ScalingStacks

3. Normed section algebra [00N2]

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

3. Normed section algebra

In this section, one studies norms on graded linear series of a line bundle on a projective variety.

3.1. Basic setting

Let kk be a field equipped with a complete non-Archimedean absolute value |⋅|\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert, which is not trivial. Let XX be an irreducible scheme of finite type over Spec⁡k\spec k. One denotes by XanX^{\mathrm{an}} the Berkovich analytic space associated with XX and by jX:Xan→Xj_{X}:X^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow X the map sending any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} to its associated scheme point.

  1. 1.

    Let V=⨁n∈ℕVnV=\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{n} be a graded kk-algebra. Let ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert be an algebra seminorm on VV. For every n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}, this algebra seminorm induces by restriction a seminorm on the kk-vector space VnV_{n}, denoted by ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}. As ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert is sub-multiplicative, these seminorms satisfy the property

    ∀(m,n)∈ℕ2,sm∈Vm,sn∈Vn,∥sm⋅sn∥m+n⩽∥sm∥m⋅∥sn∥n;∥1∥0=1\forall(m,n)\in\mathbb{N}^{2},s_{m}\in V_{m},s_{n}\in V_{n},\quad\lVert s_{m}\cdot s_{n}\rVert_{m+n}\leqslant\lVert s_{m}\rVert_{m}\cdot\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n};\quad\lVert 1\rVert_{0}=1

    Conversly, given a familly of ultrametric seminorms {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} on kk-vector spaces VnV_{n} of VV satisfying these properties, the seminorm on the graded kk-algebra ⨁n∈ℕVn\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{n} defined by

    ∀s¯=(sn)n∈ℕ,⦀s¯⦀:=supn∈ℕ∥sn∥n\forall\underline{s}=(s_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}},\quad\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert:=\sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n}

    is submultiplicative, hence is an algebra seminorm on VV. In fact, let s¯=(sn)n∈ℕ\underline{s}=(s_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} and t¯=(tn)n∈ℕ\underline{t}=(t_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} be two elements of ⨁n∈ℕVn\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{n} and u¯=(un)n∈ℕ=s¯⋅t¯\underline{u}=(u_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}}=\underline{s}\cdot\underline{t}, then one has

    un=∑(p,q)∈ℕ2p+q=nsp⋅tq.u_{n}=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(p,q)\in\mathbb{N}^{2}\\ p+q=n\end{subarray}}s_{p}\cdot t_{q}.

    By using the fact that the seminorm ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} is ultrametric, one obtains that

    ∥un∥n⩽max(p,q)∈ℕ2p+q=n⁡∥sp⋅tq∥n⩽max(p,q)∈ℕ2p+q=n⁡∥sp∥p⋅∥tq∥q,\lVert u_{n}\rVert_{n}\leqslant\max_{\begin{subarray}{c}(p,q)\in\mathbb{N}^{2}\\ p+q=n\end{subarray}}\lVert s_{p}\cdot t_{q}\rVert_{n}\leqslant\max_{\begin{subarray}{c}(p,q)\in\mathbb{N}^{2}\\ p+q=n\end{subarray}}\lVert s_{p}\rVert_{p}\cdot\lVert t_{q}\rVert_{q},

    so ⦀u¯⦀\vvvert\underline{u}\vvvert is bounded from above by ⦀s¯⦀⋅⦀t¯⦀\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert\cdot\vvvert\underline{t}\vvvert. Denote by V^(⦀⋅⦀)\widehat{V}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert) the separated completion of the seminormed algebra (⨁n∈ℕVn,⦀⋅⦀)(\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{n},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert).

    One denotes by Υ​(V∙​(L))\Upsilon(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)) the set of all power-multiplicative ultrametric algebra norms ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert which satisfies

    ∀(sn)∈V∙(L),⦀(sn)⦀=supn∈ℕ⦀sn⦀.\forall(s_{n})\in V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L),\ \vvvert(s_{n})\vvvert=\sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\vvvert s_{n}\vvvert.

    This last condition is equivalent to the orthogonality of {Vn}n∈ℕ\{V_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} as kk-linear subspaces.

  2. 2.

    For any invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module LL, one denotes by V∙​(L)V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L) the graded kk-algebra ⨁n∈ℕVn​(L)\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{n}(L) where Vn​(L):=H0​(X,L⊗n)V_{n}(L):=H^{0}(X,L^{\otimes n}). As XX is irreducible, V0​(L)=kV_{0}(L)=k.

    Let f:Y→Xf:Y\rightarrow X be a morphism of kk-schemes. The morphism of 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-modules L⊗n→f∗​f∗​(L⊗n)L^{\otimes n}\to f_{*}f^{*}(L^{\otimes n}) induces linear maps of kk-vector spaces Vn​(L)→Vn​(f∗​L)V_{n}(L)\rightarrow V_{n}(f^{*}L) and graded homomorphism of degree 00 of graded-kk-algebras V∙​(L)→V∙​(f∗​L)V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L)\rightarrow V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(f^{*}L). Denote by Vn​(LX|Y)V_{n}(L_{X|Y}) and V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}) the image vector space and image graded algebra.

    One denotes by T​o​t​(L∨)Tot(L^{\vee}) the scheme Spec⁡(Sym𝒪X⁡L)\spec(\sym_{\mathscr{O}_{X}}L) over Spec⁡k\spec k, by πX\pi_{X} the canonical morphism of schemes T​o​t​(L∨)→XTot(L^{\vee})\rightarrow X, and by 𝕆\mathbb{O} the reduced closed subscheme of zero section. If the graded kk-algebra V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) is of finite type, then one denotes by 𝟎\boldsymbol{0} the closed point of Spec⁡V∙​(L)\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) given by the maximal ideal V≥1​(L)V_{\geq 1}(L), and by pX​(𝟎)p_{X}(\mathbf{0}) the canonical blow-up morphism T​o​t​(L∨)→Spec⁡V∙​(L)Tot(L^{\vee})\rightarrow\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) along the sub-scheme 𝟎\mathbf{0}.

    Denote the integer dimkVn​(L)−1\dim_{k}V_{n}(L)-1 by dnd_{n}. If L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated, there is a morphism induced by Vn​(L)V_{n}(L)

    ιn:X→ℙ⁡(Vn​(L))≃ℙdn.\iota_{n}:\ X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}(V_{n}(L))\simeq\mathbb{P}^{d_{n}}.
  3. 3.

    Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module. Let ℱX\mathcal{F}_{X} be the sheaf of real-valued functions on XanX^{\mathrm{an}}. By pseudometric on LL one refers to a morphism of sheaves of sets ϕ:L→jX,∗​(ℱX)\phi:L\rightarrow j_{X,*}(\mathcal{F}_{X}) such that, for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, the map |⋅|ϕ​(x):L⁡(x)→ℝ\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{\phi}(x):L(x)\rightarrow\mathbb{R} induced by ϕ\phi is a seminorm on the one-dimensional vector space L⁡(x)L(x) over κ^​(x)\widehat{\kappa}(x). If, for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, the map |⋅|ϕ​(x)\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{\phi}(x) is a norm, one says that ϕ\phi is a metric.

    We say that a pseudometric ϕ\phi is (upper semi-)continuous if, for any Zariski open subset UU of XX and any section s∈Γ⁡(X,L)s\in\Gamma(X,L), the function (x∈Uan)→|s|ϕ​(x)(x\in U^{\mathrm{an}})\rightarrow|s|_{\phi}(x) is (upper semi-)continuous.

  4. 4.

    The pair (L,ϕ)(L,\phi) is called a pseudometrized invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module. For any ϵ∈ℝ\epsilon\in\mathbb{R}, the following subset of T​o​t​(L∨)anTot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}, equipped with induced topology

    {(x,e∨(x))∈Tot(L∨)an:|e∨(s)|(x)≤|s|ϕ(x)⋅eϵ(resp.<eϵ)}\{(x,e^{\vee}(x))\in Tot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}:\lvert e^{\vee}(s)\rvert(x)\leq\lvert s\rvert_{\phi}(x)\cdot\mathrm{e}^{\epsilon}\ (resp.<\mathrm{e}^{\epsilon})\}

    is called the dual closed (resp. open) disc bundle of radius eϵ\mathrm{e}^{\epsilon} of the pseudometrized pair (L,ϕ)(L,\phi), where ss is a local section of LL. We denote it by 𝔻¯∨​(L,ϕ,ϵ)\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\phi,\epsilon) (resp. OPEN𝔻∨​(L,ϕ,ϵ))\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi,\epsilon)).

