ScalingStacks

3.3. Regularity on the smooth locus [02E0]

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

3.3. Regularity on the smooth locus

Theorem 3.5.

Let XX be projective algebraic complex manifold, ω0\omega_{0} a smooth semi Kähler form that is Kähler outside a complex subvariety S⊂XS\subset X, and fix Ω\Omega be a Kähler form on XX. Assume that ωon=D​Ωn\omega_{o}^{n}=D\Omega^{n}, where D−εD^{-\varepsilon} is in L1​(Ωn)L^{1}(\Omega^{n}), and that [ω0],[Ω]∈N​Sℝ​(X)[\omega_{0}],[\Omega]\in NS_{\mathbb{R}}(X).

Let s1,…,sps_{1},...,s_{p} (resp. t1,…,tqt_{1},...,t_{q}) be holomorphic sections of some line bundle LL (resp L′L^{\prime}) on XX. Fix k∈ℝ≥0k\in\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}, l∈ℝ≥0l\in\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} and F∈𝒞∞​(X,ℝ)F\in{\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}(X,\mathbb{R}). Assume that

∫X1|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​Ωn<∞​ and ​∫X|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​eF​Ωn=∫XΩn.\int_{X}\frac{1}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}\Omega^{n}<\infty\text{ and }\int_{X}\frac{|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}e^{F}\Omega^{n}=\int_{X}\Omega^{n}.

Then the unique continuous function φ∈P​S​H​(X,ω0)\varphi\in PSH(X,\omega_{0}) such that

(ω0+d​dc​φ)n=|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​eF​Ωn​ and ​supXφ=−1(\omega_{0}+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=\frac{|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}e^{F}\Omega^{n}\,\text{ and }\sup_{X}\varphi=-1

is smooth outside B=S∪∩i{si=0}∪∩i{ti=0}B=S\cup\cap_{i}\{s_{i}=0\}\cup\cap_{i}\{t_{i}=0\}.

Remark 3.6.

This result should be compared with [Y], Theorem 8. Yau’s result is stronger in many respects (there is no projectivity/rationality assumption and it gives a more precise regularity theory); on the other hand the conditions on the poles of the L.H.S. is less optimal than here.

We expect the projectivity/rationality assumptions to be superfluous. We also expect that a finer regularity theory might be developed for singular KE metrics depending on a finer analysis of the klt singularities involved.

The rest of this subsection will be devoted to the proof of Theorem 3.5. For the reader’s convenience, we will treat two special cases before tackling the general case 55 5 Notice that apart from the 𝒞0{\mathcal{C}}^{0}-estimate with degenerate L.H.S., the methods used here are standard and in [Y], [Ts] and [Ko]. Higher regularity in [TZ] is treated along similar lines given the L∞L^{\infty}-estimate the authors announce.

Preliminary considerations

Thanks to Lemma 3.2 – here we use that D−ε∈L1D^{-\varepsilon}\in L^{1} – and Theorem 2.1, for every t∈[0,1]t\in[0,1] there is a unique continuous function φt∈P​S​H​(X,ω0+t​Ω)\varphi_{t}\in PSH(X,\omega_{0}+t\Omega) such that

(ωo+t​Ω+d​dc​φt)n=Ct​|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​eF​Ωn​ and ​supXφt=−1,(\omega_{o}+t\Omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{t})^{n}=C_{t}\frac{|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}e^{F}\Omega^{n}\text{ and }\sup_{X}\varphi_{t}=-1,

where Ct>0C_{t}>0 is an adequate normalisation constant and ‖φt‖𝒞0​(X)\|\varphi_{t}\|_{{\mathcal{C}}^{0}(X)} is uniformly bounded by a constant independant of t≥0t\geq 0.

