CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Modularity theorem

theorem in mathematics

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 10, 2026
Entity authorityQ649469
Source-derived summary

In number theory, the modularity theorem states that elliptic curves over the field of rational numbers are related to modular forms in a particular way. Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor proved the modularity theorem for semistable elliptic curves, which was enough to imply Fermat's Last Theorem (FLT). Later, a series of papers by Wiles's former students Brian Conrad, Fred Diamond and Richard Taylor, culminating in a joint paper with Christophe Breuil, extended Wiles's techniques to prove the full modularity theorem in 2001. Before that, the statement was known as the Taniyama–Shimura conjecture, Taniyama–Shimura–Weil conjecture, or the modularity conjecture for elliptic curves.

Statement

The theorem states that any elliptic curve over

Q

{\displaystyle \mathbb {Q} }

can be obtained via a rational map with integer coefficients from the classical modular curve X0(N) for some integer N; this is a curve with integer coefficients with an explicit definition. This mapping is called a modular parametrization of level N. If N is the smallest integer for which such a parametrization can be found (which by the modularity theorem itself is now known to be a number called the conductor), then the parametrization may be defined in terms of a mapping generated by a particular kind of modular form of weight two and level N, a normalized newform with integer q-expansion, followed if need be by an isogeny.

Related statements

The modularity theorem implies a closely related analytic statement:

To each elliptic curve E over

Q

{\displaystyle \mathbb {Q} }

we may attach a corresponding L-series. The L-series is a Dirichlet series, commonly written

L

(

E

,

s

)

=

n

=

1

a

n

n

s

.

{\displaystyle L(E,s)=\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }{\frac {a_{n}}{n^{s}}}.}

The generating function of the coefficients an is then

f

(

E

,

q

)

=

n

=

1

a

n

q

n

.

{\displaystyle f(E,q)=\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }a_{n}q^{n}.}

If we make the substitution

q

=

e

2

π

i

τ

{\displaystyle q=e^{2\pi i\tau }}

we see that we have written the Fourier expansion of a function f(E,τ) of the complex variable τ, so the coefficients of the q-series are also thought of as the Fourier coefficients of f.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Modularity theorem” as theorem in mathematics. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2001—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Modularity, theorem and mathematics can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as theorem in mathematics. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q649469. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2001.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Modularity theorem”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Modularity theorem primary sources, Modularity theorem archive and Modularity research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Modularity theorem”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Modularity theorem” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.