ScalingStacks

Verified tagged author-source HTML Β· 2006.16961v1 Β· cited publication edition alignment unverified.

2 Uniform Skoda inequality

We work in the context of semistable simple normal crossing (snc) models. Concretely, let Ο€:𝒳→𝔻t\pi:\mathcal{X}\to\mathbb{D}_{t} be a flat projective family of nn-dimensional varieties over a small disc 𝔻t\mathbb{D}_{t}, such that the total space 𝒳\mathcal{X} is smooth, Ο€\pi is a submersion over the punctured disc with connected fibres, the central fibre X0X_{0} is reduced and is an snc divisor in 𝒳\mathcal{X}. Denote the components of X0X_{0} as EiE_{i} with i∈Ii\in I. We equip 𝒳\mathcal{X} with a fixed background KΓ€hler metric ω𝒳\omega_{\mathcal{X}}, inducing a distance function dω𝒳d_{\omega_{\mathcal{X}}}. This induces a family of rescaled KΓ€hler metrics Ο‰t=1|log⁑|t||​ω𝒳|Xt\omega_{t}=\frac{1}{|\log|t||}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}. We shall derive a uniform Skoda type estimate (1) for (Xt,Ο‰t,d​μt)(X_{t},\omega_{t},d\mu_{t}), where d​μtd\mu_{t} belongs to a natural class of measures. The main result is Theorem 2.9.

2.1 Quantitative stratification and good test functions

There is a quantitative stratification on any smooth fibre XtX_{t} induced by the intersection pattern of EiE_{i}: for JβŠ‚IJ\subset I such that EJ=∩i∈JEiβ‰ βˆ…E_{J}=\cap_{i\in J}E_{i}\neq\emptyset, the corresponding statum is

EJ0={x∈Xt|dω𝒳(x,EJ)≲ϡ}βˆ–{x∈Xt|dω𝒳(x,EJβ€²)≲ϡ,Β someΒ Jβ€²βŠ‹J},E_{J}^{0}=\{x\in X_{t}|d_{\omega_{\mathcal{X}}}(x,E_{J})\lesssim\epsilon\}\setminus\{x\in X_{t}|d_{\omega_{\mathcal{X}}}(x,E_{J^{\prime}})\lesssim\epsilon,\text{ some }J^{\prime}\supsetneq J\},

namely a small β€˜Ο΅\epsilon-tubular neighbourhood’ of EJE_{J} minus the deeper strata. For J={i}J=\{i\} we write Ei0=E{i}0E_{i}^{0}=E_{\{i\}}^{0}. Here the disc 𝔻t\mathbb{D}_{t} and the small parameter Ο΅β‰ͺ1\epsilon\ll 1 can be shrinked for convenience; the essential thing is that all parameters should be independent of the coordinate tt.

It is useful to introduce local coordinates {zi}0n\{z_{i}\}_{0}^{n} around EJβŠ‚π’³E_{J}\subset\mathcal{X}, such that z0,…,zpz_{0},\ldots,z_{p} with p=|J|βˆ’1p=|J|-1 are the local defining equations of EjE_{j} for j∈Jj\in J, and locally the fibration map is t=z0​…​zpt=z_{0}\ldots z_{p}. Then up to uniform equivalence, locally

Ο‰π’³βˆΌβˆ‘0nβˆ’1​d​zi∧d​zΒ―i.\omega_{\mathcal{X}}\sim\sum_{0}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{i}\wedge d\bar{z}_{i}.

The rest of this section is devoted to the construction of good test functions. Given any of these divisors E0E_{0}, we can find a nonnegative function h=hE0h=h_{E_{0}} on 𝒳\mathcal{X}, such that

  • β€’

    In the local charts near E0E_{0} with z0z_{0} being the defining function for E0E_{0},

    h=|z0|2​h~​(z0,…​zn)h=|z_{0}|^{2}\tilde{h}(z_{0},\ldots z_{n})

    for some positive smooth function h~\tilde{h};

  • β€’

    Away from E0E_{0} the function hh is comparable to 1.