  5. 5.

    Let f:Y→Xf:Y\rightarrow X be a morphism of separated kk-schemes of finite type. Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module, equipped with a pseudometric ϕ\phi. We define a pseudometric f∗​ϕf^{*}\phi on f∗​(L)f^{*}(L) such that, for any section ss of LL on a Zariski open subset UU of XX, one has

    ∀y∈f−1​(U)an,|f∗​(s)|f∗​ϕ​(y)=|s|ϕ​(fan​(y)).\forall\,y\in f^{-1}(U)^{\mathrm{an}},\quad|f^{*}(s)|_{f^{*}\phi}(y)=|s|_{\phi}(f^{\mathrm{an}}(y)).

    Since fan:Yan→Xanf^{\mathrm{an}}:Y^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow X^{\mathrm{an}} is continuous (Proposition 2.94), if the metric ϕ\phi is continuous, so is f∗​ϕf^{*}\phi. If YY is a subscheme of XX and if f:Y→Xf:Y\rightarrow X is the canonical immersion, the restricted metric f∗​ϕf^{*}\phi is also denoted by ϕ|Y\phi|_{Y}.

  6. 6.

    Any map f:Xan→ℝ∪{+∞}f:X^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\cup\{+\infty\} determines a pseudometric τf\tau_{f} on 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X} such that, for any regular function aa of XX on a Zariski open subset UU, one has (with the convention e−∞=0\mathrm{e}^{-\infty}=0)

    ∀x∈Uan,|a|ϕf​(x)=|a|​(x)⋅e−f⁡(x).\forall\,x\in U^{\mathrm{an}},\quad\lvert a\rvert_{\phi_{f}}(x)=|a|(x)\cdot\mathrm{e}^{-f(x)}.

    Note that f↦τff\mapsto\tau_{f} defines a bijection between the set of maps Xan→ℝ∪{+∞}X^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}\cup\{+\infty\} and that of pseudometrics on 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}, which maps the set of real-valued functions bijectively to that of pseudometrics on 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}. Moreover, a pseudometric ϕf\phi_{f} is continuous if and only if ff is continuous on XanX^{\mathrm{an}}. The trivial invertible sheaf 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X} equipped with the pseudometric τf\tau_{f} is denoted by 𝒪X​(f)\mathscr{O}_{X}(f). The metric corresponding to the identically vanishing function is called the trivial metric on 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}.

  7. 7.

    Let ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} be two metrics on LL. The distance of these two pseudometrics is a generalized positive real number (in ℝ+∪{+∞}\mathbb{R}_{+}\cup\{+\infty\}) defined by

    dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2)=supx∈Xan|log⁡|ϕ1​(x)ϕ2​(x)|κ^​(x)|.\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2})=\sup_{x\in X^{\mathrm{an}}}\Big|\log\Big|\frac{\phi_{1}(x)}{\phi_{2}(x)}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\Big|.

    If XX is proper and ϕ1\phi_{1}, ϕ2\phi_{2} are continuous metrics, then dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2)∈ℝ+\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}.

  8. 8.

    Let L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} be invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-modules, and ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} be pseudometrics on L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} respectively. The pseudometric ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} induce by passing to tensor product a metric on L1⊗L2L_{1}\otimes L_{2}, denoted by ϕ1+ϕ2\phi_{1}+\phi_{2}. For any Zariski open subset UU of XX and any (s1,s2)∈Γ⁡(U,L1)×Γ⁡(U,L2)(s_{1},s_{2})\in\Gamma(U,L_{1})\times\Gamma(U,L_{2}), one has

    ∀x∈Uan,|s1⋅s2|ϕ1+ϕ2​(x)=|s1|ϕ1​(x)⋅|s2|ϕ2​(x).\forall\,x\in U^{\mathrm{an}},\quad\lvert s_{1}\cdot s_{2}\rvert_{\phi_{1}+\phi_{2}}(x)=\lvert s_{1}\rvert_{\phi_{1}}(x)\cdot\lvert s_{2}\rvert_{\phi_{2}}(x).

    If ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} are continuous, then ϕ1+ϕ2\phi_{1}+\phi_{2} is also continuous.

    In particular, for any ϵ∈ℝ\epsilon\in\mathbb{R}, we denote by ϕ⁡(ϵ)\phi(\epsilon) the pseudometric ϕ+τeϵ\phi+\tau_{\mathrm{e}^{\epsilon}} on L⊗𝒪X=LL\otimes\mathscr{O}_{X}=L.

    Moreover, any metric ϕ\phi on LL determines by passing to its dual a metric −ϕ-\phi on L∨L^{\vee} such that, for any Zariski open subset UU of XX and any (s,α)∈Γ⁡(U,L)×Γ⁡(U,L∨)(s,\alpha)\in\Gamma(U,L)\times\Gamma(U,L^{\vee}), one has

    ∀x∈Uan,|α⁡(s)|​(x)=|α|−ϕ​(x)⋅|s|ϕ​(x).\forall\,x\in U^{\mathrm{an}},\quad\lvert\alpha(s)\rvert(x)=\lvert\alpha\rvert_{-\phi}(x)\cdot\lvert s\rvert_{\phi}(x).

    If the metric ϕ\phi is continuous, so is −ϕ-\phi.

  9. 9.

    Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module, and n∈ℕ∖{0}n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{0\}. A pseudometric ϕ\phi on LL determines by tensor power a pseudometric on L⊗nL^{\otimes n} for any n∈ℕ∖{0}n\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{0\}, denoted by n​ϕn\phi. By convention, 0​ϕ0\phi denotes the trivial metric on L⊗0≅𝒪XL^{\otimes 0}\cong\mathscr{O}_{X} (see 6. above).

    Similarly, assume given a pseudometric ϕ\phi on L⊗nL^{\otimes n}. We denote by 1n​ϕ\frac{1}{n}\phi the pseudometric on LL such that, for any Zariski open subset UU of XX and any section s∈Γ⁡(U,L)s\in\Gamma(U,L), one has

    ∥s∥1n​ϕ=∥sn∥ϕ1/n.\lVert s\rVert_{\frac{1}{n}\phi}=\lVert s^{n}\rVert_{\phi}^{1/n}.

    If the pseudometric ϕ\phi is continuous, then also is 1n​ϕ\frac{1}{n}\phi.

  10. 10.

    Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module. For any nn such that L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated, let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L). For any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, the evaluation map

    Vn​(L)⊗kκ^​(x)⟶L⊗n​(x)V_{n}(L)\otimes_{k}\widehat{\kappa}(x)\longrightarrow L^{\otimes n}(x)

    induces a quotient norm of ∥⋅∥n,κ^​(x)\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n,\widehat{\kappa}(x)} on the κ^​(x)\widehat{\kappa}(x)-vector space L⊗n​(x)L^{\otimes n}(x), denoted by ∥⋅∥n,X|x\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n,X|x}. This gives rise to a metric on L⊗nL^{\otimes n}, which we call the Fubini-Study metric associated with ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} on L⊗nL^{\otimes n}, denoted by FS​(∥⋅∥n)​(x)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})(x). The metric 1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}) on LL is called the nn-th Fubini-Study metric associated with ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} on LL.

    In particular, let {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} be a basis of Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) and let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a ultrametric norm on V1​(L)V_{1}(L) with respect to which {s1,j}j∈{0,…,d1}\{s_{1,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{1}\}} is an orthogonal basis. Such a metric FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}) is studied and heavily used in [CMor18], and is said to be diagonalizable in [BE18].

  11. 11.

