5. Locality and the comparison principle [01AQ]
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
5. Locality and the comparison principle
Let be a form as in §4 with . In this section we prove the following analogue of [BT87, Proposition 4.2].
Theorem 5.1.
If and are bounded -psh functions, then
| (5.1) |
A first consequence is the fact that our operator is local in nature, something that is not an immediate consequence of our definition in §3.
Corollary 5.2.
Suppose , are bounded -psh functions that agree on an open set . Then on .
Proof.
Another key consequence of Theorem 5.1 is the comparison principle:
Corollary 5.3.
If and are bounded -psh functions, then
Proof.
As in [GZ07, Theorem 1.5] the result easily follows from the locality property by integration. More precisely, for any we have
so we obtain the desired estimate by letting . ∎
The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 5.1. We shall use
Lemma 5.4.
Let be a uniformly bounded net of -psh functions, and assume that converges to in the weak sense of measures for some bounded -psh function . Then
for every bounded, quasicontinuous function .
Proof.
We may assume , and for all , where . Given , let be an open set such that and is continuous on , see Definition 4.4. Using the Tietze extension theorem, we extend to a continuous function on all of such that . We then have
It follows from Lemma 4.6 that
Since is continuous, as , thus
Letting tend to zero completes the proof. ∎
Proof of Theorem 5.1.
We prove the result for successively more general functions , .
Step 1. First assume , are -psh model functions.
Pick an SNC model on which , and are determined by vertical divisors and respectively. These three functions are then affine on any face of the dual complex . Further, and are both atomic measures, supported on divisorial points corresponding to irreducible components of the special fiber, see §2.7. If is such a component for which , then and hence for all irreducible components of the special fiber intersecting , or else would not be affine on the face in . We have thus shown for all components of intersecting . If follows that as numerical classes on , and hence by definition of Monge-Ampère measures of model functions.
Step 2. Now suppose that is an -psh model function but that is merely a bounded -psh function.
We may assume , where . Note that the set is open since is continuous and is usc. It suffices to prove that for all model functions whose support is contained in and such that .
Fix a small number . By Proposition 4.3 there exists an open set and a decreasing sequence of -psh model functions on such that and such that converges uniformly to on . Pick small and rational and write . For , we have . Since and are both model functions, we have on by Step 1. It follows from Lemma 4.6 that
where we have used and .
Since is a model function, it is the difference of two -psh model functions by Proposition 2.6. Now decreases to as and , so Theorem 3.1 and the above inequality imply
We obtain the desired equality letting .
Step 3. Finally we treat the general case when and are bounded -psh functions.
Let be a decreasing net of -psh model functions converging to . Write . This is an open set. Set . Then
By what precedes, on . Moreover decreases to and so the measure converges weakly to . Let be a continuous function on . By Proposition 4.3 are quasicontinuous. It follows that and are also quasicontinuous, and applying Lemma 5.4 twice we get that
This holds for every , so , as was to be shown. ∎