ScalingStacks

8.1. Regularity of envelopes [01H4]

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

8.1. Regularity of envelopes

As a tool to prove our regularization theorem, we rely on the following envelope construction, whose complex analogue is widely used.

Definition 8.1.

The θ\theta-psh envelope Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) of a continuous function u∈C0​(X)u\in C^{0}(X) is defined by setting for each x∈Xx\in X

Pθ(u)(x)=sup{φ(x)∣φ∈PSH(X,θ),φ≤u on X}.P_{\theta}(u)(x)=\sup\left\{\varphi(x)\mid\varphi\in\PSH(X,\theta),\,\varphi\leq u\text{ on }X\right\}.

Here are a few easy properties of the envelope operator.

Proposition 8.2.

Let u,u′∈C0​(X)u,u^{\prime}\in C^{0}(X).

  • (i)

    Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) is θ\theta-psh, and is the largest θ\theta-psh function dominated by uu on XX.

  • (ii)

    PθP_{\theta} is non-decreasing, i.e. u≤v⇒Pθ​(u)≤Pθ​(v)u\leq v\Rightarrow P_{\theta}(u)\leq P_{\theta}(v).

  • (iii)

    Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) is concave in both arguments, i.e.

    Pt​θ+(1−t)​θ′​(t​u+(1−t)​u′)≥t​Pθ​(u)+(1−t)​Pθ′​(u′)P_{t\theta+(1-t)\theta^{\prime}}\left(tu+(1-t)u^{\prime}\right)\geq tP_{\theta}(u)+(1-t)P_{\theta}^{\prime}(u^{\prime})

    for 0≤t≤10\leq t\leq 1.

  • (iv)

    For each c∈𝐑c\in\mathbf{R} we have Pθ​(u+c)=Pθ​(u)+cP_{\theta}(u+c)=P_{\theta}(u)+c.

  • (v)

    For each v∈𝒟⁡(X)v\in\mathcal{D}(X) we have Pθ​(u)=Pθ+d​dc​v​(u−v)+vP_{\theta}(u)=P_{\theta+dd^{c}v}(u-v)+v.

  • (vi)

    PθP_{\theta} is 11-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the sup-norm, i.e. supX|Pθ​(u)−Pθ​(v)|≤supX|u−v|\sup_{X}|P_{\theta}(u)-P_{\theta}(v)|\leq\sup_{X}|u-v|.

  • (vii)

    Given a determination 𝒳\mathcal{X} of θ\theta and a convergent sequence θm→θ\theta_{m}\to\theta in N1​(𝒳/S)N^{1}(\mathcal{X}/S), we have Pθm​(u)→Pθ​(u)P_{\theta_{m}}(u)\to P_{\theta}(u) uniformly on XX.

Proof.

(i) The only thing to show is that Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) is θ\theta-psh. Since Pθ​(u)≤uP_{\theta}(u)\leq u and uu is continuous, it follows that the usc regularization satisfies Pθ​(u)∗≤uP_{\theta}(u)^{*}\leq u. Now, Pθ​(u)∗P_{\theta}(u)^{*} is θ\theta-psh by Theorem 7.9, and is hence a competitor in the definition of Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u). Thus Pθ​(u)=Pθ​(u)∗P_{\theta}(u)=P_{\theta}(u)^{*} is indeed θ\theta-psh.

(ii) is trivial.

(iii) follows from the fact that given φ∈PSH⁡(X,θ)\varphi\in\PSH(X,\theta), φ′∈PSH⁡(X,θ′)\varphi^{\prime}\in\PSH(X,\theta^{\prime}) with φ≤u\varphi\leq u and φ′≤u′\varphi^{\prime}\leq u^{\prime}, t​φ+(1−t)​φ′t\varphi+(1-t)\varphi^{\prime} belongs to PSH⁡(X,t​θ+(1−t)​θ′)\PSH(X,t\theta+(1-t)\theta^{\prime}) and is dominated by t​u+(1−t)​u′tu+(1-t)u^{\prime}.

(iv) and (v) are seen similarly.

(vi) is a formal consequence of (ii) and (iv).

(vii) By Proposition 5.2 we may assume after perhaps passing to a higher model that there exists a model function vv determined on 𝒳\mathcal{X} such that θ+d​dc​v\theta+dd^{c}v is 𝒳\mathcal{X}-positive, i.e. determined by an ample class in N1​(𝒳/S)N^{1}(\mathcal{X}/S). As a consequence, there exists an open neighborhood V⊂N1​(𝒳/S)V\subset N^{1}(\mathcal{X}/S) of θ\theta such that τ+d​dc​v\tau+dd^{c}v is 𝒳\mathcal{X}-positive for all τ∈V\tau\in V.