We cannot use right away [Y], Theorem 8 p. 403, to ensure that (φt)(\varphi_{t}) be smooth outside BB for t>0t>0, since our integral condition is stronger than his. However we can use [Y], Thm 3, p 365 to conclude that, in case ∩i{ti=0}=∅\cap_{i}\{t_{i}=0\}=\emptyset, (φt)(\varphi_{t}) is smooth outside BB and d​dc​φtdd^{c}\varphi_{t} is a form whose coefficients are globally bounded on XX, hence φt∈𝒞1,1​(X)\varphi_{t}\in{\mathcal{C}}^{1,1}(X) for t>0t>0. Since this does not imply ellipticity if ∩i{si=0}≠∅\cap_{i}\{s_{i}=0\}\not=\emptyset, this does not imply higher regularity on the whole of XX.

The required uniformity in t>0t>0 is not proved in [Y]. To deal with this case, we use a nice trick due to H.Tsuji [Ts].

The simplest case

First, assume ∩i{si=0}∪∩i{ti=0}=∅\cap_{i}\{s_{i}=0\}\cup\cap_{i}\{t_{i}=0\}=\emptyset. Hence the family of equations under consideration can be rewritten as:

(ωo+t​Ω+d​dc​φt)n=Ct​eF​Ωn,(\omega_{o}+t\Omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{t})^{n}=C_{t}e^{F}\Omega^{n},

FF being smooth.

Tsuji’s trick is as follows. By Kodaira’s lemma, there exists EE an effective Cartier divisor of XX such that [ωo]=[κε]+ε⁡[E][\omega_{o}]=[\kappa_{\varepsilon}]+\varepsilon[E] where [κε][\kappa_{\varepsilon}] is ample, hence we may choose a representative κε\kappa_{\varepsilon} which is a Kähler form for every ε>0\varepsilon>0 small enough. We may actually assume EE contains BB and use a family of EE such that ∩S​u​p​p​(E)=B\cap Supp(E)=B, by Nakamaye’s theorem on base loci [Na].

Actually, despite the notation, it will NOT be necessary to let ε\varepsilon decrease to 00 66 6 This technical device could be useful to study finer regularity results and we will fix once for all such an ε>0\varepsilon>0.

Let σ∈H0​(X,𝒪X​(E))\sigma\in H^{0}(X,\mathcal{O}_{X}(E)) be the canonical section vanishing on EE with the appropriate multiplicity. We can fix a smooth hermitian metric on this line bundle such that the Poincaré Lelong equation holds,

ωo=κε+ε⁡[E]−ε​d​dc​log⁡|σ|2.\omega_{o}=\kappa_{\varepsilon}+\varepsilon[E]-\varepsilon dd^{c}\log|\sigma|^{2}.

The function φt:=φt−ε​log⁡|σ|2\varphi_{t}:=\varphi_{t}-\varepsilon\log|\sigma|^{2} is smooth in X∖EX\setminus E and is a classical solution to the PDE

(κε+t​Ω+d​dc​φt)n=eFε,t​(κε+t​Ω)n,(\kappa_{\varepsilon}+t\Omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{t})^{n}=e^{F_{\varepsilon,t}}(\kappa_{\varepsilon}+t\Omega)^{n},

where (Fε,t)1≥t>0(F_{\varepsilon,t})_{1\geq t>0} is uniformly bounded in the 𝒞∞​(X){\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}(X)-topology of functions and κt=κε+t​Ω\kappa_{t}=\kappa_{\varepsilon}+t\Omega is uniformly bounded in the 𝒞∞{\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}-topology of Kähler forms on XX.

We can use the result of the calculation in [Y], section 2. The important formula is (2.22) p. 351 and in a subsidiary fashion (2.21). In these formulae, at each point p∈X−Ep\in X-E, an adequate system of normal coordinates for κt\kappa_{t} is constructed and comparing the notations here and there, we substitute nn for mm, κt\kappa_{t} for gi​j¯g_{i\bar{j}}, κt+d​dc​φt\kappa_{t}+dd^{c}\varphi_{t} for gi​j¯′g_{i\bar{j}}^{\prime}, φt\varphi_{t} for φ\varphi and Fε,tF_{\varepsilon,t} for FF. The operator Δ\Delta is the Laplace operator (with the analyst’s sign) of κt\kappa_{t} and Δ′\Delta^{\prime} the Laplace operator of κt+d​dc​φt\kappa_{t}+dd^{c}\varphi_{t}. Also Ri​i¯​l​l¯=Ri​i¯​l​l¯tR_{i\bar{i}l\bar{l}}=R^{t}_{i\bar{i}l\bar{l}} is the holomorphic bissectional curvature of κt\kappa_{t} expressed in the above system of normal coordinates.

