vi+1V_{i+1}. This accounts for all edges of VV which are not horizontal, by which we mean edges which are not between two surface vertices.

The results of the previous section immediately imply the following theorem, declaring that in most cases connected components of the subgraphs 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} of 𝒢K,D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell} are isogeny volcanoes. In such a case, we will refer to this graph as a QM-equivariant isogeny volcano. This justifies our use of terminology regarding edges and vertices in these subgraphs.

Theorem 4.5.

Fix an imaginary quadratic field KK, a prime \ell and a natural number f0f_{0} with (,f0)=1(\ell,f_{0})=1 and f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4. Consider the graph 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} as an undirected graph by identifying edges with their dual edges as described above. Each connected component of this graph has the structure of an \ell-volcano of infinite depth.

A path in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} refers to a finite sequence of directed edges, say e1,,ere_{1},\ldots,e_{r}, such that the terminal vertex of eie_{i} is the initial vertex of ei+1e_{i+1} for all 1ir11\leq i\leq r-1. In the f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4 case, because the edges in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} all have canonical inverse edges we are justified in using the following terminology: we call an edge backtracking if ei+1e_{i+1} is inverse to eie_{i} for some edge eie_{i} in the path. Note that in the case of \ell ramified in KK, a path consisting of two surface edges always is backtracking. If \ell is split in KK, then there is a horizontal cycle at the surface. In this case, concatenation of this cycle with itself any number of times does not result in backtracking.

Our definitions and the results of this section lead us to the following correspondence:

Lemma 4.6.

Suppose that f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4. We then have a bijective correspondence between the set of geometric isomorphism classes of QM-cyclic a\ell^{a}-isogenies of QM abelian surfaces with KK-CM and central conductor with prime-to-\ell part f0f_{0}, and the set of length aa non-backtracking paths in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}. This associates to an isogeny its corresponding path in this isogeny graph.

Proof.

This result is in exact analogy to [Cl22, Lemma 4.2], and the proof is as therein. ∎

In §6, we will describe the Galois orbits of such paths in order to describe the KK-CM locus on X0D(a)X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a}) via the above correspondence. For this, the following observation will be of use: any non-backtracking length aa path in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} for f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4 can be written as a concatenation of paths P1,P2P_{1},P_{2} and P3P_{3}, where P1P_{1} is strictly ascending, P2P_{2} is strictly horizontal and hence consists entirely of surface edges, and P3P_{3} is strictly descending, such that the lengths of these paths (which may be 0) sum to aa.

4.3. The field of moduli of a QM-cylic \ell isogeny

A QM-cyclic \ell isogeny φ\varphi of KK-CM abelian surfaces with D\ell\nmid D corresponds to an edge ee in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}, say between vertices vv and vv^{\prime} in levels LL and LL^{\prime}, respectively. Assume that the path is non-descending (LLL\geq L^{\prime}), so either it is horizontal (L=LL=L^{\prime}) or ascending (L=L+1L=L^{\prime}+1).

An automorphism fixing ee must fix both vv and vv^{\prime}, and so by Theorems 2.7 and 2.8 we have that either (φ)=K(Lf0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0}), or [K(Lf0):(φ)]=2[K(\ell^{L}f_{0}):\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)]=2. In the latter case, there exists an involution σGal(K(Lf0)/)\sigma\in\text{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}) fixing vv, and we know precisely when this occurs by Theorem 2.8 – that is, when D(K)=1D(K)=1.

Assume that f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4, such that 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} has the structure of an \ell-volcano. (We will deal with the case of f02ΔK{3,4}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\} in the remarks leading up to Proposition 5.3.) If ee is the unique edge between vv and a vertex in level LL^{\prime}, then ee is fixed by σ\sigma if and only if vv is. This is the case unless L=L=0L=L^{\prime}=0 and \ell splits in KK, in which case there are two edges from vv to surface vertices (which are not necessarily unique, or distinct from vv). In either of these cases, consider [(E×E,ι)],[(E\times E^{\prime},\iota)], with EE having CM by 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}), a decomposition of our QM abelian surface corresponding to v1v_{1}. The two outward edges from vv then have corresponding kernels ι(𝒪)E[𝔭]\iota(\mathcal{O})\cdot E[\mathfrak{p}] and ι(𝒪)E[𝔭¯]\iota(\mathcal{O})\cdot E[\overline{\mathfrak{p}}], with 𝔭\mathfrak{p} a prime ideal in 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}) of norm \ell.

We claim that, in this situation, the involution σGal(K(f0)/)\sigma\in\text{Gal}(K(f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}) fixing vv cannot fix 𝔭\mathfrak{p}, and hence cannot fix our edge ee. Indeed, the exact statement of Theorem 2.8 says that σ=τσ𝔞\sigma=\tau\sigma_{\mathfrak{a}} for a certain ideal 𝔞\mathfrak{a} of 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}), so to fix ee it would have to be the case that σ𝔞\sigma_{\mathfrak{a}} acts on ee and hence on vv by complex conjugation. It follows from [GR06, Lemma 5.10] that this cannot be the case, as ωD(K)\omega_{D(K)} acts non-trivially on vv. From this discussion, we reach the following result regarding fields of moduli corresponding to our edges.

Proposition 4.7.

Let φ\varphi be a QM cyclic \ell-isogeny corresponding to an edge ee from vv to vv^{\prime} in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} as above, with f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4.

  • If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, i.e., if there is a prime pDp\mid D which is inert in KK, then (φ)=K(Lf0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0}).

  • Suppose that D(K)=1D(K)=1.

    • If φ\varphi is a QM cyclic isogeny of QM abelian surfaces with CM by 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}) and \ell splits in KK, then (φ)=K(f0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(f_{0}).

    • Otherwise, [K(Lf0):(φ)]=2[K(\ell^{L}f_{0}):\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)]=2, with (φ)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi) equal to the field of moduli corresponding to vv as described in Theorem 2.8.

5. The action of Galois on 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}

5.1. Action of Gal(¯/)\textnormal{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q})

We have an action of Aut()\textnormal{Aut}(\mathbb{C}) on 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}: an automorphism σ\sigma maps a vertex vv corresponding to an isomorphism class of QM abelian surfaces [(A,ι)][(A,\iota)] to the vertex corresponding to [(σ(A),σ(ι))][(\sigma(A),\sigma(\iota))], and edges are mapped to edges via the action on the corresponding isomorphism classes of isogenies. This action factors through Gal(¯/)\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}), and preserves the level of a vertex. It follows that it also preserves the notions of ascending, descending and horizontal for paths.

For a fixed level L0L\geq 0, let 𝒢K,,f0,LD\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L} denote the portion of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} from the surface (level 0) to level LL:

𝒢K,,f0,LD:=i=0LVi𝒢K,,f0D.\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L}:=\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}.

By Theorem 2.7, the action of Gal(¯/)\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}) on 𝒢K,,f0,LD\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L} factors through Gal(K(Lf0)/)\text{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, i.e., if there is some prime pDp\mid D which is inert in KK, then Theorem 2.8 says that the action of this group on VLV_{L} is free. Otherwise, each vertex vv in level LL is fixed by some involution σ\sigma, and the class of QM abelian surfaces corresponding to vv has field of moduli isomorphic to K(Lf0)σK(\ell^{L}f_{0})^{\sigma}.

We now fix a vertex vv in level LL in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}, and suppose that σGal(K(Lf0)/)\sigma\in\text{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}) is an involution fixing vv. (This forces D(K)=1D(K)=1.) In the following two sections, we provide an explicit description of the action of σ\sigma on 𝒢K,,f0,LD\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L} in all cases. First, we note here the number of vertices at each level fixed by σ\sigma.

Proposition 5.1.

Let xXD(1)/x\in X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} be an 𝔬(Lf0)\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L}f_{0})-CM point fixed by an involution σGal(K(Lf0)/)\sigma\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}). Let bb denote the number of prime divisors of DD which are inert in KK. For 0LL0\leq L^{\prime}\leq L, the number of vertices of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma is

2b#Pic(𝔬(Lf0))[2].2^{b}\cdot\#\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0}))[2].
Proof.

By Theorem 2.8, the involution σ\sigma is of the form σ=τσ0\sigma=\tau\circ\sigma_{0} for some σ0Pic(𝔬(Lf0))\sigma_{0}\in\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L}f_{0})), where τ\tau denotes complex conjugation. The set of vertices of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} at level LL^{\prime} has cardinality 2bh(𝔬(Lf0))2^{b}\cdot h(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0})), consisting of 2b2^{b} orbits under the action of Pic(𝔬(Lf0))\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0})). Each orbit is a Pic(𝔬(Lf0))\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0}))-torsor, and σ0\sigma_{0} yields a bijection on each.

As a result, we have that the number of level LL^{\prime} vertices in a given orbit which are fixed by σ\sigma is the same as the number of elements of Pic(𝔬(Lf0))\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0})) fixed by τ\tau. As shown in [Cl22, Prop. 2.6], this count is equal to #Pic(𝔬(Lf0))[2]\#\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0}))[2], as τ\tau acts on Pic(𝔬(Lf0))\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L^{\prime}}f_{0})) by inverting ideals. ∎

Regarding this count, by [Cox13, Prop. 3.11] we have the following:

Lemma 5.2.

Let rr denote the number of distinct odd prime divisors of a fixed imaginary quadratic discriminant Δ\Delta. Then Pic(𝔬Δ)[2](/2)μ\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}_{\Delta})[2]\cong\left(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}\right)^{\mu}, where

μ={r1 if Δ1(mod4) or Δ4(mod16),r if Δ8,12(mod16) or Δ16(mod32),r+1 if Δ0(mod32).\mu=\begin{cases}r-1&\text{ if }\Delta\equiv 1\phantom{,12}\pmod{4}\phantom{6}\text{ or }\Delta\equiv 4\phantom{1}\pmod{16},\\ r&\text{ if }\Delta\equiv 8,12\pmod{16}\text{ or }\Delta\equiv 16\pmod{32},\\ r+1&\text{ if }\Delta\equiv 0\phantom{,12}\pmod{32}.\end{cases}

5.2. The field of moduli of a QM-cyclic a\ell^{a} isogeny

Let φ\varphi be a QM cyclic a\ell^{a} isogeny of KK-CM abelian surfaces inducing a Δ=f2ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM point on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}, with D\ell\nmid D and D>1D>1. Let PP be the length aa non-backtracking path in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} corresponding to φ\varphi, via Lemma 4.6, for the appropriate f0+f_{0}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+}. The ordered edges in PP correspond to a decomposition

φ=φ1φa,\varphi=\varphi_{1}\circ\cdots\circ\varphi_{a},

where each φi\varphi_{i} is a QM-cyclic \ell-isogeny. If Δ<4\Delta<-4, then Lemma 3.2 provides

(φ)=(φ1)(φa),\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{1})\cdots\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{a}),

and for f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4 Proposition 4.7 determines (φi)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{i}) for each ii. Note that if (φi)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi_{i}) is a ring class field for any ii, then (φ)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi) must contain KK

For f02ΔK{3,4}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}, it is impossible to have D(K)=1D(K)=1, as ΔK\Delta_{K} has only a single prime divisor while DD has at least 22. This is of course consistent with, and can be seen from, the general fact that Shimura curves have no real points; the residue field of a 3-3-CM or 4-4-CM point on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} must be KK in this situation. By these observations and the discussion of the Galois action in the previous section, we have the following proposition.

Proposition 5.3.

Let φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) be a QM-cyclic a\ell^{a} isogeny. Suppose that (A,ι)(A,\iota) has KK-CM with central conductor fA=af0f_{A}=\ell^{a}f_{0} and that (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) has central conductor fA=af0f_{A^{\prime}}=\ell^{a^{\prime}}f_{0}. Let L=max{a,a}L=\textnormal{max}\{a,a^{\prime}\}. Let PP be the path corresponding to φ\varphi in 𝒢K,,f0,LD\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L}.

  • If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, i.e., if there is a prime pDp\mid D which is inert in KK, then (φ)=K(Lf0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0}).

  • Suppose that D(K)=1D(K)=1.

    • If \ell splits in KK and φ\varphi factors through an \ell-isogeny of QM abelian surfaces with f02ΔKf_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM, then (φ)=K(Lf0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0}).

    • Suppose that we are not in the previous case. Let σGal(K(Lf0)/)\sigma\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f_{0})/\mathbb{Q}) be an involution fixing the class of (A,ι)(A,\iota) or (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}). If σ\sigma fixes the path PP, then (φ)=K(Lf0)σ\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0})^{\sigma}. Otherwise, (φ)=K(Lf0)\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)=K(\ell^{L}f_{0}).

We now explicitly analyze the Galois action in all cases as done in [Cl22, §5.3] and [CS22, §4.2] in the D=1D=1 case. Borrowing the notation therein, for a specified K,f0,K,f_{0}, and \ell we let

τL:=#Pic(𝔬(Lf0)[2].\tau_{L}:=\#\textnormal{Pic}(\mathfrak{o}(\ell^{L}f_{0})[2].

By Proposition 5.1, the number of vertices in level LL^{\prime} in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} which are fixed by an involution σPic(Lf0)\sigma\in\textnormal{Pic}(\ell^{L}f_{0}) of the type we are studying is 2bτL2^{b}\cdot\tau_{L^{\prime}}.

5.3. Explicit description: f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4

In the current section, we assume f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4, such that each component of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} has the structure of an \ell-volcano of infinite depth. This is in exact parallel to [Cl22, §5.3], baring the same structure of results.

Let 0LL0\leq L^{\prime}\leq L, and let σPic(Lf0)\sigma\in\textnormal{Pic}(\ell^{L}f_{0}) be an involution fixing a vertex vv in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}^{D} in level LL. In the following lemmas, we describe the action of σ\sigma on 𝒢K,,f0,LD\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0},L}. In each case, we provide example figures of a component of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}^{D} (up to some finite level). In these graphs, vertices and edges colored purple are fixed by the action of the designated involution σ\sigma, while black edges and vertices are acted on non-trivially by σ\sigma. Without loss of generality based on the symmetry of our graph components, we will always take vv to be the left-most vertex in level LL in our figures.

Lemma 5.4.

Let >2\ell>2 be a prime which is unramified in KK and f0+f_{0}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} with f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4. Let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above with L1L\geq 1, and consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,,f0D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}.

Each surface vertex has two descendants fixed by σ\sigma in level 11. For 1L<L1\leq L^{\prime}<L, each fixed vertex in level LL^{\prime} has a unique fixed descendent in level L+1L^{\prime}+1.

Proof.

By Lemma 5.2 we have τ1=2τ0\tau_{1}=2\tau_{0}, while τL=τL+1\tau_{L^{\prime}}=\tau_{L^{\prime}+1} for 1L<L1\leq L^{\prime}<L. The number of edges descending from a given vertex in level L1L^{\prime}\geq 1 is \ell, hence is odd, and so we immediately see that each fixed vertex in level LL^{\prime} with 1LL1\leq L^{\prime}\leq L must have at least one fixed descendant in level L+1L^{\prime}+1, hence exactly one by our count.

The number of descending edges from a given surface vertex is either +1\ell+1 or 1\ell-1 depending on whether \ell is inert or split in KK, hence is even in both cases. With our involution being of the form σ=τσ0\sigma=\tau\sigma_{0}, a translated version of the argument of [CS22, Cor. 5.5] gives that each fixed surface vertex has at least one fixed descendant in level 11. Therefore, each fixed surface vertex must have at least two fixed descendants in level 11 by parity, giving the result. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 1. =3\ell=3 inert in KK with L=2L=2
Refer to caption
Figure 2. =3\ell=3 split in KK with L=2L=2
Lemma 5.5.

Let >2\ell>2 be a prime that ramifies in KK and f0+f_{0}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} with f02ΔK<4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4. Let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above, and consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,,f0D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}.

Any vertex vv^{\prime} in level LL^{\prime} with 0L<L0\leq L^{\prime}<L which is fixed by σ\sigma has exactly one descendant in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma.

Proof.

