ScalingStacks

Examples 8.2 . [0306]

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

Examples 8.2.

(1) Let XX be a scheme and Y⊆XY\subseteq X a closed subset of codimension one. Denote by j:X∖Y→Xj:X\setminus Y\rightarrow X the inclusion. Then the inclusion

αX:ℳX=j∗​(𝒪X∖Y×)∩𝒪X→𝒪X\alpha_{X}:\mathcal{M}_{X}=j_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{X\setminus Y}^{\times})\cap\mathcal{O}_{X}\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}

of the sheaf of regular functions invertible off of YY is a log structure on XX. This is called a divisorial log structure on XX.

(2) A prelog structure, i.e., an arbitrary homomorphism of sheaves of monoids φ:𝒫→𝒪X\varphi:\mathcal{P}\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}, defines an associated log structure ℳX\mathcal{M}_{X} by

ℳX=(𝒫⊕𝒪X×)/{(p,φ​(p)−1)|p∈φ−1​(𝒪X×)}\mathcal{M}_{X}=(\mathcal{P}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\times})/\{(p,\varphi(p)^{-1})\,|\,p\in\varphi^{-1}(\mathcal{O}_{X}^{\times})\}

and αX​(p,h)=h⋅φ⁡(p)\alpha_{X}(p,h)=h\cdot\varphi(p).

(3) If f:X→Yf:X\rightarrow Y is a morphism of schemes and αY:ℳY→𝒪Y\alpha_{Y}:\mathcal{M}_{Y}\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{Y} is a log structure on YY, then the prelog structure f−1​(ℳY)→𝒪Xf^{-1}(\mathcal{M}_{Y})\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X} given as the composition of αY:f−1​(ℳY)→f−1​𝒪Y\alpha_{Y}:f^{-1}(\mathcal{M}_{Y})\rightarrow f^{-1}\mathcal{O}_{Y} and f∗:f−1​𝒪Y→𝒪Xf^{*}:f^{-1}\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X} defines an associated log structure on XX, the pull-back log structure.

(4) In (1) we can pull back the log structure on XX to YY using (3). Thus in particular, if 𝒳→D\mathcal{X}\rightarrow D is a toric degeneration, the inclusion 𝒳0⊆𝒳\mathcal{X}_{0}\subseteq\mathcal{X} gives a log structure on 𝒳\mathcal{X} and an induced log structure on 𝒳0\mathcal{X}_{0}. Similarly the inclusion 0∈D0\in D gives a log structure on DD and an induced one on 00. Here ℳ0=ℂ×⊕ℕ\mathcal{M}_{0}=\mathbb{C}^{\times}\oplus\mathbb{N}, where ℕ\mathbb{N} is the (additive) monoid of natural (non-negative) numbers, and

α0​(h,n)={hn=00n≠0.\alpha_{0}(h,n)=\begin{cases}h&n=0\\ 0&n\not=0.\end{cases}

0†0^{\dagger} is usually called the standard log point.

We then have log morphisms 𝒳†→D†\mathcal{X}^{\dagger}\rightarrow D^{\dagger} and 𝒳0†→0†\mathcal{X}_{0}^{\dagger}\rightarrow 0^{\dagger}.

(5) If σ⊆Mℝ=ℝn\sigma\subseteq M_{\mathbb{R}}=\mathbb{R}^{n} is a strictly convex rational polyhedral cone, σ∨⊆Nℝ{\sigma}^{\scriptscriptstyle\vee}\subseteq N_{\mathbb{R}} the dual cone, let P=σ∨∩NP={\sigma}^{\scriptscriptstyle\vee}\cap N: this is a monoid under addition. The affine toric variety defined by σ\sigma can be written as X=Spec⁡ℂ⁡[P]X=\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[P]. We then have a pre-log structure induced by the homomorphism of monoids

P→ℂ⁡[P]P\rightarrow\mathbb{C}[P]

given by p↦zpp\mapsto z^{p}. There is then an associated log structure on XX. This is in fact the same as the log structure induced by ∂X⊆X\partial X\subseteq X, where ∂X\partial X is the toric boundary of XX, i.e., the union of toric divisors of XX.

If p∈Pp\in P, then the monomial zpz^{p} defines a map f:X→Spec⁡ℂ⁡[ℕ]=𝔸1f:X\rightarrow\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[\mathbb{N}]=\mathbb{A}^{1} which is a log morphism with the log structure on Spec⁡ℂ⁡[ℕ]\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[\mathbb{N}] induced similarly by ℕ→ℂ⁡[ℕ]\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{C}[\mathbb{N}]. The fibre X0=Spec⁡ℂ⁡[P]/(zp)X_{0}=\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[P]/(z^{p}) is a subscheme of XX, there is an induced log structure on X0X_{0}, and a map X0†→0†X_{0}^{\dagger}\rightarrow 0^{\dagger} as in (4). The log morphism ff is an example of a log smooth morphism. Essentially all log smooth morphisms are étale locally of this form (if ℕ\mathbb{N} is replaced by a more general monoid). See [48] for details.

Condition (4) of Definition 7.1 in fact implies that locally, away from ZZ, 𝒳†\mathcal{X}^{\dagger} and 𝒳0†\mathcal{X}_{0}^{\dagger} are of the above form. So we should view 𝒳†→D†\mathcal{X}^{\dagger}\rightarrow D^{\dagger} as log smooth away from ZZ, and from the log point of view, 𝒳0†\mathcal{X}_{0}^{\dagger} can be treated much like a non-singular scheme away from ZZ.

(6) Given a monoid PP as in (5) and a morphism X→Spec⁡ℂ⁡[P]X\rightarrow\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[P], we can pull back the log structure defined above on Spec⁡ℂ⁡[P]\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[P] to XX. If X†X^{\dagger} is a log scheme which étale locally can be described in this way, we say X†X^{\dagger} is a fine saturated log scheme. The adjective “fine” tells us it is locally described via maps to schemes of the form Spec⁡ℂ⁡[P]\operatorname{Spec}\mathbb{C}[P] where PP is a finitely generated integral monoid, i.e., the canonical homomorphism P→PgpP\rightarrow P^{{\operatorname{gp}}} is an injection. The adjective “saturated” tells us the monoid PP is saturated. This means that PP is integral and whenever p∈Pgpp\in P^{{\operatorname{gp}}} satisfies m​p∈Pmp\in P for some m>0m>0, p∈Pp\in P. Such monoids arise, e.g., as the intersection of a rational polyhedral cone with a lattice.

Most of the literature on log geometry tends to apply only to fine log structures. In the key example of 𝒳0†→0†\mathcal{X}_{0}^{\dagger}\rightarrow 0^{\dagger}, the log structure is fine saturated away from the set ZZ. However, it is not in general fine along ZZ, and this tends to cause many technical problems as new techniques have to be developed to deal properly with the log structure along ZZ. ∎

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