ScalingStacks

Part II [03UP]

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 Β· Original author HTML

Part II

6 Compactifications of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures

6.1 Properties of compactifications

Assume that we are given a non-compact manifold Bs​mB^{sm} with a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure. We would like to β€œcompactify” it, i.e. to find a compact Hausdorff topological space BB such that Bs​mβŠ‚BB^{sm}\subset B is an open dense subset. We do not require an extension of the 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure to BB. The question is: what kind of properties one should expect from such a compactification? We cannot give a complete list of such properties at the moment. Instead, we formulate two of them and illustrate the notion of compactification in PL case. Similarity between examples in Sections 3.2 and 4.2 suggests that the class of singularities which appear in integrable systems should be more or less the same as the class of singularities appearing in non-archimedean geometry.

Let x∈Bs​i​n​g:=Bβˆ–Bs​mx\in B^{sing}:=B\setminus B^{sm} be a singular point of some compactification of Bs​mB^{sm}. Then we require the following
Finiteness property. There is a fundamental system of neighborhoods UβŠ‚BU\subset B of xx such that the number of connected components of U∩Bs​mU\cap B^{sm} is finite.

Let U∩Bs​m=βŠ”1≀i≀NUiU\cap B^{sm}=\sqcup_{1\leq i\leq N}U_{i} be the disjoint union of the connected components. Let us pick a point xi∈Uix_{i}\in U_{i} and consider a continuous path Ξ³:[0,1]β†’B\gamma:[0,1]\to B such that γ⁑(0)=xi,γ⁑(1)=x,γ⁑([0,1))βŠ‚Ui\gamma(0)=x_{i},\gamma(1)=x,\gamma([0,1))\subset U_{i}. Using the affine structure we can canonically lift this path to a path Ξ³β€²:[0,1)β†’Txi​B\gamma^{\prime}:[0,1)\to T_{x_{i}}B. We assume that the lifted path Ξ³β€²\gamma^{\prime} extends to time t=1t=1 and is analytic at t=1t=1 (it is a technical assumption, helping to avoid some pathologies). Then we require the following
Independence property. Path Ξ³\gamma with the properties as above exists, and point γ′​(1)∈Txi​B\gamma^{\prime}(1)\in T_{x_{i}}B does not depend on the choice of Ξ³\gamma.

Independence property implies the existence of a fixed vector for the monodromy representation restricted to Ο€1​(U∩Bs​m,xi)\pi_{1}(U\cap B^{sm},x_{i}) (this implies the Fixed Point property from Section 3.1).

6.2 PL compactifications

Let VV be a finite set, SβŠ‚2VS\subset 2^{V} belongs to the set of (n+1)(n+1)-element subsets of VV. Then we have a nn-dimensional simplicial complex B=βˆͺY∈SΞ”YβŠ‚Ξ”VB=\cup_{Y\in S}\Delta^{Y}\subset\Delta^{V}.

Let us choose a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on nn-dimensional faces of BB which is compatible with the standard affine structure, and consider all (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dimensional faces which enjoy the following property: they belong to exactly two nn-dimensional faces. For any two such nn-dimensional faces Οƒ\sigma and Ο„\tau we choose a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on ΟƒβˆͺΟ„\sigma\cup\tau which is compatible with the already chosen 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures on Οƒ\sigma and Ο„\tau (such a choice is equivalent to a choice of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure in a neighborhood of the (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dimensional face Οƒβˆ©Ο„\sigma\cap\tau). In this way we obtain a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on the union UU of the interior points of all nn-dimensional simplices and also the interior points of (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dimensional faces belonging to exactly two top-dimensional cells.

Proposition 3

There exists (and unique) maximal extension of this 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure to an open subset UmaxβŠ‚BU_{\max}\subset B containing UU.

Proof. Let us proceed inductively by codimension of faces. The induction step reduces to the obvious remark that the extension of the standard 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on 𝐑nβˆ–L{{\bf R}}^{n}\setminus L to a neighborhood of point p∈Lp\in L in 𝐑n{\bf R}^{n} is unique in the case when LβŠ‚π‘nL\subset{\bf R}^{n} is an affine subspace, dimL≀nβˆ’2\dim L\leq n-2\,\,. β– \blacksquare

It is easy to see that Bs​m:=UmaxB^{sm}:=U_{\max} with 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on it, compactified by BB satisfies both Finiteness and Independence properties.

We introduce PL compactifications both as a β€œtoy model”, and also (as we hope, see Conjecture 6 in Section 6.3) as a sufficiently representative class for applications. In this case we can try to formulate additional desired properties. One of goals is to find a good substitution for the algebro-geometric notion of a canonical singularity (which is, morally, a singularity of a non-collapsing limit of a family of Calabi-Yau manifolds with fixed KΓ€hler class).

For a large class of maximally degenerating Calabi-Yau manifolds there is a proposal by several authors (see [GS] and [HZh]) for a PL compactification BB conjecturally related to the Gromov-Hausdorff limit. Space BB is topologically a sphere SnS^{n}, it carries two dual cell decompositions. Each of these decompositions is identified with the boundary βˆ‚P1\partial P_{1} or βˆ‚P2\partial P_{2} of a convex (n+1)(n+1)-dimensional polytope. Moreover, on each nn-dimensional face of each polytope we have a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure compatible with the natural affine structure. The assumption is that for any two open nn-cells U,Uβ€²U,U^{\prime} from the first and the second cell decompositions, two induced 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures on U∩Uβ€²U\cap U^{\prime} coincide. This gives a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Bβˆ–(S​knβˆ’1∩S​knβˆ’1β€²)B\setminus\left(Sk_{n-1}\cap Sk_{n-1}^{\prime}\right) where S​knβˆ’1Sk_{n-1} and S​knβˆ’1β€²Sk_{n-1}^{\prime} are (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-skeletons of two CW-structures.

6.3 Some conjectures about singular sets

Our conjectures are in fact rather β€œwishes”, i.e. they are desired properties of Bs​i​n​g=Bβˆ–Bs​mB^{sing}=B\setminus B^{sm}. For simplicity we assume that Bs​i​n​gB^{sing} is a stratified set (say, CW complex) of dimension less or equal than nβˆ’1n-1.

Conjecture 5

We have a decomposition Bs​i​n​g=Bnβˆ’1s​i​n​gβˆͺB≀nβˆ’2s​i​n​gB^{sing}=B^{sing}_{n-1}\cup B^{sing}_{\leq n-2}, where B≀nβˆ’2s​i​n​gB^{sing}_{\leq n-2} consists of strata of dimension less or equal than nβˆ’2n-2, Bnβˆ’1s​i​n​gB^{sing}_{n-1} is the union of strata of dimension nβˆ’1n-1, and locally near every point x∈Bnβˆ’1s​i​n​gx\in B^{sing}_{n-1} the 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure is modeled by the β€œbook” βˆͺi∈I𝐑nβˆ’1×𝐑β‰₯0\cup_{i\in I}{{\bf R}}^{n-1}\times{{\bf R}}_{\geq 0}. Here II is a finite set, all half-spaces have a common plane 𝐑nβˆ’1Γ—{0}{{\bf R}}^{n-1}\times\{0\} and xx belongs to this plane. 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Bs​m=βŠ”i∈I𝐑nβˆ’1×𝐑>0B^{sm}=\sqcup_{i\in I}{{\bf R}}^{n-1}\times{{\bf R}}_{>0} is the natural one.

This conjecture gives a local model for a singular 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure at a singular component of codimension one. Let us discuss the case of higher codimension. We start with the following definition.

Definition 7

A 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure with singularities on BB is given by:

  1. 1.

    a closed subset Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gβŠ‚BB^{pre-sing}\subset B of a compact space BB;

  2. 2.

    a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on the open set Bβˆ–Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\setminus B^{pre-sing} .

One can think about closed set of β€œpotential singularities” Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB^{pre-sing} as containing the actual set of singularities Bs​i​n​gB^{sing}).

Definition 8

A continuous path γ⁑(t),t∈[0,1]\gamma(t),t\in[0,1] in the space of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures with singularities on a given compact space BB is given by:

  1. 1.

    a continuous path Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB_{t}^{pre-sing} in the space of all compact subsets of BB,

  2. 2.

    a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Bβˆ–Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\setminus B_{t}^{pre-sing} for all t∈[0,1]t\in[0,1]

Notice that for each t0∈(0,1)t_{0}\in(0,1) and x0∈Bβˆ–Bt0p​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gx_{0}\in B\setminus B_{t_{0}}^{pre-sing} we can choose neighborhoods Ut0U_{t_{0}} of t0t_{0} and Ux0U_{x_{0}} of x0x_{0} such that Ux0βŠ‚Bβˆ–Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gU_{x_{0}}\subset B\setminus B_{t}^{pre-sing} for all t∈Ut0t\in U_{t_{0}}. Then we require that:

  1. 3.

    if Ut0U_{t_{0}} and Ux0U_{x_{0}} are sufficiently small then the induced 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Ux0U_{x_{0}} does not depend on t∈Ut0t\in U_{t_{0}}.

