ScalingStacks

Proof. [017N]

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 Β· Original author HTML

Proof.

Let 𝒳{\mathcal{X}}, 𝒳′{\mathcal{X}}^{\prime} be proper dlt models of XX, with 𝒳′{\mathcal{X}}^{\prime} dominating 𝒳{\mathcal{X}} via a proper birational morphism ρ:𝒳′→𝒳\rho\colon{\mathcal{X}}^{\prime}\to{\mathcal{X}}. Let β„’#=(β„’,ψ0){\mathcal{L}}^{\#}=({\mathcal{L}},\psi_{0}) be a residually metrized model of KXK_{X} consisting of a model β„’{\mathcal{L}} of KXK_{X} determined on 𝒳{\mathcal{X}} and a continuous metric ψ0\psi_{0} on β„’0{\mathcal{L}}_{0}. Set β„’β€²=Οβˆ—β€‹β„’{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}=\rho^{*}{\mathcal{L}}, ψ0β€²=Οβˆ—β€‹Οˆ0\psi^{\prime}_{0}=\rho^{*}\psi_{0} and β„’β€²#=(β„’β€²,ψ0β€²){\mathcal{L}}^{\prime\#}=({\mathcal{L}}^{\prime},\psi^{\prime}_{0}). We must prove that ΞΌβ„’β€²#=ΞΌβ„’#\mu_{{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime\#}}=\mu_{{\mathcal{L}}^{\#}}.

Let Οƒβ€²\sigma^{\prime} be a top-dimensional face of Δ⁑(β„’β€²)\Delta({\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}), Yβ€²Y^{\prime} the associated stratum of 𝒳0β€²{\mathcal{X}}^{\prime}_{0}, YY the minimal stratum of 𝒳0{\mathcal{X}}_{0} containing ρ⁑(Yβ€²)\rho(Y^{\prime}) and Οƒ=ΟƒY\sigma=\sigma_{Y} the associated simplex of Δ⁑(𝒳)\Delta({\mathcal{X}}). Then Οƒ\sigma and Οƒβ€²\sigma^{\prime} have the same dimension, and if we (somewhat abusively) identify Οƒ\sigma and Οƒβ€²\sigma^{\prime} with their images in Sk⁑(Ο•β„’)βŠ‚Xan\operatorname{Sk}(\phi_{\mathcal{L}})\subset X^{\mathrm{an}}, then Οƒβ€²\sigma^{\prime} is a rational subsimplex of Οƒ\sigma. It suffices to prove that ΞΌβ„’β€²#​(Οƒβ€²)=ΞΌβ„’#​(Οƒβ€²)\mu_{{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime\#}}(\sigma^{\prime})=\mu_{{\mathcal{L}}^{\#}}(\sigma^{\prime}).

Now ρ\rho restricts to a birational morphism of Yβ€²β†’YY^{\prime}\to Y, so since λσ|Οƒβ€²=λσ′\lambda_{\sigma}|_{\sigma^{\prime}}=\lambda_{\sigma^{\prime}} and bΟƒ=bΟƒβ€²b_{\sigma}=b_{\sigma^{\prime}}, it suffices to prove that ResY′⁑(β„’β€²#)=Οβˆ—β€‹ResY⁑(β„’#)\operatorname{Res}_{Y^{\prime}}({\mathcal{L}}^{\prime\#})=\rho^{*}\operatorname{Res}_{Y}({\mathcal{L}}^{\#}). But this is formal. Indeed, we have (ρ|Y)βˆ—β€‹(BYβ€²β„’β€²)=BYβ„’(\rho|_{Y})_{*}(B_{Y^{\prime}}^{{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}})=B_{Y}^{\mathcal{L}} and we can identify (ρ|Y)βˆ—β€‹K(Y,BYβ„’)(\rho|_{Y})^{*}K_{(Y,B_{Y}^{\mathcal{L}})} with K(Yβ€²,BYβ€²β„’β€²)K_{(Y^{\prime},B_{Y^{\prime}}^{{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}})} in such a way that the restriction of ψ0β€²\psi^{\prime}_{0} to β„’β€²|Yβ€²=K(Yβ€²,BYβ€²β„’β€²){\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}|_{Y^{\prime}}=K_{(Y^{\prime},B_{Y^{\prime}}^{{\mathcal{L}}^{\prime}})} coincides with the pullback under ρ|Yβ€²\rho|_{Y^{\prime}} of the restriction of ψ0\psi_{0} to β„’|Y=K(Y,BYβ„’){\mathcal{L}}|_{Y}=K_{(Y,B_{Y}^{\mathcal{L}})}. ∎

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