ScalingStacks

Proof: [037R]

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

Proof: The following argument is quite close to the proof of the Sturmfels–Tevelev formula given by Baker, Payne and Rabinoff (see [BPR11], Theorem 8.2). Let YY be the closure of φ⁡(X)\varphi(X) in TT and let q:T→T′q:T\rightarrow T^{\prime} be a generic homomorphism onto a split torus T′=Spec⁡(K⁡[M′])T^{\prime}={\rm Spec}(K[M^{\prime}]) of rank n:=dim(X)n:=\dim(X) where generic is meant in the same way as in 7.4. Since removing lower dimensional subvarieties does not change φtrop​(X){\varphi_{\rm trop}}(X) and the tropical multiplicity functions, we may assume that φ\varphi is a finite morphism and then XX is affine.

Let Y′Y^{\prime} be the closure of q⁡(Y)q(Y) in T′T^{\prime}. Let ω∈NΓ\omega\in N_{\Gamma} be a regular point of Trop​(Y)=φtrop​(X){\rm Trop}(Y)={\varphi_{\rm trop}}(X), i.e. ω\omega is contained in the relative interior of an nn-dimensional polytope Δ⊂Trop⁡(Y)\Delta\subset{\rm Trop}(Y). We may choose for Δ\Delta an integral Γ\Gamma-affine polytope. We set τ:=relint⁡(Δ)\tau:={\rm relint}(\Delta) and ω′:=Trop​(q)​(ω)\omega^{\prime}:={\rm Trop}(q)(\omega). We consider the affinoid subdomains Uω:=trop−1​(ω)U_{\omega}:={\rm trop}^{-1}(\omega) in Tan{T^{\rm an}} and Uω′′:=trop−1​(ω′)U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}}:={\rm trop}^{-1}(\omega^{\prime}) in (T′)an(T^{\prime})^{\rm an}. By finiteness of φ\varphi, the set Xω:=(φan)−1​(Uω)=φtrop−1​(ω)X_{\omega}:=(\varphi^{\rm an})^{-1}(U_{\omega})=\varphi_{\rm trop}^{-1}(\omega) is an affinoid subdomain of Xan{X^{\rm an}} and φ\varphi restricts to a finite morphism Xω→Yω:=Yan∩UωX_{\omega}\rightarrow Y_{\omega}:={Y^{\rm an}}\cap U_{\omega}. Let 𝒳ω,𝒴ω,𝒰ω,𝒰ω′′{\mathscr{X}}_{\omega},{\mathscr{Y}}_{\omega},{\mathscr{U}}_{\omega},{\mathscr{U}}^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} be the canonical formal affine K∘{K^{\circ}}-models of Xω,Yω,Uω,Uω′′X_{\omega},Y_{\omega},U_{\omega},U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} associated to the algebra of power bounded elements in the corresponding affinoid algebra. Moreover, let Yω¯\overline{Y_{\omega}} be the closure of YωY_{\omega} in 𝒰ω{\mathscr{U}}_{\omega}. Then we have canonical morphisms

𝒳ω→φ𝒴ω→ιYω¯→q𝒰ω′′{\mathscr{X}}_{\omega}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\varphi}}{{\rightarrow}}{\mathscr{Y}}_{\omega}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\iota}}{{\rightarrow}}\overline{Y_{\omega}}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle q}}{{\rightarrow}}{\mathscr{U}}^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} (4)

of admissible formal affine schemes over K∘{K^{\circ}} in the sense of Bosch, Lütkebohmert and Raynaud (see [BL93], §1). We claim that all these morphisms are finite and surjective. Obviously, the generic fibres of the first and second morphism are finite and surjective. To see that the generic fibre of the third morphism is finite, we note first that Trop​(q)−1​(ω′)∩Trop⁡(Y){\rm Trop}(q)^{-1}(\omega^{\prime})\cap{\rm Trop}(Y) is finite by construction of qq and hence q−1​(Uω′′)∩Yanq^{-1}(U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}})\cap{Y^{\rm an}} is in the relative interior of an affinoid subdomain of Tan{T^{\rm an}} which is contained in q−1​(Uω′′)q^{-1}(U_{\omega^{\prime}}^{\prime}). We conclude that q−1​(Uω′′)∩Yan→Uω′′q^{-1}(U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}})\cap{Y^{\rm an}}\rightarrow U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} is a proper map (see the proof of Theorem 4.31 in [BPR11] for more details about the argument). Since q−1​(Uω′′)∩Yanq^{-1}(U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}})\cap{Y^{\rm an}} is the disjoint union of the finitely many affinoids Uρ∩YanU_{\rho}\cap{Y^{\rm an}}, ρ∈Trop​(q)−1​(ω′)∩Trop⁡(Y)\rho\in{\rm Trop}(q)^{-1}(\omega^{\prime})\cap{\rm Trop}(Y), we conclude that qq induces a proper morphism Yω→Uω′′Y_{\omega}\rightarrow U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} of affinoids. By Kiehl’s direct image theorem ([BGR84], Theorem 9.6.3/1), this morphism is finite and hence also surjective using dimensionality arguments. We conclude that all three morphisms in (4) are surjective and finiteness follows from [BPR11], Proposition 3.13.