Notice that in the case when the homotopy type of Bβˆ–Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\setminus B_{t}^{pre-sing} remains unchanged the representation ρt:Ο€1​(Bβˆ–Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​g)β†’G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉𝐑n\rho_{t}:\pi_{1}\left(B\setminus B_{t}^{pre-sing}\right)\to GL(n,{\bf Z})\ltimes{\bf R}^{n} stays the same.

We are going to give an example of a non-trivial path in the next subsection. We expect that singularities which appear in the collapse of Calabi-Yau manifolds satisfy the following

Conjecture 6

If Bs​i​n​g=Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB^{sing}=B^{pre-sing} is of codimension at least two in BB, then there is a continuous path γ⁑(t)\gamma(t) in the space of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures with singularities which connects a given structure with the one coming from a PL compactification, and such that for all t∈[0,1]t\in[0,1] we have c​o​d​i​m​(Btp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​g)β‰₯2codim(B_{t}^{pre-sing})\geq 2 and γ⁑(t)\gamma(t) has Finiteness and Independence properties.

6.4 Standard singularities in codimension two

Let us remove the angle {(x,y)βˆˆπ‘2|  0<x<y}\left\{(x,y)\in{\bf R}^{2}\,|\,\,0<x<y\,\right\} from 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}. After that we identify sides of the angle by the affine transformation (x,y)↦(x+y,y)(x,y)\mapsto(x+y,y). In this way we introduce a new 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\} with the monodromy around (0,0)(0,0) given by the unipotent matrix (see Figure 3)

(1101).\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}1&1\\ 0&1\end{array}\right)\,\,.

Refer to caption

Figure 3: Glue both sides of the dashed area. White parallelograms are identified.

This 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure does not admit a continuation to 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}. Therefore we obtain a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure with singularities on 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}. We will call standard the singularity at (0,0)(0,0).

Equivalently, we can describe this 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\} by taking a cut along the ray {(x,0)|x>0}\{(x,0)\,|\,x>0\} in 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2} and glue the standard 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure above and below the cut by means of the affine transformation (x,y)↦(x+y,y)(x,y)\mapsto(x+y,y) (see Figure 1 in Section 3.2.4). In this description it is clear that we can start the cut at arbitrary point (x0,0)(x_{0},0) on the xx-axes. The resulting singularity will be also called the standard one.

Remark 1

We can vary a position of (x0,0)(x_{0},0), thus obtaining a continuous path in the space of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures with singularities in 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}.

More generally, suppose that BB is equipped with a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure which has standard singularities at points p1,…,pmp_{1},\dots,p_{m}. Then we can slightly move each point pip_{i} in the direction invariant under the local monodromy around pip_{i}. This gives a new 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure which is ZPL-isomorphic to the initial one.

Standard singularity is called focus-focus singularity in the theory of integrable systems (see [Zu]). In non-archimedean geometry it appears as a singular value of some map f:Xa​n→𝐑2f:X^{an}\to{{\bf R}}^{2}, where XX is an algebraic surface in 33-dimensional affine space 𝐀K3{\bf A}_{K}^{3} (see Section 8).

Let us consider the Cartesian product of 𝐑2βˆ–{(0,0)}{{\bf R}}^{2}\setminus\{(0,0)\} equipped with the above 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure with the standard (non-singular) 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on 𝐑nβˆ’2{{\bf R}}^{n-2}. Let us choose a continuous function f⁑(z1,…,znβˆ’2)f(z_{1},...,z_{n-2}) and start the cuts at all points (f⁑(z1,…,znβˆ’2),0,z1,…,znβˆ’2)(f(z_{1},...,z_{n-2}),0,z_{1},...,z_{n-2}). This means that we introduce the standard non-singular 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure in the region yβ‰ 0y\neq 0 as well as in the region (y=0,x<f⁑(z1,…,znβˆ’2))(y=0,x<f(z_{1},...,z_{n-2})). Near points (y=0,x>f⁑(z1,…,znβˆ’2))(y=0,x>f(z_{1},...,z_{n-2})) we introduce a modified 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure by declaring functions

(y,x+max⁑(y,0),z1,…,znβˆ’2)(y,x+\max(y,0),z_{1},\dots,z_{n-2})

to be 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine coordinates. This gives an example of a β€œcurved” singular set Bs​i​n​gB^{sing} of codimension 2. Since function ff can be approximated by PL functions, the above 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure can be deformed to a PL one.

6.5 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine version of Gauss-Bonnet theorem

Let BB be a connected compact oriented topological surface, Bs​i​n​gβŠ‚BB^{sing}\subset B a finite set. Assume that Bs​m=Bβˆ–Bs​i​n​gB^{sm}=B\setminus B^{sing} carries a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure such that for any x∈Bs​i​n​gx\in B^{sing} there exists a small neighborhood UU such that U=βˆͺi∈IUiU=\cup_{i\in I}U_{i} where II is a finite set and each UiU_{i} is affine equivalent to a germ of an angle in 𝐑2{{\bf R}}^{2}, with xx being the apex of each angle.

The aim of this section is to define a map il​o​c:Bs​i​n​gβ†’112​𝐙i_{loc}:B^{sing}\to{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}} (which depends only on 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure near Bs​i​n​gB^{sing}) and prove the following result (a kind of Gauss-Bonnet theorem).

Theorem 2

The following equality holds

βˆ‘x∈Bs​i​n​gil​o​c​(x)=χ⁑(B),\sum_{x\in B^{sing}}i_{loc}(x)=\chi(B)\,\,,

where χ⁑(B)\chi(B) is the Euler characteristic of BB.

We start with the construction of il​o​ci_{loc}. Let us denote by S​L​(2,𝐙)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})} the pre-image of S​L​(2,𝐙)SL(2,{{\bf Z}}) in the universal covering S​L​(2,𝐑)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf R}})} of the group S​L​(2,𝐑)SL(2,{{\bf R}}). The group S​L​(2,𝐑)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf R}})} contains Ο€1​(S​L​(2,𝐑))≃𝐙\pi_{1}(SL(2,{{\bf R}}))\simeq{{\bf Z}}. Let uu be a generator of the latter (it belongs also to S​L​(2,𝐙)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})}).

We have an exact sequence of groups

1→𝐙→S​L​(2,𝐙)~β†’P​S​L​(2,𝐙)β†’1.1\to{{\bf Z}}\to\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})}\to PSL(2,{{\bf Z}})\to 1\,\,.

Notice that P​S​L​(2,𝐙)PSL(2,{{\bf Z}}) is a free product 𝐙/2βˆ—π™/3{{\bf Z}}/2*{{\bf Z}}/3. Moreover, in the above exact sequence 𝐙{{\bf Z}} is embedded into the center of S​L​(2,𝐙)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})}. Notice that uu is the image of 2βˆˆπ™2\in{{\bf Z}}. One can choose representatives a2,a3a_{2},a_{3} of the standard generators of P​S​L​(2,𝐙)PSL(2,{{\bf Z}}) in such a way that S​L​(2,𝐙)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})} is generated by u,a2,a3u,a_{2},a_{3} subject to the relations a22=a33,a24=a36=ua_{2}^{2}=a_{3}^{3},a_{2}^{4}=a_{3}^{6}=u. This gives a homomorphism of groups Ο•:S​L​(2,𝐙)~→𝐙\phi:\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})}\to{{\bf Z}} such that ϕ⁑(a2)=3,ϕ⁑(a3)=2,ϕ⁑(u)=12\phi(a_{2})=3,\phi(a_{3})=2,\phi(u)=12. Dividing by 1212 we obtain a homomorphism i:S​L​(2,𝐙)~β†’112​𝐙i:\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})}\to{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}} such that i⁑(u)=1i(u)=1.

Let us consider a topological S1S^{1}-bundle EE over BB, such that the fiber over x∈Bx\in B is the union of all affine rays outcoming of xx. Then the restriction of EE to Bs​mB^{sm} is just the spherical bundle. Let us pick x0∈Bs​mx_{0}\in B^{sm} and remove it from BB together with small neighborhoods of all points Bs​i​n​gB^{sing}. We denote by B1B_{1} the topological space obtained in this way. We can trivialize the tangent bundle over B1B_{1} (we choose a C∞C^{\infty}-trivialization, compatible with S​L​(2,𝐑)SL(2,{{\bf R}})-structure) in such a way that it extends to a continuous trivialization of S1S^{1}-bundle EE over Bβˆ–{x0}B\setminus\{x_{0}\}. Let α∈Ω1​(B1)βŠ—s​l​(2,𝐑)\alpha\in\Omega^{1}(B_{1})\otimes sl(2,{{\bf R}}) be a 11-form defined by means of the affine structure βˆ‡\nabla on B1B_{1}. Then d​α+12​[Ξ±,Ξ±]=0d\alpha+{\frac{1}{2}}[\alpha,\alpha]=0 and Ξ±\alpha defines a flat connection on a trivial S​L​(2,𝐑)~\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf R}})}-bundle on B1B_{1}. It gives a a monodromy representation Ο€1​(B1)β†’S​L​(2,𝐙)~\pi_{1}(B_{1})\to\widetilde{SL(2,{{\bf Z}})} defined up to a conjugation. Composing it with the homomorphism ii we obtain a homomorphism Ο€1​(B1)β†’112​𝐙\pi_{1}(B_{1})\to{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}}. Since 112​𝐙{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}} is an abelian group, the latter homomorphism is a composition Ο€1​(B1)β†’H1​(B1,𝐙)β†’112​𝐙\pi_{1}(B_{1})\to H_{1}(B_{1},{\bf Z})\to{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}}. Let us pick small circles [Ξ³x]∈H1​(B,𝐙)[\gamma_{x}]\in H_{1}(B,{\bf Z}) for each x∈Bs​i​n​gx\in B^{sing}. Then the above homomorphism gives us a number denoted by il​o​c​(x)∈112​𝐙i_{loc}(x)\in{\frac{1}{12}}{{\bf Z}}.