We claim that Pτ​(u)P_{\tau}(u) is uniformly bounded on XX for τ∈V\tau\in V. Indeed for each τ∈V\tau\in V we have 𝐑⊂PSH⁡(X,τ+d​dc​v)\mathbf{R}\subset\PSH(X,\tau+dd^{c}v), hence Pτ+d​dc​v​(u−v)≥infXu−supX|v|P_{\tau+dd^{c}v}(u-v)\geq\inf_{X}u-\sup_{X}|v|. By (v) it follows that

infXu−2​supX|v|≤Pτ​(u)≤supXu,\inf_{X}u-2\sup_{X}|v|\leq P_{\tau}(u)\leq\sup_{X}u,

which proves the claim.

Now for each x∈Xx\in X the function τ↦Pτ​(u)​(x)\tau\mapsto P_{\tau}(u)(x) is concave on VV, hence locally Lipschitz continuous on VV, with local Lipschitz constant only depending on supτ∈V|Pτ​(u)​(x)|\sup_{\tau\in V}|P_{\tau}(u)(x)|, which is in turn bounded independently of x∈Xx\in X, and the result follows. ∎

Our main result in this section is the following regularity property of envelopes. As we shall see, it is in fact equivalent to the monotone regularization theorem.

Theorem 8.3.

For any u∈C0​(X)u\in C^{0}(X) the θ\theta-psh envelope Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) is a uniform limit on XX of θ\theta-psh model functions. In particular, Pθ​(u)P_{\theta}(u) is continuous.

Before attacking Theorem 8.3 we shall prove the following weaker statement.

Lemma 8.4.

Let P~θ​(u)\widetilde{P}_{\theta}(u) be the pointwise supremum of all θ\theta-psh model functions φ\varphi such that φ≤u\varphi\leq u. Then P~θ​(u)≤Pθ​(u)\widetilde{P}_{\theta}(u)\leq P_{\theta}(u) and equality holds on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}}.

Proof.

The inequality P~θ​(u)≤Pθ​(u)\widetilde{P}_{\theta}(u)\leq P_{\theta}(u) is trivial. To prove that equality holds on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}}, pick ε>0\varepsilon>0 and x∈emb𝒳⁡(Δ𝒳)x\in\emb_{\mathcal{X}}(\Delta_{\mathcal{X}}) for some SNC model 𝒳\mathcal{X} on which θ\theta is determined. By construction, there exists ψ∈PSH⁡(X,θ)\psi\in\PSH(X,\theta) such that ψ≤0\psi\leq 0 and ψ⁡(x)≥Pθ​(u)​(x)−ε\psi(x)\geq P_{\theta}(u)(x)-\varepsilon. By the definition of PSH⁡(X,θ)\PSH(X,\theta), there then exists a θ\theta-psh model function φ\varphi such that |φ−(ψ−ε)|≤ε|\varphi-(\psi-\varepsilon)|\leq\varepsilon on emb𝒳⁡(Δ𝒳)\emb_{\mathcal{X}}(\Delta_{\mathcal{X}}). Thus φ≤φ∘p𝒳≤ψ∘p𝒳≤0\varphi\leq\varphi\circ p_{\mathcal{X}}\leq\psi\circ p_{\mathcal{X}}\leq 0 on XX and φ⁡(x)≥ψ⁡(x)−2​ε≥Pθ​(u)​(x)−3​ε\varphi(x)\geq\psi(x)-2\varepsilon\geq P_{\theta}(u)(x)-3\varepsilon. We conclude that P~θ​(u)=Pθ​(u)\widetilde{P}_{\theta}(u)=P_{\theta}(u) on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}}. ∎

Proof of Theorem 8.3.

We shall reduce the statement to a geometric assertion that can be proved using asymptotic multiplier ideals.

First, we may assume that u∈𝒟⁡(X)u\in\mathcal{D}(X), thanks to Corollary 2.3 and (vi) of Proposition 8.2.

Second, we can reduce to the case when θ∈N1​(𝒳/S)𝐐\theta\in N^{1}(\mathcal{X}/S)_{\mathbf{Q}} is a rational class, using (vii) of Proposition 8.2.

Third, we may further reduce to the case u=0u=0, after replacing θ\theta with θ+d​dc​u\theta+dd^{c}u, using (v) of Proposition 8.2.

After scaling, we may finally assume that θ\theta is the curvature form of a model metric determined by a line bunle ℒ\mathcal{L} on some model 𝒳\mathcal{X}. Now we conclude the proof using the following result. ∎

Theorem 8.5.