Each vertex in level LL^{\prime} has \ell descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1. A descendant of vv^{\prime} must be sent to another descendant of vv^{\prime} by σ\sigma, by virtue of vv^{\prime} being fixed by σ\sigma. At least one descendant must be fixed by σ\sigma by the assumption that \ell is odd. Lemma 5.2 gives that τL=τL+1\tau_{L^{\prime}}=\tau_{L^{\prime}+1}, and so there must be exactly one fixed descendant of vv^{\prime}. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 3. =3\ell=3 ramified in KK with |V0|=1|V_{0}|=1 and L=2L=2
Refer to caption
Figure 4. =3\ell=3 ramified in KK with |V0|=2|V_{0}|=2 and L=2L=2
Lemma 5.6.

Suppose that =2\ell=2 is unramified in KK and that f02ΔK3f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\neq-3. Let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above with L1L\geq 1, and consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,2,f0D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,f_{0}}.
  1. (1)

    Every surface vertex fixed by σ\sigma has a unique fixed descendant in level 11.

  2. (2)

    Suppose L2L\geq 2. Each vertex in level 11 which is fixed by σ\sigma has all of its descendants in levels 22 to min(L,3)\text{min}(L,3) fixed by σ\sigma.

  3. (3)

    Let 3L<L3\leq L^{\prime}<L. If vv^{\prime} is a vertex in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma, then the vertex ww in level LL^{\prime} which shares a neighbor in level L1L^{\prime}-1 with vv^{\prime} is also fixed by σ\sigma, and exactly one of vv^{\prime} and ww has its two descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma.

Proof.

(1) Lemma 5.2 provides τ1=τ0\tau_{1}=\tau_{0}. If 22 is inert in KK, then each fixed surface vertex has three neighbors in level 11 and hence at least one must be fixed. The count then implies exactly one of these neighbors must be fixed. If 22 splits in KK, then each fixed surface vertex has exactly one neighbor in level 11 which then must be fixed.

(2) Lemma 5.2 provides τ3=2τ2\tau_{3}=2\tau_{2} and τ2=2τ1\tau_{2}=2\tau_{1}. As each non-surface vertex has two immediate descendants in the next level, the claim follows.

(3) For 3L<L3\leq L^{\prime}<L, we have τL+1=τL\tau_{L^{\prime}+1}=\tau_{L}. Let vLv_{L^{\prime}} be a fixed vertex in level LL^{\prime} having a fixed neighbor vertex in level L1L^{\prime}-1. By a parity argument, there must then be another fixed vertex wLw_{L^{\prime}} in level LL^{\prime} with the same neighbor in level L1L^{\prime}-1 as vLv_{L^{\prime}}. By the count, it suffices to show that vLv_{L^{\prime}} and wLw_{L^{\prime}} cannot both have descendants fixed by σ\sigma.

Suppose to the contrary that vL+1v_{L^{\prime}+1} and wL+1w_{L^{\prime}+1} are σ\sigma-fixed neighbors of vLv_{L^{\prime}} and wLw_{L^{\prime}}, respectively, in level L+1L^{\prime}+1. We find that this cannot be the case as in [Cl22, Lemma 5.6 c]; this would imply that we have a QM-cyclic 242^{4}-isogeny which , upon restriction, would provide a cyclic, real 242^{4}-isogeny of elliptic curves with CM by Δ=22L+2f02ΔK\Delta=2^{2L+2}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}. This in turn implies the existence of a primitive, proper real 𝔬(2L+1f0)\mathfrak{o}(2^{L+1}f_{0})-ideal of index 1616, which does not exist. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 5. =2\ell=2 inert with L=4L=4
Refer to caption
Figure 6. =2\ell=2 split with L=4L=4

In the case of =2\ell=2 ramifying in KK, the discriminant of KK must be of the form ΔK=4m\Delta_{K}=4m for m2m\equiv 2 or 3(mod4)3\pmod{4}, and so ΔK8\Delta_{K}\equiv 8 or 12(mod16)12\pmod{16}. Hence, the discriminant of the order 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}) corresponding to the surface of 𝒢K,2,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,f_{0}} will also lie in one of these congruence classes mod 1616. Whether these components have a surface loop is answered by the following lemma.

Lemma 5.7.

Consider a component of 𝒢K,2,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,f_{0}} with 22 ramified in KK. The surface V0V_{0} of this component consists of a single vertex with a single self-loop if and only if ΔK{4,8}\Delta_{K}\in\{-4,-8\} and f0=1f_{0}=1.

Proof.

This proof comes down to a simple argument about ideals of norm 22 in 𝔬(f0)\mathfrak{o}(f_{0}), as in [Cl22, Lemma 5.7]

The following lemmas therefore cover all possible cases.

Lemma 5.8.

Let ΔK=8\Delta_{K}=-8 and =2\ell=2, and let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above with L1L\geq 1. Consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,2,1D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,1}.
  1. (1)

    The two descendants in level 11 of the single surface vertex are fixed by σ\sigma.

  2. (2)

    For 1<L<L1<L^{\prime}<L, there are 22 vertices in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma and they have a common neighbor vertex in level L1L^{\prime}-1. One of these must have both descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma, while the other has its direct descendants swapped by σ\sigma.

Proof.

There is a single vertex on the surface, as the class number of KK is 11. Lemma 5.2 tells us that τ1=2τ0\tau_{1}=2\tau_{0} in this case, so both descendants of the surface vertex are fixed by σ\sigma. For 1L<L1\leq L^{\prime}<L, we have

τL+1=τL=2,\tau_{L^{\prime}+1}=\tau_{L^{\prime}}=2,

so one of the fixed vertices in level LL^{\prime} must have both descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma, while the other has its vertices swapped by σ\sigma. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 7. f02ΔK=8f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-8 and =2\ell=2 with L=3L=3
Lemma 5.9.

Suppose that ΔK12(mod16)\Delta_{K}\equiv 12\pmod{16} and f02ΔK4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\neq-4 with =2\ell=2. Let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above with L1L\geq 1. Consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,2,f0D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,f_{0}}.
  1. (1)

    There are two surface vertices, both fixed by σ\sigma. One surface vertex, which we will denote by v0v_{0}, has both descendants in level 11 fixed by σ\sigma, while the other has its level 11 descendants swapped by σ\sigma.

  2. (2)

    If L2L\geq 2 (such that the action of σ\sigma is defined at level 22), then each of the 44 vertices in level 22 which descend from v0v_{0} are fixed by σ\sigma.

  3. (3)

    For 2L<L2\leq L^{\prime}<L and for a vertex vv^{\prime} in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma, let ww denote the other level LL^{\prime} vertex sharing a neighbor vertex in level L1L^{\prime}-1 with vv^{\prime} (which must also be fixed by σ\sigma). Exactly one of vv^{\prime} or ww has both descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma, while the other vertex has its direct descendants swapped by σ\sigma.

Proof.

In this case the surface has two σ\sigma-fixed vertices with a single edge between them. We have

τ1=τ0 and τ2=2τ1\tau_{1}=\tau_{0}\quad\text{ and }\quad\tau_{2}=2\tau_{1}

by Lemma 5.2, giving parts (1) and (2). For 2L<L2\leq L^{\prime}<L, we have

τL=τL1,\tau_{L^{\prime}}=\tau_{L^{\prime}-1},

so half of the σ\sigma-fixed vertices in level L1L^{\prime}-1 must have both descendants in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma, while the other half have their descendants in level LL^{\prime} swapped by σ\sigma. That there must be exactly one pair of fixed vertices in level LL^{\prime} descending from a given fixed vertex in level L2L^{\prime}-2 follows as in part (3) of Lemma 5.6. ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 8. ΔK4\Delta_{K}\neq-4 with =2,ord2(ΔK)=2\ell=2,\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=2 and L=3L=3
Lemma 5.10.

Suppose that ΔK8(mod16)\Delta_{K}\equiv 8\pmod{16} with ΔK<8\Delta_{K}<-8 and =2\ell=2. Let v,Lv,L and σ\sigma be as above with L1L\geq 1. Consider the action of σ\sigma on

i=0LVi𝒢K,2,f0D.\bigsqcup_{i=0}^{L}V_{i}\subseteq\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,2,f_{0}}.
  1. (1)

    There are two surface vertices, both fixed by σ\sigma, and all 44 vertices in level 11 are fixed by σ\sigma.

  2. (2)

    For 1L<L1\leq L^{\prime}<L and for a vertex vv^{\prime} in level LL^{\prime} fixed by σ\sigma, let ww denote the other level LL^{\prime} vertex sharing a neighbor vertex in level L1L^{\prime}-1 with vv^{\prime}. Exactly one of vv^{\prime} or ww has both descendants in level L+1L^{\prime}+1 fixed by σ\sigma, while the other vertex has its direct descendants swapped by σ\sigma.

Proof.

In this case again we have two σ\sigma-fixed vertices comprising our surface. Here Lemma 5.2 gives τ1=2τ0\tau_{1}=2\tau_{0}, providing part (1). For 1L<L1\leq L^{\prime}<L, Lemma 5.2 gives τL=τL1\tau_{L^{\prime}}=\tau_{L^{\prime}-1}. The same argument as in part (3) of Lemma 5.9 then provides part (2). ∎

Refer to caption
Figure 9. ΔK<8\Delta_{K}<-8 with =2,ord2(ΔK)=3\ell=2,\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=3 and L=3L=3

5.4. Explicit description part II: f02ΔK{3,4}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}

Keeping our notation from the previous section, we now assume f0=1f_{0}=1 and ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}. As mentioned earlier in this section, we always have D(K)1D(K)\neq 1 in this case. Therefore, the action of Gal(K(Lf)/)\text{Gal}(K(\ell^{L}f)/\mathbb{Q}) on VLV_{L} is free for all L0L\geq 0. This is splendid news for us; while the CM fields (i)\mathbb{Q}(i) and (3)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-3}) require extra attention at other points in this study, they cause absolutely no difficulties as far as determining the explicit Galois action on 𝒢K,,1D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,1}. This is to be compared with the D=1D=1 case of [CS22, §4], wherein much care goes into defining and explicitly describing a meaningful action of complex conjugation on CM components of isogeny graphs in these cases.

Still, we provide here example figures of components of 𝒢K,,1\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,1} (up to finite level LL) for each case as reference for the reader for the path type analysis and enumeration done in §6. In these cases, edges from level 0 to 11 have multiplicity as exposited in [CS22, §3] due to the presence of automorphisms that do not fix kernels of isogenies. We therefore do not have a one-to-one identification between edges and “dual” edges in this case, and so as in the referenced study we clearly denote edges with orientation and multiplicity between levels 0 and 11.

Refer to caption
Figure 10. f02ΔK=4,=2f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-4,\ell=2 up to level 33
Refer to caption
Figure 11. f02ΔK=4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-4, \ell split (=5\ell=5, left) and inert (=3\ell=3, right) up to level 22
Refer to caption
Figure 12. f02ΔK=3,=3f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-3,\ell=3 up to level 22 (left) and =2\ell=2 up to level 33 (right)
Refer to caption
Figure 13. f02ΔK=3f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-3, \ell split (=7\ell=7, left) and inert (=5\ell=5, right) up to level 22

6. CM points on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}

We fix a\ell^{a} a prime power and Δ=f2ΔK=2Lf02ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K}=\ell^{2L}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}, with gcd(f0,)=1\text{gcd}(f_{0},\ell)=1, an imaginary quadratic discriminant. In this section, we describe the Δ\Delta-CM locus on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}. To this aim, we fully classify all closed point equivalence classes, by which we mean Gal(¯/)\textnormal{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/\mathbb{Q}) orbits, of non-backtracking, length aa paths in 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}}. We record the number of classes of each type with each possible residue field (up to isomorphism).

In the f02ΔK{3,4}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\} cases, the notion of backtracking in 𝒢K,,1D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,1} has subtlety between levels 0 and 11 that is not present in isogeny volcanoes. We address this now: traversing any edge from a vertex vv in level 0 to a vertex ww in level 11 followed by the single edge from ww to vv corresponds to a composition of dual isogenies, and thus is backtracking. On the other hand, for a given isogeny φ\varphi corresponding to the edge ee from ww to vv, there is a single edge from vv to ww corresponding to its dual φ^\widehat{\varphi}. Therefore, traversing ee followed by the other edge (respectively, either of the two other edges) from vv to ww does not count as backtracking in the case of f02ΔK=4f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-4 (respectively, f02ΔK=3f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}=-3).

With bb denoting the number of prime divisors of DD which are inert in KK, we have 2b2^{b} closed Δ\Delta-CM points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, with the fibers over each under the natural map from X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}} to XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} being isomorphic via Atkin-Lehner involutions. In all cases, we then have

C(φ)eφdφ=2bdeg(X0(a)X(1))=2bψ(a)=2b(a+a1),\sum_{C(\varphi)}e_{\varphi}d_{\varphi}=2^{b}\text{deg}(X_{0}(\ell^{a})\rightarrow X(1))=2^{b}\psi(\ell^{a})=2^{b}(\ell^{a}+\ell^{a-1}),

where our sum is over closed-point equivalence classes C(φ)C(\varphi) of QM-cyclic a\ell^{a} isogenies φ\varphi with corresponding CM discriminant Δ\Delta.

The map X0D(a)/XD(1)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has nontrivial ramification over a closed Δ\Delta-CM point if and only if Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. For Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\} and path length aa, we have that a closed point equivalence class has ramification, of index 22 or 33 in the respective cases of Δ=4\Delta=-4 and 3-3, if and only if the paths in the class include a descending edge from level 0 to level 11. This allows for a check on the classifications and counts that we provide.

If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the path types showing up in our analysis of each 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} are exactly those appearing in [Cl22] and [CS22]. In this case, each graph 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} consists of 2b2^{b} copies of the analogous graph 𝒢K,,f0\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} from the D=1D=1 modular curve case. Moreover, we have shown that the action of relevant involutions on each component is identical to the action of complex conjugation in the D=1D=1 case, up to symmetry of our graphs. In each place where the isomorphism class of a residue field in the referenced D=1D=1 analysis is a rational ring class field, we have in its place here some totally complex, index 22 subfield of a ring class field as described in Theorem 2.8.

If at least one prime dividing DD is inert in KK, i.e., if D(K)>1D(K)>1, then all of the residue fields of Δ\Delta-CM points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and hence on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}, are ring class fields. The path types showing up are exactly those in [CS22], but the counts will in general differ from the case of the previous paragraph. Specifically, a given path type in our analysis in the case of D(K)=1D(K)=1 consists of mm classes with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f^{\prime}) and nn classes with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f^{\prime}) for some f+f^{\prime}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} and m,n0m,n\geq 0. In the case of D(K)>1D(K)>1, the same path type then consists of 2m+n2m+n classes, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f^{\prime}).

Example 6.1.

Suppose that K=(i)K=\mathbb{Q}(i) splits BB, and consider the case of Δ=4\Delta=-4 and a=2\ell^{a}=2. We have 2b+12^{b+1} closed-point equivalence classes of QM-cyclic 22-isogenies of QM abelian surfaces with 4-4-CM. Each corresponding point on X0D(2)/X_{0}^{D}(2)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has residue degree 11 over its image on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, having residue field KK. Half of these classes, corresponding to self-loop edges at the surface, have no ramification, while each of the 2b2^{b} classes C(φ)C(\varphi) corresponding to a pair of descending edges to level 11 has eφ=2e_{\varphi}=2.

A non-backtracking length aa path in 𝒢K,,1\mathcal{G}_{K,\ell,1} starting in level LL consists of cc ascending edges, followed by hh horizontal edges, followed by dd descending edges for some c,h,d0c,h,d\geq 0 with c+h+d=ac+h+d=a. We denote this decomposition type of the path with the ordered triple (c,h,d)(c,h,d).

6.1. Path type analysis: general case

We begin here by considering the portion of the path type analysis that is independent of \ell and ΔK\Delta_{K}.

I. There are classes consisting of strictly descending paths, i.e., with (c,h,d)=(0,0,a)(c,h,d)=(0,0,a). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with residue field K(af)K(\ell^{a}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(af)K(\ell^{a}f).

II. If aLa\leq L, there are classes of strictly ascending paths, i.e., with (c,h,d)=(a,0,0)(c,h,d)=(a,0,0). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

III. If L=0L=0 and (ΔK)=0\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=0, then there classes of paths with (c,h,d)=(0,1,a1)(c,h,d)=(0,1,a-1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field K(a1f)K(\ell^{a-1}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(a1f)K(\ell^{a-1}f).