Proof of the Theorem. Let us pick up a small circle [Ξ³x0]∈H1​(B1,𝐙)[\gamma_{x_{0}}]\in H_{1}(B_{1},{\bf Z}) around x0x_{0}. Then βˆ‘x∈Bs​i​n​g[Ξ³x]+[Ξ³x0]=0\sum_{x\in B^{sing}}[\gamma_{x}]+[\gamma_{x_{0}}]=0. The monodromy around x0x_{0} can be easily computed via the winding number of the induced vector field (section of E|Ξ³x0E_{|\gamma_{x_{0}}}) and is equal to βˆ’Ο‡β‘(B)​u-\chi(B)u. Applying homomorphism ii we obtain the result. β– \blacksquare

Corollary 2

Suppose that the monodromy for each point x∈Bs​i​n​gx\in B^{sing} is the standard one (see Section 6.4). Then one has two possibilities:

a) Bs​i​n​g=βˆ…B^{sing}=\emptyset and B=Bs​mB=B^{sm} is a 22-dimensional torus;

b) the set Bs​i​n​gB^{sing} consists of 2424 distinct points on the sphere S2S^{2}.

Proof. It is easy to see that for each point x∈Bs​i​n​gx\in B^{sing} one has il​o​c​(x)=112i_{loc}(x)={\frac{1}{12}}. Then from Gauss-Bonnet theorem one deduces that χ⁑(B)=2βˆ’2​g\chi(B)=2-2g, where gg is the genus of the Riemann surface BB. Then we have

|Bs​i​n​g|12=2βˆ’2​g.{\frac{|B^{sing}|}{12}}=2-2g\,\,.

Since LHS is non-negative we conclude that either g=1g=1 or g=0g=0. In the first case |Bs​i​n​g|=0|B^{sing}|=0 and we have a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on a torus. In the second case we have |Bs​i​n​g|=24|B^{sing}|=24 and g=0g=0. β– \blacksquare

Remark 2

This corollary was proved in [LeS] by different methods.

Similarly, for the affine structure with the monodromy at each point conjugate to

(1401)\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}1&4\\ 0&1\end{array}\right)

one has il​o​c​(x)=13i_{loc}(x)=\frac{1}{3}, and we have six singular points on S2S^{2} (see Section 4.2.5).

6.6 Skeleton of a non-archimedean Calabi-Yau variety

Let X=X/KX=X/K be a smooth proper algebraic variety over a non-archimedean field KK, dimX=n\dim\,X=n and Ξ©βˆˆΞ“β‘(X,Ξ©Xn)\Omega\in\Gamma(X,\Omega_{X}^{n}) be a non-zero top degree form on XX. We will associate canonically with the pair (X,Ξ©)(X,\Omega) a piecewise-linear compact space S​k​(X,Ξ©)βŠ‚Xa​nSk(X,\Omega)\subset X^{an} such that dim𝐑S​k​(X,Ξ©)≀n\dim_{{\bf R}}Sk(X,\Omega)\leq n.

Let us assume for simplicity that K=𝐂⁑((t))K={{\bf C}}((t)) and XX is defined over 𝐂tm​e​rβŠ‚K{{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}\subset K. Analytic space Xa​nX^{an} contains a dense subset XD​i​vX_{Div} of divisorial points corresponding to irreducible components of special fibers of all snc models 𝒳{\cal X} of XX (see Appendix A):

XD​i​v=βˆͺ𝒳i𝒳(VS𝒳),X_{Div}=\cup_{\cal X}i_{\cal X}(V_{S_{\cal X}})\,\,\,,

where VS𝒳V_{S_{\cal X}} is the set of vertices of the Clemens polytope S𝒳S_{\cal X}.

Top degree form Ξ©\Omega gives rise to a map ψΩ:XD​i​v→𝐐\psi_{\Omega}:X_{Div}\to{\bf Q}. Namely, if p:𝒳→S​p​e​c​(𝐂tm​e​r)p:{\cal X}\to Spec({{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}) is a snc model and DβŠ‚π’³0D\subset{\cal X}_{0} is an irreducible divisor of the special fiber then we define

ΟˆΞ©β€‹(D)=o​r​dD​(Ω∧d​t/t)o​r​dD​(pβˆ—β€‹(t)).\psi_{\Omega}(D)={{ord_{D}(\Omega\wedge dt/t)}\over{{ord_{D}(p^{\ast}(t))}}}\,\,.

Here Ω∧d​t/t\Omega\wedge dt/t is a meromorphic top degree form on 𝒳/𝐂{\cal X}/{{\bf C}}.

It is easy to show that ΟˆΞ©β€‹(D)\psi_{\Omega}(D) depends only on the point i𝒳​(D)∈Xa​ni_{\cal X}(D)\in X^{an}. Function ψΩ\psi_{\Omega} is (globally) bounded from below.

Definition 9

A divisorial point i𝒳​(D)i_{\cal X}(D) is called essential if

ΟˆΞ©β€‹(D)=infx∈XD​i​vΟˆΞ©β€‹(x).\psi_{\Omega}(D)=\inf_{x\in X_{Div}}\psi_{\Omega}(x)\,\,.
Definition 10

Skeleton S​k​(X,Ξ©)Sk(X,\Omega) is the closure in Xa​nX^{an} of the set of essential points.55 5 Our notion of a skeleton should not be mixed with the one introduced in [Be3]. The latter is related to the Clemens polytope S𝒳S_{\cal X} of a snc model 𝒳\cal X.

Let 𝒳{\cal X} be a snc model. We will explain how to describe S​k​(X,Ξ©)Sk(X,\Omega) in terms of 𝒳{\cal X} and Ξ©\Omega. In fact it is a nonempty simplicial subcomplex of i𝒳​(S𝒳)i_{\cal X}(S_{\cal X}).

Let us call 𝒳{\cal X}-essential a divisor DiβŠ‚π’³0D_{i}\subset{\cal X}_{0} such that

ΟˆΞ©β€‹(Di)=minDjβˆˆπ’³0β‘ΟˆΞ©β€‹(Dj).\psi_{\Omega}(D_{i})=\min_{D_{j}\in{\cal X}_{0}}\psi_{\Omega}(D_{j})\,\,.

A nonempty collection Di1,…,DilD_{i_{1}},...,D_{i_{l}} of divisors in 𝒳0{\cal X}_{0} is called 𝒳{\cal X}-essential if all DikD_{i_{k}} are 𝒳{\cal X}-essential, the intersection Di1∩Di2βˆ©β€¦βˆ©DilD_{i_{1}}\cap D_{i_{2}}\cap...\cap D_{i_{l}} is non-empty and does not belong to the closure of the divisor of zeros of Ξ©\Omega is π’³βˆ–π’³0{\cal X}\setminus{\cal X}_{0}.

Theorem 3

The skeleton S​k​(X,Ξ©)Sk(X,\Omega) is the image under i𝒳i_{\cal X} of the subcomplex S​k​(𝒳,Ξ©)βŠ‚S𝒳Sk({\cal X},\Omega)\subset S_{\cal X} consisting of simplices corresponding to 𝒳{\cal X}-essential collections of divisors.

Sketch of the proof. Notice that for any snc model 𝒳{\cal X} the subset S𝒳​(𝐐)βŠ‚S𝒳S_{\cal X}({\bf Q})\subset S_{\cal X} consisting of points with rational barycentric coordinates is mapped by i𝒳i_{\cal X} into XD​i​vX_{Div}. Namely, we can modify 𝒳{\cal X} by blowing up at nonempty intersections of irreducible components of the special fiber and then continue this process indefinitely. Divisorial points obtained in this way exhaust all points of i𝒳​(S𝒳​(𝐐))i_{\cal X}(S_{\cal X}({\bf Q})).