We observe

  • β€’

    The form βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑h=βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑h~\partial\bar{\partial}\log h=\partial\bar{\partial}\log\tilde{h} extends smoothly;

  • β€’

    For |t|2β‰ͺh≲δβ‰ͺ1|t|^{2}\ll h\lesssim\delta\ll 1 inside XtX_{t}, so that |z0|≫|t||z_{0}|\gg|t|, by a local calculation near EJE_{J} with 0∈J0\in J,

    βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚log⁑hβˆ§βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑hβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯βˆ’12​|z0|2​d​z0∧d​zΒ―0βˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1≳min⁑{1|z0|2,max1≀i≀p⁑|zi|βˆ’2}​ω𝒳|Xtn≳min{1h,h1/p|t|βˆ’2/p}ω𝒳|Xtn≳min{1h,h1/n|t|βˆ’2/n}ω𝒳|Xtn.\begin{split}&\sqrt{-1}\partial\log h\wedge\bar{\partial}\log h\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{2|z_{0}|^{2}}dz_{0}\wedge d\bar{z}_{0}\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\\ &\gtrsim\min\{\frac{1}{|z_{0}|^{2}},\max_{1\leq i\leq p}|z_{i}|^{-2}\}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\\ &\gtrsim\min\{\frac{1}{h},h^{1/p}|t|^{-2/p}\}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\\ &\gtrsim\min\{\frac{1}{h},h^{1/n}|t|^{-2/n}\}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}.\end{split}

    Here in the first line we need to fix Ξ΄β‰ͺ1\delta\ll 1 so that the effect of βˆ‚log⁑h\partial\log h is dominated by d​log⁑z0d\log z_{0}. The second line uses that for 1≀k≀p1\leq k\leq p, the volume forms on XtX_{t}

    1|z0|2​d​z0∧d​zΒ―0∧∏jβ‰ k,1≀j≀nβˆ’1​d​zj∧d​zΒ―j∼1|zk|2β€‹βˆ1≀j≀nβˆ’1​d​zj∧d​zΒ―j,\frac{1}{|z_{0}|^{2}}dz_{0}\wedge d\bar{z}_{0}\wedge\prod_{j\neq k,1\leq j\leq n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{j}\wedge d\bar{z}_{j}\sim\frac{1}{|z_{k}|^{2}}\prod_{1\leq j\leq n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{j}\wedge d\bar{z}_{j},

    and the third line uses |t|=|z0​…​zp|∼h1/2​|z1​…​zp||t|=|z_{0}\ldots z_{p}|\sim h^{1/2}|z_{1}\ldots z_{p}|.

  • β€’

    On XtX_{t} the function h≳|t|2h\gtrsim|t|^{2}. The region {|t|2∼h}βŠ‚Xt\{|t|^{2}\sim h\}\subset X_{t} can be identified as E00E_{0}^{0}, namely the vicinity of E0E_{0} away from deeper strata. Here

    βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚log⁑hβˆ§βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑hβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯0,βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑hβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰³βˆ’Ο‰π’³|Xtn.\begin{split}&\sqrt{-1}\partial\log h\wedge\bar{\partial}\log h\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq 0,\\ &\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}\log h\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\gtrsim-\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}.\end{split}
007S

Lemma 2.1. (Good test function) Given the divisor E0E_{0}, we can choose a C2C^{2} test function vv on XtX_{t} such that the following hold uniformly for small t≠0t\neq 0:

  • β€’

    vv is zero for hβ‰₯Ξ΄h\geq\delta.

  • β€’

    Globally 0≀vβ‰€βˆ’log⁑|t|0\leq v\leq-\log|t|.

  • β€’

    For any divisor EjE_{j} intersecting E0E_{0}, there is a subset of Ej0E_{j}^{0} with measure at least C2C_{2} on which βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯C3​ω𝒳|Xtn\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq C_{3}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}.

  • β€’

    For C4​|t|2≀h≀δC_{4}|t|^{2}\leq h\leq\delta, the form βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯0\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq 0.

