ScalingStacks

7.3 Lifting Problem [03VU]

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

7.3 Lifting Problem

Let KK be as in Section 7.2, B⊃Bp​r​e−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 B∖Bp​r​e−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 U⊃B∖Bp​r​e−s​i​n​g,U≠B∖Bp​r​e−s​i​n​gU\supset B\setminus B^{pre-sing},U\neq B\setminus B^{pre-sing}. Slightly abusing notation we will denote B∖Bp​r​e−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 Ω\Omega and a continuous proper (and maybe also Stein) map π:X→B\pi:X\to B such that:

  1. 1.

    Bp​r​e−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 π\pi coincides with the given one;

  2. 2.

    the restriction Ω|π−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,Ω)(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​(Ω)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 Ω\Omega canonically in such a way that R​e​s​(Ω)=1Res(\Omega)=1

Question. What restrictions on the behavior of the KK-affine structure near Bp​r​e−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 Ω\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​g≠∅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 “reduced” Lifting Problem. In other words one can construct a smooth KK-analytic space X′X^{\prime} with an analytic top degree form Ω′\Omega^{\prime} and a map π′:X′→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)⋉(K×)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 πc​a​n:(𝐆ma​n)n→𝐑n\pi_{can}:({\bf G}_{m}^{an})^{n}\to{{\bf R}}^{n} preserving the form ⋀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,λ1,…,λn)∈S​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(K×)n(A,\lambda_{1},...,\lambda_{n})\in SL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} acts on monomials as

zI=z1I1​…​znIn↦(∏i=1nλiIi)​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)−(v​a​l​(λ1),…,v​a​l​(λn)).x=(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})\mapsto A(x)-(val(\lambda_{1}),\dots,val(\lambda_{n}))\,\,\,.

Let Bs​m=∪αUαB^{sm}=\cup_{\alpha}U_{\alpha} be an open covering by coordinate charts Uα≃Vα⊂𝐑nU_{\alpha}\simeq V_{\alpha}\subset{{\bf R}}^{n} such that for any α,β\alpha,\beta we are given elements gα,β∈S​L​(n,𝐙)⋉(K×)ng_{\alpha,\beta}\in SL(n,{{\bf Z}})\ltimes(K^{\times})^{n} satisfying the 11-cocycle condition for any triple α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma. Then the space X′X^{\prime} is obtained from πc​a​n−1​(Vα)\pi_{can}^{-1}(V_{\alpha}) by gluing by means of the transformations gα,βg_{\alpha,\beta}. The form ⋀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 Ω′\Omega^{\prime} on X′X^{\prime}. Thus we have obtained a solution of the reduced Lifting Problem. The sheaf π∗​(𝒪X′):=𝒪Bs​mc​a​n\pi_{\ast}({\cal O}_{X^{\prime}}):={\cal O}_{B^{sm}}^{can} is called the canonical sheaf.

In the case Bp​r​e−s​i​n​g≠∅B^{pre-sing}\neq\emptyset this solution seems to be a “wrong” one, i.e. it cannot be extended to a solution π:X→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 “true” solution of the Lifting Problem.

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