Let LL be an ample line bundle on XX and ℒ∈Pic⁡(𝒳)\mathcal{L}\in\Pic(\mathcal{X}) an extension of LL to an SNC model 𝒳\mathcal{X}. Let θ∈𝒵1,1​(X)\theta\in\mathcal{Z}^{1,1}(X) be the curvature form of the corresponding model metric on LL. For m≫1m\gg 1 let 𝔞m⊂𝒪𝒳\mathfrak{a}_{m}\subset\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}} be the (vertical) base-ideal of m​ℒm\mathcal{L} and set φm:=1m​log⁡|𝔞m|\varphi_{m}:=\tfrac{1}{m}\log|\mathfrak{a}_{m}|. Then φm\varphi_{m} is a θ\theta-psh model function and φm→Pθ​(0)\varphi_{m}\to P_{\theta}(0) uniformly on XX as m→∞m\to\infty.

Proof of Theorem 8.5.

For m≫1m\gg 1, m​ℒ|Xm\mathcal{L}|_{X} is globally generated, which shows that the ideal sheaf 𝔞m\mathfrak{a}_{m} is vertical. Since 𝒪𝒳​(m​ℒ)⊗𝔞m\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}(m\mathcal{L})\otimes\mathfrak{a}_{m} is globally generated by the definition of 𝔞m\mathfrak{a}_{m}, it follows that φm∈𝒟⁡(X)\varphi_{m}\in\mathcal{D}(X) is θ\theta-psh by Lemma 5.6. Note that 𝔞m⋅𝔞l⊂𝔞m+l\mathfrak{a}_{m}\cdot\mathfrak{a}_{l}\subset\mathfrak{a}_{m+l} for all m,lm,l. This yields the super-additivity property m​φm+l​φl≤(m+l)​φm+lm\varphi_{m}+l\varphi_{l}\leq(m+l)\varphi_{m+l}. As a consequence, the pointwise limit limmφm\lim_{m}\varphi_{m} exists and coincides with supmφm\sup_{m}\varphi_{m}.

Step 1. Let us first prove that Pθ​(0)=supmφmP_{\theta}(0)=\sup_{m}\varphi_{m} on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}}. This is similar to Step 2 of Theorem 5.11. Since φm\varphi_{m} is θ\theta-psh and φm≤0\varphi_{m}\leq 0 for all mm, we have supmφm≤Pθ​(0)\sup_{m}\varphi_{m}\leq P_{\theta}(0) on XX. To see that equality holds on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}}, pick ε>0\varepsilon>0 and x∈emb𝒳′⁡(Δ𝒳′)x\in\emb_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}(\Delta_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}) for some SNC model 𝒳′\mathcal{X}^{\prime} dominating 𝒳\mathcal{X}. By Lemma 8.4 there exists a θ\theta-psh model function φ\varphi such that φ≤0\varphi\leq 0 and φ⁡(x)≥Pθ​(0)​(x)−ε\varphi(x)\geq P_{\theta}(0)(x)-\varepsilon. Replacing 𝒳′\mathcal{X}^{\prime} by a higher model, we may assume that φ=φD\varphi=\varphi_{D} is determined by some divisor D∈Div0⁡(𝒳′)𝐐D\in\Div_{0}(\mathcal{X}^{\prime})_{\mathbf{Q}}. Invoking Proposition 5.2 we may also assume that there exists D′∈Div0⁡(𝒳′)𝐐D^{\prime}\in\Div_{0}(\mathcal{X}^{\prime})_{\mathbf{Q}} with −ε≤φD′≤0-\varepsilon\leq\varphi_{D^{\prime}}\leq 0 on XX and π∗​ℒ+D+D′\pi^{*}\mathcal{L}+D+D^{\prime} ample. Since D+D′≤0D+D^{\prime}\leq 0 we then have

𝒪𝒳′​(m​π∗​ℒ+m⁡(D+D′))⊂𝒪𝒳′​(m​π∗​ℒ).\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}(m\pi^{*}\mathcal{L}+m(D+D^{\prime}))\subset\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}(m\pi^{*}\mathcal{L}).

Now the left-hand side is globally generated for some mm, and we conclude that

𝒪𝒳′​(m⁡(D+D′))⊂𝒪𝒳′⋅𝔞m,\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}(m(D+D^{\prime}))\subset\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}}\cdot\mathfrak{a}_{m},

hence

Pθ​(0)​(x)≤φD​(x)+ε≤φD+D′​(x)+2​ε≤1m​log⁡|𝔞m|​(x)+2​ε≤suplφl​(x)+2​ε.P_{\theta}(0)(x)\leq\varphi_{D}(x)+\varepsilon\leq\varphi_{D+D^{\prime}}(x)+2\varepsilon\leq\frac{1}{m}\log|\mathfrak{a}_{m}|(x)+2\varepsilon\leq\sup_{l}\varphi_{l}(x)+2\varepsilon.