Since κt\kappa_{t} is uniformly bounded in the 𝒞2{\mathcal{C}}^{2} topology of Kähler forms then certainly there is constant C=CεC=C_{\varepsilon} independent of tt such that (2.21) holds and C′C^{\prime} also independent of tt such that C′>infRi​i¯​l​l¯tC^{\prime}>\inf R^{t}_{i\bar{i}l\bar{l}}.

After these substitutions are made, (2.22) p. 351 reads:

eC​φt​Δ′​(e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt))≥Δ⁡(Fε,t)−n2​C′−C​n​(n+Δ​φt)+e−Fε,tn−1​(n+Δ​φt)nn−1e^{C\varphi_{t}}\Delta^{\prime}(e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t}))\geq\Delta(F_{\varepsilon,t})-n^{2}C^{\prime}-Cn(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})+e^{-\frac{F_{\varepsilon,t}}{n-1}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})^{\frac{n}{n-1}}

We can fix constants CiC_{i} independent of tt such that

ΔFε,t≥C1 and e−Fε,t/n−1≥C3>0.\Delta F_{\varepsilon,t}\geq C_{1}\;\;\;\;\text{ and }\;\;\;\;e^{-F_{\varepsilon,t}/n-1}\geq C_{3}>0.

Thus setting y=n+Δ​φty=n+\Delta\varphi_{t} yields

eC​φt​Δ′​(e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt))≥C5+C6​y+eC7​ymm−1.e^{C\varphi_{t}}\Delta^{\prime}(e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t}))\geq C_{5}+C_{6}y+e^{C_{7}}y^{\frac{m}{m-1}}.

Now by definition

e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt)=|σ|+C​ε​e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt+ε​Δ​log⁡|σ|2).e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})=|\sigma|^{+C\varepsilon}e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t}+\varepsilon\Delta\log|\sigma|^{2}).

For each t>0t>0 the functions φt\varphi_{t}, ε​Δ​log⁡|σ|2\varepsilon\Delta\log|\sigma|^{2} and Δ​φt\Delta\varphi_{t} are bounded on XX. Hence the positive function e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt)e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t}) is continuous on XX, vanishes on EE and is smooth on X−EX-E. Its maximum is achieved at some point pt∉Ep_{t}\not\in E. It follows from the maximum principle that

0≥C5+C6​y+eC7​ynn−1​ at point ​y=y⁡(pt).0\geq C_{5}+C_{6}y+e^{C_{7}}y^{\frac{n}{n-1}}\text{ at point }y=y(p_{t}).

Therefore y≤C8y\leq C_{8} with a constant independent of t>0t>0. Now e−C​φt​(pt)=|σ⁡(pt)|+C​ε​e−C​φt​(pt)e^{-C\varphi_{t}(p_{t})}=|\sigma(p_{t})|^{+C\varepsilon}e^{-C\varphi_{t}(p_{t})}. Using the uniform 𝒞0{\mathcal{C}}^{0} estimate for φt\varphi_{t}, we get 0≤(n+Δt​φt)≤C9​e+C​φt0\leq(n+\Delta_{t}\varphi_{t})\leq C_{9}e^{+C\varphi_{t}}. Since |φt||\varphi_{t}| and ε​Δ​log⁡|σ|2\varepsilon\Delta\log|\sigma|^{2} are uniformly bounded by a constant independent of t>0t>0, we infer

(n+Δt​φt)≤C10​|σ|−C​ε=C10​|σ|−Cε​ε.(n+\Delta_{t}\varphi_{t})\leq C_{10}|\sigma|^{-C\varepsilon}=C_{10}|\sigma|^{-C_{\varepsilon}\varepsilon}.