We will prove that the set of essential points in Xa​nX^{an} coincides with i𝒳​(S𝒳​(𝐐)∩S​k​(𝒳,Ξ©))i_{\cal X}(S_{\cal X}({\bf Q})\cap Sk({\cal X},\Omega)). First of all, a direct computation shows that ψΩ\psi_{\Omega} being restricted to i𝒳​(S𝒳​(𝐐))i_{\cal X}(S_{\cal X}({\bf Q})) achieves its absolute minimum on i𝒳​(S𝒳​(𝐐)∩S​k​(𝒳,Ξ©))i_{\cal X}(S_{\cal X}({\bf Q})\cap Sk({\cal X},\Omega)). Secondly, another straightforward computation shows that the latter set does not change under blow-ups of first and second type (see Section A.5 in Appendix A). This concludes the proof. β– \blacksquare

For Calabi-Yau manifold XX we will denote S​k​(X,Ξ©)Sk(X,\Omega) simply by S​k​(X)Sk(X), as there exists only one (up to a scalar) non-zero top-degree form Ξ©\Omega on XX and S​k​(X,λ​Ω)=S​k​(X,Ξ©)β€‹βˆ€Ξ»βˆˆKΓ—Sk(X,\lambda\Omega)=Sk(X,\Omega)\,\,\,\forall\lambda\in K^{\times}.

One can prove that the PL space S​k​(X,Ξ©)Sk(X,\Omega) is in fact a birational invariant. Moreover the group A​u​tb​r​t​(X)Aut^{brt}(X) of birational automorphisms of XX acts on the skeleton by 𝐙​P​L{{\bf Z}}PL transformations. In order to obtain non-trivial examples of such actions we need Calabi-Yau manifolds with large groups of birational automorphisms. An example of a 𝐙​P​L{{\bf Z}}PL-action is considered in the next subsection.

6.7 K3 surfaces and 𝐙​P​L{{\bf Z}}PL-actions on S2S^{2}

6.7.1 Integrable systems

Recall that in Section 3.3 we constructed a 3838-dimensional space 𝒫{\cal P} parameterizing integrable systems (X,Ο‰)β†’B(X,\omega)\to B with B≃S2B\simeq S^{2}. The space 𝒫{\cal P} carries a codimension 2020 foliation β„±{\cal F} corresponding to small deformations of integrable systems which do not change the invariant [ρ][\rho] of the local system ρ:Ο€1​(Bs​m)β†’S​L​(2,𝐙)⋉𝐑2\rho:\pi_{1}(B^{sm})\to SL(2,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes{{\bf R}}^{2}. We explained that the fundamental group of a leaf of β„±{\cal F} acts by PL homeomorphisms of S2S^{2}. Here we are going to give a (partial) description of 𝒫{\cal P} and β„±{\cal F} in cohomological terms using Torelli theorem (see Appendix B).

An algebraic polarized K3 surface X/𝐂X/{{\bf C}} elliptically fibered over 𝐂​P1{{\bf C}}P^{1}, equipped with a holomorphic volume form Ξ©\Omega can be encoded by the data (Ξ›,(β‹…,β‹…),[Ο‰],[Ξ©],[Ξ³],𝒦X)(\Lambda,(\cdot,\cdot),[\omega],[\Omega],[\gamma],{\cal K}_{X}), where

  1. 1.

    (Ξ›,(β‹…,β‹…),𝐂⁑[Ξ©],𝒦X)(\Lambda,(\cdot,\cdot),{\bf C}[\Omega],{\cal K}_{X}) is a K3 period data;

  2. 2.

    [Ο‰],[Ξ³]βˆˆΞ›[\omega],[\gamma]\in\Lambda, Ξ©βˆˆΞ›βŠ—π‚\Omega\in\Lambda\otimes{{\bf C}}\,\,;

  3. 3.

    [Ο‰]βˆˆπ’¦X,Ξ³βˆˆβˆ‚π’¦X,([Ο‰],[Ξ©])=([Ξ³],[Ξ©])=([Ξ³],[Ξ³])=0[\omega]\in{\cal K}_{X},\,\,\,\gamma\in\partial{\cal K}_{X},\,\,\,([\omega],[\Omega])=([\gamma],[\Omega])=([\gamma],[\gamma])=0\,\,;

  4. 4.

    Ξ³\gamma is a non-zero primitive lattice vector.

Here [Ο‰][\omega] is the class of polarization (projective embedding) of XX, [Ξ³][\gamma] is dual to the class of generic fiber of the elliptic fibration Ο€:X→𝐂​P1\pi:X\to{{\bf C}}P^{1}.

Perhaps one can express in cohomological terms the fact that Ο€\pi has exactly 2424 critical values. The latter is an open condition.

Let LβŠ‚H2​(X,𝐙)L\subset H_{2}(X,{{\bf Z}}) be a subgroup consisting of homology classes which can be represented by cycles which are projected into graphs in Bs​mB^{sm} (such cycles are circle fibrations over graphs). When we move along a leaf of β„±{\cal F} then the pairing of R​e​([Ξ©])Re([\Omega]) with LL remains unchanged (see Section 3.1.1). Clearly LβŠ‚[Ξ³]βŸ‚L\subset[\gamma]^{\perp}, and moreover, one can check that L=[Ξ³]βŸ‚β‰ƒπ™21L=[\gamma]^{\perp}\simeq{{\bf Z}}^{21}. The pairing with R​e​([Ξ©])Re([\Omega]) gives a map Ξ›2,18:=[Ξ³]βŸ‚/𝐙⁑[Ξ³]→𝐑\Lambda_{2,18}:=[\gamma]^{\perp}/{{\bf Z}}[\gamma]\to{{\bf R}}, where Ξ›2,18\Lambda_{2,18} is the following even unimodular lattice of signature (2,18)(2,18):

Ξ›2,18=(0110)βŠ•(0110)βŠ•(βˆ’E8)βŠ•(βˆ’E8),\Lambda_{2,18}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}0&1\\ 1&0\end{array}\right)\oplus\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}0&1\\ 1&0\end{array}\right)\oplus\left(-E_{8}\right)\oplus\left(-E_{8}\right)\,\,,

where βˆ’E8-E_{8} is the Cartan matrix for Dynkin diagram E8E_{8} taken with the minus sign.

The functional (R​e​[Ξ©],β‹…)(Re[\Omega],\cdot) on Ξ›2,18\Lambda_{2,18} can be represented as (vR​e​[Ξ©],β‹…)(v_{Re[\Omega]},\cdot) where vR​e​[Ξ©]βˆˆΞ›2,18βŠ—π‘v_{Re[\Omega]}\in\Lambda_{2,18}\otimes{{\bf R}} is a vector with the strictly positive square norm. One can show that the (non-Hausdorff) space of leaves of β„±{\cal F} is canonically identified with the set {vβˆˆΞ›2,18βŠ—π‘|(v,v)>0}/A​u​t​(Ξ›2,18)\{v\in\Lambda_{2,18}\otimes{{\bf R}}|(v,v)>0\}/Aut(\Lambda_{2,18}).

The fundamental group of the leaf β„±v{\cal F}_{v} corresponding to a vector vβˆˆΞ›2,18βŠ—π‘v\in\Lambda_{2,18}\otimes{{\bf R}} maps onto the group Ξ“vβŠ‚A​u​t​(Ξ›2,18)\Gamma_{v}\subset Aut(\Lambda_{2,18}). This group is (up to a conjugation) the stabilizer in (A​u​t​(Ξ›2,18),(β‹…,β‹…)2,18,v)(Aut(\Lambda_{2,18}),(\cdot,\cdot)_{2,18},v) of the cone KvK_{v}, which is a connected component of the set

{wβˆˆΞ›2,18βŠ—π‘|(w,v)=0,(w,w)>0}βˆ–β‹ƒΞ³βˆˆΞ›2,18,(Ξ³,Ξ³)=βˆ’2,(Ξ³,v)=0HΞ³\{w\in\Lambda_{2,18}\otimes{{\bf R}}|(w,v)=0,(w,w)>0\}\setminus\bigcup_{\gamma\in\Lambda_{2,18},(\gamma,\gamma)=-2,(\gamma,v)=0}H_{\gamma}

and HΞ³βˆˆΞ›2,18βŠ—π‘H_{\gamma}\in\Lambda_{2,18}\otimes{{\bf R}} is the hyperplane orthogonal to Ξ³\gamma (cf. Appendix B). Let us denote by A​u​t𝐙​P​L,v​(S2)Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v}(S^{2}) the group of piecewise-linear transformations of S2S^{2} with integer linear part. Index vv signifies the dependence of 𝐙​P​L{\bf Z}PL-structure on S2S^{2} on vv.

Conjecture 7

The homomorphism Ο€1​(β„±v)β†’A​u​t𝐙​P​L,v​(S2)\pi_{1}({\cal F}_{v})\to Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v}(S^{2}) arising from the monodromy of the local system along the leaf β„±v{\cal F}_{v} (see Sections 3.3, 6.4) is equal to the composition

Ο€1​(β„±v)β† Ξ“vβ†’A​u​t𝐙​P​L,v​(S2),\pi_{1}({\cal F}_{v})\twoheadrightarrow\Gamma_{v}\to Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v}(S^{2})\,\,,

where the homomorphism Ο•v:Ξ“vβ†’A​u​t𝐙​P​L,v​(S2)\phi_{v}:\Gamma_{v}\to Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v}(S^{2}) is uniquely determined by this property.