  • β€’

    For h≀C4​|t|2h\leq C_{4}|t|^{2}, the form βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯βˆ’C5​ω𝒳|Xtn\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq-C_{5}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}.

007T

Proof. We seek the test function in the form v=Φ∘log⁑hv=\Phi\circ\log h for some convex, non-increasing, non-negative C2C^{2}-function Φ\Phi. Compute

βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹v=Ξ¦β€²β€²β€‹βˆ‚log⁑hβˆ§βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑h+Φ′​(βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹log⁑h~),\partial\bar{\partial}v=\Phi^{\prime\prime}\partial\log h\wedge\bar{\partial}\log h+\Phi^{\prime}(\partial\bar{\partial}\log\tilde{h}),

so using the properties of hh above,

βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1β‰₯{(Ξ¦β€²β€²C1β€²min{1h,h1/n|t|βˆ’2/n}+Ξ¦β€²C2β€²)ω𝒳|Xtn,|t|2≲h≀δ,C3′Φ′ω𝒳|Xtn,h≲|t|2.\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}\geq\begin{cases}\left(\Phi^{\prime\prime}C_{1}^{\prime}\min\{\frac{1}{h},h^{1/n}|t|^{-2/n}\}+\Phi^{\prime}C_{2}^{\prime}\right)\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n},\quad&|t|^{2}\lesssim h\leq\delta,\\ C_{3}^{\prime}\Phi^{\prime}\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n},\quad&h\lesssim|t|^{2}.\end{cases}

To satisfy our conditions on vv, it is enough to have

  • β€’

    Φ⁑(x)=0\Phi(x)=0 for xβ‰₯log⁑δx\geq\log\delta.

  • β€’

    |Φ′​(x)|≲1|\Phi^{\prime}(x)|\lesssim 1 for 2​log⁑|t|≲x≀log⁑δ2\log|t|\lesssim x\leq\log\delta.

  • β€’

    βˆ’dd​xlog|Ξ¦β€²|=Ξ¦β€²β€²|Ξ¦β€²|β‰₯C4β€²max{h,hβˆ’1/n|t|2/n}-\frac{d}{dx}\log|\Phi^{\prime}|=\frac{\Phi^{\prime\prime}}{|\Phi^{\prime}|}\geq C_{4}^{\prime}\max\{h,h^{-1/n}|t|^{2/n}\} for h=ex≀δ,h=e^{x}\leq\delta, where C4β€²>C2β€²/C1β€²C_{4}^{\prime}>C_{2}^{\prime}/C_{1}^{\prime}. Morever, for x<Ξ΄x<\delta, we need Ξ¦β€²<0\Phi^{\prime}<0 so that βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} has some strict positivity for Ξ΄/2<h<Ξ΄\delta/2<h<\delta. Notice convexity of Ξ¦\Phi is a consequence of these conditions.

To construct such Ξ¦\Phi, we can prescribe the behaviour near x=log⁑δx=\log\delta by Φ′​(x)=βˆ’e1/(xβˆ’log⁑δ)\Phi^{\prime}(x)=-e^{1/(x-\log\delta)} for x<log⁑δx<\log\delta, and match this with a solution to

βˆ’dd​xlog|Ξ¦β€²|=C4β€²max{ex,eβˆ’x/n|t|2/n},x<logΞ΄-\frac{d}{dx}\log|\Phi^{\prime}|=C_{4}^{\prime}\max\{e^{x},e^{-x/n}|t|^{2/n}\},\quad x<\log\delta

for some large enough C4β€²C_{4}^{\prime}, such that Ξ¦β€²\Phi^{\prime} remains C1C^{1} at the matching point. Integration shows that |Ξ¦β€²||\Phi^{\prime}| remains uniformly bounded at h∼|t|2h\sim|t|^{2}, or equivalently x∼2​log⁑|t|x\sim 2\log|t|. ∎

2.2 Convexity

Consider u∈P​S​H​(Xt,Ο‰t)u\in PSH(X_{t},\omega_{t}) normalised to supXtu=0\sup_{X_{t}}u=0. Equivalently, we can cover XtX_{t} by a bounded number of charts as before, and use the local potentials of ω𝒳\omega_{\mathcal{X}} to represent uu as a collection of local plurisubharmonic (psh) functions {uΞ²}\{u_{\beta}\} with |uΞ²βˆ’u|≀C|u_{\beta}-u|\leq C.