    Similarly, let ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert be an algebra norm on V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L). For any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, the evaluation map induces a κ^​(x)\widehat{\kappa}(x)-algebra homomorphism

    V∙​(L)⊗κ^​(x)→⨁n∈ℕL⊗n​(x)=:V∙​(L)​(x)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)\otimes\widehat{\kappa}(x)\rightarrow\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}L^{\otimes n}(x)=:V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)(x)

    This algebra homomorphism induces a quotient algebra norm of the scalar extension ⦀⋅⦀κ^​(x)\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)} on V∙​(L)​(x)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)(x), denoted by ⦀⋅⦀X|x\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{X|x}. Let V^(L,⦀⋅⦀)(x)\widehat{V}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)(x) denote the separated completion of (V∙(L)(x),⦀⋅⦀X|x)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)(x),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{X|x}). Once a non-zero element e1​(x)∈L​(x)e_{1}(x)\in L(x) is chosen, the second algebra can be identified with κ^​(x)​[T]\widehat{\kappa}(x)[T] by sending e1​(x)e_{1}(x) to TT.

  12. 12.

    Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X} module. Let {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} be a familly of norms on {Vn​(L)}n∈ℕ\{V_{n}(L)\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}. If the sequence of metrics {1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)}n∈ℕ\{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges pointwisely to a limit metric, we denote it by 𝒫⁡({∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ)\mathcal{P}(\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}) and call it the Fubini-Study envelop metric associated with {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}.

    Note that if the convergence is uniform for x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, since Fubini-Study metrics {1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)}n∈ℕ\{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} are continuous, the envelop metric will also be continuous. Conversely, if XX is proper over Spec⁡k\spec k and the envelop metric is continuous, then the convergence is uniform in x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} as XanX^{\mathrm{an}} is Hausdorff and compact by Theorem 2.95. A metric ϕ\phi on LL is asymptotic Fubini-Study if it is a Fubini-Study envelop metric and the convergence is uniform for x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} (see [BE18, Definition 6.1]). Asymptotic Fubini-Study metrics are thus continuous. Note that asymptotic Fubini-Study property in this sense is equivalent to the notion of semipositive metric by the terminology of [CMor18]. We refer to [BFJ16, §5.4] and [BE18, §6.1] for a clear discussion of other various notions of semipositivity that have been proposed and studied in [Zha95], [Gu98], [Mor11], [BFJ16], [CLD12], [BMPS], [CMor18], [GM16] and literature therein.

    In particular, let ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert be an algebra seminorm on V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L), and let {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} be the associated familly of seminorms on {Vn​(L)}n∈ℕ\{V_{n}(L)\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}. The seminorms {1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)​(x)}n∈ℕ\{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})(x)\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} on L⁡(x)L(x) satisfy sub-multiplicative property, so they converges to a limit seminorm on L⁡(x)L(x). This gives rise to a pseuodometric on LL, called the Fubini-Study envelop pseudometric associated with ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert. We denote it by 𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert). It is not necessarily continuous.

  13. 13.

    Assume that XX is proper over Spec⁡k\spec k. Note that XanX^{\mathrm{an}} is then a compact Hausdorff space (see [Ber, Theorem 3.4.8]). Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module and ϕ\phi be an upper semicontinuous metric on LL (see 3. above). As XanX^{\mathrm{an}} is compact, any upper semicontinuous function on XanX^{\mathrm{an}} is bounded from above and attains its maximal value. In particular, for any s∈V1​(L)s\in V_{1}(L), one has

    ∥s∥ϕ:=supx∈Xan|s|ϕ​(x)<+∞.\lVert s\rVert_{\phi}:=\sup_{x\in X^{\mathrm{an}}}\lvert s\rvert_{\phi}(x)<+\infty.

    Moreover, ∥⋅∥ϕ:V1​(L)→ℝ≥0\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\phi}:V_{1}(L)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} is a norm on V1​(L)V_{1}(L). This norm is ultrametric since the absolute value |⋅|\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert on kk is non-Archimedean and LL is of rank 11. We denote by ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} the norm on the kk-vector space V∙​(L)V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L) defined as

    ∀s¯=(sn)n∈ℕ∈V∙(L),⦀s¯⦀ϕ:=supn∈ℕ∥sn∥n​ϕ.\forall\,\underline{s}=(s_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\in V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L),\quad\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert_{\phi}:=\sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}.

    Note that the kk-algebra V∙​(L)V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L) equipped with this norm forms a normed kk-algebra. In fact, since 0​ϕ0\phi is the trivial metric on 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}, one has ⦀𝟏⦀0​ϕ=1\vvvert\mathbf{1}\vvvert_{0\phi}=1, where 𝟏\mathbf{1} denotes the unit section of 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}. Moreover, for sn∈Vn​(L)s_{n}\in V_{n}(L) and sm∈Vm​(L)s_{m}\in V_{m}(L), we have

    ∥sm⋅sn∥n​ϕ=supx∈Xan|sm|m​ϕ​(x)⋅|sm|m​ϕ​(x)⩽supx∈Xan|sm|m​ϕ​(x)⋅supx∈Xan|sn|n​ϕ​(x)=∥sm∥m​ϕ⋅∥sn∥n​ϕ\begin{split}\lVert s_{m}\cdot s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}=&\sup_{x\in X^{\mathrm{an}}}\lvert s_{m}\rvert_{m\phi}(x)\cdot\lvert s_{m}\rvert_{m\phi}(x)\\ \leqslant&\sup_{x\in X^{\mathrm{an}}}\lvert s_{m}\rvert_{m\phi}(x)\cdot\sup_{x\in X^{\mathrm{an}}}\lvert s_{n}\rvert_{n\phi}(x)=\lVert s_{m}\rVert_{m\phi}\cdot\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}\end{split}

    Then ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} is an algebra norm by 1.

    In addition, the familly of norms {∥⋅∥n​ϕ}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} satisfies the power-multiplicative property for homogeneous elements:

    ∀sn∈Vn​(L),∀m∈ℕ,∥(sn)m∥n​m​ϕ=(∥sn∥n​ϕ)m.\forall s_{n}\in V_{n}(L),\forall m\in\mathbb{N},\quad\lVert(s_{n})^{m}\rVert_{nm\phi}=(\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi})^{m}.

    In fact, the algebra norm ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} is power-multiplicative also for non-homogeneous elements (see Proposition 3.1).

    Moreover, for every n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}, there is a metric 1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n​ϕ)\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}) on LL, namely the nn-th Fubini-Study metrics on LL associated with ∥⋅∥n​ϕ\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}.

    One denotes by V^∙​(L,ϕ)\widehat{V}_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L,\phi) the separated completion of the normed kk-algebra (V∙(L),⦀⋅⦀ϕ)(V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}). More generally, if V∙V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet} is a graded sub-kk-algebra of V∙​(L)V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}(L), by abuse of notation we still denote by ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} the restriction of the norm ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} on V∙V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet} and denote by V^∙​(ϕ)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(\phi) the separated completion of the normed algebra (V∙,⦀⋅⦀ϕ)(V_{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}). The restricted norm is also power-multiplicative.

    In particular, for any N∈ℕ∖{0}N\in\mathbb{N}\setminus\{0\}, if one takes V∙V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}} to be ⨁n∈ℕVn​N​(L)\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{nN}(L), denoted by V∙(N)​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L), we denote by V^∙(N)​(L,ϕ)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L,\phi) the separated completion of (V∙(N)(L),⦀⋅⦀ϕ)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}).

  14. 14.

    Assume that XX is proper over Spec⁡k\spec k. Let LL be an invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module and ϕ\phi be an upper semicontinuous metric on LL. Let f:Y→Xf:Y\rightarrow X be a morphism of kk-schemes of finite type. Let ∥⋅∥n​ϕ,X|Y\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi,X|Y} be the quotient norm of ∥⋅∥n​ϕ\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi} on Vn​(LX|Y)V_{n}(L_{X|Y}). It is ultrametric. Let ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y} be the quotient algebra norm of ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}). In fact,

    ∀t¯=(tn)n∈ℕ∈V∙(LX|Y),⦀t¯⦀ϕ,X|Y=supn∈ℕ∥tn∥n​ϕ,X|Y.\forall\underline{t}=(t_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\in V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}),\quad\vvvert\underline{t}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}=\sup_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\in\mathbb{N}\end{subarray}}\lVert t_{n}\rVert_{n\phi,X|Y}.