IV. If L=0L=0 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=1, then for each hh with 1ha1\leq h\leq a there are classes of paths with (c,h,d)=(0,h,ah)(c,h,d)=(0,h,a-h) and residue field K(ahf)K(\ell^{a-h}f). There are 2b+12^{b+1} such classes if D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, and there are 2b2^{b} such classes otherwise.

X. If a>L1a>L\geq 1 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=1, then there are classes of paths with (c,h,d)=(L,aL,0)(c,h,d)=(L,a-L,0) and residue field K(f)K(f). There are 2b+12^{b+1} such classes if D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, and there are 2b2^{b} such classes otherwise.

6.2. Path type analysis: >2\ell>2

Here we assume that \ell is an odd prime.

V. If L2L\geq 2, then for each cc with 1cmin{a1,L1}1\leq c\leq\text{min}\{a-1,L-1\} there are paths which ascend at least one edge but not all the way to the surface, and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(c,0,ac)(c,h,d)=(c,0,a-c). Each such class has corresponding residue field K(max{a2c,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2c,0\}}f). There are 2b(1)min{c,ac}12^{b}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}-1} such paths if D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, and 2b1(1)min{c,ac}12^{b-1}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}-1} such paths otherwise.

VI. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=-1, then there are paths which ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2bmin{L,aL}2^{b}\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b1(min{L,aL}1)2^{b-1}\left(\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f), and 2b2^{b} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f).

VII. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2 and (ΔK)=0\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=0, then there are paths which ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). Each such path has corresponding residue field K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b(1)min{L,aL}12^{b}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-1} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2b1(1)min{L,aL}12^{b-1}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-1} classes.

VIII. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2 and (ΔK)=0\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=0, then there are paths which ascend to the surface, follow one surface edge, and then possibly descend, with (c,h,d)=(L,1,aL1)(c,h,d)=(L,1,a-L-1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2bmin{L,aL1}2^{b}\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-1\}} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L1,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b1(min{L,aL1}1)2^{b-1}\left(\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-1\}}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L1,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f), and 2b2^{b} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(max{a2L1,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f).

IX. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=1, then there are paths which ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b(2)min{L,aL}12^{b}(\ell-2)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-1} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b1((2)min{L,aL}11)2^{b-1}\left((\ell-2)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-1}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f), and 2b2^{b} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(max{a2L,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f).

XI. If aL+23a\geq L+2\geq 3 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=1, then for each 1haL11\leq h\leq a-L-1 there are paths which ascend to the surface, traverse hh edges on the surface, and then descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,h,aLh)(c,h,d)=(L,h,a-L-h). Each such path has corresponding residue field K(max{a2Lh,0}f)K(\ell^{\text{max}\{a-2L-h,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b+1(1)min{L,aLh}12^{b+1}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-h\}-1} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2b(1)min{L,aLh}12^{b}(\ell-1)\ell^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-h\}-1} classes.

6.3. Path type analysis: =2,(ΔK2)0\ell=2,\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}\neq 0

Here we assume that =2\ell=2 with ΔK\Delta_{K} odd.

V. If L2L\geq 2, we have classes consisting of paths which ascend at least one edge but not all the way to the surface, and then immediately descend at least one edge. We have the following types:

  • V1.

    If a2a\geq 2, then there are classes with (c,h,d)=(1,0,a1)(c,h,d)=(1,0,a-1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f).

  • V2.

    If La3L\geq a\geq 3, then there are classes with (c,h,d)=(a1,0,1)(c,h,d)=(a-1,0,1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f).

  • V3.

    If aL+14a\geq L+1\geq 4, then there are paths with (c,h,d)=(L1,0,aL+1)(c,h,d)=(L-1,0,a-L+1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, there are 2min{aL+1,L1}+b12^{\text{min}\{a-L+1,L-1\}+b-1} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L+2,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L+2,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b(2min{aL+1,L1}21)2^{b}\left(2^{\text{min}\{a-L+1,L-1\}-2}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L+2,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L+2,0\}}f), and 2b+12^{b+1} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2max{a2L+2,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L+2,0\}}f).

  • V4.

    For each cc with 2cmin{L2,a2}2\leq c\leq\text{min}\{L-2,a-2\}, there are paths with (c,h,d)=(c,0,ac)(c,h,d)=(c,0,a-c). Each such path has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2c,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2c,0\}}f). There are 2min{c,ac}+b12^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}+b-1} equivalence classes of such paths if D(K)1D(K)\neq 1. Otherwise, there are 2min{c,ac}+b22^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}+b-2} such classes.

VI. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2 and (ΔK2)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=-1, there are paths that ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). Each such class has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{L,aL}+b2^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}+b} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2min{L,aL}1+b2^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-1+b} such classes.

XI. If aL+23a\geq L+2\geq 3 and (ΔK2)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=1, then for all 1haL11\leq h\leq a-L-1 there are paths which ascend to the surface, traverse hh horizontal edges, and then descend at least once, with (c,h,d)=(L,h,aLh)(c,h,d)=(L,h,a-L-h). Each such class has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2Lh,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L-h,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{L,aLh}+b2^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-h\}+b} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2min{L,aLh}+b12^{\text{min}\{L,a-L-h\}+b-1} such classes.

6.4. Path type analysis: =2,ord2(ΔK)=2\ell=2,\textnormal{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=2

Here we assume that =2\ell=2 with ord2(ΔK)=2\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=2.

V. If L2L\geq 2, we have classes consisting of paths which ascend at least one edge but not all the way to the surface, and then immediately descend at least one edge. We have the following types:

  • V1.

    If a2a\geq 2, then there are classes with (c,h,d)=(1,0,a1)(c,h,d)=(1,0,a-1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f).

  • V2.

    If La3L\geq a\geq 3, then there are classes with (c,h,d)=(a1,0,1)(c,h,d)=(a-1,0,1). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

  • V3.

    For each cc with 2cmin{L1,a2}2\leq c\leq\text{min}\{L-1,a-2\}, there are paths (c,h,d)=(c,0,ac)(c,h,d)=(c,0,a-c). Each such class has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2c,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2c,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{c,ac}+b12^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}+b-1} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2min{c,ac}+b22^{\text{min}\{c,a-c\}+b-2} such classes.

VI. If L1L\geq 1, then we have paths which ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). We have the following cases:

  • VI1.

    Suppose L=1L=1 and a2a\geq 2. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f).

  • VI2.

    Suppose a=L+13a=L+1\geq 3. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

  • VI3.

    Suppose aL+24a\geq L+2\geq 4. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{L,aL}+b12^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}+b-1} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b(2min{L,aL}21)2^{b}\left(2^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}-2}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f), and 2b+12^{b+1} classes of such paths with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f).

VIII. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2, then we have paths which ascend to the surface, and then traverse the unique surface edge, and then possibly descend, with (c,h,d)=(L,1,aL1)(c,h,d)=(L,1,a-L-1). We have the following cases:

  • VIII1.

    Suppose a=L+1a=L+1. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

  • VIII2.

    Suppose aL+2a\geq L+2. Each such path has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L1,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{L,a1L}+b2^{\text{min}\{L,a-1-L\}+b} classes of such paths. Otherwise, there are 2min{L,a1L}+b12^{\text{min}\{L,a-1-L\}+b-1} such classes.

6.5. Path type analysis: =2,ord2(ΔK)=3\ell=2,\textnormal{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=3

Here we assume that =2\ell=2 with ord2(ΔK)=3\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=3. The types of paths occurring here are the same as in the previous section, owing to the fact that the structure of 𝒢K,,f0D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell,f_{0}} here is the same as therein. The corresponding residue field counts may differ, though, as the Galois action differs.

V. The analysis of this type is exactly as in §6.4.

VI. If L1L\geq 1, then we have paths which ascend to the surface and then immediately descend at least one edge, with (c,h,d)=(L,0,aL)(c,h,d)=(L,0,a-L). We have the following cases:

  • VI1.

    Suppose L=1L=1 and a2a\geq 2. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(2a-2f)K(2^{\text{a-2}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2a-2f)K(2^{\text{a-2}}f).

  • VI2.

    Suppose a=L+13a=L+1\geq 3. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

  • VI3.

    If aL+24a\geq L+2\geq 4, then each such class has corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f). If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2min{L,aL}+b12^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}+b-1} such classes. Otherwise, there are 2min{L,aL}+b22^{\text{min}\{L,a-L\}+b-2} such classes.

VIII. If aL+12a\geq L+1\geq 2, then we have paths which ascend to the surface, and then traverse the unique surface edge, and then possibly descend, with (c,h,d)=(L,1,aL1)(c,h,d)=(L,1,a-L-1). We have the following cases:

  • VIII1.

    Suppose a=L+1a=L+1. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then there are 2b2^{b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(f)K(f). Otherwise, there are 2b2^{b} such classes, each with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f).

  • VIII2.

    Suppose that aL+2a\geq L+2. If D(K)1D(K)\neq-1, then there are 2min{L,a1L}+b2^{\text{min}\{L,a-1-L\}+b} classes of such paths, each with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L1,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f). Otherwise, there are 2b(2min{L,a1L}11)2^{b}\left(2^{\text{min}\{L,a-1-L\}-1}-1\right) classes of such paths with corresponding residue field K(2max{a2L1,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f), and 2b+12^{b+1} classes with corresponding residue field an index 22 subfield of K(2max{a2L1,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L-1,0\}}f).

6.6. Primitive residue fields of CM points on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}

Fixing Δ\Delta an imaginary quadratic discriminant and N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} relatively prime to DD, we say that a field FF is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} if

  • there is a Δ\Delta-CM point xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with (x)F\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong F, and

  • there does not exists a Δ\Delta-CM point yX0D(N)/y\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with (y)L\mathbb{Q}(y)\cong L with LFL\subsetneq F.

The preceding path type analysis in this section allows us to determine primitive residue fields for prime power levels N=aN=\ell^{a}. It follows from this analysis that, In all cases, there are at most 22 primitive residue fields, and that each primitive residue field is either a ring classes field or an index 22 subfield of a ring class field.

The cases occurring here are in line with those in [Cl22] and [CS22], though here the primitive residue fields depend on whether D(K)=1D(K)=1. In particular, if some prime dividing DD is inert in KK, then all residue fields of CM points on X0D(a)X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a}) are ring class fields and hence there can only be one primitive residue field. This necessarily happens, for instance, if the class number of KK is odd. We provide Case 1.5b with the alternative title of “The dreaded case,” as in [Cl22], to warn the reader that it will have an important role in later results on primitive residue fields and degrees.

Case 1.1. Suppose a=2\ell^{a}=2.

  • Case 1.1a.

    Suppose (Δ2)1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{2}\neq-1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.1b.

    Suppose (Δ2)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{2}=-1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(2f)K(2f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(2f)K(2f).

Case 1.2. Suppose a>2,L=0\ell^{a}>2,L=0 and (Δ)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{\ell}=1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the primitive residue fields are K(f)K(f) and an index 22 subfield of K(af)K(\ell^{a}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

Case 1.3. Suppose a>2,L=0\ell^{a}>2,L=0 and (Δ)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{\ell}=-1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(af)K(\ell^{a}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(af)K(\ell^{a}f).

Case 1.4. Suppose a>2,L=0\ell^{a}>2,L=0 and (Δ)=0\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{\ell}=0. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(a1f)K(\ell^{a-1}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(a1f)K(\ell^{a-1}f).

Case 1.5. Suppose >2,L1\ell>2,L\geq 1 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=1.

  • Case 1.5a.

    Suppose a2La\leq 2L. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.5b.

    (The dreaded case). Suppose a2L+1a\geq 2L+1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the primitive residue fields are K(f)K(f) and an index 22 subfield of K(a2Lf)K(\ell^{a-2L}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

Case 1.6. Suppose >2,L1\ell>2,L\geq 1 and (ΔK)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=-1.

  • Case 1.6a.

    Suppose a2La\leq 2L. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.6b.

    Suppose a2L+1a\geq 2L+1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(a2Lf)K(\ell^{a-2L}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(a2Lf)K(\ell^{a-2L}f).

Case 1.7. Suppose >2,L1\ell>2,L\geq 1 and (ΔK)=0\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{\ell}=0.

  • Case 1.7a.

    Suppose a2L+1a\leq 2L+1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.7b.

    Suppose a2L+2a\geq 2L+2. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(a2L1f)K(\ell^{a-2L-1}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(a2L1f)K(\ell^{a-2L-1}f).

Case 1.8. Suppose =2,a2,L1\ell=2,a\geq 2,L\geq 1 and (ΔK2)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=1.

  • Case 1.8a.

    Suppose L=1L=1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the primitive residue fields are K(f)K(f) and an index 22 subfield of K(2af)K(2^{a}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.8b.

    Suppose L2L\geq 2 and a2L2a\leq 2L-2. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.8c.

    Suppose L2L\geq 2 and a2L1a\geq 2L-1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the primitive residue fields are K(f)K(f) and an index 22 subfield of K(2a2L+2f)K(2^{a-2L+2}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

Case 1.9 Suppose =2,a2,L1\ell=2,a\geq 2,L\geq 1 and (ΔK2)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=-1.

  • Case 1.9a.

    Suppose L=1L=1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the primitive residue fields are K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f) and an index 22 subfield of K(2af)K(2^{a}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(2a2f)K(2^{a-2}f).

  • Case 1.9b.

    Suppose L2L\geq 2 and a2L2a\leq 2L-2. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.9c.

    Suppose L2L\geq 2 and a2L1a\geq 2L-1. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then the primitive residue fields are K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f) and an index 22 subfield of K(2a2L+2f)K(2^{a-2L+2}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(2max{a2L,0}f)K(2^{\text{max}\{a-2L,0\}}f).

Case 1.10 Suppose =2,a2,L1,(ΔK2)=0\ell=2,a\geq 2,L\geq 1,\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=0 and ord2(ΔK)=2\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=2.

  • Case 1.10a.

    Suppose a2La\leq 2L. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.10b.

    Suppose a2L+1a\geq 2L+1. If D(K)1D(K)\neq 1, then the primitive residue fields are K(2a2L1f)K(2^{a-2L-1}f) and an index 22 subfield of K(2a2Lf)K(2^{a-2L}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(2a2L1f)K(2^{a-2L-1}f).

Case 1.11 Suppose =2,a2,L1,(ΔK2)=0\ell=2,a\geq 2,L\geq 1,\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta_{K}}{2}=0 and ord2(ΔK)=3\text{ord}_{2}(\Delta_{K})=3.

  • Case 1.11a.

    Suppose a2L+1a\leq 2L+1. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(f)K(f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(f)K(f).

  • Case 1.11b.

    Suppose a2L+2a\geq 2L+2. If D(K)=1D(K)=1, then the only primitive residue field is an index 22 subfield of K(2a2L1f)K(2^{a-2L-1}f). Otherwise, the only primitive residue field is K(2a2L1f)K(2^{a-2L-1}f).

6.7. Primitive degrees of CM points on X0D(a)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

A positive integer dd is a primitive degree for a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} if

  • there is a a Δ\Delta-CM point of degree dd on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and

  • there does not exist a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} of degree properly dividing dd.

If dd is such a degree, then the residue field of a degree dd point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. For N=aN=\ell^{a} a prime power, we then have from the previous section that there are at most two primitive degrees.

While there are several cases that admit two primitive residue fields when D(K)=1D(K)=1, the only case admitting two primitive degrees is Case 1.5b (The dreaded case). In Case 1.5b, our two primitive residue fields are K(f)K(f) and an index 22 subfield LL of K(a2Lf)K(\ell^{a-2L}f), with respective degrees [K(f):]=2h(𝔬(f))[K(f):\mathbb{Q}]=2h(\mathfrak{o}(f)) and [L:]=a2Lh(𝔬(f))[L:\mathbb{Q}]=\ell^{a-2L}h(\mathfrak{o}(f)). As \ell is odd, we indeed have two primitive degrees in this case.

7. Algebraic results on residue fields of CM points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}

We develop here algebraic number theoretic results on fields which arise as residue fields of CM points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} which will feed into our main results. In particular, a determination of composita and tensor products of such fields will be needed in determining information about the CM locus on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for general NN from information at prime-power levels.