007U

Lemma 2.2. (Convexity) Let Ο•\phi be any psh function on the open subset of {1<|zi|<Ξ›,i=1,…p,|zk|<1,k=p+1,…n}βŠ‚(β„‚βˆ—)pΓ—β„‚nβˆ’p\{1<|z_{i}|<\Lambda,i=1,\ldots p,|z_{k}|<1,k=p+1,\ldots n\}\subset(\mathbb{C}^{*})^{p}\times\mathbb{C}^{n-p}. Then the function

ϕ¯​(x1,…​xn)=1(2​π)nβ€‹βˆ«D​(1)nβˆ’p∏p+1nβˆ’1​d​zk∧d​zΒ―kβ€‹βˆ«Tpϕ⁑(ex1+i​θ1,…​exp+i​θp)​d​θ1​…​d​θp\bar{\phi}(x_{1},\ldots x_{n})=\frac{1}{(2\pi)^{n}}\int_{D(1)^{n-p}}\prod_{p+1}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{k}\wedge d\bar{z}_{k}\int_{T^{p}}\phi(e^{x_{1}+i\theta_{1}},\ldots e^{x_{p}+i\theta_{p}})d\theta_{1}\ldots d\theta_{p}

is convex.

007V

Proof. For any choice of ΞΈi\theta_{i} the function ϕ⁑(z1​ei​θ1,…​zp​ei​θn,zp+1,…,zn)\phi(z_{1}e^{i\theta_{1}},\ldots z_{p}e^{i\theta_{n}},z_{p+1},\ldots,z_{n}) is psh, since the TpT^{p}-action on (β„‚βˆ—)p(\mathbb{C}^{*})^{p} is holomorphic. Thus the average function ϕ¯\bar{\phi} is also psh as a function of z1,…​zpz_{1},\ldots z_{p}. Any TpT^{p}-invariant psh function must be convex in the log coordinates, because for xi=log⁑|zi|x_{i}=\log|z_{i}|,

βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹Ο•Β―=14β€‹βˆ‘βˆ‚2Ο•Β―βˆ‚xiβ€‹βˆ‚xjβ€‹βˆ’1​d​log⁑zi∧d​log⁑zjΒ―β‰₯0.\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}\bar{\phi}=\frac{1}{4}\sum\frac{\partial^{2}\bar{\phi}}{\partial x_{i}\partial x_{j}}\sqrt{-1}d\log z_{i}\wedge d\overline{\log z_{j}}\geq 0.

∎

2.3 Harnack type inequality

007W

Lemma 2.3. (Almost maximum on top strata) For u∈P​S​H​(Xt,Ο‰t)u\in PSH(X_{t},\omega_{t}) normalised to supXtu=0\sup_{X_{t}}u=0, there is some i∈Ii\in I, such that

supEi0uβ‰₯βˆ’C,∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtnβ‰₯βˆ’Cβ€².\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C,\quad\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}.
007X