    One denotes by V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}) the separated completion of the normed kk-algebra (V∙(LX|Y),⦀⋅⦀ϕX|Y)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi_{X|Y}}). In particular, for any N∈ℕN\in\mathbb{N}, we denote by V∙(N)​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L_{X|Y}) the graded kk-algebra ⨁n∈ℕVn​N​(LX|Y)\bigoplus_{n\in\mathbb{N}}V_{nN}(L_{X|Y}). This is a sub-algebra of V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}). The restriction of ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y} on this sub-algebra is still denoted by ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}. One denotes by V^∙(N)​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}) the separated completion of (V∙(N)(LX|Y),⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L_{X|Y}),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}). In particular, if ff is the canonical immersion associated with a sub-scheme, we get a Banach kk-algebra V^∙(N)​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}^{(N)}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}).

In the rest of the article, we make the following assumptions. For algebro-geometric data: let XX be an integral projective scheme over Spec⁡k\spec k of pure dimension dd, YY be a reduced closed sub-scheme of XX with its canonical closed immersion iY:Y→Xi_{Y}:Y\rightarrow X, and LL be an ample invertible 𝒪X\mathscr{O}_{X}-module. One can find M∈ℕM\in\mathbb{N} such that L⊗ML^{\otimes M} is very ample and for any n≥Mn\geq M, the restriction map from Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) to Vn​(L|Y)V_{n}(L|_{Y}) is surjective, so Vn​(L|Y)=Vn​(LX|Y)V_{n}(L|_{Y})=V_{n}(L_{X|Y}). For the metric data, let ϕ\phi be an upper-semicontinuous metric on LL.

3.2. Algebraic properties of normed section algebra

We show the power-multiplicativity of the supremum algebra norm ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}, and that the normed section algebras are reduced Banach algebras.

Proposition 3.1.

The algebra norm ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} is power-multiplicative. Hence its spectral algebra seminorm is equal to itself, and it is an algbra norm.

Proof.

In fact, let s¯=(sn)n∈ℕ\underline{s}=(s_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} be an element of V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) and m∈ℕm\in\mathbb{N}, let n0∈ℕn_{0}\in\mathbb{N} be the smallest integer for which ⦀s¯⦀ϕ=∥sn0∥n0​ϕ\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert_{\phi}=\lVert s_{n_{0}}\rVert_{n_{0}\phi}. By the ultrametricity of ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} and the power-multiplicativity of {∥⋅∥n​ϕ}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}, one has

⦀s¯m⦀ϕ⩽∥(sn0)m∥m​n0​ϕ=(∥sn0∥n0​ϕ)m=⦀s¯⦀ϕm.\vvvert\underline{s}^{m}\vvvert_{\phi}\leqslant\lVert(s_{n_{0}})^{m}\rVert_{mn_{0}\phi}=(\lVert s_{n_{0}}\rVert_{n_{0}\phi})^{m}=\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert_{\phi}^{m}.

By the choice of n0n_{0}, one has

∀(j0,…,jl)∈ℕl+1,∑i∈{0,…,l}i⋅ji=m​n0,∥∏i∈{0,…,l}(si)ji∥m​n0​ϕ≤∥(sn​0)m∥m​n0​ϕ\forall(j_{0},\dots,j_{l})\in\mathbb{N}^{l+1},\sum_{i\in\{0,\dots,l\}}i\cdot j_{i}=mn_{0},\quad\Big\lVert\prod_{i\in\{0,\dots,l\}}(s_{i})^{j_{i}}\Big\rVert_{mn_{0}\phi}\leq\lVert(s_{n0})^{m}\rVert_{mn_{0}\phi}

and the equality holds if and only if (j0,…,jl)=(0,…,0,n0,0,…,0)(j_{0},\dots,j_{l})=(0,\dots,0,n_{0},0,\dots,0) where n0n_{0} is on the mm-th place, so by the definition of ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert and its ultra-metricity, one get

⦀s¯m⦀ϕ⩾∥(s¯m)m​n0∥m​n0​ϕ≥∥(sn​0)m∥m​n0​ϕ=⦀s¯⦀ϕm,\vvvert\underline{s}^{m}\vvvert_{\phi}\geqslant\lVert(\underline{s}^{m})_{mn_{0}}\rVert_{mn_{0}\phi}\geq\lVert(s_{n0})^{m}\rVert_{mn_{0}\phi}=\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert_{\phi}^{m},

hence there is an equality. ∎

Corollary 3.2.

Then the Banach kk-algebras V^∙​(L,ϕ)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi), V^∙​(L|Y,ϕ|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L|_{Y},\phi|_{Y}) and V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}) are semi-simple. In particular, they are reduced.

Proof.

Let s¯∈V^∙​(L,ϕ)\underline{s}\in\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi) be an element in rad​(V^∙​(L,ϕ))\text{rad}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi)), then by Proposition 3.1, one has

0=⦀s¯⦀ϕ;sp=⦀s⦀ϕ,0=\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert_{\phi;\mathrm{sp}}=\vvvert s\vvvert_{\phi},

so

∀n∈ℕ,∥sn∥n​ϕ=0.\forall n\in\mathbb{N},\quad\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}=0.

By the assumption, all componets sns_{n} are zero sections. So s¯=0¯\underline{s}=\underline{0}, hence V^∙​(L,ϕ)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi) is semi-simple. Same arguments works for V^∙​(L|Y,ϕ|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L|_{Y},\phi|_{Y}).

Let t¯∈rad​(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y))\underline{t}\in\text{rad}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y})). Then tn∈rad​(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y))t_{n}\in\text{rad}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y})) for every n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}. For any m∈ℕm\in\mathbb{N}, there exists sn​m∈Vn​m​(L)s_{nm}\in V_{nm}(L) such that sn​m|Y=tnms_{nm}|_{Y}=t_{n}^{m} and

limm→∞∥sn​m∥n​m​ϕ1m=0.\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}m\to\infty\end{subarray}}\lVert s_{nm}\rVert_{nm\phi}^{\frac{1}{m}}=0.

As ∥tnm∥n​m​ϕ|Y≤∥sn​m∥n​m​ϕ\lVert t_{n}^{m}\rVert_{nm\phi|_{Y}}\leq\lVert s_{nm}\rVert_{nm\phi}, one has that

∀n∈ℕ,∥tn∥n​ϕ|Y=0\forall n\in\mathbb{N},\quad\lVert t_{n}\rVert_{n\phi|_{Y}}=0

so t¯=0¯\underline{t}=\underline{0}. Hence V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}) is semi-simple. ∎

Remark 3.3.

The reducity of closed sub-scheme YY is necessary for the semi-simplicity of the Banach kk-algebra V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}).

3.3. Spectrum of normed section algebra

We embed the Berkovich spectrum of normed section algebra into the analytification of the spectrum of the section algebra.

Lemma 3.4.

The homomorphism of inclusion of kk-algebras V⁡(L)→V^∙​(L,ϕ)V(L)\rightarrow\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi) induces a continuous map between topological spaces 𝔐⁡(V^∙​(L,ϕ))→(Spec⁡V⁡(L))an\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi))\rightarrow(\spec V(L))^{\mathrm{an}} which is closed. Moreover, the map is injective.

Proof.

This is clear by Proposition 2.88. ∎

Proposition 3.5.

There exist algebra norms ⦀⋅⦀ϕaff\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}^{\mathrm{aff}} on V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) and ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Yaff\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}} on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}) such that the separated completions of (V∙(L),⦀⋅⦀ϕaff)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}^{\mathrm{aff}}) and (V∙(LX|Y),⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Yaff)(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}),\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}}) are affinoid algebras. Denote them by V^∙​(L,ϕaff)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi^{\mathrm{aff}}) and V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Yaff)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}}). Moreover, there exists a commutative diagram of homomorphisms of kk-algebras with σ\sigma and σY\sigma_{Y} being homomorphisms of Banach kk-algebras

V∙​(L)\textstyle{V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}iY\scriptstyle{i_{Y}}V^∙​(L,ϕaff)\textstyle{\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi^{\mathrm{aff}})\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}σ\scriptstyle{\sigma}iY​(ϕaff)\scriptstyle{i_{Y}(\phi^{\mathrm{aff}})}V^∙​(L,ϕ)\textstyle{\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi)\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}iY​(ϕ)\scriptstyle{i_{Y}(\phi)}V∙​(LX|Y)\textstyle{V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y})\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Yaff)\textstyle{\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}})\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}σ|Y\scriptstyle{\sigma|_{Y}}V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\textstyle{\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y})}

All homomorphisms (except iYi_{Y}) have dense images, and iYi_{Y} is surjective.