For an imaginary quadratic field KK, we let K(f)K(f) denote the ring class field corresponding to the imaginary quadratic order 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) of conductor ff in KK, i.e., that of discriminant f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}.

Proposition 7.1.

Let KK denote an imaginary quadratic field of discriminant ΔK\Delta_{K}.

  1. (1)

    If ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\not\in\{-3,-4\}, then for any f1,f2+f_{1},f_{2}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} we have

    K(f1)K(f2)=K(lcm(f1,f2)).K(f_{1})\cdot K(f_{2})=K(\textnormal{lcm}(f_{1},f_{2})).
  2. (2)

    Suppose ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}.

    1. (a)

      For any f1,f2+f_{1},f_{2}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} with gcd(f1,f2)>1\text{gcd}(f_{1},f_{2})>1, we have

      K(f1)K(f2)=K(lcm(f1,f2)).K(f_{1})\cdot K(f_{2})=K(\textnormal{lcm}(f_{1},f_{2})).
    2. (b)

      If the class number of the order of discriminant f12ΔKf_{1}^{2}\Delta_{K} is 11, i.e., if f12ΔKS={3,4,12,16,27}f_{1}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in S=\{-3,-4,-12,-16,-27\}, then

      K(f1)K(f2)=K(f2).K(f_{1})\cdot K(f_{2})=K(f_{2}).
    3. (c)

      Suppose we have positive integers f1,,frf_{1},\ldots,f_{r} which are all pairwise relatively prime and not in the SS defined above. Then K(f1)K(fr)K(f1fr)K(f_{1})\cdots K(f_{r})\subsetneq K(f_{1}\cdots f_{r}), with

      [K(f1fr):K(f1)K(fr)]={2r1 if ΔK=43r1 if ΔK=3.[K(f_{1}\cdots f_{r}):K(f_{1})\cdots K(f_{r})]=\begin{cases}2^{r-1}\text{ if }\Delta_{K}=-4\\ 3^{r-1}\text{ if }\Delta_{K}=-3\end{cases}.
  3. (3)

    In all cases, K(f1)K(f_{1}) and K(f2)K(f_{2}) are linearly disjoint over K(gcd(f1,f2))K(\textnormal{gcd}(f_{1},f_{2})).

Proof.

Part (1) is [Cl22, Prop. 2.10], while part (2) is [CS22, Prop. 2.1] and part (3) follows from the combination of these two propositions. ∎

We now use Proposition 7.1 to get analogs of [Cl22, Prop. 2.10] and [CS22, Prop. 2.2], in which “rational ring class fields” are exchanged for those index 22 subfields of rings class fields which arise as residue fields of CM points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

Corollary 7.2.

Suppose that x1X0D(N1)/x_{1}\in X_{0}^{D}(N_{1})_{/\mathbb{Q}} and x2X0D(N2)/x_{2}\in X_{0}^{D}(N_{2})_{/\mathbb{Q}} are 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM points, where 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) is an imaginary quadratic order in KK. For i=1,2i=1,2, let fi+f_{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} such that

K(xi)K(fi).K\cdot\mathbb{Q}(x_{i})\cong K(f_{i}).

Let M=gcd(N1,N2)M=\textnormal{gcd}(N_{1},N_{2}) and m=lcm(N1,N2)m=\textnormal{lcm}(N_{1},N_{2}), and suppose that xX0D(M)x\in X_{0}^{D}(M) is a point lying above x1x_{1} and x2x_{2} which is fixed by an involution σGal(K(M)/K)\sigma\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(M)/K). Let π:X0D(M)/XD(1)/\pi:X_{0}^{D}(M)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the natural map. Then

  1. (1)

    The fields (x1)\mathbb{Q}(x_{1}) and (x2)\mathbb{Q}(x_{2}) are linearly disjoint over (π(x))\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x)).

  2. (2)

    We have

    (x1)(π(x))(x2)(x).\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\mathbb{Q}(x_{2})\cong\mathbb{Q}(x).
  3. (3)

    We have

    (x1)(π(x))K(x2)K(x).\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\cong K(x).
Proof.

The ring class fields K(f1)K(f_{1}) and K(f2)K(f_{2}) are linearly disjoint over K(m)K(m) by Proposition 7.1. That (x1)\mathbb{Q}(x_{1}) and (x2)\mathbb{Q}(x_{2}) are linearly disjoint over (π(x))\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x)), and that

[(x):(x1)(x2)]=[K(x):K(x1)K(x2]=[K(m):K(f1)K(f2)],[\mathbb{Q}(x):\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\cdot\mathbb{Q}(x_{2})]=[K(x):K(x_{1})\cdot K(x_{2}]=[K(m):K(f_{1})\cdot K(f_{2})],

follow by the same type of arguments as in the analogous case of rational ring class fields in [Cl22, Prop. 2.10] and [CS22, Prop. 2.2], using that K(x)K(x1)K(x2)K(f1)K(f2)K(x)\cong K(x_{1})\cdot K(x_{2})\cong K(f_{1})\cdot K(f_{2}) via Proposition 3.3 (note that the assumption that xx is fixed by σ\sigma forces f2ΔK<4f^{2}\Delta_{K}<-4, so this proposition applies.).

Part (2) now follows from the preceding remarks, combined with Proposition 7.1. As for part (3), first note that the fact that (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) is fixed by some involution σGal(K(M)/K)\sigma\in\textnormal{Gal}(K(M)/K) immediately implies that h(𝔬(f))>1h(\mathfrak{o}(f))>1 (as XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no real points). We note that the map

(x1)×K(x2)\displaystyle\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\times K(x_{2}) K(x1)K(x2)\displaystyle\longrightarrow K(x_{1})\cdot K(x_{2})
(x1,x2)\displaystyle(x_{1},x_{2}) x1x2\displaystyle\longmapsto x_{1}\cdot x_{2}

is (π(x))\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))-bilinear, and the induced map on the tensor product over (π(x))\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x)) must be an isomorphism

(x1)(π(x))K(x2)K(x1)K(x2)\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\cong K(x_{1})\cdot K(x_{2})

as the two finite (f)\mathbb{Q}(f)-algebras here have the same dimension. The result then follows as K(x1)K(x2)K(x)K(x_{1})\cdot K(x_{2})\cong K(x). ∎

Corollary 7.3.

Suppose that x1,x2,,xrx_{1},x_{2},\ldots,x_{r} are 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM points with xiX0D(Ni)/x_{i}\in X_{0}^{D}(N_{i})_{/\mathbb{Q}} for each i=1,,ri=1,\ldots,r, where 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f) is an imaginary quadratic order in KK. For each i=1,,ri=1,\ldots,r, let fi+f_{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} such that

K(xi)K(fi).K\cdot\mathbb{Q}(x_{i})\cong K(f_{i}).

Let M=gcd(N1,,Nr)M=\textnormal{gcd}(N_{1},\ldots,N_{r}) and m=lcm(N1,,Nr)m=\textnormal{lcm}(N_{1},\ldots,N_{r}). Let π:X0D(M)/XD(1)/\pi:X_{0}^{D}(M)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the natural map. Let S={3,4,12,16,27}S=\{-3,-4,-12,-16,-27\} be the set of discriminants of imaginary quadratic orders of class number 11 with ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}.

  1. (1)

    Suppose that r=2r=2. If f1Sf_{1}\in S, then we have

    K(x1)(π(x))K(x2)K(x2)×K(x2).K(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\cong K(x_{2})\times K(x_{2}).

    Now assuming f1,f2Sf_{1},f_{2}\not\in S, if ΔK<4\Delta_{K}<-4 or if gcd(f1,f2)>1\text{gcd}(f_{1},f_{2})>1 then

    K(x1)(π(x))K(x2)K(M)×K(M).K(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\cong K(M)\times K(M).
  2. (2)

    Suppose that ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}, that f1,,frSf_{1},\ldots,f_{r}\not\in S, and that f1,,frf_{1},\ldots,f_{r} are all pairwise relatively prime. We then have

    (x1)(π(x))(π(x))(xr)K(x1)(π(x))(π(x))K(xr)Lr,\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\ldots\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\mathbb{Q}(x_{r})\cong K(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\ldots\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{r})\cong L^{r},

    with LL a subfield of K(M)K(M) of index 2r12^{r-1} if ΔK=4\Delta_{K}=-4 and index 3r13^{r-1} if ΔK=3\Delta_{K}=-3.

Proof.
  1. (1)

    Using part (3)(3) of Corollary 7.2, we have

    K(x1)(π(x))K(x2)\displaystyle K(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2}) ((x1)(π(x))K(x))(π(x))((x2)(π(x))K(x))\displaystyle\cong\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x)\right)\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{2})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x)\right)
    ((x1)(π(x))(x2))(π(x))(K(x)(π(x))K(x))\displaystyle\cong\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\mathbb{Q}(x_{2})\right)\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\left(K(x)\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x)\right)
    ((x1)(π(x))(x2))(π(x))(K(x)×K(x))\displaystyle\cong\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\mathbb{Q}(x_{2})\right)\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}\left(K(x)\times K(x)\right)
    ((x1)(π(x))K(x2))×((x1)(π(x))K(x2)).\displaystyle\cong\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\right)\times\left(\mathbb{Q}(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2})\right).

    The stated result then follows from another use of Corollary 7.2 part (3) if (x1)\mathbb{Q}(x_{1}) properly embeds in the ring class field K(f1)K(f_{1}). Otherwise, (xi)K(fi)\mathbb{Q}(x_{i})\cong K(f_{i}) for i=1,2i=1,2 and (π(x))K(f)\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))\cong K(f). The case of f1Sf_{1}\in S is then clear, so assume f1,f2Sf_{1},f_{2}\not\in S and at least one of ΔK<4\Delta_{K}<-4 or gcd(f1,f2)>1\text{gcd}(f_{1},f_{2})>1 holds. It then follows from Proposition 7.1 that

    K(x1)(π(x))K(x2)\displaystyle K(x_{1})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))}K(x_{2}) (K(f1)K(f)K(f2))×(K(x1)K(f)K(f2))\displaystyle\cong\left(K(f_{1})\otimes_{K(f)}K(f_{2})\right)\times\left(K(x_{1})\otimes_{K(f)}K(f_{2})\right)
    K(M)×K(M).\displaystyle\cong K(M)\times K(M).
  2. (2)

    This result follows similarly to the above argument using Proposition 7.1 once more. Note that our assumption that the fif_{i} are relatively prime forces (xi)\mathbb{Q}(x_{i}) to be a ring class field for each ii; this assumption gives K(π(x))K(1)=KK\cdot\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))\cong K(1)=K as ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}, and our Shimura curves have no real points so indeed (π(x))K\mathbb{Q}(\pi(x))\cong K. ∎

8. CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}

In this section, we describe the Δ\Delta-CM locus on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for any N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} relatively prime to DD and any imaginary quadratic discriminant Δ\Delta. For Δ<4\Delta<-4, this description is possible using the foundations we have built thus far, specifically Propositions 3.3 and 5.3, along with the path type analysis in §6. For Δ=ΔK{3,4}\Delta=\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}, however, Proposition 3.3 does not apply.

We first elaborate on the description in former case, and then provide a result for compiling across prime powers in the case of Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. Following this, we discuss primitive residue fields and degrees of Δ\Delta-CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

8.1. Compiling across prime powers: Δ<4\Delta<-4

For a fixed prime \ell relatively prime to DD, let Δ=2Lf02ΔK\Delta=\ell^{2L}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K} with gcd(f0,)=1\text{gcd}(f_{0},\ell)=1 be an imaginary quadratic discriminant. Fixing a+a\in\mathbb{Z}^{+}, consider the natural map π:X0D(a)/XD(1)/\pi:X^{D}_{0}(\ell^{a})_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and the fiber π1(x)\pi^{-1}(x) over a Δ\Delta-CM point xX0D(1)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Tthere are 2b2^{b} such fibers by Theorem 2.13, and any two are isomorphic via an Atkin–Lehner involution wpw_{p} for some prime pDp\mid D which is inert in KK. We then have π1(x)SpecA\pi^{-1}(x)\cong\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}A with

A=j=0aLjbj×k=0aK(kf)ckA=\prod_{j=0}^{a}{L_{j}}^{b_{j}}\times\prod_{k=0}^{a}K(\ell^{k}f)^{c_{k}} (2)

for some non-negative integers bj,ckb_{j},c_{k}, where LjL_{j} is an index 22 subfield of K(jf)K(\ell^{j}f) for all 0ja0\leq j\leq a. The explicit values bjb_{j} and ckc_{k}, based on a\ell^{a} and Δ\Delta, are determined by our path type analysis in §6.

Next assume Δ<4\Delta<-4, let NN denote a positive integer relatively prime to DD, and consider the fiber π1(x)\pi^{-1}(x) of the map π:X0D(N)/X(1)/\pi:X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} over a Δ\Delta-CM point xXD(1)/x\in X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Let N=1a1rarN=\ell_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{a_{r}} be the prime-power factorization of NN, and for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r consider the fiber πi1(x)\pi_{i}^{-1}(x) of πi:X0D(iai)XD(1)/\pi_{i}:X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} over xx. We then have

πi1(x)SpecAi,\pi_{i}^{-1}(x)\cong\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}A_{i},

with each AiA_{i} of the form given in (2). Proposition 3.3 then provides that π1(x)SpecA\pi^{-1}(x)\cong\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}A with

A=A1(x)(x)Ar.A=A_{1}\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(x)}\cdots\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(x)}A_{r}.

It follows that AA is a direct sum of terms of the form

M=M1(x)(x)Mr,M=M_{1}\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(x)}\cdots\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}(x)}M_{r},

where for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r we have that MiM_{i} is isomorphic to K(ijif)K(\ell_{i}^{j_{i}}f), or a totally complex index 22 subfield thereof, for some 0jiai0\leq j_{i}\leq a_{i}.

Let ss be the number of indices 1ir1\leq i\leq r such that KK is contained in MiM_{i}, i.e., such that MiK(iji)M_{i}\cong K(\ell_{i}^{j_{i}}) is a ring class field. The results of §7 then tell us that

M{L if s=0K(1j1rjrf)2s1 otherwise,M\cong\begin{cases}L\quad&\text{ if }s=0\\ K(\ell_{1}^{j_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{j_{r}}f)^{2^{s-1}}\quad&\text{ otherwise,}\end{cases}

where LK(1j1rjr)L\subsetneq K(\ell_{1}^{j_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{j_{r}}) is a totally complex, index 22 subfield in the s=0s=0 case. (Note that ijiΔ{12,16,27}\ell_{i}^{j_{i}}\Delta\in\{-12,-16,-27\} can only occur, due to the Δ<4\Delta<-4 assumption, if ji=0j_{i}=0, so these possibilities do not require special attention here.)

8.2. Compiling across prime powers: Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}

Here, we determine how to compile residue field information across prime-power level for Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. Our result here should be compared to [CS22, Prop. 82, Thm. 8.3], wherein more work is required due to the fact that residue fields of 3-3 and 4-4-CM points on X0(N)/X_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} do not always contain the CM field KK.

Theorem 8.1.

Let N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} coprime to DD with prime-power factorization N=1a1rarN=\ell_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{a_{r}}, and suppose xX0D(N)/x\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is a Δ\Delta-CM point with Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}. Let πi:X0D(N)/X0D(1a1)/\pi_{i}:X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(\ell_{1}^{a_{1}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the natural map and let xi=πi(x)x_{i}=\pi_{i}(x) for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r. Let PiP_{i} be any path in the closed-point equivalence class of paths in 𝒢K,i,1D\mathcal{G}^{D}_{K,\ell_{i},1} corresponding to xix_{i}, and let di0d_{i}\geq 0 be the number of descending edges in PiP_{i} (which is independent of the representative path). We then have

(x)K(1d1rdr).\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong K(\ell_{1}^{d_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{d_{r}}).
Proof.

Because Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}, we know that the residue field of the image of xx under the natural map to XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is necessarily KK. Therefore, K(xi)K\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(x_{i}) for each ii and hence (xi)K(idi)\mathbb{Q}(x_{i})\cong K(\ell_{i}^{d_{i}}) for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r.