Proof. Let the global maximum of uu be achieved at q0∈EJ0q_{0}\in E_{J}^{0}, and denote the local potential of uu as uΞ²u_{\beta}. Without loss of generality uβ≀0u_{\beta}\leq 0. We have uβ​(q0)β‰₯βˆ’Cu_{\beta}(q_{0})\geq-C since |uβˆ’uΞ²|≀C|u-u_{\beta}|\leq C. Applying the mean value inequality around q0q_{0}, we find that the local average function uΒ―Ξ²\bar{u}_{\beta} produced in Lemma 2.2 satisfies supuΒ―Ξ²β‰₯βˆ’C\sup\bar{u}_{\beta}\geq-C for another uniform constant CC. By the convexity of uΒ―Ξ²\bar{u}_{\beta} its sup is almost achieved at the boundary of the chart, which is contained in a union of less deep strata EJβ€²0E_{J^{\prime}}^{0} with Jβ€²βŠŠJJ^{\prime}\subsetneq J. Thus we can find a point qβ€²q^{\prime} with u⁑(qβ€²)β‰₯βˆ’Cu(q^{\prime})\geq-C that belongs to a less deep stratum; an induction shows that there is some i∈Ii\in I, such that supEi0uβ‰₯βˆ’C\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C.

For the L1L^{1}-bound we recall the following Harnack inequality argument. Suppose a coordinate ball B⁑(q,3​R)B(q,3R) is contained in a local chart in a small neighbourhood of Ei0E_{i}^{0}. Applying the mean value inequality to the local psh function associated to uu, we see for y∈B⁑(q,R)y\in B(q,R) that

u⁑(y)≀C+βˆ’βˆ«B⁑(y,2​R)u≲1+βˆ’βˆ«B⁑(q,R)u.u(y)\leq C+\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(y,2R)}u\lesssim 1+\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(q,R)}u.

hence the Harnack inequality

βˆ’βˆ«B⁑(q,R)|u|≲1+infB⁑(q,R)(βˆ’u).\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(q,R)}|u|\lesssim 1+\inf_{B(q,R)}(-u).

Applying this to a chain of balls connecting any two points in Ei0E_{i}^{0} gives the L1L^{1}-bound ∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtnβ‰₯βˆ’Cβ€²\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}; the bound is uniform because the number of balls involved in the chain can be controlled independent of tt. ∎

007Y

Proposition 2.4. (Almost maximum on top strata II) There is a uniform lower bound for all |t|β‰ͺ1|t|\ll 1 and all i∈Ii\in I:

supEi0uβ‰₯βˆ’C,∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtnβ‰₯βˆ’Cβ€².\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C,\quad\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}. (3)
007Z

Proof. The L1L^{1}-estimate follows from the sup estimate as above, so the real problem is to transfer bounds between different Ei0E_{i}^{0}. This is nontrivial because the necks connecting Ei0E_{i}^{0} with each other are highly degenerate.

Given one divisor E0E_{0} such that ∫E00u​ω𝒳|Xtnβ‰₯βˆ’C,\int_{E_{0}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C, we produce a good test function vv by Lemma 2.1. Integrating by parts,

∫Xtvβ€‹βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹uβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1=∫Xtuβ€‹βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1.\int_{X_{t}}v\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}u\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}=\int_{X_{t}}u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}.

The LHS is the difference of ∫Xtv⁑(Ο‰t+βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹u)βˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1\int_{X_{t}}v(\omega_{t}+\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}u)\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} and ∫Xtv​ωtβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1\int_{X_{t}}v\omega_{t}\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}, and since βˆ’log⁑|t|≳vβ‰₯0-\log|t|\gtrsim v\geq 0 both terms are bounded between 00 and CC. Thus

|∫Xtuβ€‹βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1|≀C.|\int_{X_{t}}u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}|\leq C.

Now the form βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} can only be negative on {h∼|t|2}=E00\{h\sim|t|^{2}\}=E_{0}^{0}, and is bounded below by βˆ’C​ω𝒳|Xtn-C\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}. Thus the positive part of the signed measure uβ€‹βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} has total mass controlled by ∫E00|u|​ω𝒳|Xtn≀C\int_{E_{0}^{0}}|u|\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\leq C. Consequently, the negative part of the signed measure must also have total mass ≀C\leq C.