Proof.

As V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) is a finitely generated sub-kk-algebra of V^∙​(L,ϕ)\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi) which is dense for the topology induced by Banach algebra norm, by Proposition 2.44, there exists an affinoid algebra norm ⦀⋅⦀ϕaff\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}^{\mathrm{aff}} on V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L) and a homomorphism of Banach algebras

σ:V^∙​(L,ϕaff)→V^∙​(L,ϕ).\sigma:\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi^{\mathrm{aff}})\rightarrow\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi).

One then takes ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Yaff\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}} on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}) to be the quotient norm of ⦀⋅⦀ϕaff\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}^{\mathrm{aff}}. By Example 2.42, this quotient norm is also an affinoid algebra norm. By this quotient construction, there exists a homomorphism of Banach kk-algebras

σ|Y:V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Yaff)→V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)\sigma|_{Y}:\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}})\rightarrow\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y})

which fits into a commutative diagram with iY​(ϕ)i_{Y}(\phi) and iY​(ϕaff)i_{Y}(\phi^{\mathrm{aff}}). ∎

Corollary 3.6.

The commutative diagram of homomorphisms of kk-algebras induces a commutative diagram of continuous maps of topological spaces

(Spec⁡(V∙​(L)))an\textstyle{(\spec(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)))^{\mathrm{an}}}𝔐​(V^​(L,ϕaff))\textstyle{\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}(L,\phi^{\mathrm{aff}}))\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}𝔐​(V^∙​(L,ϕ))\textstyle{\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi))\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}σ∗\scriptstyle{\sigma^{*}}(Spec⁡(V∙​(LX|Y)))an\textstyle{(\spec(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y})))^{\mathrm{an}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}iY∗\scriptstyle{i_{Y}^{*}}𝔐⁡(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Yaff))\textstyle{\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}^{\mathrm{aff}}))\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}iY​(ϕaff)∗\scriptstyle{i_{Y}(\phi^{\mathrm{aff}})^{*}}𝔐⁡(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y))\textstyle{\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}))\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}σ|Y∗\scriptstyle{\sigma|_{Y}^{*}}iY​(ϕ)∗\scriptstyle{i_{Y}(\phi)^{*}}

All maps are closed. If the algebra seminorm ⦀⋅⦀ϕ\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi} is a norm, then all maps are injective.

Proof.

This follows from Proposition 2.26, Proposition 2.88 and Proposition 2.27. ∎

3.4. Fubini-Study metrics

We study distances between Fubini-Study metrics, and gives explicit expressions for Fubini-Study metrics admitting non-Archimedean orthogonal basis. Many of the results here are also obtained in [CMor18] or in [BE18, Section 6].

Lemma 3.7.

Assume that LL is globally generated. Let ∥⋅∥1\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1} be a norm on V1​(L)V_{1}(L) and let FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1}) be the associated Fubini-Study metric. Then for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and e⁡(x)∈L⁡(x)∖0e(x)\in L(x)\setminus 0,

|e⁡(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)=infλ∈κ^​(x),s1∈V1​(L)s1​(x)=λ⋅e⁡(x)|λ|−1⋅∥s1∥.\lvert e(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1})}=\inf_{\begin{subarray}{c}\lambda\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ s_{1}\in V_{1}(L)\\ s_{1}(x)=\lambda\cdot e(x)\end{subarray}}\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{1}\rVert.

(with the convention that 0−1=+∞0^{-1}=+\infty)

Proof.

This follows from Lemma 2.11. ∎

Lemma 3.8.

Let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L), then 1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}) is a continuous metric on LL. ([CMor18, Proposition 3.1])

Lemma 3.9.

Let ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} be two upper-semicontinuous metrics on LL, then

dist⁡(∥⋅∥ϕ1,∥⋅∥ϕ2)≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\phi_{1}},\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\phi_{2}})\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

(see also [BE18, Lemma 6.10])

Proof.

For any s∈V1​(L)s\in V_{1}(L), if ∥s∥ϕ1≥∥s∥ϕ2\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}\geq\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}, let x1∈Xanx_{1}\in X^{\mathrm{an}} be a point where ∥s∥ϕ1\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}} is attained. One has

|log⁡∥s∥ϕ1∥s∥ϕ2|≤|log|​s⁡(x1)s⁡(x1)|κ^​(x1)|≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\Big|\log\frac{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}}{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}}\Big|\leq\Big|\log\Big|\frac{s(x_{1})}{s(x_{1})}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x_{1})}\Big|\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

Otherwise, let x2∈Xanx_{2}\in X^{\mathrm{an}} be a point where ∥s∥ϕ2\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}} is attained. Then

|log⁡∥s∥ϕ2∥s∥ϕ1|≤|log|​s⁡(x2)s⁡(x2)|κ^​(x2)|≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\Big|\log\frac{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}}{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}}\Big|\leq\Big|\log\Big|\frac{s(x_{2})}{s(x_{2})}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x_{2})}\Big|\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

Hence the desired inequality holds. ∎

Lemma 3.10.

Let ∥⋅∥\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert and ∥⋅∥′\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime} be two norms on V1​(L)V_{1}(L), then

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥),FS⁡(∥⋅∥′))≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}))\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).

(see also [BE18, Equation (6.2)])

Proof.

For any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, let e⁡(x)∈Lan​(x)∖{0}e(x)\in L^{\mathrm{an}}(x)\setminus\{0\}. Let s,s′∈V1​(L)s,s^{\prime}\in V_{1}(L) and λ,λ′∈κ^​(x)\lambda,\lambda^{\prime}\in\hat{\kappa}(x) be elements such that

s⁡(x)=λ⋅e⁡(x),∥e⁡(x)∥X|x=|λ|−1​∥s∥,s(x)=\lambda\cdot e(x),\ \lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}=\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert,
s′​(x)=λ′⋅e⁡(x),∥e⁡(x)∥X|x=|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′.s^{\prime}(x)=\lambda^{\prime}\cdot e(x),\ \lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}=\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}.

If ∥e⁡(x)∥X|x>∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}>\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x}, one has

dist⁡(∥e⁡(x)∥X|x,∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′)=|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ|−1​∥s∥′|≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\begin{split}\dist(\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x},\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x})&=\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\\ &\leq\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).\end{split}

Otherwise, one has

dist⁡(∥e⁡(x)∥X|x,∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′)=|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤|log⁡|λ′|−1​∥s′∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\begin{split}\dist(\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x},\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x})&=\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\\ &\leq\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).\end{split}

Varying xx and taking the supremum, one gets the desired inequality. ∎

Proposition 3.11.

Assume that there exist a norm ∥⋅∥1\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1} on V1​(L)V_{1}(L) such that ϕ\phi is equal to FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1}). Then for any n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}, FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}) is equal to n​ϕn\phi. ([CMor18, Proposition 3.3])

Proposition 3.12.

Assume that ϕ\phi is an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL, then the envelop metric 𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ)\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}) is equal to ϕ\phi. (see also [BE18, Theorem 6.15 (iii)])

Proof.

By assumption, there exists a familly of norms {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} such that uniformly for x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}},

limn→∞1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)​(∗)​(x)=|∗|ϕ​(x),\quad\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})(\ast)(x)=\lvert\ast\rvert_{\phi}(x),

so for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, there exists N0∈ℕN_{0}\in\mathbb{N} such that for any n≥N0n\geq N_{0}

dist⁡(n​ϕ,FS⁡(∥⋅∥n))≤n​ϵ,\dist(n\phi,\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq n\epsilon,

hence by Lemma 3.9 and 3.10,

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),FS⁡(∥⋅∥FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)))≤n​ϵ.\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}))\leq n\epsilon.

By Proposition 3.11, one has OPENFS⁡(∥⋅∥FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)))=FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}))=\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}), so

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),FS⁡(∥⋅∥n))≤n​ϵ,\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq n\epsilon,

and

dist⁡(1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n))≤ϵ.\dist(\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq\epsilon.