One can consider the whole moduli space β„³44{\cal M}_{44} of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures on S2S^{2} with 2424 standard singularities. This space is a Hausdorff orbifold (with a natural 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure!) of dimension 4444, and it carries a foliation of codimension 2020 as before. It seems that using our main result (Theorem 5 in Part III) together with certain natural assumption (see Conjecture 11 in Section 11.6) one can show that the action by 𝐙​P​L{\bf Z}PL transformations of S2S^{2} of the fundamental group of leaves of the foliation on the larger space β„³44{\cal M}_{44} is again reduced to the action of Ξ“v\Gamma_{v}.

6.7.2 Analytic surfaces

Let X=(Xt)tβ†’0X=(X_{t})_{t\to 0} be a maximally degenerate K3 surface over the field 𝐂tm​e​r{{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer} (see Section 5.1). We denote by Ξ›X\Lambda_{X} the quotient group [Ξ³0]βŸ‚/𝐙⁑[Ξ³0][\gamma_{0}]^{\perp}/{{\bf Z}}[\gamma_{0}] where [Ξ³0]∈H2​(Xt,𝐙)[\gamma_{0}]\in H_{2}(X_{t},{\bf Z}) is the vanishing cycle. Then Ξ›X≃Λ2,18\Lambda_{X}\simeq\Lambda_{2,18}. Let us assume that the monodromy acts trivially on Ξ›X\Lambda_{X}.

We define a natural homomorphism ρX:Ξ›Xβ†’(𝐂tm​e​r)Γ—\rho_{X}:\Lambda_{X}\to({{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer})^{\times} by the formula

ρX​([Ξ³])=exp⁑(2​π​iβ€‹βˆ«Ξ³Ξ©t∫γ0Ξ©t),[Ξ³]∈[Ξ³0]βŸ‚.\rho_{X}([\gamma])=\exp\left(2\pi i{\int_{\gamma}\Omega_{t}\over{\int_{\gamma_{0}}\Omega_{t}}}\right),\,\,\,[\gamma]\in[\gamma_{0}]^{\perp}\,\,.

One can give a more abstract definition of ρX\rho_{X} in terms of the variation of Hodge structure. It is easy to see that (v​a​l𝐂tm​e​r∘ρX)​([Ξ³])=(vX,[Ξ³])\left(val_{{{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}}\circ\rho_{X}\right)([\gamma])=(v_{X},[\gamma]) where vXβˆˆΞ›Xv_{X}\in\Lambda_{X} is a vector such that (vX,vX)>0(v_{X},v_{X})>0, and v​a​l𝐂tm​e​rval_{{{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}} is the standard valuation on the field 𝐂tm​e​rβŠ‚π‚β‘((t)){{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}\subset{{\bf C}}((t)).

Let Xa​nX^{an} be the corresponding analytic K3 surface over the field K=𝐂⁑((t))K={{\bf C}}((t)). We have an analytic torus fibration over S2βˆ–{x1,…,x24}S^{2}\setminus\{x_{1},...,x_{24}\} which can be extended to a continuous map Xa​nβ†’S2X^{an}\to S^{2}. Let us call such an extension a singular analytic torus fibration with standard singularities.

Conjecture 8

For any analytic K3 surface Xa​n/KX^{an}/K admitting an analytic torus fibration Xa​nβ†’S2X^{an}\to S^{2} with standard singularities, one can define intrinsically the lattice Ξ›Xa​n\Lambda_{X^{an}} and the homomorphism ρXa​n:Ξ›Xa​nβ†’KΓ—\rho_{X^{an}}:\Lambda_{X^{an}}\to K^{\times}.

Notice that for K3 surfaces any birational automorphism is biregular. Hence the group of birational automorphisms A​u​tb​r​t​(X)Aut^{brt}(X) acts by a ZPL-transformations of the sphere S2S^{2} which is equipped with a singular 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure (see Section 6.6), i.e. we have a homomorphism

A​u​tb​r​t​(X)=A​u​t​(X)β†’A​u​t𝐙​P​L,vX​(S​k​(Xa​n,Ξ©))≃A​u​t𝐙​P​L,vX​(S2).Aut^{brt}(X)=Aut(X)\to Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v_{X}}(Sk(X^{an},\Omega))\simeq Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v_{X}}(S^{2})\,\,.
Conjecture 9

1) The image ΓρX\Gamma_{\rho_{X}} of A​u​t​(X)Aut(X) in A​u​t​(Ξ›X,ρX)Aut(\Lambda_{X},\rho_{X}) is a subgroup of Ξ“vX\Gamma_{v_{X}} where vX:=v​a​lK∘ρX:Ξ›X→𝐑v_{X}:=val_{K}\circ\rho_{X}:\Lambda_{X}\to{{\bf R}}.

2) The homomorphism A​u​t​(X)β†’A​u​t𝐙​P​L,vX​(S2)Aut(X)\to Aut_{{{\bf Z}}PL,v_{X}}(S^{2}) is conjugate to the restriction to ΓρX\Gamma_{\rho_{X}} of the homomorphism Ο•vX\phi_{v_{X}} defined in the previous subsection.

6.7.3 Lattice points

Let us consider the special case when vector vv is a lattice vector, i.e. vβˆˆΞ›2,18v\in\Lambda_{2,18}. In A-model picture it corresponds to the integrality of the class [Ο‰][\omega] of symplectic 2-form. In B-model this means that the non-archimedean field KK has valuation in π™βŠ‚π‘{\bf Z}\subset{\bf R}. In terms of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structures it means that the monodromy of the affine connection is reduced to S​L​(2,𝐙)⋉𝐙2SL(2,{\bf Z})\ltimes{\bf Z}^{2}. Group Ξ“v\Gamma_{v} is a subgroup (and also a quotient group) of an arithmetic subgroup in the Lie group S​O​(1,18)SO(1,18). Also in this case there is a Ξ“v\Gamma_{v}-invariant notion of a point with integer coordinates on B≃S2B\simeq S^{2}, as well of points with coordinates in 1N​𝐙\frac{1}{N}{\bf Z} for any integer Nβ‰₯1N\geq 1. The number Mv,NM_{v,N} of such points is finite. It is not hard to see that Mv,N=A​r​e​av+2=(v,v)2​N2+2M_{v,N}=Area_{v}+2={{(v,v)}\over{2}}N^{2}+2 where A​r​e​avArea_{v} is the area of BB with a 𝐙{\bf Z}-PL structure corresponding to vv. This is analogous to the Riemann-Roch formula r​k​(Γ⁑(X𝐂,LβŠ—N))=∫Xc1​(L)22+2rk\,\left(\Gamma(X_{\bf C},L^{\otimes N})\right)=\int_{X}{{c_{1}(L)^{2}}\over{2}}+2 for an ample line bundle LL on a complex K3 surface X𝐂X_{\bf C}.

The action of Ξ“v\Gamma_{v} on S2S^{2} gives rise to a homomorphism Ξ“vβ†’SMv,n\Gamma_{v}\to S_{M_{v,n}} where SMv,nS_{M_{v,n}} is the symmetric group. Also the action gives a homomorphism from Ξ“v\Gamma_{v} to the mapping class group Ο€1​(β„³0,Mv,Nu​n​o​r​d)\pi_{1}({\cal{M}}_{0,M_{v,N}}^{unord}), the fundamental group of the moduli space of genus zero complex curves with Mv,NM_{v,N} unordered distinct marked points. The last group is closely related to the braid group. The conclusion is that we have constructed homomorphisms from arithmetic groups to a tower of braid groups.

One can deduce from Torelli theorem an interpretation of Ξ“v\Gamma_{v} as a quotient group of the fundamental group of a neighborhood UU of a cusp in 19-dimensional moduli space of polarized complex algebraic K3-surfaces, where vector vv corresponds to the polarization. Therefore the homomorphism Ξ“vβ†’SMv,n\Gamma_{v}\to S_{M_{v,n}} gives a finite covering Uβ€²U^{\prime} of UU. One may wonder whether there exists a line bundle over Uβ€²U^{\prime} whose direct image to UU coinsides with the direct image of the sheaf LβŠ—NL^{\otimes N} from the universal family of K3 surfaces (this question is in spirit of some ideas of Andrey Tyurin, see e.g. [Tyu]).