Let φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) be a QM-cyclic NN-isogeny over (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) inducing xx (necessarily there is such an isogeny, as K(x)K\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(x)). Let Q=ker(φ)Q=\text{ker}(\varphi), let C=e1(Q)C=e_{1}(Q), and for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r let CiCC_{i}\leq C be the Sylow i\ell_{i} subgroup of CC. Let φi:(A,ι)(A/(𝒪Ci),ιi)\varphi_{i}:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A/(\mathcal{O}\cdot C_{i}),\iota_{i}) be the i\ell_{i}-primary part of φ\varphi, and let fif_{i} denote the central conductor of (A/(𝒪Ci),ι)(A/(\mathcal{O}\cdot C_{i}),\iota) (where by ι\iota here we really mean the induced QM structure on the quotient). Put

:={idi>0}={iordi(fi)>0}{1,,r}\mathcal{I}:=\{i\mid d_{i}>0\}=\{i\mid\text{ord}_{\ell_{i}}(f_{i})>0\}\subseteq\{1,\ldots,r\}

and

Q:={𝒪Ci}iQ.Q^{\prime}:=\left\langle\left\{\mathcal{O}\cdot C_{i}\right\}_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\right\rangle\leq Q.

Our original isogeny φ\varphi then factors as φ=φ′′φ\varphi=\varphi^{\prime\prime}\circ\varphi^{\prime} where φ:(A,ι)(A/Q,ι)\varphi^{\prime}:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A/Q^{\prime},\iota). Because a QM-cyclic i\ell_{i}-isogeny preserves the prime-to-i\ell_{i} part of the central conductor, the central conductor of (A/Q,ι)(A/Q^{\prime},\iota) must be divisible by 1d1rdr\ell_{1}^{d_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{d_{r}}. We then have

K(1d1rdr)(φ)(φ),K(\ell_{1}^{d_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{d_{r}})\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\varphi^{\prime})\subseteq\mathbb{Q}(\varphi),

and it remains to show the reverse containment. If the central conductor of (A,ι)(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) is also 11, then (up to isomorphism on the target) φ\varphi is a QM-equivariant endomorphism of (A,ι)(A,\iota) and therefore (φ)K\mathbb{Q}(\varphi)\subseteq K as desired. Otherwise, the dual isogeny φ\varphi^{\vee} induces a Δ\Delta^{\prime}-CM point xX0D(N)/x^{\prime}\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with Δ<4\Delta^{\prime}<-4. We have (x)(x)\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong\mathbb{Q}(x^{\prime}), and the claim then holds via an application of Proposition 3.3 to xx^{\prime}. ∎

8.3. The main algorithm

We have now built up all we need to prove our main result, Theorem 1.1.

proof of Theorem 1.1.

The existence and structure of this algorithm follows from our prior results. We summarize the steps of the algorithm with appropriate references for individual steps here:

Algorithm 8.2 (The 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM-locus on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}).

Input: an indefinite quaternion discriminant DD over \mathbb{Q}, a positive integer NN coprime to DD, an imaginary quadratic discriminant ΔK\Delta_{K} and a positive integer ff

Output: the complete list of tuples (is_fixed,f,e,c)(\texttt{is{\_}fixed},f^{\prime},e,c), consisting of a boolean is_fixed, a positive integer ff^{\prime}, an integer e{1,2,3}e\in\{1,2,3\} and a positive integer cc, such that there exist exactly cc closed f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM points xx on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with K(x)K(f)K(x)\cong K(f^{\prime}), with (x)K(f)\mathbb{Q}(x)\cong K(f^{\prime}) if is_fixed is False and with [K(f):(x)]=2[K(f^{\prime}):\mathbb{Q}(x)]=2 otherwise and with ramification index ee with respect to the natural map to XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

Steps:

  • Compute the prime-power factorization N=1a1rarN=\ell_{1}^{a_{1}}\cdots\ell_{r}^{a_{r}} of NN.

  • For each index i{1,,r}i\in\{1,\ldots,r\}, compute using the path type enumeration results of §6 information on all f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM points on X0D(iai)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}}. This information is stored as a list of lists (is_fixedi,fi,ei,ci)(\texttt{is{\_}fixed}_{i},f_{i},e_{i},c_{i}) as in our desired output at general level. (If D=1D=1, this information is originally obtained in the path-type analysis at prime-power level given in [Cl22] and [CS22].)

  • For each tuple (P1,,Pr)(P_{1},\ldots,P_{r}), in which each PiP_{i} is the information of an f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM point on X0D(iai)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} of the form (is_fixedi,fi,ei,ci)(\texttt{is{\_}fixed}_{i},f_{i},e_{i},c_{i}) as computed in the previous part, compute the information (is_fixed,f,e,c)(\texttt{is{\_}fixed},f^{\prime},e,c) of all f2ΔKf^{2}\Delta_{K}-CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with image a point with information given by PiP_{i} under the natural map to X0D(iai)/X_{0}^{D}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} for all i{1,,r}i\in\{1,\ldots,r\}. This is done as follows:

    • The boolean is_fixed is true if and only if the boolean is_fixedi\texttt{is{\_}fixed}_{i} is true for all i{1,,r}i\in\{1,\ldots,r\} by Proposition 3.3 and the results of §7.

    • The CM conductor ff^{\prime} of such a point is equal to the least common multiple of the conductors f1,,frf_{1},\ldots,f_{r} at each prime-power level. This is by Proposition 3.3 and the results of §7, as also spelt out at the start of §8.1, if ΔK<4\Delta_{K}<-4, and is Theorem 8.1 in the case of ΔK{3,4}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\}.

    • The ramification index ee is equal to the maximum among the indices eie_{i} (so in particular is 22 or 33 if and only if f02ΔK{3,4}f_{0}^{2}\Delta_{K}\in\{-3,-4\} and at least one of the PiP_{i} has ei=2e_{i}=2 or ei=3e_{i}=3).

    • If Δ<4\Delta<-4, then the count cc is given by the results of §8.1. If Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\}, then this count is given by the results of §8.2 if D>1D>1 and is given by the results of [CS22] if D=1D=1.

This algorithm has been implemented, and is available as the function CM_points_XD0 in the file shimura_curve_CM_locus.m in [Rep].

8.4. Primitive residue fields of CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}

The preceding results imply that the residue field of any Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is isomorphic to either a ring class field or a totally complex, index 22 subfield of a ring class field as described in Theorem 2.8. As a result, there are at most two primitive residue fields of Δ\Delta-CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Moreover, there exists a positive integer CC such that an index 22 subfield of K(Cf)K(Cf) is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} if and only if for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r there exists a positive integer CiC_{i} such that an index 22 subfield of K(Cif)K(C_{i}f) is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(iai)X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}).

We begin by investigating the cases in which we do have such a field as a primitive residue field, determining when we have two primitive residue fields and, if so, whether we have two primitive degrees of residue fields. Note that this assumption requires D(K)=1D(K)=1, and hence Δ<4\Delta<-4. Let Hi=ihiiaiH_{i}=\ell_{i}^{h_{i}}\mid\ell_{i}^{a_{i}} be the unique positive integer such that an index 22 subfield LiL_{i} of K(Hif)K(H_{i}f) is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(iai)/X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r. Setting

H=H1Hr,H=H_{1}\cdots H_{r},

we have that a totally complex, index 22 subfield LL of K(Hf)K(Hf) is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} by the results of §8.1.

If LiL_{i} is the unique primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(iai)/X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r, then LL is the unique primitive residue field for X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Otherwise, let Ci=iciiaiC_{i}=\ell_{i}^{c_{i}}\mid\ell_{i}^{a_{i}} be the smallest positive integer such that there is a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(iai)/X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}} with residue field isomorphic to either K(Cif)K(C_{i}f) or an index 22 subfield thereof for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r. Setting

C=C1Cr,C=C_{1}\cdots C_{r},

we then have that K(Cf)K(Cf) is also a primitive residue field for X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

Now assume that we have two primitive residue fields, LK(Hf)L\subsetneq K(Hf) with [K(Hf):L]=2[K(Hf):L]=2 and K(Cf)K(Cf), of Δ\Delta-CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Set

d1:=[L:] and d2:=[K(Cf):].d_{1}:=[L:\mathbb{Q}]\quad\text{ and }\quad d_{2}:=[K(Cf):\mathbb{Q}].

We note CiHiC_{i}\leq H_{i} for each 1ir1\leq i\leq r by the definitions of these quantities. Further, by assumption we have at least one value of ii such that K(Cif)K(C_{i}f) is a primitive residue field for X0D(iai)/X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}})_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and thus

[K(Cif):][K(Hi):]2=[Li:].[K(C_{i}f):\mathbb{Q}]\leq\frac{[K(H_{i}):\mathbb{Q}]}{2}=[L_{i}:\mathbb{Q}].

It follows that d2d1d_{2}\leq d_{1}. Therefore, we have a unique primitive degree of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} if and only if d2d1d_{2}\mid d_{1}, in which case d2d_{2} is the unique primitive degree. The following result determines when this occurs:

Theorem 8.3.

With the setup and notation as above, let ss be the number of indices 1ir1\leq i\leq r such that K(Hif)K(H_{i}f) is a primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(iai)X^{D}_{0}(\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}) (or equivalently, such that Ci<HiC_{i}<H_{i}).

  1. (1)

    If s=0s=0, then LL is the unique primitive residue field of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and d1d_{1} is the unique primitive degree.

  2. (2)

    Suppose that s1s\geq 1 and that for some 1ir1\leq i\leq r with Ci<HiC_{i}<H_{i} we are not in Case 1.5b (The dreaded case) with respect to Δ\Delta and the prime power iai\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}. We then have that LL and K(Cf)K(Cf) are the two primitive residue fields of Δ\Delta-CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, while d2d_{2} is the unique primitive degree.

  3. (3)

    Suppose that s1s\geq 1 and that for all 1ir1\leq i\leq r with Ci<HiC_{i}<H_{i} we are in Case 1.5b (The dreaded case) with respect to Δ\Delta and the prime power iai\ell_{i}^{a_{i}}. We then have that LL and K(Cf)K(Cf) are the two primitive residue fields of Δ\Delta-CM points on X0D(N)/X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and that d1d_{1} and d2d_{2} are the two primitive degrees of such points.

Proof.

The proof follows exactly as in [Cl22, Thm. 9.2]; the main inputs here are the degrees of our residue fields, which are the same for our totally complex index 22 subfields of ring class fields as they are for the rational ring class fields appearing in the D=1D=1 modular curve study. ∎

9. CM points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}

In this section, we prove Theorem 1.2, showing that there is a very close relationship between CM points on the Shimura curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. This is a generalization of [CS22, Thm. 1.2], which was specific to the D=1D=1 case, and allows us to go from our understanding of the Δ\Delta-CM locus on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} based on §8 to an understanding of, at the very least, degrees of CM points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}.

Proof of Theorem 1.2.

We first recall some relevant facts about ramification under the natural map π:X1D(N)/X0D(N)/\pi:X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\to X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. All points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} not having CM by discriminant Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\} are unramified over their image on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. For N4N\geq 4, just as in the D=1D=1 case, the curve X1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N) over \mathbb{C} has no elliptic points of periods 22 or 33, from which it follows that all 4-4 and 3-3-CM points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} are ramified with ramification index 22 or 33, respectively. The curve X1D(2)/X_{1}^{D}(2)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a single elliptic point of period 22, unramified with respect to π\pi, lying over each of the 2b2^{b} points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with 4-4-CM. The curve X1D(3)/X_{1}^{D}(3)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a single elliptic point of period 33, unramified with respect to π\pi, lying over each of the 2b2^{b} points on XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with 3-3-CM. (One can see these claims regarding elliptic points and ramification from elementary arguments involving congruence subgroups. For example, for D=1D=1 this is [DS05, Exc. 2.3.7].)

First, suppose that Δ<4\Delta<-4. If N2N\leq 2 then the map π\pi is an isomorphism, so assume N3N\geq 3 in which case it is a (/N)/{±1}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})^{*}/\{\pm 1\}-Galois covering, hence has degree ϕ(N)/2\phi(N)/2. Let ff be the conductor of Δ\Delta, such that Δ=f2ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K}, and consider a point x~π1(x)\tilde{x}\in\pi^{-1}(x). It suffices to show that [K(x~):K(x)]=ϕ(N)2[K(\tilde{x}):K(x)]=\frac{\phi(N)}{2}, viewing π\pi as a morphism over KK.

Take φ:(A,ι)(A,ι)\varphi:(A,\iota)\rightarrow(A^{\prime},\iota^{\prime}) to be a QM-cyclic NN-isogeny over K(x)K(x) inducing xX0D(N)/Kx\in X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/K}. We know such an isogeny exists over K(x)K(x) by Theorem 2.6, because K(x)K(x) contains (x)\mathbb{Q}(x) and splits BB. By Theorem 2.7 we have K(x)=K(f)K(x)=K(f). We have a well defined ±1\pm 1 Galois representation

ρ¯N:Gal(K¯/K(f))GL2(/N)/{±1}\overline{\rho}_{N}:\text{Gal}(\overline{K}/K(f))\rightarrow\text{GL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z})/\{\pm 1\}

not depending on our choice of representative for xx, as Aut(A,ι)={±1}\textnormal{Aut}(A,\iota)=\{\pm 1\}. Let Q=ker(φ)A[N]Q=\text{ker}(\varphi)\leq A[N] and letting PQP\in Q be a choice of generator (of e1(Q)e_{1}(Q) as an abelian group, or equivalently of QQ as an 𝒪\mathcal{O}-module). The action of Gal(K¯/K(f))\text{Gal}(\overline{K}/K(f)) on PP is then tracked by an isogeny character

λ:Gal(K¯/K(f))(/N)/{±1}.\lambda:\text{Gal}(\overline{K}/K(f))\rightarrow\left(\mathbb{Z}/N\mathbb{Z}\right)/\{\pm 1\}.

Theorem 2.13 gives that A:=ASpecK(x)SpecA_{\mathbb{C}}:=A\otimes_{\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}K(x)}\operatorname{\textnormal{Spec}}\mathbb{C} has a decomposition ψ:A/𝔬(f)×EA\psi:A_{\mathbb{C}}\xrightarrow{\sim}\mathbb{C}/\mathfrak{o}(f)\times E_{A}, where EAE_{A} is a Δ\Delta-CM elliptic curve over \mathbb{C}. The elliptic curves in this decomposition both have models over K(f)K(f), as moreover they both have models over (f)(jΔ)\mathbb{Q}(f)\cong\mathbb{Q}(j_{\Delta}) where jΔj_{\Delta} is the jj-invariant of a Δ\Delta-CM elliptic curve. Hence, a K(f)K(f)-rational model for this product is a twist of AA.

It then suffices, as our representation is independent of the choice of K(f)K(f)-rational model, to consider the case A=E×EA=E\times E^{\prime} with EE and EE^{\prime} being Δ\Delta-CM elliptic curves over K(f)K(f). Here, our QM-stable subgroup QA[N]Q\leq A[N] corresponds to a cyclic subgroup of E[N]E[N], and λ\lambda is induced by the Galois action on this cyclic subgroup. This ±1\pm 1 character λ\lambda is surjective by [BC20, Thm. 1.4] (in which the authors state a result of [St01] in this form). Therefore, if {P,P}\{P,-P\} is stable over an extension LL of K(f)K(f), such that Gal(¯/L)\text{Gal}(\overline{\mathbb{Q}}/L) is in the kernel of λ\lambda, we have

ϕ(N)2[L:K(f)],\frac{\phi(N)}{2}\mid[L:K(f)],

and so indeed we have [K(x~):K(x)]=ϕ(N)/2[K(\tilde{x}):K(x)]=\phi(N)/2.

We next tackle case (2)(a), assuming that xx is a ramified point of the map X0D(N)/XD(1)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. In this case, we have that a representative (A,ι,Q)/K(x)(A,\iota,Q)_{/K(x)} inducing xx, where QA[N]Q\leq A[N] is a QM-cyclic subgroup, is well-defined up to quadratic twist, as all models for (A,ι)(A,\iota) are defined over K(x)K(x). This is because, working geometrically for a second, a 3-3 or 4-4 CM point xX0D(N)x\in X_{0}^{D}(N) over \mathbb{C} is ramified with respect to the natural map to XD(1)X^{D}(1) if and only if it is non-elliptic; it has the trivial stabilizer {±1}\{\pm 1\}, while its image is an elliptic point of order 33 or 44. The same argument as in the Δ<4\Delta<-4 case above then applies.

