ScalingStacks

Remark 1.2 . [009C]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

Remark 1.2.

Notice we have intentionally avoided completing the family at 0∈S0\in S. That would involve the choice of a model of π:X→S\pi:X\to S, namely a normal flat projective SS-scheme 𝒳\mathcal{X} together with an isomorphism with XX over the punctured curve S∖{0}S\setminus\{0\}. It is called an snc model if 𝒳\mathcal{X} is smooth, and the central fibre over 0∈S0\in S is a simple normal crossing divisor in 𝒳\mathcal{X}. If furthermore the central fibre is reduced, it is called a semistable snc model. Models can be analogously defined over the formal disc. The existence of snc models is a consequence of Hironaka’s resolution theorem. They are highly nonunique. By the semistable reduction theorem [27, chapter 2], after finite base change to another smooth algebraic curve S′S^{\prime}, we can always find some semistable snc model for the degeneration family X×S(S′∖{0})X\times_{S}(S^{\prime}\setminus\{0\}), so the existence of a semistable snc model is not a substantial assumption. Everything here is quasi-projective. The choice of a model is very useful, but not intrinsic to the degenerating CY metrics.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.