6.8 Further examples

There are many families of Calabi-Yau varieties with huge groups of birational automorphisms. The following example we learned from D.Panov and D.Zvonkine. For any real numbers l1,…,ln>0l_{1},\dots,l_{n}>0 we can consider the space of planar nn-gons with the length of edges equal to l1,…,lnl_{1},\dots,l_{n}, modulo the group of orientation-preserving motions. This space can be identified with the space of solutions of the following system of equations

βˆ‘li​zi=0,βˆ‘li​ziβˆ’1=0\sum l_{i}z_{i}=0,\,\,\,\sum l_{i}z_{i}^{-1}=0

where (z1:…:zn)βˆˆπ‚Pnβˆ’1(z_{1}:\dots:z_{n})\in{\bf C}P^{n-1} is a point satisfying the reality condition |zi|=1,i=1,…,n|z_{i}|=1,\,\,i=1,\dots,n. Hence we obtain a singular subvariety of 𝐂​Pnβˆ’1{\bf C}P^{n-1} of codimension 22, depending on parameters l1,…,lnl_{1},\dots,l_{n}. One can check that this variety is birationally isomorphic to a non-singular Calabi-Yau variety. For any proper set IβŠ‚{1,…,n}I\subset\{1,\dots,n\}, 2≀|I|≀nβˆ’22\leq|I|\leq n-2 we have a birational involution ΟƒI\sigma_{I} defined by the formula

ΟƒIβˆ—β€‹(zi)={c/ziΒ ifΒ i∈IziΒ ifΒ iβˆ‰I\sigma_{I}^{*}(z_{i})=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}c/z_{i}&\mbox{ if $i\in I$}\\ z_{i}&\mbox{ if $i\notin I$}\end{array}\right.

where c:=βˆ‘i∈Ili​ziβˆ‘i∈Ili/zic:=\frac{\sum_{i\in I}l_{i}z_{i}}{\sum_{i\in I}l_{i}/z_{i}}.

We do not know at the moment the structure of the group GnG_{n} generated by involutions ΟƒI\sigma_{I}. One can obtain easily explicit formulas for the action of GnG_{n} by piecewise-linear homemorphisms of Snβˆ’3S^{n-3}. Length parameters lil_{i} should be replaced by elements of a non-archimedean field KK with β€œgeneric” norms Ξ»i=v​a​lK​(li)βˆˆπ‘\lambda_{i}=val_{K}(l_{i})\in{\bf R}. Denote by ΞΆi,i=1,…,n\zeta_{i},\,\,i=1,\dots,n real variables which have the meaning of valuations of variables zi∈Kz_{i}\in K. Sphere Snβˆ’3S^{n-3} is obtained in the following way. In 𝐑n{\bf R}^{n} we consider the intersection of two subsets:

{(ΞΆ1,…​΢n)|mini⁑(Ξ»i+ΞΆi)​ is achieved at least twice}\{(\zeta_{1},\dots\zeta_{n})\,|\,\,\,\min_{i}(\lambda_{i}+\zeta_{i})\mbox{ is achieved at least twice}\}

and

{(ΞΆ1,…​΢n)|mini⁑(Ξ»iβˆ’ΞΆi)​ is achieved at least twice}\{(\zeta_{1},\dots\zeta_{n})\,|\,\,\,\min_{i}(\lambda_{i}-\zeta_{i})\mbox{ is achieved at least twice}\}

and then take the quotient by the action of 𝐑{\bf R}:

(ΞΆ1,…​΢n)β†’(ΞΆ1+c,…​΢n+c)(\zeta_{1},\dots\zeta_{n})\rightarrow(\zeta_{1}+c,\dots\zeta_{n}+c)

corresponding to the projectivization. For appropriately chosen (Ξ»1,…,Ξ»n)(\lambda_{1},\dots,\lambda_{n}) we obtain a set which is the union of Snβˆ’3S^{n-3} with several β€œwings” going to infinity. The action of the involution ΟƒI\sigma_{I} is obtained from algebraic formulas from above, in which one replace non-archimedean variables by real ones, addition by minimum and multiplication (division) by addition (subtraction).

7 KK-affine structures

7.1 Definitions

Let Bs​mB^{sm} be a manifold with 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure. The sheaf of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine functions A​f​f𝐙:=A​f​f𝐙,Bs​mAff_{{\bf Z}}:=Aff_{{{\bf Z}},B^{sm}} gives rise to an exact sequence of sheaves of abelian groups

0→𝐑→A​f​f𝐙→(Tβˆ—)𝐙→0.0\to{{\bf R}}\to Aff_{{\bf Z}}\to(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 0\,\,.

Let KK be a complete non-archimedean field with a valuation map v​a​lval. We give two equivalent definitions of a KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} compatible with a given 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure.

Definition 11

A KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} compatible with the given 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure is a sheaf A​f​fKAff_{K} of abelian groups on Bs​mB^{sm}, an exact sequence of sheaves

0β†’KΓ—β†’A​f​fKβ†’(Tβˆ—)𝐙→0,0\to K^{\times}\to Aff_{K}\to(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 0\,\,,

together with a homomorphism Ξ¦\Phi of this exact sequence to the exact sequence of sheaves of abelian groups

0→𝐑→A​f​f𝐙→(Tβˆ—)𝐙→0,0\to{{\bf R}}\to Aff_{{\bf Z}}\to(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 0\,\,,

such that Ξ¦=i​d\Phi=id on (Tβˆ—)𝐙(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}} and Ξ¦=v​a​l\Phi=val on KΓ—K^{\times}.

Since Bs​mB^{sm} carries a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure, we have an associated G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉𝐑nGL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes{{\bf R}}^{n}-torsor on Bs​mB^{sm}, whose fiber over a point xx consists of all 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine coordinate systems at xx.

Definition 12

A KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} compatible with the given 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure is a G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)nGL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n}-torsor on Bs​mB^{sm} such that the application of v​a​lΓ—nval^{\times n} to (KΓ—)n(K^{\times})^{n} gives the initial G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉𝐑nGL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes{{\bf R}}^{n}-torsor.

Equivalence of two definitions from above is obvious in local 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine coordinates. The reason is that the set of automorphisms of the exact sequence of groups

0β†’KΓ—β†’K××𝐙n→𝐙nβ†’00\to K^{\times}\to K^{\times}\times{{\bf Z}}^{n}\to{{\bf Z}}^{n}\to 0

identical on KΓ—K^{\times} coincides with the group G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)nGL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n}.

Finally, we can formulate the Fixed Point Property for KK-affine structures (see Section 3.1 for 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine case):
Fixed Point Property for KK-affine structures. In the notation of the end of Section 3.1, for any b∈Bs​i​n​gb\in B^{sing} and sufficiently small neighborhood UU of bb the lifted monodromy representation Ο€1​(U)β†’G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)n\pi_{1}(U)\to GL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} has fixed vectors in KΓ—nK^{\times n}, and the 𝐑{{\bf R}}-affine span of the corresponding (under the valuation map) vectors in 𝐑n{{\bf R}}^{n} coincides with the set of fixed points of the monodromy representation Ο€1​(U)β†’G​L​(n,𝐙)⋉𝐑n\pi_{1}(U)\to GL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes{{\bf R}}^{n}.

7.2 KK-affine structure on smooth points

Starting from this section till the end of the paper (except of the Section 11.7) we will assume the following
Zero Charactersistic Assumption. KK is a complete non-archimedean local field such that its residue field has characteristic zero.

Let XX be a KK-analytic manifold of dimension nn and we are given a continuous map Ο€:Xβ†’B\pi:X\to B, where BB is a topological space. Then Bs​mB^{sm} carries a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure (Theorem 1). Suppose that there is an open KK-analytic submanifold UβŠ‚XU\subset X such that Ο€βˆ’1​(Bs​m)βŠ‚U\pi^{-1}(B^{sm})\subset U and there is a nonwhere vanishing analytic form Ξ©βˆˆΞ“β‘(U,Ξ©Xn)\Omega\in\Gamma(U,\Omega_{X}^{n}). We are going to define a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine function V​a​l​(Ξ©)Val(\Omega) similarly to the definition of the function V​a​l​(Ο†)Val(\varphi) in Section 4.1. Namely, in local coordinates (z1,…,zn)(z_{1},...,z_{n}) we consider the expression Ο†:=Ξ©/β‹€1≀i≀n(d​zi/zi)\varphi:=\Omega/\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}(dz_{i}/z_{i}). This is an invertible function, and we define V​a​l​(Ξ©)Val(\Omega) as V​a​l​(Ο†)Val(\varphi). The independence on the choice of coordinates follows from the following lemma

Lemma 2

Let (zi)i=1,…,n,(ziβ€²)i=1,…,n(z_{i})_{i=1,\dots,n},\,\,(z^{\prime}_{i})_{i=1,\dots,n} be two systems of invertible coordinates on Ο€βˆ’1​(U)\pi^{-1}(U) for some connected open UβŠ‚Bs​mU\subset B^{sm}. Then

|(β‹€1≀i≀n(d​zi/zi))/(β‹€1≀i≀n(d​ziβ€²/ziβ€²))|x=1β€‹βˆ€xβˆˆΟ€βˆ’1​(U).\left|\left({\textstyle\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}(dz_{i}/z_{i})}\right)/\left({\textstyle\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}(dz^{\prime}_{i}/z^{\prime}_{i})}\right)\right|_{x}=1\,\,\,\forall x\in\pi^{-1}(U)\,\,.

