Paper XII: Patching Support, Hecke Packets, and Conditional Automorphic Completion · Guided reading
Start here
How does deformation support lead to Hecke occupancy, and which inputs make arithmetic completion possible?
The paper develops algebraic support descent, finite Hecke packet decompositions, and conditional completion criteria. It distinguishes a point being supported from the additional arithmetic data needed for automorphy.
These suggested paths use this edition’s available material. Support results retain their finiteness and Noetherian assumptions where stated. Arithmetic completion requires explicit occupancy, comparison, and classicality inputs; universal companion existence is not proved.
Visual introduction
Vectors, matrices, linear maps, kernels and images, and reading a statement with hypotheses. Consult the selected paper for any additional algebra or analysis it uses.
- Separate support from multiplicity
Paper XII distinguishes module support from packet and arithmetic constructions. This example compares two explicitly supplied modules. Patching, classicality and the other arithmetic inputs remain separate.
- Visual guide in HTML
Explore the drawings and their accompanying explanations.
- Question, background, and scope
Use the work overview to identify the problem and required background.
Checkpoint: Explain the question and the model in your own words before continuing.
Full study
Keep the work’s definitions and hypotheses with each result.
- Begin the HTML reading edition
Start at the opening section, then use previous and next to continue in order.
- Abstract and publication scope
Continue through the opening chapters in the edition’s order.
- Introduction
Continue through the opening chapters in the edition’s order.
- Global deformation data and exact boundaries
Continue through the opening chapters in the edition’s order.
- Full contents
Choose any chapter or companion section from the complete contents.
- All reading files
Return to the edition’s full reading-file list.
Checkpoint: Choose a result or example and record its assumptions, conclusion, and source location.
Proof and evidence
Read the corresponding statement and its assumptions before inspecting an evidence record.
Recorded coverage. 49 revised claims map to 291 production targets in historical evidence. Original wording remains 41 complete, seven partial, one unchecked. Arithmetic and automorphic inputs remain explicit.
Lean: Inherited / related evidence · Evidence basis: Historical formal evidence
Remaining work. Replay the pinned amended contract and preserve the original-versus-amended concordance. Do not promote missing arithmetic premises.
- Support and near faithfulness
Read the selected setup or definition before using the result.
- Near faithfulness is full support
Read the precise statement and its hypotheses.
- Read its written proof
Follow the recorded written argument for this statement.
- Lean guide (PDF)
Read the correspondence map or formal guide before interpreting formal coverage.
- Historical formal replay instructions (September 2026)
Read the correspondence map or formal guide before interpreting formal coverage.
- Inspect retained Lean sources
Compare the full types with the written statements and recorded coverage.
- Code and reproduction files
Read the input limits, expected results, and reproduction instructions.
- Evidence and recorded limits
Check the edition and evidence behind the work’s status.
Checkpoint: Distinguish the written claim, what was checked, and what remains open.