Taking limit for n→∞n\to\infty and then for ϵ→0\epsilon\to 0, one has

dist(𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,ϕ)=0,\dist(\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi},\phi)=0,

so the two metrics are equal. ∎

If the ultrametric norm ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} admits an orthogonal basis, one can calculate explicitly the associated Fubini-Study metric FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}).

Lemma 3.13.

Let (K,|⋅|K)(K,\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{K}) be a complete ultrametric valued field extension of (k,|⋅|)(k,\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert). Then for any {rj}j∈{0,…,d}\{r_{j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}} elements in ℝ+\mathbb{R}_{+}, one has

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}=minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj},\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\},

where {κj}j∈{0,…,d}\{\kappa_{j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}} are elements in KK.

Proof.

On the one hand, let j0∈{0,…,d}j_{0}\in\{0,\dots,d\} be an index such that rj0r_{j_{0}} is minimal. By taking κj=0\kappa_{j}=0 for j≠j0j\neq j_{0} and κj0=1\kappa_{j_{0}}=1, one sees that

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}≤rj0=minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj}.\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}\leq r_{j_{0}}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\}.

On the other hand, by the ultrametricity of |⋅|K\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{K}, if ∑jκj=1\sum_{j}\kappa_{j}=1, then there exist at least one j1∈{0,…,d}j_{1}\in\{0,\dots,d\} such that |κj1|≥1\lvert\kappa_{j_{1}}\rvert\geq 1, so

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}≥inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1|κj1|K⋅rj1≥inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1rj1=rj1≥minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj}.\begin{split}\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}&\geq\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\lvert\kappa_{j_{1}}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j_{1}}\\ &\geq\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}r_{j_{1}}=r_{j_{1}}\geq\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\}.\end{split}

Hence the two sides are equal. ∎

Proposition 3.14.

Assume that L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated. Let {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} be a basis of Vn​(L)V_{n}(L). Let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a ultrametric norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) with respect to which {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} is orthogonal. Then for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and en​(x)∈L⊗n​(x)∖0e_{n}(x)\in L^{\otimes n}(x)\setminus 0,

|en​(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)=minj∈{0,…,dn}⁡{|en​(x)sn,j​(x)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n},\lvert e_{n}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\Big\{\Big|\frac{e_{n}(x)}{s_{n,j}(x)}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}\Big\},

with the convention that 0−1=+∞0^{-1}=+\infty. (see also [CMor18, Lemma 3.3])

Proof.

For j∈{0,…,dn}j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}, let λj∈κ^​(x)\lambda_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x) be such that sn,j​(x)=λj⋅en​(x)s_{n,j}(x)=\lambda_{j}\cdot e_{n}(x). By construction,

|en​(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)=infμj∈κ^​(x),∑μj⋅sn,j​(x)=en​(x)‖∑j∈{0,…,dn}μj⋅sn,j‖=infμj∈κ^​(x),∑μj⋅sn,j​(x)=en​(x)maxj⁡{|μj|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥}=infκj∈κ^​(x),∑κj=1maxj⁡{|κj⋅λj−1|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥}=infκj∈κ^​(x),∑κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|κ^​(x)⋅|λj|κ^​(x)−1⋅∥sn,j∥}=minj∈{0,…,dn}⁡{|λj|κ^​(x)−1⋅∥sn,j∥n}.\begin{split}\lvert e_{n}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}=&\inf_{\mu_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}(x)=e_{n}(x)}\Big\|\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}\Big\|\\ =&\inf_{\mu_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}(x)=e_{n}(x)}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\mu_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\inf_{\kappa_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\cdot\lambda_{j}^{-1}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\inf_{\kappa_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lvert\lambda_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\Big\{\lvert\lambda_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}\Big\}.\end{split}

The last equality is obtained with Lemma 3.13. ∎

Corollary 3.15.

With the same hypothesis as above, for en∨​(x)∈(L⊗n)∨​(x)∖0e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\in(L^{\otimes n})^{\vee}(x)\setminus 0, one has

|en∨​(x)|FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨=max⁡{|en∨​(x)​(sn,j)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n−1}.\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}}=\max\Big\{\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}^{-1}\Big\}.
Proof.

It suffices to note that en∨​(x)​(sn,j)=λje_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})=\lambda_{j}. ∎

3.5. Dual unit disc bundle

Let ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert be an algebra norm on V∙​(L)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L), such that Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) are orthogonal subspaces for ⦀⋅⦀\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert. We relate the Berkovich spectrum of normed section algebra with the dual unit disc bundle with respect to the envelop metric.

Proposition 3.16.

Let z∈(Spec⁡V∙​(L))anz\in(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}} be a point. Let (x,e∨​(x))∈T​o​t​(L∨)(x,e^{\vee}(x))\in Tot(L^{\vee}) be the point (p​(𝟎)−1)an​(z)(p(\boldsymbol{0})^{-1})^{\mathrm{an}}(z). Then z∈𝔐(V^(L,⦀⋅⦀))z\in\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)) if and only if one of the following criteria holds

  1. (1)

    there exist C⁡(z)>0C(z)>0 such that

    ∀s¯∈V∙(L),|s¯|z≤C(z)⋅⦀s¯⦀.\forall\underline{s}\in V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L),\quad\lvert\underline{s}\rvert_{z}\leq C(z)\cdot\vvvert\underline{s}\vvvert.
  2. (2)

    there exist C⁡(z)>0C(z)>0 such that

    ∀s¯(x)∈V∙(L)(x),|s¯(x)|z≤C(z)⋅⦀s¯(x)⦀X|x.\forall\underline{s}(x)\in V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L)(x),\quad\lvert\underline{s}(x)\rvert_{z}\leq C(z)\cdot\vvvert\underline{s}(x)\vvvert_{X|x}.
  3. (3)

    there exist C′​(z)=1C^{\prime}(z)=1 such that

    ∀e1(x)∈V1(L)(x),|e1(x)|z≤⦀e1(x)⦀(X|x);sp,\forall e_{1}(x)\in V_{1}(L)(x),\quad\lvert e_{1}(x)\rvert_{z}\leq\vvvert e_{1}(x)\vvvert_{(X|x);\mathrm{sp}},

    where ⦀⋅⦀(X|x);sp\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{(X|x);\mathrm{sp}} is the spectral algebra seminorm of ⦀⋅⦀X|x\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{X|x}.

Proof.

The criterion 1 unfolds the definition of the fact that z∈𝔐z\in\mathfrak{M}. The criterion 2 is equivalent to the criterion 1, as ⦀⋅⦀X|x\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{X|x} is the quotient algebra norm of ⦀⋅⦀κ^​(x)\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)} for the evaluation map ev⁡(x)\mathrm{ev}(x). The criterion 3 is equivalent to the criterion 2: if 2 holds, then

∀n∈ℕ,|e1(x)|z≤C(z)1n⋅⦀e1⊗n(x)⦀X|x1n,\forall n\in\mathbb{N},\quad\lvert e_{1}(x)\rvert_{z}\leq C(z)^{\frac{1}{n}}\cdot\vvvert e_{1}^{\otimes n}(x)\vvvert_{X|x}^{\frac{1}{n}},

so 3 holds after a limit process for n→∞n\to\infty. Conversely, if 3 holds, then since Vn​(L)​(x)V_{n}(L)(x) is spaned by e1⊗n​(x)e_{1}^{\otimes n}(x) over κ^​(x)\widehat{\kappa}(x), one has

∀n∈ℕ,|sn|z≤⦀sn(x)⦀(X|x);sp≤⦀sn(x)⦀X|x,\forall n\in\mathbb{N},\quad\lvert s_{n}\rvert_{z}\leq\vvvert s_{n}(x)\vvvert_{(X|x);\mathrm{sp}}\leq\vvvert s_{n}(x)\vvvert_{X|x},

so 2 holds by the ultra-metricity of |⋅|z\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{z} and the orthogonality of ⦀⋅⦀X|x\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{X|x} for Vn​(L)V_{n}(L)’s. ∎

Corollary 3.17.

With the same notations as above, the algebra seminorm ⦀⋅⦀(X|x);sp\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{(X|x);\mathrm{sp}} on L⁡(x)L(x) is equal to |⋅|𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)(x)\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)}(x).