By construction, for any divisor EjE_{j} intersecting E0E_{0} there is a nontrivial amount of βˆ’1β€‹βˆ‚βˆ‚Β―β€‹vβˆ§Ο‰π’³|Xtnβˆ’1\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}-measure inside Ej0E_{j}^{0}. This forces supEj0uβ‰₯βˆ’C\sup_{E_{j}^{0}}u\geq-C. To summarize, we have transferred the sup bound from E00E_{0}^{0} to any Ej0E_{j}^{0} with Ej∩E0β‰ βˆ…E_{j}\cap E_{0}\neq\emptyset. Since the central fibre X0X_{0} is connected, in at most |I||I| steps this sup bound is transferred to all Ei0E_{i}^{0} with i∈Ii\in I. ∎

0080

Remark 2.5. This proof is inspired by the intersection theoretic argument of [2, section 6.1], which can be viewed as a non-archimedean analogue.

2.4 Local L1L^{1} estimate

Given a local chart on EJ0E_{J}^{0} with β„‚βˆ—\mathbb{C}^{*}-coordinates z1,…​zpz_{1},\ldots z_{p} and β„‚\mathbb{C}-coordinates zp+1,…,znz_{p+1},\ldots,z_{n}, and a point qq therein, we shall refer to the subregion

{12|zi(q)|≲|zi|≲2|zi(q)|,1≀i≀p}\{\frac{1}{2}|z_{i}(q)|\lesssim|z_{i}|\lesssim 2|z_{i}(q)|,\quad 1\leq i\leq p\}

as a log scale.

0081

Lemma 2.6. (Local L1L^{1}-estimate) Within every log scale there is a uniform bound on the L1L^{1}-average integral

βˆ’βˆ«l​o​c|u|∏1pβˆ’1dlogzi∧dlogzΒ―i∧∏p+1nβˆ’1dzk∧dzΒ―k≀C.\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.98003pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.26338pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.6363pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.45924pt}}\!\int_{loc}|u|\prod_{1}^{p}\sqrt{-1}d\log z_{i}\wedge d\log\bar{z}_{i}\wedge\prod_{p+1}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{k}\wedge d\bar{z}_{k}\leq C.
0082

Proof. We induct on the depth of the strata. For p=0p=0 this follows from Prop. 2.4. So let us assume the bound is achieved for depth <p<p. For a given chart, we consider the local psh function uΞ²u_{\beta} associated to uu and produce the convex average function uΒ―Ξ²\bar{u}_{\beta} as in Lemma 2.2. Since a definite neighbourhood of the boundary of the chart lies inside less deep strata, we know that near the boundary |uΒ―Ξ²|≀C|\bar{u}_{\beta}|\leq C by the induction hypothesis and the convexity condition. Using convexity again in the interior of the chart we see |uΒ―Ξ²|≀C|\bar{u}_{\beta}|\leq C in the whole chart.

Within any log scale, by construction the local average βˆ’βˆ«l​o​c(uΞ²βˆ’uΒ―Ξ²)=0.\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{loc}(u_{\beta}-\bar{u}_{\beta})=0. But uβ≀Cu_{\beta}\leq C by u≀0u\leq 0, hence

βˆ’βˆ«l​o​c|uΞ²βˆ’uΒ―Ξ²|β‰²βˆ’βˆ«l​o​c(uΞ²βˆ’uΒ―Ξ²)+≀C.\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{loc}|u_{\beta}-\bar{u}_{\beta}|\lesssim\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{loc}(u_{\beta}-\bar{u}_{\beta})_{+}\leq C.

Using |uβˆ’uΞ²|≀C|u-u_{\beta}|\leq C we conclude the local L1L^{1}-estimate on uu. ∎

2.5 Local Skoda estimate

We recall a basic version of the Skoda inequality:

0083

Proposition 2.7. (cf. [22, Thm 3.1]) If Ο•\phi is psh on B2βŠ‚β„‚nB_{2}\subset\mathbb{C}^{n}, with ∫B2|Ο•|​ωEn≀1\int_{B_{2}}|\phi|\omega_{E}^{n}\leq 1 with respect to the standard Euclidean metric Ο‰E\omega_{E}, then there are dimensional constants Ξ±\alpha, CC, such that

∫B1eβˆ’Ξ±β€‹Ο•β€‹Ο‰En≀C.\int_{B_{1}}e^{-\alpha\phi}\omega_{E}^{n}\leq C.