Step 2. Introduce for each m∈𝐍m\in\mathbf{N} the asymptotic multiplier ideal 𝔟m=𝒥⁡(𝔞∙m)⊂𝒪𝒳\mathfrak{b}_{m}=\mathcal{J}(\mathfrak{a}_{\bullet}^{m})\subset\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}} associated to the graded sequence 𝔞∙\mathfrak{a}_{\bullet}. We refer to Appendix B for the definition and the proof of the fundamental properties of multiplier ideals in our present setting. We shall use the following results. First we have the elementary inclusion 𝔞m⊂𝔟m\mathfrak{a}_{m}\subset\mathfrak{b}_{m} for all mm. Second, the subadditivity property (cf. Theorem B.7) implies 𝔟m​l⊂𝔟ml\mathfrak{b}_{ml}\subset\mathfrak{b}^{l}_{m} for any l,ml,m. We infer that 𝔞m​l⊂𝔟m​l⊂𝔟ml\mathfrak{a}_{ml}\subset\mathfrak{b}_{ml}\subset\mathfrak{b}_{m}^{l} for any m,lm,l and hence

(8.1) 1m​log⁡|𝔟m|≥supl1m​l​log⁡|𝔞m​l|=suplφm​l=Pθ​(0)\tfrac{1}{m}\log|\mathfrak{b}_{m}|\geq\sup_{l}\tfrac{1}{ml}\log|\mathfrak{a}_{ml}|=\sup_{l}\varphi_{ml}=P_{\theta}(0)

on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}} for all mm, where the last equality follows from the first step.

Since both Pθ​(0)P_{\theta}(0) and φm\varphi_{m} remain unchanged when 𝒳\mathcal{X} is replaced with a higher model, we may assume that there exists an effective divisor E∈Div0⁡(𝒳)𝐐E\in\Div_{0}(\mathcal{X})_{\mathbf{Q}} such that 𝒜:=ℒ−E\mathcal{A}:=\mathcal{L}-E is ample on 𝒳\mathcal{X}. By the uniform global generation property of multiplier ideals (Theorem B.8) we may then choose m0∈𝐍m_{0}\in\mathbf{N} such that 𝒪𝒳​(m​ℒ+m0​𝒜)⊗𝔟m\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}(m\mathcal{L}+m_{0}\mathcal{A})\otimes\mathfrak{b}_{m} is globally generated for all mm. Since 𝒪𝒳​(m​ℒ+m0​𝒜)\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}(m\mathcal{L}+m_{0}\mathcal{A}) injects in 𝒪𝒳​((m+m0)​ℒ)\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}((m+m_{0})\mathcal{L}) by multiplying with the canonical section of 𝒪𝒳​(m0​E)\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{X}}(m_{0}E), it follows that

log⁡|𝔟m|≤log⁡|𝔞m+m0|+m0​φE.\log|\mathfrak{b}_{m}|\leq\log|\mathfrak{a}_{m+m_{0}}|+m_{0}\varphi_{E}.

Replacing mm with m−m0m-m_{0} and using (8.1) we infer (m−m0)​Pθ​(0)≤m​φm+m0​φE(m-m_{0})P_{\theta}(0)\leq m\varphi_{m}+m_{0}\varphi_{E}, so that

φm≤Pθ​(0)≤mm−m0​φm+m0m−m0​φE\varphi_{m}\leq P_{\theta}(0)\leq\tfrac{m}{m-m_{0}}\varphi_{m}+\tfrac{m_{0}}{m-m_{0}}\varphi_{E}

on XqmX^{\mathrm{qm}} for m≫1m\gg 1. As φm\varphi_{m}, Pθ​(0)P_{\theta}(0) and φE\varphi_{E} are all θ\theta-psh, Proposition 7.6 shows that this inquality extends to all of XX. Now φE\varphi_{E} is bounded and φm\varphi_{m} is uniformly bounded, as follows from φ1≤φm≤0\varphi_{1}\leq\varphi_{m}\leq 0, so φm\varphi_{m} converges uniformly on XX to Pθ​(0)P_{\theta}(0), as was to be shown. ∎

Let us end this subsection with a result that will be used in [BFJ].

Corollary 8.6.

If φ∈PSH⁡(X,θ)\varphi\in\PSH(X,\theta) and v∈C0​(X)v\in C^{0}(X) are such that φ≤v\varphi\leq v then for every ε>0\varepsilon>0 there exists an θ\theta-psh model function ψ\psi such that φ≤ψ≤v+ε\varphi\leq\psi\leq v+\varepsilon.

Proof.

We may assume φ=Pθ​(v)\varphi=P_{\theta}(v), in which case the result follows from Theorem 8.3. ∎

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