This yields a tt-independent 𝒞0{\mathcal{C}}^{0}- estimate of d​dc​φtdd^{c}\varphi_{t} on the compact subsets of X−EX-E 77 7 Note that C=CεC=C_{\varepsilon} and that ε​Cε\varepsilon C_{\varepsilon} might blow up as ε\varepsilon goes to 00. .

Standard arguments of the theory of complex Monge-Ampère equations give an interior estimate of φt\varphi_{t} in 𝒞l​o​ck,α​(X−E){\mathcal{C}}^{k,\alpha}_{loc}(X-E) for every k≥2k\geq 2, α∈]0,1[\alpha\in]0,1[ which is independent of t>0t>0 (see for instance Theorem 5.1, p. 15 in [Bl2]). Hence the family (φt)t>0(\varphi_{t})_{t>0} is precompact in every 𝒞l​o​ck,α​(X−E){\mathcal{C}}^{k,\alpha}_{loc}(X-E). Its cluster values are cluster values in 𝒞O​(X−E){\mathcal{C}}^{O}(X-E) hence they are all equal to φ|X−E\varphi|_{X-E}. This implies φ∈𝒞l​o​ck,α​(X−E)\varphi\in{\mathcal{C}}^{k,\alpha}_{loc}(X-E), hence that φ∈𝒞∞​(X−E)\varphi\in{\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}(X-E).

Case where ∩i{ti=0}=∅\cap_{i}\{t_{i}=0\}=\emptyset

88 8 It suffices to consider this case for constructing singular KE metrics on algebraic varieties with canonical singularities

We study here the equation

(ωo+t​Ω+d​dc​φt)n=Ct​(|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k)​eF​Ωn(\omega_{o}+t\Omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{t})^{n}=C_{t}(|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k})e^{F}\Omega^{n}

The first few steps of the preceding argument can be repeated without changes. Next we apply formula (2.22) in [Y] as earlier, except that we set F=Fε,t+log⁡‖s‖(2​k)F=F_{\varepsilon,t}+\log||s||^{(2k)}, where ‖s‖(2​k):=|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k||s||^{(2k)}:=|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}. This yields

eC​φt​Δ′​(e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt))\displaystyle e^{C\varphi_{t}}\Delta^{\prime}(e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})) ≥\displaystyle\geq Δ​Fε,t+Δ​log⁡‖s‖(2​k)−n2​C′−C​n​(n+Δ​φt)\displaystyle\Delta F_{\varepsilon,t}+\Delta\log||s||^{(2k)}-n^{2}C^{\prime}-Cn(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})
+(e−Fε,t‖s‖(2​k))1/(n−1)​(n+Δ​φt)nn−1\displaystyle+\left(\frac{e^{-F_{\varepsilon,t}}}{||s||^{(2k)}}\right)^{1/(n-1)}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t})^{\frac{n}{n-1}}

We recall the two preceding inequalities and observe two new ones that are available:

Δ​Fε,t≥C1\displaystyle\Delta F_{\varepsilon,t}\geq C_{1}\; and e−Fε,t/n−1≥C3>0;\displaystyle\;e^{-F_{\varepsilon,t}/n-1}\geq C_{3}>0;
Δ​log⁡‖s‖(2​k)≥C2\displaystyle\Delta\log||s||^{(2k)}\geq C_{2} and C4≥‖s‖(2​k).\displaystyle C_{4}\geq||s||^{(2k)}.

Setting as earlier y=n+Δ​φty=n+\Delta\varphi_{t}, we get

eC​φt​Δ′​(e−C​φt​(n+Δ​φt))≥C5+C6​y+eC7​ymm−1.e^{C\varphi_{t}}\Delta^{\prime}(e^{-C\varphi_{t}}(n+\Delta\varphi_{t}))\geq C_{5}+C_{6}y+e^{C_{7}}y^{\frac{m}{m-1}}.

After this point, the proof is entirely the same as before.

Remark 3.7.

In order to carry out the second order a priori estimate, one needs information that only depend on supXF\sup_{X}F and infXΔ​F\inf_{X}\Delta F. This is pointed out in [Y], p. 351, and it is the basis for the proof of [Y], Thm 3.

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