Applying this with Lemma 2.6,

0084

Corollary 2.8. (Local Skoda estimate) Within every log scale, there are uniform positive constants Ξ±\alpha and CC, such that

βˆ’βˆ«l​o​ceβˆ’Ξ±β€‹u∏1pβˆ’1dlogzi∧dlogzΒ―i∧∏p+1nβˆ’1dzk∧dzΒ―k≀C.\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{loc}e^{-\alpha u}\prod_{1}^{p}\sqrt{-1}d\log z_{i}\wedge d\log\bar{z}_{i}\wedge\prod_{p+1}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{k}\wedge d\bar{z}_{k}\leq C.

2.6 Uniform global Skoda estimate

We are interested in the following class of measures, motivated by Calabi-Yau measures (cf. section 3.1). Let aia_{i} be non-negative real numbers assigned to i∈Ii\in I, with min⁑ai=0\min a_{i}=0. Let

m=max{|J|βˆ’1:EJβ‰ βˆ…,ai=0Β forΒ i∈J}.m=\max\{|J|-1:E_{J}\neq\emptyset,a_{i}=0\text{ for }i\in J\}.

We say the measures d​μtd\mu_{t} on XtX_{t} satisfy a uniform upper bound of class (ai)(a_{i}), if on the local charts of each EJ0E_{J}^{0},

dΞΌt≀C|log⁑|t||m|z0|2​a0β‹―|zp|2​ap∏1pβˆ’1dlogzi∧dlogzΒ―i∧∏p+1nβˆ’1dzk∧dzΒ―k.d\mu_{t}\leq\frac{C}{|\log|t||^{m}}|z_{0}|^{2a_{0}}\cdots|z_{p}|^{2a_{p}}\prod_{1}^{p}\sqrt{-1}d\log z_{i}\wedge d\log\bar{z}_{i}\wedge\prod_{p+1}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{k}\wedge d\bar{z}_{k}. (4)

The normalisation factor ensures ∫Xtd​μt≀C\int_{X_{t}}d\mu_{t}\leq C independent of tt, by a straightforward local calculation.

0085

Theorem 2.9. (Uniform Skoda estimate) Suppose the measures d​μtd\mu_{t} on XtX_{t} satisfy a uniform upper bound of class (ai)(a_{i}). Then there are uniform positive constants Ξ±\alpha and AA, such that

∫Xteβˆ’Ξ±β€‹u​d​μt≀A,βˆ€u∈P​S​H​(Xt,Ο‰t)​ with ​supXtu=0.\int_{X_{t}}e^{-\alpha u}d\mu_{t}\leq A,\quad\forall u\in PSH(X_{t},\omega_{t})\text{ with }\sup_{X_{t}}u=0.
0086

Proof. We choose the charts so that each point on XtX_{t} is covered by ≀C\leq C log scales. Summing over the local Skoda estimates from all log scales, ∫Xteβˆ’Ξ±β€‹u​d​μt\int_{X_{t}}e^{-\alpha u}d\mu_{t} is bounded by

C|log⁑|t||mβ€‹βˆ‘log scales∫l​o​c|z0|2​a0​…​|zp|2​apβ€‹βˆ1pβˆ’1​d​log⁑zi∧d​log⁑zΒ―i∧∏p+1nβˆ’1​d​zk∧d​zΒ―k≀C.\begin{split}&\frac{C}{|\log|t||^{m}}\sum_{\text{log scales}}\int_{loc}|z_{0}|^{2a_{0}}\ldots|z_{p}|^{2a_{p}}\prod_{1}^{p}\sqrt{-1}d\log z_{i}\wedge d\log\bar{z}_{i}\wedge\prod_{p+1}^{n}\sqrt{-1}dz_{k}\wedge d\bar{z}_{k}\\ &\leq C.\end{split}

∎

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source collection and HTML conversion remain in progress.