Proof.

For any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and any e1​(x)∈V1​(L)​(x)e_{1}(x)\in V_{1}(L)(x), we have

⦀e1(x)⦀(X|x);sp=limn→∞⦀e1⊗n(x)⦀X|x1n=limn→∞1nFS(∥⋅∥n)(e1(x))(x)=𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)(e1(x))(x).\begin{split}\vvvert e_{1}(x)\vvvert_{(X|x);\mathrm{sp}}&=\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\vvvert e_{1}^{\otimes n}(x)\vvvert_{X|x}^{\frac{1}{n}}\\ &=\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})(e_{1}(x))(x)=\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)(e_{1}(x))(x).\end{split}

∎

Remark 3.18.

The resulting algebra seminorm |⋅|𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)(x)\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)}(x) gives rise to a pseudometric on LanL^{\mathrm{an}}.

Lemma 3.19.

The map p​(𝟎)anp(\mathbf{0})^{\mathrm{an}} induces a continuous map of topological spacecs

p​(𝟎)an:T​o​t​(L∨)an→(Spec⁡V∙​(L))an.p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}:Tot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}.

Moreover, it induces a homeomorphism

p​(𝟎)an:T​o​t​(L∨)an∖𝕆an→(Spec⁡V∙​(L))an∖𝟎an.p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}:Tot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}}.
Proof.

By Proposition 2.94, the morphism p⁡(𝟎)p(\boldsymbol{0}) of schemes of finite type over Spec⁡k\spec k induces a continuous map betweeen the topological space of their analytification:

p​(𝟎)an:T​o​t​(L∨)an→(Spec⁡V∙​(L))an.p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}:Tot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}.

Since

p⁡(𝟎):T​o​t​(L∨)∖𝕆→Spec⁡(V∙​(L))∖𝟎p(\boldsymbol{0}):Tot(L^{\vee})\setminus\mathbb{O}\rightarrow\spec(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))\setminus\boldsymbol{0}

is an isomorphism of schemes of finite type, its analytification induces a homeomorphism by Proposition 2.94

p​(𝟎)an:T​o​t​(L∨)an∖𝕆an→(Spec⁡V∙​(L))an∖𝟎an.p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}:Tot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}}.

∎

Proposition 3.20.

The map p​(𝟎)anp(\mathbf{0})^{\mathrm{an}} induces a continuous map of topological spacecs

𝔻¯∨(L,𝒫(⦀⋅⦀),0)→(SpecV∙(L))an\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert),0)\rightarrow(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}

which induces a homeomorphism between

𝔻¯∨(L,𝒫(⦀⋅⦀),0)∖𝕆an→(𝔐(V^∙(L,⦀⋅⦀)))∖𝟎an.\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert),0)\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}}\rightarrow(\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)))\setminus\mathbf{0}^{\mathrm{an}}.
Proof.

Starting with the continuous map in Lemma 3.19, we can determine the pre-image of 𝔐(V^∙(L,⦀⋅⦀))\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)): let z∈(Spec⁡V∙​(L))an∖𝟎anz\in(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}} be a point and (x,e∨​(x))(x,e^{\vee}(x)) be its unique pre-image under p​(𝟎)anp(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}, where x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and e∨​(x)∈L∨​(x)e^{\vee}(x)\in L^{\vee}(x). By Lemma 3, if we fix a non-zero element e1​(x)∈L​(x)e_{1}(x)\in L(x), the point zz lies in 𝔐(V^∙(L,⦀⋅⦀))\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)) if and only if

|e1(x)|z≤|e1(x)|𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)(x).\lvert e_{1}(x)\rvert_{z}\leq\lvert e_{1}(x)\rvert_{\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)}(x).

This condition is equivalent to

|e∨(e1)(x)|≤|e1(x)|𝒫(⦀⋅⦀)(x).\lvert e^{\vee}(e_{1})(x)\rvert\leq\lvert e_{1}(x)\rvert_{\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert)}(x).

Hence there exists a continuous surjective map

p(𝟎)an:𝔻¯∨(L,𝒫(⦀⋅⦀),0)→(𝔐(V^∙(L,⦀⋅⦀))).p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}:\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert),0)\rightarrow(\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert))).

If we remove 𝕆an\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}} and 𝟎an\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}} from the domain and image, the restricted map is indeed a homeomorphism. ∎

One can give a precise description of dual unit disc bundle for a Fubini-Study metric admitting orthogonal basis.

Proposition 3.21.

Let n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N} be an integer such that L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated. Let {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} be a basis of Vn​(L)V_{n}(L). Let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a ultrametric norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) with respect to which this basis is orthogonal. Let (x,e1∨​(x))∈T​o​t​(L∨)(x,e_{1}^{\vee}(x))\in Tot(L^{\vee}) and z∈(Spec⁡V∙​(L))anz\in(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}} be it image under p​(𝟎)anp(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}, then (x,e1∨​(x))∈𝔻¯∨​(L,1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n))(x,e_{1}^{\vee}(x))\in\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})) (resp.𝔻∨​(L,1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n))\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))) if and only if

∀j∈{0,…,dn},|sn,j​(z)|≤∥sn,j∥n​(resp.<∥sn,j∥n).\forall j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\},\ \lvert s_{n,j}(z)\rvert\leq\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}\ (\text{resp.}<\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}).

In particular, the image of 𝔻∨​(L,1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n))\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})) under p​(𝟎)anp(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}} is an open subset in (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}.

Proof.

The assertion is clear if e1​(x)=0e_{1}(x)=0. For e1​(x)≠0e_{1}(x)\neq 0, let en​(x)=e1⊗n​(x)e_{n}(x)=e_{1}^{\otimes n}(x), note that

|e1∨​(x)|1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨=(|en∨​(x)|FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨)1n.\lvert e_{1}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}}=(\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}})^{\frac{1}{n}}.

By Corollary 3.15, one has

|en∨​(x)|FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨=max⁡{|en∨​(x)​(sn,j)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n−1}\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}}=\max\Big\{\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}^{-1}\Big\}

so

|e1∨​(x)|1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨=max⁡{|en∨​(x)​(sn,j)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n−1}1n.\lvert e_{1}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}}=\max\Big\{\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}^{-1}\Big\}^{\frac{1}{n}}.

Tautologically, one has

sn,j​(z)=(e1⊗n)∨​(x)​(sn,j)=en∨​(x)​(sn,j),s_{n,j}(z)=(e_{1}^{\otimes n})^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})=e_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j}),

so the criterion holds. By these defining equations, it is easy to see that the image of the open dual unit disc bundle is an open set. ∎

Corollary 3.22.

Let ϕ\phi be a continuous metric on LL. Then the image of 𝔻∨​(L,ϕ)\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi) under p​(𝟎)anp(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}} is an open subset of (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}.

Proof.

As ϕ\phi is continuous, 𝔻∨​(L,ϕ)∖𝕆an\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi)\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}} is an open subset of T​o​t​(L∨)an∖𝕆anTot(L^{\vee})^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}}. By Lemma 3.19, under the map p​(𝟎)anp(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}, the image of 𝔻∨​(L,ϕ)∖𝕆an\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi)\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}} is an open subset of (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an∖𝟎an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}\setminus\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}}, so it is also an open subset of (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}. It suffices to treat 𝟎an\boldsymbol{0}^{\mathrm{an}} which is the image of 𝕆an\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}}.

As LL is ample, there exist n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N} such that L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated. Let {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} be a basis and let ψ\psi be the Fubini-Study metric associated with some ultrametric norm ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} for which this basis is orthogonal. As both 1n​ψ\frac{1}{n}\psi and ϕ\phi are continuous and XanX^{\mathrm{an}} is compact, there exist α∈ℝ\alpha\in\mathbb{R} such that

∀x∈Xan,1n​ψ​(α)​(x)≤ϕ⁡(x),\forall x\in X^{\mathrm{an}},\ \frac{1}{n}\psi(\alpha)(x)\leq\phi(x),

so

p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,1n​ψ​(α)))⊆p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,ϕ)).p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\frac{1}{n}\psi(\alpha)))\subseteq p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi)).

the left hand side is an open subset of (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}} by Lemma 3.21. Then

p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,ϕ))=p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,ϕ)∖𝕆an)∪p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,1n​ψ​(α)))p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi))=p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi)\setminus\mathbb{O}^{\mathrm{an}})\cup p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\frac{1}{n}\psi(\alpha)))

is an open set in (Spec⁡V∙​(L))an(\spec V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}. ∎

Corollary 3.23.

