Paper detail

Omega results for cubic field counts via lower-order terms in the one-level density

In this paper we obtain a precise formula for the $1$-level density of $L$-functions attached to non-Galois cubic Dedekind zeta functions. We find a secondary term which is unique to this context, in the sense that no lower-order term of this shape has appeared in previously studied families. The presence of this new term allows us to deduce an omega result for cubic field counting functions, under the assumption of the Generalized Riemann Hypothesis. We also investigate the associated $L$-functions Ratios Conjecture, and find that it does not predict this new lower-order term. Taking into account the secondary term in Roberts' Conjecture, we refine the Ratios Conjecture to one which captures this new term. Finally, we show that any improvement in the exponent of the error term of the recent Bhargava--Taniguchi--Thorne cubic field counting estimate would imply that the best possible error term in the refined Ratios Conjecture is $O_\varepsilon(X^{-\frac 13+\varepsilon})$. This is in opposition with all previously studied families, in which the expected error in the Ratios Conjecture prediction for the $1$-level density is $O_\varepsilon(X^{-\frac 12+\varepsilon})$.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.