We now assume that xx is a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with Δ{3,4}\Delta\in\{-3,-4\} which is unramified with respect to the map to XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. If N=2N=2, then π\pi is an isomorphism, so the claim is trivial. If N=3N=3, the fact mentioned above that there is one point lying over each elliptic point on XD(1)X^{D}(1) is exactly the inertness claim. For N4N\geq 4, we know that every point in π1(x)\pi^{-1}(x) is ramified with respect to the map X1D(N)/XD(1)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, giving the claimed ramification index. The residue degree is therefore at most the claimed residue degree in each case.

To provide the lower bound on the residue degree, we modify the argument of the Δ<4\Delta<-4 case slightly in a predictable way. If Δ=4\Delta=-4, then a representative for xx is well-defined up to quartic twist. We consider a representative of the form (E1×E2,ι,𝒪C)(E_{1}\times E_{2},\iota,\mathcal{O}\cdot C) where E1,E2E_{1},E_{2} are 𝔬(f)\mathfrak{o}(f)-CM elliptic curves and CE1[N]C\leq E_{1}[N] is a cyclic order NN subgroup (again, via the type of argument as in the Δ<4\Delta<-4 case using Theorem 2.13). Let qN:𝔬K𝔬K/N𝔬Kq_{N}:\mathfrak{o}_{K}\rightarrow\mathfrak{o}_{K}/N\mathfrak{o}_{K} denote the quotient map. By tracking the action of Galois on a generator PP of CC we get a well-defined reduced mod NN Galois representation

ρN¯:Gal((x)/)(𝔬K/N𝔬K)×/qN(𝔬K×)\overline{\rho_{N}}:\text{Gal}(\mathbb{Q}(x)/\mathbb{Q})\rightarrow\left(\mathfrak{o}_{K}/N\mathfrak{o}_{K}\right)^{\times}/q_{N}(\mathfrak{o}_{K}^{\times})

which is surjective (see [BC20, §1.3]). As the set {P,P,iP,iP}\{P,-P,iP,-iP\} is stable under the action of Gal((x~)/)\text{Gal}(\mathbb{Q}(\tilde{x})/\mathbb{Q}) for x~π1(x)\tilde{x}\in\pi^{-1}(x), we must have

ϕ(N)4=#(ρN¯(Gal((x~)/)))[(x~):(x)],\frac{\phi(N)}{4}=\#\left(\overline{\rho_{N}}\left(\text{Gal}(\mathbb{Q}(\tilde{x})/\mathbb{Q})\right)\right)\mid[\mathbb{Q}(\tilde{x}):\mathbb{Q}(x)],

giving the result for Δ=4\Delta=-4. For Δ=3\Delta=-3, exchanging “quartic” for “cubic” and μ4\mu_{4} for μ3\mu_{3} results in the required divisibility ϕ(N)6fπ(x)\frac{\phi(N)}{6}\mid f_{\pi}(x). ∎

10. Sporadic CM points on Shimura Curves

Fix D>1D>1 an indefinite quaternion discriminant over \mathbb{Q} and N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} relatively prime to DD. In analogy to prior work on degrees of CM points on certain classical families of modular curves [CGPS22], we may consider the least degree dCM(X)d_{\text{CM}}(X) of a CM-point on a Shimura curve XX for the modular Shimura curves X=X0D(N)/X=X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X=X1D(N)/X=X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. For an imaginary quadratic order 𝔬\mathfrak{o}, the results of §8.4 allow us to compute all primitive residue fields and degrees of 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, and hence to compute the least degree d𝔬,CM(X0D(N))\text{d}_{\mathfrak{o},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) of an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. Note that the least degree of an 𝔬\mathfrak{o}-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} always satisfies

h(𝔬)d𝔬,CM(X0D(N)).h(\mathfrak{o})\mid d_{\mathfrak{o},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)).

Using a complete list of all imaginary quadratic orders 𝔬\mathfrak{o} of class number up to 100100, it then follows that if we have some order 𝔬0\mathfrak{o}_{0} with

d𝔬0,CM(X0D(N))100,d_{\mathfrak{o}_{0},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))\leq 100,

then we can solve the minimization over orders problem to compute the least degree of a CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}:

dCM(X0D(N))=min{d𝔬,CM(X0D(N))h(𝔬)100}.d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))=\text{min}\left\{d_{\mathfrak{o},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))\mid h(\mathfrak{o})\leq 100\right\}.

We have implemented an algorithm to compute least degrees over specified orders and, when possible, to compute d𝔬,CM(X0D(N))d_{\mathfrak{o},\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) exactly as described above. The relevant code, along with all other code used for the computational tasks described in this section, can be found at the repository [Rep]. One may also find there a list of computed exact values of dCM(X0D(N))d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)), along with an order minimizing the degree, for all relevant pairs (D,N)(D,N) with DN<105DN<10^{5}. All computations described in this section are performed using [Magma].

Theorem 1.2 provides all of the information we need to go from least degrees of CM points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} to least degrees of CM points on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. For ease of the relevant statement, we first generalize some terminology from [CGPS22]: we will call a pair (D,N)(D,N) with N4N\geq 4

  • Type I if DD splits (3)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-3}), we have ord3(N)1\text{ord}_{3}(N)\leq 1, and NN is not divisible by any prime 2(mod3)\ell\equiv 2\pmod{3}, and

  • Type II if DD splits (1)\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{-1}), we have ord2(N)1\text{ord}_{2}(N)\leq 1, and NN is not divisible by any prime 3(mod4)\ell\equiv 3\pmod{4}.

Proposition 10.1.

Let D>1D>1 be a quaternion discriminant over \mathbb{Q} and N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} coprime to DD.

  1. (1)

    If (D,N)(D,N) is Type I, then

    dCM(X1D(N))=ϕ(N)3.d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{1}^{D}(N))=\frac{\phi(N)}{3}.
  2. (2)

    If (D,N)(D,N) is not Type I and is Type II, then

    dCM(X1D(N))=ϕ(N)2.d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{1}^{D}(N))=\frac{\phi(N)}{2}.
  3. (3)

    If (D,N)(D,N) is not Type I or Type II, then

    dCM(X1D(N))=ϕ(N)2dCM(X0D(N)).d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{1}^{D}(N))=\frac{\phi(N)}{2}\cdot d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)).
Proof.

The natural map X1D(N)/X0D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has non-trivial ramification exactly when (D,N)(D,N) is either Type I or Type II. In these cases, we have dCM(X0D(N))=2d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2, which is as small as possible as the D>1D>1 assumption implies these curves have no rational points. The statements then follow immediately from the residue degrees with respect to this map provided by Theorem 1.2. ∎

For a curve X/X_{/\mathbb{Q}}, let δ(X)\delta(X) denote the least positive integer dd such that XX has infinitely points of degree dd. We call a point xXx\in X sporadic if

deg(x):=[(x):]<δ(X).\text{deg}(x):=[\mathbb{Q}(x):\mathbb{Q}]<\delta(X).

That is, xx is a sporadic point if there are only finitely points yXy\in X with deg(y)deg(x)\text{deg}(y)\leq\text{deg}(x). Sporadic points on modular curves have been objects of interest in several recent works, including [Naj16, BELOV19, BN21, CGPS22, Smi23, BGRW24].

In the remainder of this section, we apply our least degree computations towards the question of whether the curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} and X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} have sporadic CM points.

10.1. An explicit upper bound on dCM(X0D(N))d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))

In analogy to the Heegner hypothesis of the modular curve case, we make the following definition:

Definition 10.2.

Let DD be an indefinite quaternion discriminant and NN a positive integer relatively prime to DD. We will say that an imaginary quadratic discriminant Δ\Delta satisfies the (D,N)(D,N) Heegner hypothesis if

  1. (1)

    for all primes D\ell\mid D, we have (Δ)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{\ell}=-1, and

  2. (2)

    for all primes N\ell\mid N, we have (Δ)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{\Delta}{\ell}=1,

If Δ\Delta satisfies the (D,N)(D,N) Heegner hypothesis, this implies the existence of a Δ\Delta-CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} which is rational over K(f)K(f), the ring class field of conductor ff where Δ=f2ΔK\Delta=f^{2}\Delta_{K}. This point therefore has degree at most 2h(𝔬(f))2\cdot h(\mathfrak{o}(f)).

We provide an upper bound on the least degree of a CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} as follows: let LL be the least positive integer such that

  • (Lp)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{L}{p}=-1 for all odd primes pDp\mid D,

  • (Lp)=1\genfrac{(}{)}{}{}{L}{p}=1 for all odd primes pNp\mid N, and

  • we have

    L{5(mod8) if 2D1(mod8) otherwise.L\equiv\begin{cases}5\pmod{8}\text{ if }2\mid D\\ 1\pmod{8}\text{ otherwise}.\end{cases}

Then 0<L<8DN0<L<8DN, and so d0=L16DNd_{0}=L-16DN is an imaginary quadratic discriminant satisfying the (D,N)(D,N) Heegner hypothesis with 16DN<d0<8DN-16DN<d_{0}<-8DN. It follows that there exists a fundamental discriminant ΔK\Delta_{K} of an imaginary quadratic field KK satisfying the (D,N)(D,N) Heegner hypothesis with |ΔK|<16DN|\Delta_{K}|<16DN; take KK such that d0d_{0} corresponds to an order in KK and hence d0=f2ΔKd_{0}=f^{2}\Delta_{K} for some positive integer ff.

For an imaginary quadratic field KK of discriminant ΔK<4\Delta_{K}<-4, we have

hK=h(𝔬(ΔK))e2π|d|log|d|h_{K}=h(\mathfrak{o}(\Delta_{K}))\leq\frac{e}{2\pi}\sqrt{|d|}\log{|d|}

(see, e.g., [CCS13, Appendix]), such that the above provides

dCM(X0D(N))2hK4eπDNlog(16DN).d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))\leq 2\cdot h_{K}\leq\frac{4e}{\pi}\sqrt{DN}\log{(16DN)}. (3)

10.2. Shimura curves with infinitely many points of degree 2

If δ(X0D(N))=2\delta(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2, then as X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no real points it certainly does not have a sporadic point. We mention here all pairs (D,N)(D,N) for which we know δ(X0D(N))=2\delta(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2 based on the existing literature.

All genus 0 and 11 cases necessarily have δ(X0D(N))=2\delta(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2, as we have no degree 11 points. Voight [Voi09] lists all (D,N)(D,N) for which X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has genus zero:

{(6,1),(10,1),(22,1)},\{(6,1),(10,1),(22,1)\},

and genus one:

{(6,5),(6,7),(6,13),(10,3),(10,7),(14,1),(15,1),(21,1),(33,1),(34,1),(46,1)}.\{(6,5),(6,7),(6,13),(10,3),(10,7),(14,1),(15,1),(21,1),(33,1),(34,1),(46,1)\}.

By a result of Abramovich–Harris [AH91], a nice curve XX defined over \mathbb{Q} of genus at least 22 with δ(X)=2\delta(X)=2 is either hyperelliptic over \mathbb{Q}, or is bielliptic and emits a degree 22 map to an elliptic curve over \mathbb{Q} with positive rank. The pairs (D,N)(D,N) for which X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is hyperelliptic of genus at least 22 were determined by Ogg111Actually, for the pairs (10,19)(10,19) and (14,5)(14,5), the referenced work of Ogg says that the corresponding curves are hyperelliptic over \mathbb{R}. Ogg does not say whether that is the case over \mathbb{Q}, but work of Guo-Yang [GY17] answers negatively for the former pair and positively for the latter. [Ogg83]:

{\displaystyle\{ (6,11),(6,19),(6,29),(6,31),(6,37),(10,11),(10,23),(14,5),(15,2),\displaystyle(6,11),(6,19),(6,29),(6,31),(6,37),(10,11),(10,23),(14,5),(15,2),
(22,3),(22,5),(26,1),(35,1),(38,1),(39,1),(39,2),(51,1),(55,1),(58,1),(62,1),\displaystyle(22,3),(22,5),(26,1),(35,1),(38,1),(39,1),(39,2),(51,1),(55,1),(58,1),(62,1),
(69,1),(74,1),(86,1),(87,1),(94,1),(95,1),(111,1),(119,1),(134,1),\displaystyle(69,1),(74,1),(86,1),(87,1),(94,1),(95,1),(111,1),(119,1),(134,1),
(146,1),(159,1),(194,1),(206,1)}.\displaystyle(146,1),(159,1),(194,1),(206,1)\}.

As for the bielliptic case, Rotger [Rot02] has determined all discriminants DD such that XD(1)=X0D(1)X^{D}(1)=X_{0}^{D}(1) is bielliptic, and further determines those for which XD(1)/X^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is bielliptc over \mathbb{Q} and maps to a positive rank elliptic curve. All such discriminants DD with g(X0D(1))2g(X_{0}^{D}(1))\geq 2 and with X0D(1)/X_{0}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} not hyperelliptic are as follows:

D{57,65,77,82,106,118,122,129,143,166,210,215,314,330,390,510,546}.\displaystyle D\in\{57,65,77,82,106,118,122,129,143,166,210,215,314,330,390,510,546\}.

10.3. Sporadic CM points

In order to declare the existence of a sporadic CM point on a Shimura curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, a main tool for us will be the following result of Frey [Frey94, Prop. 2] on the least degree δ(X)\delta(X) over which a nice curve X/FX_{/F} has infinitely many closed points:

Theorem 10.3 (Frey 1994).

For a nice curve XX defined over a number field FF, we have

γF(X)2δ(X)γF(X),\frac{\gamma_{F}(X)}{2}\leq\delta(X)\leq\gamma_{F}(X),

where γF(X)\gamma_{F}(X) denotes the FF-gonality of XX, i.e., is the least degree of a non-constant FF-rational map to the projective line.

It follows from Theorem 10.3 that if

dCM(X0D(N))<γ(X0D(N))2,d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))<\frac{\gamma_{\mathbb{Q}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))}{2}, (4)

then there exists a sporadic CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}. To complement this, a result of Abramovich provides a lower bound on the gonality of a Shimura curve. Our cases of interest in applying this result are X0D(N)=XΓ0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N)=X_{\Gamma^{D}_{0}(N)} and X1D(N)=XΓ1D(N)X_{1}^{D}(N)=X_{\Gamma^{D}_{1}(N)} (or, equivalently, X0D(N)=X𝒪N1X_{0}^{D}(N)=X_{\mathcal{O}_{N}^{1}}, where 𝒪N\mathcal{O}_{N} is an Eichler order of level NN in BB, for the former curve).

Theorem 10.4 (Abramovich 1996).

Let XΓX_{\Gamma} be the Shimura curve corresponding to Γ𝒪1\Gamma\leq\mathcal{O}^{1} a subgroup of the units of norm 11 in an order 𝒪\mathcal{O} of BB. Then

9758192(g(XΓ)1)γ(XΓ)γ(XΓ).\frac{975}{8192}(g(X_{\Gamma})-1)\leq\gamma_{\mathbb{C}}(X_{\Gamma})\leq\gamma_{\mathbb{Q}}(X_{\Gamma}).
Proof.

This is a version of [Abr96, Thm. 1.1], where the constant has been improved using the best known progress due to Kim–Sarnak on Selberg’s eigenvalue conjecture [KS03, p. 176]. ∎

The following result will allow us to transfer information about the existence of sporadic points on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} to those on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}:

Proposition 10.5.

Let π:X1D(N)/X0D(N)/\pi:X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}}\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} denote the natural modular map. Suppose that P0X0D(N)/P_{0}\in X^{D}_{0}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} satisfies

deg(P0)97516384(g(X0D(N))1).\textnormal{deg}(P_{0})\leq\frac{975}{16384}\left(g(X^{D}_{0}(N))-1\right).

Then any PX1D(N)/P\in X^{D}_{1}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} with π(P)=P0\pi(P)=P_{0} is sporadic.

Proof.