If 𝒫⁡(ϕ)\mathcal{P}(\phi) is continous, then for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, one has

𝔐⁡(V^∙​(L,ϕ))⊆IntV∙top​(𝔐⁡(V^∙​(L,ϕ⁡(ϵ)))),\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi))\subseteq\text{Int}^{\mathrm{top}}_{V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}}(\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi(\epsilon)))),

where IntV∙top\text{Int}^{\mathrm{top}}_{V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}} denotes the topological interior as subspace of Spec⁡(V∙​(L))an\spec(V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L))^{\mathrm{an}}.

Proof.

By Proposition 3.20, the left hand side 𝔐​(V^∙​(L,ϕ))\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi)) is identified with p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻¯∨​(L,ϕ))p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\phi)), which is contained in the open subset p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻∨​(L,ϕ⁡(ϵ)))p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\mathbb{D}^{\vee}(L,\phi(\epsilon))). This open subset is contained in p​(𝟎)an​(𝔻¯∨​(L,ϕ⁡(ϵ)))p(\boldsymbol{0})^{\mathrm{an}}(\overline{\mathbb{D}}^{\vee}(L,\phi(\epsilon))) which is identified with 𝔐⁡(V^∙​(L,ϕ⁡(ϵ)))\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L,\phi(\epsilon))), hence this open subset is contained in the topological interior of the later, the right hand side. ∎

3.6. Comparison of algebra norms

We compare the quotient algebra norm and the supremum algebra norm on the restricted section algebra, and get directly a (non-uniform) extension theorem.

Proposition 3.24.

Let ϕ\phi be an upper-semicontinuous metric on LL. Then

𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ)|Y=𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y).\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi})|_{Y}=\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}).
Proof.

By definition, for any y∈Yany\in Y^{\mathrm{an}}, one has

𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ)(y)=limn→∞1nFS(∥⋅∥n​ϕ)(y),\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi})(y)=\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi})(y),
𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y)(y)=limn→∞1nFS(∥⋅∥n​ϕ,X|Y)(y).\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y})(y)=\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi,X|Y})(y).

Since the kk-linear map Vn​(L)→Vn​(LX|Y)V_{n}(L)\rightarrow V_{n}(L_{X|Y}) is surjective for all large n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}, and ∥⋅∥n​ϕ,X|Y\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi,X|Y} is the quotient norm of ∥⋅∥n​ϕ\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}, one has

FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ)​(y)=FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ,X|Y)​(y).\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi})(y)=\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi,X|Y})(y).

Hence the two envelop metrics are equal. ∎

Lemma 3.25.

Let ϕ\phi be an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL. Then ϕ|Y\phi|_{Y} is an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on L|YL|_{Y}.

Proof.

Suppose that ϕ\phi is the pointwise limit on XanX^{\mathrm{an}} of {1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)}\{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})\}, where {∥⋅∥n}\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\} are norms on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L). Then L|YL|_{Y} is the pointwise limit of {1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n,X|Y)}\{\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n,X|Y})\} on YanY^{\mathrm{an}}. ∎

Proposition 3.26.

Let ϕ\phi be a asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL. Consider two algebra norms ⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}} and ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y} on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}). Then the three metrics are equal

𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y)=𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y)=ϕ|Y.\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y})=\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}})=\phi|_{Y}.
Proof.

By Proposition 3.24,

𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y)=𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ)|Y=ϕ|Y.\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y})=\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi})|_{Y}=\phi|_{Y}.

It suffices to show the second equality. By Lemma 3.25, ϕ|Y\phi|_{Y} is an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on L|YL|_{Y}. By Proposition 3.12,

𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y)=ϕ|Y.\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}})=\phi|_{Y}.

∎

Corollary 3.27.

Let ϕ\phi be a asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL. Then on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}), the spectral algebra seminorm of ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y} is equal to ⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}}. There exists a canonical homeomorphism

𝔐⁡(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕX|Y))≃𝔐⁡(V^∙​(LX|Y,ϕ|Y)).\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y}))\simeq\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi|_{Y})).
Proof.

By Theorem 2.33, one has a homeomorphism

𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y;sp))≃𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y))=𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,ϕX|Y)),\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y;\mathrm{sp}}))\simeq\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}))=\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi_{X|Y})),

by Proposition 3.26, one has

𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y;sp))≃𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y))=𝔐(V^∙(LX|Y,ϕ|Y)).\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y;\mathrm{sp}}))\simeq\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}}))=\mathfrak{M}(\widehat{V}_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y},\phi|_{Y})).

By Proposition 2.30, the two power-multiplicative algebra seminorms ⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}} and ⦀⋅⦀ϕ,X|Y;sp\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y;\mathrm{sp}} on V∙​(LX|Y)V_{{\scriptscriptstyle\bullet}}(L_{X|Y}) are equal since they are both supremum norms on the same spectrum. ∎

Theorem 3.28.

Let ϕ\phi be an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL, then for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, and any t1∈V1​(L|Y)t_{1}\in V_{1}(L|_{Y}), there exists nY∈ℕn_{Y}\in\mathbb{N} such that for any n≥nYn\geq n_{Y}, there exists sn∈Vn​(L)s_{n}\in V_{n}(L) with sn|Y=t1⊗ns_{n}|_{Y}=t_{1}^{\otimes n} and

∥sn∥n​ϕ≤en​ϵ⋅(∥t1∥ϕ|Y)n.\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}\leq\mathrm{e}^{n\epsilon}\cdot(\lVert t_{1}\rVert_{\phi|_{Y}})^{n}.
Proof.

For any M≤m≤2​M−1M\leq m\leq 2M-1, we have t1⊗m∈Vm​(LX|Y)t_{1}^{\otimes m}\in V_{m}(L_{X|Y}). By Corollary 3.27, for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, there exists Nm∈ℕN_{m}\in\mathbb{N} such that for l≥Nml\geq N_{m},

⦀t1⊗m​l⦀ϕ,X|Y1l/⦀t1⊗m⦀ϕ|Y≤ϵ.\vvvert t_{1}^{\otimes ml}\vvvert_{\phi,X|Y}^{\frac{1}{l}}/\vvvert t_{1}^{\otimes m}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}}\leq\epsilon.

It is easy to see that there exists nY∈ℕn_{Y}\in\mathbb{N} such that the set of integers

{ml:l≥Nm,M≤m≤2M−1}\{ml:l\geq N_{m},M\leq m\leq 2M-1\}

contains a subset of form ℕ−{0,…,nY−1}\mathbb{N}-\{0,\dots,n_{Y}-1\}: the case M=1M=1 is clear; if M≥2M\geq 2, the fact that MM and M+1M+1 are coprime guarantees the existence of nYn_{Y}. Note that ⦀⋅⦀ϕ|Y\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi|_{Y}} is power-multiplicative, so for any n≥nYn\geq n_{Y}, there exists sn∈Vn​(L)s_{n}\in V_{n}(L) with sn|Y=t1⊗ns_{n}|_{Y}=t_{1}^{\otimes n} such that

∥sn∥n​ϕ≤en​ϵ⋅∥t1⊗n∥n​ϕ|Y=en​ϵ⋅(∥t1∥ϕ|Y)n.\lVert s_{n}\rVert_{n\phi}\leq\mathrm{e}^{n\epsilon}\cdot\lVert t_{1}^{\otimes n}\rVert_{n\phi|_{Y}}=\mathrm{e}^{n\epsilon}\cdot(\lVert t_{1}\rVert_{\phi|_{Y}})^{n}.

∎

Remark 3.29.

This result is first obtained in [CMor18], by using approximation of ϕ\phi by model metrics. Here we give another proof. Note that a slight unsatisfactory point of this version of metric extension theorem is that the degree nYn_{Y} depends a priori on the choice of initial data, the restricted section t1t_{1}. We will remove this dependence in the following sections.

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