Proof: By Lemma 1 from Section 4.1 we know that ziβ€²z_{i}^{\prime} as any invertible function can be written in form ci​zI(i)​(1+o⁑(1))c_{i}z^{I^{(i)}}(1+o(1)) for some nonzero ci∈Kc_{i}\in K and a multi-index I(i)βˆˆπ™nI^{(i)}\in{\bf Z}^{n}. Vectors I(1),…,I(n)I^{(1)},\dots,I^{(n)} form a basis of 𝐙n{\bf Z}^{n}, as follows from the condition that z1β€²,…,znβ€²z_{1}^{\prime},\dots,z_{n}^{\prime} form a coordinate system. Therefore, after applying the change of coordinates zi↦ci​zI(i)z_{i}\mapsto c_{i}z^{I^{(i)}} preserving form β‹€id​zi/zi\bigwedge_{i}dz_{i}/z_{i} up to sign, we may assume that ziβ€²=(1+o⁑(1))​ziz_{i}^{\prime}=(1+o(1))z_{i}. The Jacobian matrix of the transformation (zi)β†’(ziβ€²)(z_{i})\to(z_{i}^{\prime}) is the identity matrix plus terms of size o⁑(1)o(1). Therefore its determinant has norm equal to 1. β– \blacksquare

Now we make the following
Constant Norm Assumption. The function V​a​l​(Ο†)Val(\varphi) is locally constant.

Theorem 4

If the Constant Norm Assumption is satisfied then there is a KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} compatible with the 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure A​f​f𝐙,Bs​mc​a​nAff_{{{\bf Z}},B^{sm}}^{can} (see Section 4.1).

Proof. Let us write in local coordinates Ξ©=φ⁑(z1,…​zn)​⋀1≀i≀nd​zizi\Omega=\varphi(z_{1},...z_{n})\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}{dz_{i}\over z_{i}}. Define residue R​e​s​(Ξ©)∈KRes(\Omega)\in K as the constant term Ο†0\varphi_{0} in the Laurent expansion φ⁑(z1,…​zn)=βˆ‘Iβˆˆπ™nΟ†I​zI\varphi(z_{1},...z_{n})=\sum_{I\in{\bf Z}^{n}}\varphi_{I}z^{I}. It is easy to see that R​e​s​(Ξ©)Res(\Omega) does not depend (up to a sign) on the choice of local coordinates. For non-vanishing everywhere Ξ©\Omega satisfying Constant Norm Assumption we have exp⁑(βˆ’V​a​l​(Ο†))=|Ο†|=|Ο†0|\exp(-Val(\varphi))=|\varphi|=|\varphi_{0}|. Therefore we have R​e​s​(Ξ©)β‰ 0Res(\Omega)\neq 0.

Let us return to the proof of the Theorem. Let FF be the sheaf of abelian groups FβŠ‚Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXΓ—)F\subset\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X}^{\times}) consisting of ff such that V​a​l​(f)=0Val(f)=0. Then we have an exact sequence of sheaves

0β†’KΓ—/π’ͺKΓ—β†’Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXΓ—)/Fβ†’(TXβˆ—)𝐙→0,0\to K^{\times}/{\cal O}_{K}^{\times}\to\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X}^{\times})/F\to(T_{X}^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 0\,\,\,,

where π’ͺK{\cal O}_{K} denotes the constant sheaf with the fiber being the ring of integers of KK. Indeed we embed KΓ—/π’ͺKΓ—K^{\times}/{\cal O}_{K}^{\times} into Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXΓ—)/F\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X}^{\times})/F as constant functions. The projection Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXΓ—)/Fβ†’(TXβˆ—)𝐙\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X}^{\times})/F\to(T_{X}^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}} assigns to the function ff the linear part of the corresponding 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine function V​a​l​(f)Val(f).

Notice that if UβŠ‚Bs​mU\subset B^{sm} is a connected domain then any fβˆˆΞ“β‘(U,F)f\in\Gamma(U,F) can be written (non-canonically) as f=a⁑(1+r)f=a(1+r), where a∈π’ͺKΓ—a\in{\cal O}_{K}^{\times} and r=o⁑(1)r=o(1) in Ο€βˆ’1​(U)\pi^{-1}(U).

We define an epimorphism of sheaves pΞ©:Fβ† π’ͺKΓ—p_{\Omega}:F\twoheadrightarrow{\cal O}_{K}^{\times} by formula

pΩ​(f)=pΩ​(a⁑(1+r))=a​exp⁑(R​e​s​(Ω​log⁑(1+r))R​e​s​(Ξ©)).p_{\Omega}(f)=p_{\Omega}(a(1+r))=a\,\exp\left({Res(\Omega\,\log(1+r))\over{Res(\Omega)}}\right)\,\,.

Here exp\exp and log\log are understood as infinite convergent series (in order to make sense of them we use Zero Characteristic Assumption).

It is easy to see that pΞ©p_{\Omega} is well-defined. Then the exact sequence of sheaves

1β†’KΓ—β†’Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXΓ—)/ker⁑(pΞ©)β†’(TXβˆ—)𝐙→11\to K^{\times}\to\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X}^{\times})/\ker(p_{\Omega})\to(T_{X}^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 1

defines a KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} compatible with A​f​f𝐙,Bs​mc​a​nAff_{{{\bf Z}},B^{sm}}^{can}. This concludes proof of the Theorem. β– \blacksquare

Notice that the above proof gives an explicit construction of the KK-affine structure. We will denote it by A​f​fK,Bs​mΞ©Aff_{K,B^{sm}}^{\Omega}. It is easy to see that this KK-affine structure does not change if we make a rescaling Ω↦c​Ω,c∈KΓ—\Omega\mapsto c\Omega,c\in K^{\times}.

7.3 Lifting Problem

Let KK be as in Section 7.2, BβŠƒBp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\supset B^{pre-sing} be a space with singular 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure (see Section 6.3), and an extension of 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Bβˆ–Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\setminus B^{pre-sing} to a KK-affine structure satisfying fixed point property (see 7.1). We assume that 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure cannot be extended to a larger open set UβŠƒBβˆ–Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​g,Uβ‰ Bβˆ–Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gU\supset B\setminus B^{pre-sing},U\neq B\setminus B^{pre-sing}. Slightly abusing notation we will denote Bβˆ–Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB\setminus B^{pre-sing} simply by Bs​mB^{sm}. We want to have a KK-analytic space XX, meromorphic non-zero top degree form Ξ©\Omega and a continuous proper (and maybe also Stein) map Ο€:Xβ†’B\pi:X\to B such that:

  1. 1.

    Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gB^{pre-sing} coincides with Bs​i​n​gB^{sing}, and 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} arising from the projection Ο€\pi coincides with the given one;

  2. 2.

    the restriction Ξ©|Ο€βˆ’1(Bs​m)\Omega_{|\pi^{-1}(B^{sm})} is a nowhere vanishing analytic form which satisfies the Constant Norm Assumption;

  3. 3.

    the KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm} arising from the pair (X,Ξ©)(X,\Omega) coincides with the initial one.

We call the problem of finding such data Lifting Problem.

Remark 3

If a solution of the Lifting Problem exists then Bs​mB^{sm} is orientable. Indeed, R​e​s​(Ξ©)Res(\Omega) is locally a constant defined up to a sign which depends on the orientation of Bs​mB^{sm}. Global choice of the constant gives an orientation. For oriented Bs​mB^{sm} we can rescale Ξ©\Omega canonically in such a way that R​e​s​(Ξ©)=1Res(\Omega)=1

Question. What restrictions on the behavior of the KK-affine structure near Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​g=Bs​i​n​gB^{pre-sing}=B^{sing} should we impose in order to guarantee the existence of a solution of the Lifting Problem?

Let B=Bs​mB=B^{sm} be a flat torus (see Section 3.2.1). Then the Lifting Problem has a solution (canonical up to rescaling of Ξ©\Omega) for any compatible KK-affine structure. More precisely, the groupoid of Tate tori and isomorphisms between them is equivalent to the groupoid of KK-affine structures on real flat tori.

In Sections 8-11 we are going to discuss a solution of the Lifting Problem for K3 surfaces. In that case Bs​i​n​gβ‰ βˆ…B^{sing}\neq\emptyset.

If we restrict ourselves only to the smooth part Bs​mB^{sm} (i.e. we allow non-compact XX) then there is a canonical solution of this β€œreduced” Lifting Problem. In other words one can construct a smooth KK-analytic space Xβ€²X^{\prime} with an analytic top degree form Ξ©β€²\Omega^{\prime} and a map Ο€β€²:Xβ€²β†’Bs​m\pi^{\prime}:X^{\prime}\to B^{sm} satisfying the above conditions 1–3. Let us explain this construction assuming that Bs​mB^{sm} is oriented.