The degree [Xω:Uω′′][X_{\omega}:U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}}] of XωX_{\omega} over the affinoid torus Uω′′U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} is well-defined as Uω′′U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} is irreducible (see [BPR11], Section 3, for a discussion of degrees). Since the degree does not change by passing to an affinoid subdomain of Uω′′U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}} (see [BPR11], Proposition 3.30), we get

[φtrop−1(τ):Trop(q)(τ)]=[Xω:Uω′′].[\varphi_{\rm trop}^{-1}(\tau):{\rm Trop}(q)(\tau)]=[X_{\omega}:U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}}]. (5)

The projection formula ([BPR11], Proposition 3.32) shows

[Xω:Uω′′]=∑B[B:(𝒰ω′′)s]=∑B[B:(𝔾mn)K~],[X_{\omega}:U^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}}]=\sum_{B}[B:({\mathscr{U}}^{\prime}_{\omega^{\prime}})_{s}]=\sum_{B}[B:({\mathbb{G}}_{m}^{n})_{{\tilde{K}}}], (6)

where BB ranges over all irreducible components of (𝒳ω)s({\mathscr{X}}_{\omega})_{s}. We conclude from (5) and (6) that

[φtrop−1(τ):Trop(q)(τ)]=∑C∑B over C[B:C]⋅[C:(𝔾mn)K~],[\varphi_{\rm trop}^{-1}(\tau):{\rm Trop}(q)(\tau)]=\sum_{C}\sum_{\text{$B$ over $C$}}[B:C]\cdot[C:({\mathbb{G}}_{m}^{n})_{{\tilde{K}}}], (7)

where CC ranges over all irreducible components of (Yω¯)s(\overline{Y_{\omega}})_{s} and BB ranges over all irreducible components of (𝒳ω)s({\mathscr{X}}_{\omega})_{s} mapping onto CC. Since the special fibre of Yω¯\overline{Y_{\omega}} is isomorphic to the initial degeneration inω​(Y){\rm in}_{\omega}(Y), all irreducible components CC are isomorphic to the torus Spec​(K~​[MΔ]){\rm Spec}({\tilde{K}}[M_{\Delta}]) (see [BPR11], Theorem 4.29) proving

[C:(𝔾mn)K~]=[MΔ:M′].[C:({\mathbb{G}}_{m}^{n})_{{\tilde{K}}}]=[M_{\Delta}:M^{\prime}]. (8)

Using (7) and (8), we get

man(ω)=[φtrop−1(τ):Trop(q)(τ)]⋅[MΔ:M′]−1=∑C∑B over C[B:C].m_{\rm an}(\omega)=[\varphi_{\rm trop}^{-1}(\tau):{\rm Trop}(q)(\tau)]\cdot[M_{\Delta}:M^{\prime}]^{-1}=\sum_{C}\sum_{\text{$B$ over $C$}}[B:C]. (9)

Since XωX_{\omega} is the preimage of the affinoid subdomain YωY_{\omega} of Tan{T^{\rm an}}, we deduce from [BPR11], Proposition 3.30, that XωX_{\omega} is of pure degree deg⁡(φ)\deg(\varphi) over YωY_{\omega} and hence the projection formula again shows the equality

deg⁡(φ)​cyc​((Yω¯)s)=(ι∘φ)∗​(cyc⁡((𝒳ω)s)CLOSE\deg(\varphi){\rm cyc}((\overline{Y_{\omega}})_{s})=(\iota\circ\varphi)_{*}({\rm cyc}(({\mathscr{X}}_{\omega})_{s}) (10)

of cycles in (𝒰ω)s({\mathscr{U}}_{\omega})_{s}. Inserting (10) in (9) by using that the special fibre of 𝒳ω{\mathscr{X}}_{\omega} is reduced, we get

man​(ω)=deg⁡(φ)​∑Cm⁡(C,(Yω¯)s),m_{\rm an}(\omega)=\deg(\varphi)\sum_{C}m(C,(\overline{Y_{\omega}})_{s}),

where m⁡(C,(Yω¯)s)m(C,(\overline{Y_{\omega}})_{s}) is the multiplicity of the irreducible component CC in the special fibre of Yω¯\overline{Y_{\omega}}. By definition, the right hand side is equal to malg​(ω)m_{\rm alg}(\omega) which proves the claim for Γ\Gamma-rational points ω\omega in Trop⁡(Y){\rm Trop}(Y). An obvious density argument finishes the proof. □\square

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