For such a point PX1D(1)/P\in X_{1}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}}, using the notation and results of Proposition 2.5 we have

deg(P)\displaystyle\text{deg}(P) deg(P0)deg(π)\displaystyle\leq\text{deg}(P_{0})\cdot\deg(\pi)
=deg(P0)ϕ(N)2\displaystyle=\text{deg}(P_{0})\cdot\frac{\phi(N)}{2}
97516384(ϕ(D)ψ(N)12ϵ1(D,N)4ϵ3(D,N)3)ϕ(N)2\displaystyle\leq\dfrac{975}{16384}\left(\frac{\phi(D)\psi(N)}{12}-\dfrac{\epsilon_{1}(D,N)}{4}-\dfrac{\epsilon_{3}(D,N)}{3}\right)\cdot\frac{\phi(N)}{2}
97516384(ϕ(N)ϕ(D)ψ(N)24)\displaystyle\leq\dfrac{975}{16384}\left(\frac{\phi(N)\phi(D)\psi(N)}{24}\right)
=97516384(g(X1D(N)1).\displaystyle=\frac{975}{16384}(g(X^{D}_{1}(N)-1).

It then follows from Theorem 10.4 that PP is sporadic. ∎

We now obtain a lower bound on the genus of X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) that will be amenable to our arguments:

Lemma 10.6.

For D>1D>1 an indefinite quaternion discriminant over \mathbb{Q} and N+N\in\mathbb{Z}^{+} relatively prime to DD, we have

g(X0D(N))1\displaystyle g(X_{0}^{D}(N))-1 >DN12(1eγloglogD+3loglog(D))7DN3\displaystyle>\dfrac{DN}{12}\left(\dfrac{1}{e^{\gamma}\log\log{D}+\frac{3}{\log\log(D)}}\right)-\frac{7\sqrt{DN}}{3}
DN12(1eγloglog(DN)+3loglog(6))7DN3.\displaystyle\geq\dfrac{DN}{12}\left(\dfrac{1}{e^{\gamma}\log\log{(DN)}+\frac{3}{\log\log(6)}}\right)-\frac{7\sqrt{DN}}{3}.
Proof.

We make use of the trivial bound ψ(N)N\psi(N)\geq N, and the lower bound

ϕ(D)>DeγloglogD+3loglogD.\phi(D)>\dfrac{D}{e^{\gamma}\log\log{D}+\frac{3}{\log\log{D}}}.

For M+M\in\mathbb{Z}^{+}, let ω(M)\omega(M) and d(M)d(M) denote, respectively, the number of distinct prime divisors of MM and the number of divisors of MM. We then have

ϵ1(D,N),ϵ3(D,N)2ω(DN)d(DN)d(D)d(N)4DN.\epsilon_{1}(D,N),\epsilon_{3}(D,N)\leq 2^{\omega(DN)}\leq d(DN)\leq d(D)\cdot d(N)\leq 4\sqrt{DN}.

Using these bounds along with the fact that D6D\geq 6 and N1N\geq 1, we arrive at the stated inequalities from the genus fromula given in Proposition 2.5. ∎

The combination of this lemma with (3) and (4) guarantees a sporadic CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} if

4eπDNlog(16DN)325DN65536(1eγloglog(DN)+3loglog(6))2275DN16384.\frac{4e}{\pi}\sqrt{DN}\log{(16DN)}\leq\frac{325DN}{65536}\left(\dfrac{1}{e^{\gamma}\log\log{(DN)}+\frac{3}{\log\log(6)}}\right)-\frac{2275\sqrt{DN}}{16384}.

This inequality holds for all pairs (D,N)(D,N) with DN4.275121010DN\geq 4.27512\cdot 10^{10}.

Ranging through pairs (D,N)(D,N) with DNDN below this bound, we attempt to determine the fundamental imaginary quadratic discriminant ΔK\Delta_{K} of smallest absolute value satisfying the (D,N)(D,N)-Heegner hypothesis. If found, we check whether we have a ΔK\Delta_{K}-CM point of degree at most half γ(X0D(N))\gamma_{\mathbb{Q}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) via the inequality

hK<325ϕ(D)ψ(N)655362275DN16384.h_{K}<\frac{325\phi(D)\psi(N)}{65536}-\frac{2275\sqrt{DN}}{16384}. (5)

We confirm that (5) holds, and thus a sporadic CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is ensured, for all pairs (D,N)(D,N) with DN>14982DN>14982 aside from the 2020 pairs comprising the following set 1\mathcal{F}_{1}:

1={\displaystyle\mathcal{F}_{1}=\{ (101959,210),(111397,210),(141427,210),(154583,210),(164749,210),\displaystyle(101959,210),(111397,210),(141427,210),(154583,210),(164749,210),
(165053,330),(174629,330),(190619,210),(192907,210),(194051,210),\displaystyle(165053,330),(174629,330),(190619,210),(192907,210),(194051,210),
(199801,330),(208351,210),(218569,210),(233519,210),(240097,210),\displaystyle(199801,330),(208351,210),(218569,210),(233519,210),(240097,210),
(272459,210),(287419,210),(296153,210),(304513,210),(307241,210)}.\displaystyle(272459,210),(287419,210),(296153,210),(304513,210),(307241,210)\}.

For each pair (D,N)1(D,N)\in\mathcal{F}_{1}, it is not that the inequality (5) does not hold. Rather, there is no imaginary quadratic discriminant of class number at most 100100 satisfying the (D,N)(D,N)-Heegner hypothesis, such that we fail to perform the check using only such discriminants. For each of these pairs, we compute dCM(X0D(N))d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)) exactly and find that for each the inequality

dCM(X0D(N))<325ϕ(D)ψ(N)327682275DN8192d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))<\frac{325\phi(D)\psi(N)}{32768}-\frac{2275\sqrt{DN}}{8192}

holds. By the preceding remarks, this confirms that the curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point for all (D,N)1(D,N)\in\mathcal{F}_{1}.

There are exactly 43924392 pairs (D,N)(D,N), each with DN14982,DN\leq 14982, for which the inequality (5) does not hold. These are listed in the file bads_list.m in [Rep]. For each of these, we perform an exact computation of dCM(X0D(N))d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N)). By the above, a sporadic CM point on X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} is guaranteed if

dCM(X0D(N))<97516384(ϕ(D)ψ(N)12e1(D,N)4e3(D,N)3).d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))<\frac{975}{16384}\left(\frac{\phi(D)\psi(N)}{12}-\frac{e_{1}(D,N)}{4}-\frac{e_{3}(D,N)}{3}\right). (6)
Lemma 10.7.

There are exactly 574574 pairs (D,N)(D,N) consisting of a quaternion discriminant D>1D>1 over \mathbb{Q} and a positive integer NN coprime to DD such that the inequality (6) does not hold. For all such pairs we have dCM(X0D(1)){2,4,6}d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(1))\in\{2,4,6\}, and the largest value of DD occuring among such pairs is D=1590D=1590.

Proof.

This follows from direct computation. The 574574 referenced pairs are listed in the file fail_dcm_check.m in [Rep]. ∎

Lemma 10.8.

Set

𝒟:={\displaystyle\mathcal{D}:=\{ 85,91,93,115,123,133,141,142,145,155,158,161,177,178,183,185,187,201,202,\displaystyle 85,91,93,115,123,133,141,142,145,155,158,161,177,178,183,185,187,201,202,
203,205,209,213,214,217,218,219,221,226,235,237,247,249,253,254,259,262,265,\displaystyle 203,205,209,213,214,217,218,219,221,226,235,237,247,249,253,254,259,262,265,
267,274,278,287,291,295,298,299,301,302,303,305,309,319,321,323,326,327,329,\displaystyle 267,274,278,287,291,295,298,299,301,302,303,305,309,319,321,323,326,327,329,
334,335,339,341,346,355,358,362,365,371,377,381,382,386,391,393,394,395,398,\displaystyle 334,335,339,341,346,355,358,362,365,371,377,381,382,386,391,393,394,395,398,
403,407,411,413,415,417,422,427,437,445,446,447,451,453,454,458,462,466,469,\displaystyle 403,407,411,413,415,417,422,427,437,445,446,447,451,453,454,458,462,466,469,
471,478,482,485,489,501,502,505,514,519,526,537,538,542,543,554,562,566,570,\displaystyle 471,478,482,485,489,501,502,505,514,519,526,537,538,542,543,554,562,566,570,
573,579,586,591,597,614,622,626,634,662,674,690,694,698,706,714,718,734,746,\displaystyle 573,579,586,591,597,614,622,626,634,662,674,690,694,698,706,714,718,734,746,
758,766,770,778,794,798,802,838,858,870,910,930,966,1110,1122,1190,1218,1230,\displaystyle 758,766,770,778,794,798,802,838,858,870,910,930,966,1110,1122,1190,1218,1230,
1254,1290,1302,1326,1410,1518,1590}.\displaystyle 1254,1290,1302,1326,1410,1518,1590\}.

and

:={\displaystyle\mathcal{E}:=\{ (85,2),(85,3),(85,4),(91,2),(91,3),(93,2),(93,4),(93,5),(115,2),(115,3),(123,2),\displaystyle(85,2),(85,3),(85,4),(91,2),(91,3),(93,2),(93,4),(93,5),(115,2),(115,3),(123,2),
(133,2),(141,2),(142,3),(145,2),(155,2),(158,3),(161,2),(177,2),(178,3),(183,2),\displaystyle(133,2),(141,2),(142,3),(145,2),(155,2),(158,3),(161,2),(177,2),(178,3),(183,2),
(201,2),(202,3)}.\displaystyle(201,2),(202,3)\}.

For each of the 181 pairs (D,N)(D,N) with either D𝒟D\in\mathcal{D} and N=1N=1 or with (D,N)(D,N)\in\mathcal{E}, the curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point.

Proof.

For each such pair (D,N)(D,N), we know from §10.2 that X0D(1)/X_{0}^{D}(1)_{/\mathbb{Q}} does not have infinitely many degree 22 points and hence X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} does not have infinitely many degree 22 points. At the same time, we compute that this curve has a CM point of degree 22, which is therefore necessarily sporadic. ∎

We are now prepared to end with the main result of this section:

Theorem 10.9.
  1. (1)

    For each of the 6464 pairs (D,N)(D,N) in Table 1, the Shimura curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no sporadic points. For each of these pairs, we have dCM(X0D(N))=2d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2.

  2. (2)

    For each of the 6464 pairs (D,N)(D,N) in Table 1 except for possibly the 1010 in the following set:

    {(6,5),(6,7),(6,13),(6,19),(6,29),(6,31),(6,37),(10,7),(14,5),(22,5)},\{(6,5),(6,7),(6,13),(6,19),(6,29),(6,31),(6,37),(10,7),(14,5),(22,5)\},

    the Shimura curve X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no sporadic CM points.

  3. (3)

    There are at most 329329 pairs (D,N)(D,N), consisting of an indefinite quaternion discriminant D>1D>1 over \mathbb{Q} and a positive integer NN coprime to DD, which do not appear among the 6464 listed in Table 1 and for which the Shimura curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} does not have a sporadic CM point. These are listed in Table LABEL:table:unknowns_table.

  4. (4)

    Let (D,N)(D,N) be a pair consisting of an indefinite quaternion discriminant D>1D>1 over \mathbb{Q} and a positive integer NN coprime to DD. If (D,N)(D,N) is not listed in Table 1 or Table LABEL:table:unknowns_table and is not equal to (91,5)(91,5), then the Shimura curve X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point.

Proof.
  1. (1)

    These Shimura curves X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} are exactly those for which we know that δ(X0D(N))=2\delta(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2 via §10.2. That each such curve has a CM point of degree 22 follows from direct computation.

  2. (2)

    For each pair in this table, we have

    δ(X1D(N))2deg(X1D(N)X0D(N))=max{2,ϕ(N)}.\delta(X_{1}^{D}(N))\leq 2\cdot\text{deg}(X_{1}^{D}(N)\rightarrow X_{0}^{D}(N))=\text{max}\{2,\phi(N)\}.

    For each pair in this table other than the 1010 listed pairs, we compute that

    max{2,ϕ(N)}dCM(X1D(N)).\text{max}\{2,\phi(N)\}\leq d_{\text{CM}}(X_{1}^{D}(N)).
  3. (3)

    This is an immediate consequence of the preceding discussion, including Lemmas 10.7 and 10.8.

  4. (4)

    By Proposition 10.5, we have that X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point for all pairs (D,N)(D,N) aside from possibly the 574574 referred to in Lemma 10.7. Of the 181181 pairs listed in Lemma 10.8, we compute that each pair except for (D,N)=(91,5)(D,N)=(91,5) satisfies

    dCM(X1D(N))=2<δ(X0D(1))δ(X1D(N)),d_{\text{CM}}(X_{1}^{D}(N))=2<\delta(X_{0}^{D}(1))\leq\delta(X_{1}^{D}(N)),

    and hence we have a sporadic CM point on X1D(N)/X_{1}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} for all such pairs. The result then follows from part (2).

Remark 10.10.

For all of the 329329 pairs (D,N)(D,N) listed in Table LABEL:table:unknowns_table, we have dCM(X0D(N)){2,4,6}d_{\text{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))\in\{2,4,6\}. For all but 5656 of these pairs, we have dCM(X0D(N))=2d_{\textnormal{CM}}(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2. For such pairs, it follows that the curve X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic (CM) point if and only if it is not bielliptic with a degree 22 map to an elliptic curve over \mathbb{Q} of positive rank. An extension of the results of [Rot02] mentioned in §10.2 to general level NN would then allow us to determine whether X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point for all but at most 5656 pairs (D,N)(D,N) with D>1D>1. Such an extension will appear in work of the author and Oana Padurariu [PS24].