First of all we notice that the orientation of Bs​mB^{sm} gives a reduction to S​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)nSL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} of the structure group of the torsor defining the KK-affine structure. The reduced group naturally acts by automorphisms of the fibration Ο€c​a​n:(𝐆ma​n)n→𝐑n\pi_{can}:({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{n}\to{{\bf R}}^{n} preserving the form β‹€1≀i≀nd​zizi\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}{dz_{i}\over z_{i}}. The action on (𝐆ma​n)n({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{n} is induced from the action on monomials. Namely, the inverse to an element (A,Ξ»1,…,Ξ»n)∈S​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)n(A,\lambda_{1},...,\lambda_{n})\in SL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} acts on monomials as

zI=z1I1​…​znIn↦(∏i=1nΞ»iIi)​zA⁑(I).z^{I}=z_{1}^{I_{1}}\dots z_{n}^{I_{n}}\mapsto\left({\textstyle\prod_{i=1}^{n}}\lambda_{i}^{I_{i}}\right)\,\,z^{A(I)}\,\,\,.

The action of the same element on 𝐑n{{\bf R}}^{n} is given by the similar formula

x=(x1,…,xn)↦A⁑(x)βˆ’(v​a​l​(Ξ»1),…,v​a​l​(Ξ»n)).x=(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})\mapsto A(x)-(val(\lambda_{1}),\dots,val(\lambda_{n}))\,\,\,.

Let Bs​m=βˆͺΞ±UΞ±B^{sm}=\cup_{\alpha}U_{\alpha} be an open covering by coordinate charts Uα≃VΞ±βŠ‚π‘nU_{\alpha}\simeq V_{\alpha}\subset{{\bf R}}^{n} such that for any Ξ±,Ξ²\alpha,\beta we are given elements gΞ±,β∈S​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(KΓ—)ng_{\alpha,\beta}\in SL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} satisfying the 11-cocycle condition for any triple Ξ±,Ξ²,Ξ³\alpha,\beta,\gamma. Then the space Xβ€²X^{\prime} is obtained from Ο€c​a​nβˆ’1​(VΞ±)\pi_{can}^{-1}(V_{\alpha}) by gluing by means of the transformations gΞ±,Ξ²g_{\alpha,\beta}. The form β‹€1≀i≀nd​zizi\bigwedge_{1\leq i\leq n}{dz_{i}\over z_{i}} gives rise to a nowhere vanishing analytic top degree form Ξ©β€²\Omega^{\prime} on Xβ€²X^{\prime}. Thus we have obtained a solution of the reduced Lifting Problem. The sheaf Ο€βˆ—β€‹(π’ͺXβ€²):=π’ͺBs​mc​a​n\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X^{\prime}}):={\cal O}_{B^{sm}}^{can} is called the canonical sheaf.

In the case Bp​r​eβˆ’s​i​n​gβ‰ βˆ…B^{pre-sing}\neq\emptyset this solution seems to be a β€œwrong” one, i.e. it cannot be extended to a solution Ο€:Xβ†’B\pi:X\to B, where XX and BB are compact. In the case of K3 surfaces we will show later how to modify it in order to obtain a β€œtrue” solution of the Lifting Problem.

7.4 Flat coordinates and periods

Here we are going to discuss a relation between KK-affine structures and so-called flat coordinates on the moduli space of complex structures on Calabi-Yau manifolds. We assume the picture of collapse from Section 5.1.

7.4.1 Flat coordinates for degenerating complex Calabi-Yau manifolds

Let Xm​e​r=(Xt)tβ†’0{X}_{mer}=(X_{t})_{t\to 0} be a maximally degenerating algebraic Calabi-Yau manifold of dimension nn over 𝐂tm​e​r{{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}. We denote by BB the Gromov-Hausdorff limit of our family (see Conjecture 1, Section 5.1). Its connected oriented open dense part Bs​mB^{sm} carries a 𝐙{\bf Z}-affine structure with the covariant lattice T𝐙T^{{\bf Z}}.

Recall that according to the picture of collapse presented in Section 5.1 there is a canonical isotopy class of embeddings from a torus bundle p:Xtβ€²β†’Bs​mp:X_{t}^{\prime}\to B^{sm} to the complex manifold XtX_{t} for all sufficiently small tβ‰ 0t\neq 0. Let us denote by [Ξ³0]∈Hn​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)[\gamma_{0}]\in H_{n}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}}) the fundamental class of the fiber of pp. This is the homology class of a singular chain in Xtβ€²X_{t}^{\prime} which projects to a point by pp.

Let Hn≀1​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)βŠ‚Hn​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)H_{n}^{\leq 1}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}})\subset H_{n}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}}) be the subgroup generated by homology classes of chains which are projected into graphs in Bs​mB^{sm}. It follows from the definition that we have an epimorphism

Ja:H1​(Bs​m,β‹€nβˆ’1T𝐙)β† Hn≀1​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)/𝐙⁑[Ξ³0]J_{a}:H_{1}(B^{sm},{\textstyle\bigwedge^{n-1}}T^{{\bf Z}})\twoheadrightarrow H_{n}^{\leq 1}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}})/{{\bf Z}}[\gamma_{0}]

similar to the homomorphims JsJ_{s} defined in the symplectic case (see Section 3.1.1). The following formula defines a homomorphism of groups

P:Hn≀1​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)/𝐙⁑[Ξ³0]β†’(𝐂tm​e​r)Γ—,[Ξ³]↦exp⁑(2​π​iβ€‹βˆ«[Ξ³]Ξ©t∫[Ξ³0]Ξ©t).P:H_{n}^{\leq 1}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}})/{{\bf Z}}[\gamma_{0}]\to({{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer})^{\times},\,\,\,\,[\gamma]\mapsto\exp\left(2\pi i{\int_{[\gamma]}\Omega_{t}\over\int_{[\gamma_{0}]}\Omega_{t}}\right)\,\,.

We will call PP the period map. Notice that 𝐙⁑[Ξ³0]:=Hn≀0​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)βŠ‚Hn≀1​(Xtβ€²,𝐙){{\bf Z}}[\gamma_{0}]:=H_{n}^{\leq 0}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}})\subset H_{n}^{\leq 1}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}}) is a low degree part of the limiting Hodge filtration on the homology of Calabi-Yau manifold XtX_{t}. Non-zero complex numbers

exp⁑(2​π​iβ€‹βˆ«[Ξ³i]Ξ©t∫[Ξ³0]Ξ©t),\exp\left(2\pi i{\int_{[\gamma_{i}]}\Omega_{t}\over\int_{[\gamma_{0}]}\Omega_{t}}\right)\,\,,

where Ξ³i\gamma_{i} is a set of generators of Hn≀1​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)/Hn≀0​(Xtβ€²,𝐙)H_{n}^{\leq 1}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}})/H_{n}^{\leq 0}(X_{t}^{\prime},{{\bf Z}}) are called flat coordinates in Mirror Symmetry (see e.g. [Mor]). Those are local coordinates near a point close to the β€œcusp” of the moduli space of complex structures (local Torelli theorem).

The orientation of Bs​mB^{sm} gives rise to an isomorphism β‹€nβˆ’1T𝐙≃(Tβˆ—)𝐙\bigwedge^{n-1}T^{{\bf Z}}\simeq(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}. Therefore, combining maps Ja,PJ_{a},P and the above isomorphism we obtain a homomorphism

P~:H1​(Bs​m,(Tβˆ—)𝐙)β†’(𝐂tm​e​r)Γ—.\widetilde{P}:H^{1}(B^{sm},(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}})\to\left({{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}\right)^{\times}\,\,.
7.4.2 Non-archimedean periods

Let Xa​n{X}^{an} be a smooth analytic Calabi-Yau manifold associated with Xm​e​rX_{mer}. Assuming the equivalence of Gromov-Hausdorff and non-archimedean pictures of collapse presented in Section 5 we have a continuous map Ο€:Xa​nβ†’B\pi:{X}^{an}\to B. It gives a KK-affine structure on Bs​mB^{sm}. The corresponding exact sequence

0β†’KΓ—β†’A​f​fKβ†’(Tβˆ—)𝐙→00\to K^{\times}\to Aff_{K}\to(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}}\to 0

represents a class in H1​(Bs​m,Tπ™βŠ—KΓ—)≃E​x​t1​((Tβˆ—)𝐙,KΓ—)H^{1}(B^{sm},T^{{\bf Z}}\otimes K^{\times})\simeq Ext^{1}((T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}},K^{\times}). Pairing with this class gives another homomorphism

Pβ€²:H1​(Bs​m,(Tβˆ—)𝐙)β†’KΓ—=H0​(Bs​m,KΓ—).P^{\prime}:H_{1}(B^{sm},(T^{\ast})^{{\bf Z}})\to K^{\times}=H_{0}(B^{sm},K^{\times})\,\,.
Conjecture 10

Homomorphism Pβ€²P^{\prime} is equal to the composition of P~\widetilde{P} with the embedding (𝐂tm​e​r)Γ—β†ͺKΓ—\left({{\bf C}}_{t}^{mer}\right)^{\times}\hookrightarrow K^{\times}.

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