(6,1)(6,1) (6,5)(6,5) (6,7)(6,7) (6,11)(6,11) (6,13)(6,13) (6,19)(6,19)
(6,29)(6,29) (6,31)(6,31) (6,37)(6,37) (10,1)(10,1) (10,3)(10,3) (10,7)(10,7)
(10,11)(10,11) (10,23)(10,23) (14,1)(14,1) (14,5)(14,5) (15,1)(15,1) (15,2)(15,2)
(21,1)(21,1) (22,1)(22,1) (22,3)(22,3) (22,5)(22,5) (26,1)(26,1) (33,1)(33,1)
(34,1)(34,1) (35,1)(35,1) (38,1)(38,1) (39,1)(39,1) (39,2)(39,2) (46,1)(46,1)
(51,1)(51,1) (55,1)(55,1) (57,1)(57,1) (58,1)(58,1) (62,1)(62,1) (65,1)(65,1)
(69,1)(69,1) (74,1)(74,1) (77,1)(77,1) (82,1)(82,1) (86,1)(86,1) (87,1)(87,1)
(94,1)(94,1) (95,1)(95,1) (106,1)(106,1) (111,1)(111,1) (118,1)(118,1) (119,1)(119,1)
(122,1)(122,1) (129,1)(129,1) (134,1)(134,1) (143,1)(143,1) (146,1)(146,1) (159,1)(159,1)
(166,1)(166,1) (194,1)(194,1) (206,1)(206,1) (210,1)(210,1) (215,1)(215,1) (314,1)(314,1)
(330,1)(330,1) (390,1)(390,1) (510,1)(510,1) (546,1)(546,1)
Table 1. 6464 pairs (D,N)(D,N) with gcd(D,N)=1\text{gcd}(D,N)=1 for which δ(X0D(N))=2\delta(X_{0}^{D}(N))=2, and hence X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has no sporadic points
Table 2. All 329329 pairs (D,N)(D,N) with D>1D>1 for which we remain unsure whether X0D(N)/X_{0}^{D}(N)_{/\mathbb{Q}} has a sporadic CM point
(6,17)(6,17) (6,23)(6,23) (6,25)(6,25) (6,35)(6,35) (6,41)(6,41) (6,43)(6,43) (6,47)(6,47) (6,49)(6,49) (6,53)(6,53)
(6,55)(6,55) (6,59)(6,59) (6,61)(6,61) (6,65)(6,65) (6,67)(6,67) (6,71)(6,71) (6,73)(6,73) (6,77)(6,77) (6,79)(6,79)
(6,83)(6,83) (6,85)(6,85) (6,89)(6,89) (6,91)(6,91) (6,95)(6,95) (6,97)(6,97) (6,101)(6,101) (6,103)(6,103) (6,107)(6,107)
(6,109)(6,109) (6,113)(6,113) (6,115)(6,115) (6,119)(6,119) (6,121)(6,121) (6,125)(6,125) (6,127)(6,127) (6,131)(6,131) (6,133)(6,133)
(6,137)(6,137) (6,139)(6,139) (6,143)(6,143) (6,145)(6,145) (6,149)(6,149) (6,151)(6,151) (6,155)(6,155) (6,157)(6,157) (6,161)(6,161)
(6,163)(6,163) (6,167)(6,167) (6,169)(6,169) (6,173)(6,173) (6,179)(6,179) (6,181)(6,181) (6,191)(6,191) (6,193)(6,193) (6,197)(6,197)
(6,199)(6,199) (6,203)(6,203) (6,287)(6,287) (6,295)(6,295) (6,319)(6,319) (10,9)(10,9) (10,13)(10,13) (10,17)(10,17) (10,19)(10,19)
(10,21)(10,21) (10,27)(10,27) (10,29)(10,29) (10,31)(10,31) (10,33)(10,33) (10,37)(10,37) (10,39)(10,39) (10,41)(10,41) (10,43)(10,43)
(10,47)(10,47) (10,49)(10,49) (10,51)(10,51) (10,53)(10,53) (10,57)(10,57) (10,59)(10,59) (10,61)(10,61) (10,63)(10,63) (10,67)(10,67)
(10,69)(10,69) (10,71)(10,71) (10,73)(10,73) (10,77)(10,77) (10,79)(10,79) (10,83)(10,83) (10,87)(10,87) (10,89)(10,89) (10,91)(10,91)
(10,97)(10,97) (10,103)(10,103) (10,119)(10,119) (10,141)(10,141) (10,161)(10,161) (10,191)(10,191) (14,3)(14,3) (14,9)(14,9) (14,11)(14,11)
(14,13)(14,13) (14,15)(14,15) (14,17)(14,17) (14,19)(14,19) (14,23)(14,23) (14,25)(14,25) (14,27)(14,27) (14,29)(14,29) (14,31)(14,31)
(14,33)(14,33) (14,37)(14,37) (14,39)(14,39) (14,41)(14,41) (14,43)(14,43) (14,47)(14,47) (14,53)(14,53) (14,59)(14,59) (14,61)(14,61)
(14,87)(14,87) (14,95)(14,95) (15,4)(15,4) (15,7)(15,7) (15,8)(15,8) (15,11)(15,11) (15,13)(15,13) (15,14)(15,14) (15,16)(15,16)
(15,17)(15,17) (15,19)(15,19) (15,22)(15,22) (15,23)(15,23) (15,26)(15,26) (15,28)(15,28) (15,29)(15,29) (15,31)(15,31) (15,32)(15,32)
(15,34)(15,34) (15,37)(15,37) (15,41)(15,41) (15,43)(15,43) (15,47)(15,47) (21,2)(21,2) (21,4)(21,4) (21,5)(21,5) (21,8)(21,8)
(21,10)(21,10) (21,11)(21,11) (21,13)(21,13) (21,16)(21,16) (21,17)(21,17) (21,19)(21,19) (21,23)(21,23) (21,25)(21,25) (21,29)(21,29)
(21,31)(21,31) (21,38)(21,38) (22,7)(22,7) (22,9)(22,9) (22,13)(22,13) (22,15)(22,15) (22,17)(22,17) (22,19)(22,19) (22,21)(22,21)
(22,23)(22,23) (22,25)(22,25) (22,27)(22,27) (22,29)(22,29) (22,31)(22,31) (22,35)(22,35) (22,37)(22,37) (22,51)(22,51) (26,3)(26,3)
(26,5)(26,5) (26,7)(26,7) (26,9)(26,9) (26,11)(26,11) (26,15)(26,15) (26,17)(26,17) (26,19)(26,19) (26,21)(26,21) (26,23)(26,23)
(26,25)(26,25) (26,29)(26,29) (26,31)(26,31) (33,2)(33,2) (33,4)(33,4) (33,5)(33,5) (33,7)(33,7) (33,8)(33,8) (33,10)(33,10)
(33,13)(33,13) (33,16)(33,16) (33,17)(33,17) (33,19)(33,19) (34,3)(34,3) (34,5)(34,5) (34,7)(34,7) (34,9)(34,9) (34,11)(34,11)
(34,13)(34,13) (34,15)(34,15) (34,19)(34,19) (34,23)(34,23) (34,29)(34,29) (34,35)(34,35) (35,2)(35,2) (35,3)(35,3) (35,4)(35,4)
(35,6)(35,6) (35,8)(35,8) (35,9)(35,9) (35,11)(35,11) (35,12)(35,12) (35,13)(35,13) (38,3)(38,3) (38,5)(38,5) (38,7)(38,7)
(38,9)(38,9) (38,11)(38,11) (38,13)(38,13) (38,17)(38,17) (38,21)(38,21) (39,4)(39,4) (39,5)(39,5) (39,7)(39,7) (39,8)(39,8)
(39,10)(39,10) (39,11)(39,11) (39,31)(39,31) (46,3)(46,3) (46,5)(46,5) (46,7)(46,7) (46,9)(46,9) (46,11)(46,11) (46,13)(46,13)
(46,15)(46,15) (46,17)(46,17) (51,2)(51,2) (51,4)(51,4) (51,5)(51,5) (51,7)(51,7) (51,8)(51,8) (51,10)(51,10) (51,11)(51,11)
(51,20)(51,20) (55,2)(55,2) (55,3)(55,3) (55,4)(55,4) (55,7)(55,7) (55,8)(55,8) (57,2)(57,2) (57,4)(57,4) (57,5)(57,5)
(57,7)(57,7) (58,3)(58,3) (58,5)(58,5) (58,7)(58,7) (58,9)(58,9) (58,11)(58,11) (58,13)(58,13) (62,3)(62,3) (62,5)(62,5)
(62,7)(62,7) (62,9)(62,9) (62,11)(62,11) (62,15)(62,15) (65,2)(65,2) (65,3)(65,3) (65,4)(65,4) (65,7)(65,7) (69,2)(69,2)
(69,4)(69,4) (69,5)(69,5) (69,7)(69,7) (69,11)(69,11) (74,3)(74,3) (74,5)(74,5) (74,7)(74,7) (77,2)(77,2) (77,3)(77,3)
(77,4)(77,4) (77,5)(77,5) (77,6)(77,6) (82,3)(82,3) (82,5)(82,5) (82,7)(82,7) (86,3)(86,3) (86,5)(86,5) (86,7)(86,7)
(87,2)(87,2) (87,4)(87,4) (87,5)(87,5) (87,8)(87,8) (94,3)(94,3) (94,5)(94,5) (94,7)(94,7) (95,2)(95,2) (95,3)(95,3)
(106,3)(106,3) (106,5)(106,5) (106,7)(106,7) (111,2)(111,2) (111,4)(111,4) (118,3)(118,3) (118,5)(118,5) (119,2)(119,2) (119,3)(119,3)
(119,6)(119,6) (122,3)(122,3) (122,5)(122,5) (122,7)(122,7) (129,2)(129,2) (129,7)(129,7) (134,3)(134,3) (134,5)(134,5) (134,9)(134,9)
(143,2)(143,2) (143,4)(143,4) (146,3)(146,3) (146,7)(146,7) (159,2)(159,2) (166,3)(166,3) (183,5)(183,5) (194,3)(194,3) (215,2)(215,2)
(215,3)(215,3) (326,3)(326,3) (327,2)(327,2) (335,2)(335,2) (390,7)(390,7)

References

  • [Abr96] D. Abramovich, A linear lower bound on the gonality of modular curves. Internat. Math. Res. Notices, no. 20 (1996), 1005-1011.
  • [AH91] D. Abramovich and J. Harris, Abelian varieties and curves in Wd(C)W_{d}(C). Compositio Math. 78 (1991), 227-238.
  • [AB04] M. Alsina and P. Bayer, Quaternion orders, quadratic forms and Shimura curves. CRM Monograph Series 22, American Mathematical Society, Providence (2004).
  • [BT07] P. Bayer and A. Travesa, Uniformizing functions for certain Shimura curves, in the case D=6D=6. Acta Arith. 126 (2007), 315–339.
  • [BC20] A. Bourdon and P. L. Clark, Torsion points and Galois representations on CM elliptic curves. Pacific J. Math. 305 (2020), 43-88.
  • [BELOV19] A. Bourdon, O. Ejder, Y. Liu, F. Odumodu and B. Viray, On the level of modular curves that give rise to isolated jj-invariants. Adv. Math. 357 (2019).
  • [BGRW24] A. Bourdon, D. R. Gill, J. Rouse and L. D. Watson, Odd degree isolated points on X1(N)X_{1}(N) with rational jj-invariant. Res. Number Theory 10 (2024).
  • [BN21] A. Bourdon and F. Najman, Sporadic points of odd degree on X1(N)X_{1}(N) coming from \mathbb{Q}-curves. Preprint: arXiv:2107.10909v2 (2021).
  • [Magma] W. Bosma, J. Cannon and C. Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I. The user language. J. Symbolic Comput., 24 (1997), 235–265.
  • [Buz97] K. Buzzard, Integral models of certain Shimura curves. Duke Math. J. 87 (1997), 591-612.
  • [Cl03] P. L. Clark, Rational points on Atkin-Lehner quotients of Shimura curves. Harvard PhD. thesis (2003).
  • [Cl09] P. L. Clark, On the Hasse principle for Shimura curves. Israel J. Math. 171 (2009), 349-365.
  • [Cl22] P. L. Clark CM elliptic curves: volcanoes, reality, and applications. Preprint: arXiv:2212.13316 (2022).
  • [CCS13] P. L. Clark, B. Cook, J. Stankewicz, Torsion points on elliptic curves with complex multiplication (with an appendix by Alex Rice). Int. J. Number Theory 9 (2013), 447-479.
  • [CGPS22] P. L. Clark, T. Genao, P. Pollack, F. Saia, The least degree of a CM point on a modular curve, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 105 (2022), 825-883.
  • [CS22] P. L. Clark and F. Saia, CM elliptic curves: volcanoes, reality, and applications, part II. Preprint, arXiv:2212.13327 (2023).
  • [CSt18] P. L. Clark and J. Stankewicz, Hasse principle violations for Atkin-Lehner twists of Shimura curves. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 146 (2018), 2839-2851.
  • [Cox13] D. A. Cox, Primes of the form x2+ny2x^{2}+ny^{2}. Fermat, class field theory and complex multiplication. Second Edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, (2013).
  • [DS05] F. Diamond and J. Shurman, A first course in modular forms. Graduate texts in mathematics, 228. Springer, New York, (2005).
  • [Fou01] M. Fouquet, Anneau d’endomorphismes et cardinalité des courbes elliptiques: aspects algorithmiques. École Polytechnique PhD. thesis, (2002).
  • [FM02] M. Fouquet and F. Morain, Isogeny volcanoes and the SEA algorithm. Algorithmic number theory (Sydney, 2002), 276-291, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci., 2369, Springer, Berlin (2002).
  • [Frey94] G. Frey, Curves with infinitely many points of fixed degree. Israel J. Math. 85, (1994), 79-83.
  • [GR06] J. González and V. Rotger, Non-elliptic Shimura curves of genus one. J. Math. Soc. Japan 58 (2006), 927-948.
  • [GY17] J. Guo and Y. Yang, Equations of hyperelliptic Shimura curves. Compos. Math. 153 (2017), 1-40.
  • [Jor81] B. W. Jordan, On the Diophantine arithmetic of Shimura curves. Harvard PhD. thesis, (1981).
  • [Kan11] E. Kani, Products of CM elliptic curves. Collect. Math. 62 (2011), 297-339.
  • [Kat75] T. Katsura, On the structure of singular abelian varieties. Proc. Japan Acad. 51 (1975), 224–228.
  • [KS03] H. H. Kim, Functoriality for the exterior square of GL4{\rm GL}_{4} and the symmetric fourth of GL2{\rm GL}_{2}, With appendix 1 by Dinakar Ramakrishnan and appendix 2 by Kim and Peter Sarnak. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (2003), 139-183.
  • [Koh96] D. Kohel, Endomorphism rings of elliptic curves over finite fields. University of California at Berkeley PhD. thesis (1996).
  • [La75] H. Lange, Produkte elliptischer Kurven. Nachr. Akad. Wiss. Göttingen Math.-Phys. Kl. II, (1975), 95-108.
  • [Mil72] J. Milne, Abelian varieties defined over their fields of moduli. I. Bull. London Math. Soc. 4 (1972), 370-372.
  • [Naj16] F. Najman, Torsion of rational elliptic curves over cubic fields and sporadic points on X1(n)X_{1}(n). Math. Res. Lett. 23 (2016), 245–272.
  • [Ogg83] A. P. Ogg, Real points on Shimura curves. Arithmetic and geometry, Vol. I, 277–307. Progr. Math., 35, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA (1983).
  • [PS23] O. Padurariu and C. Schembri, Rational points on Atkin-Lehner quotients of geometrically hyperelliptic Shimura curves. Expo. Math. 43, (2023), 492–513.
  • [PS24] O. Padurariu and F. Saia, Bielliptic Shimura curves X0D(N)X_{0}^{D}(N) with nontrivial level. Preprint, arXiv:2401.08829v2 (2024).
  • [Rot02] V. Rotger, On the group of automorphisms of Shimura curves and applications. Compositio Math. 132, (2002), 229-241.
  • [Rot04] V. Rotger, Shimura curves embedded in Igusa’s threefold. Modular curves and abelian varieties, Progr. Math. 224 (2004), 263–276.
  • [RSY05] V. Rotger, A. Skorobogatov and A. Yafaev, Failure of the Hasse principle on Atkin-Lehner quotients of Shimura curves over \mathbb{Q}. Mosc. Math. J. 5 (2005), 463-476, 495.
  • [Rep] F. Saia, CM-Points-Shimura-Curves Github Repository https://github.com/fsaia/CM-Points-Shimura-Curves (2023).
  • [Sc92] C. Schoen, Produkte Abelscher Varietäten und Moduln über Ordnungen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 429 (1992), 115-123.
  • [Sh66] G. Shimura, Moduli and fibre systems of abelian varieties. Ann. of Math. (2) 83 (1966), 294–338.
  • [Sh67] G. Shimura, Construction of class fields and zeta functions of algebraic curves. Ann. of Math. (2) 85 (1967), 58-159.
  • [Sh72] G. Shimura, On the field of rationality for an abelian variety. Nagoya Math. J. 45 (1972), 167-178.
  • [Sh75] G. Shimura, On the real points of an arithmetic quotient of a bounded symmetric domain. Math. Ann. 215 (1975), 135-164.
  • [SM74] T. Shioda and N. Mitani, Singular abelian surfaces and binary quadratic forms. Classification of algebraic varieties and compact complex manifolds, pp. 259–287. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 412, Springer, Berlin (1974).
  • [SS16] S. Siksek and A. Skorobogatov, On a Shimura curve that is a counterexample to the Hasse principle. Bull. London Math. Soc. 35 (2003), 409-414.
  • [Smi23] H. Smith, Ramification in division fields and sporadic points on modular curves. Res. Number Theory 9 (2023).
  • [St01] P. Stevenhagen, Hilbert’s 12th problem, complex multiplication and Shimura reciprocity. Class field theory – its centenary and prospect, pp. 161-176. Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 30, Math. Soc. Japan, Tokyo (2001).
  • [Sut13] D. Sutherland, Isogeny volcanoes. ANTS X–Proceedings of the Tenth Algorithmic Number Theory Symposium, 507-530, Open Book Ser., 1, Math. Sci. Publ., Berkeley, CA (2013).
  • [Uf10] D. Ufer, Shimura-Kurven, Endomorphismen und qq-Parameter. Universität Ulm PhD. thesis (2010).
  • [Vig80] M. Vignèras. Arithmètique des algébres de quaternions. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 800, Springer, Berlin (1980).
  • [Voi09] J. Voight, Shimura curves of genus at most two. Math. Comp. 78 (2009), 1155-1172.
  • [Voi21] J. Voight, Quaternion Algebras. Graduate Texts in Mathematics 288, Springer, Cham (2021).