ScalingStacks

2.2. d ​ l ​ t -models [04US]

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

2.2. d​l​tdlt-models

(2.2.1) A d​l​tdlt-model of XX is a normal proper 𝒞\mathscr{C}-model 𝒳\mathscr{X} of XX such that (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) is a d​l​tdlt-pair. This means that (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) is log canonical and that each log canonical center of (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) has non-empty intersection with 𝒳snc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. In particular, every proper s​n​csnc-model of XX is a d​l​tdlt-model. An equivalent formulation of the definition is the following: K𝒳+(𝒳s)redK_{\mathscr{X}}+(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} is ℚ\mathbb{Q}-Cartier, and for every log resolution h:𝒴→𝒳h:\mathscr{Y}\to\mathscr{X} of (𝒳,𝒳s)(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{X}_{s}) and every irreducible component EE of 𝒴s\mathscr{Y}_{s}, the multiplicity of EE in the log pullback Δ\Delta of (𝒳s)red(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} to 𝒴\mathscr{Y} is at most 11. Moreover, if it is equal to 11, then h⁡(E)h(E) must have non-empty intersection with 𝒳snc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. In practice, we will apply the d​l​tdlt property via Lemma 3.2.3 below.

(2.2.2) We say that a d​l​tdlt-model 𝒳\mathscr{X} of XX is a good minimal model if 𝒳\mathscr{X} is ℚ\mathbb{Q}-factorial and K𝒳+(𝒳s)redK_{\mathscr{X}}+(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} is semi-ample over 𝒞\mathscr{C}.

(2.2.3) For every d​l​tdlt-model 𝒳\mathscr{X} of XX, we can define the dual complex 𝒟⁡((𝒳s)red)\mathcal{D}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) for the d​l​tdlt-pair (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) by gluing cells corresponding to irreducible components of intersections of irreducible components of 𝒳s\mathscr{X}_{s}, as in Definition 8 in [dFKX12]. When kk is not algebraically closed, we note that we only glue cells corresponding to irreducible components (instead of geometrically irreducible components). In other words, 𝒟⁡((𝒳s)red)\mathcal{D}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) is the quotient of the Gal⁡(k¯/k)\mathrm{Gal}(\bar{k}/k)-equivariant dual complex constructed in [dFKX12, §31].

(2.2.4) For every d​l​tdlt-model 𝒳\mathscr{X} of XX, the log canonical centers of (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) are the irreducible components of intersections of irreducible components of (𝒳s)red(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}, by [Ko13, 4.16]. These are also precisely the closures in 𝒳s\mathscr{X}_{s} of the connected components of intersections of irreducible components of 𝒳ssnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}_{s} (since these connected components are the log canonical centers of (𝒳snc,(𝒳ssnc)red)(\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}},(\mathscr{X}_{s}^{\mathrm{snc}})_{\mathrm{red}})). Thus, the dual intersection complex 𝒟⁡((𝒳s)red)\mathcal{D}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) is the same as the dual intersection complex of the strict normal crossings divisor 𝒳ssnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}_{s}, and the cells of this complex correspond bijectively to the log canonical centers of (𝒳,(𝒳s)red)(\mathscr{X},(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}). See Section 2 in [dFKX12] for more background.

(2.2.5) Let 𝒳1\mathscr{X}_{1} and 𝒳2\mathscr{X}_{2} be two d​l​tdlt-models of XX over 𝒞\mathscr{C}. We say that 𝒳1\mathscr{X}_{1} and 𝒳2\mathscr{X}_{2} are crepant birational if there exist a normal proper 𝒞\mathscr{C}-model 𝒴\mathscr{Y} of XX and morphisms of 𝒞\mathscr{C}-models fi:𝒴→𝒳if_{i}:\mathscr{Y}\to\mathscr{X}_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2 such that the log pullbacks of (𝒳1,s)red(\mathscr{X}_{1,s})_{\mathrm{red}} and (𝒳2,s)red(\mathscr{X}_{2,s})_{\mathrm{red}} coincide (see [Ko13, 2.23]). Note that we can always assume that 𝒴\mathscr{Y} is an s​n​csnc-model, by taking a log resolution of (𝒴,𝒴s)(\mathscr{Y},\mathscr{Y}_{s}). The following theorem collects two fundamental results from the Minimal Model Program.

Theorem 2.2.6.
  1. (1)

    The CC-scheme XX has a good minimal d​l​tdlt-model if and only if KXK_{X} is semi-ample over CC.

  2. (2)

    Any two good minimal d​l​tdlt-models of XX are crepant birational.

Proof.

(1) The condition that KXK_{X} is semi-ample over CC is obviously necessary, since for every d​l​tdlt-model 𝒳\mathscr{X} of XX, the divisor KXK_{X} is ℚ\mathbb{Q}-linearly equivalent to the restriction of K𝒳+(𝒳s)redK_{\mathscr{X}}+(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} to XX. Conversely, assume that KXK_{X} is semi-ample over CC, and let 𝒴\mathscr{Y} be a proper s​n​csnc-model of XX. Then applying [HX13, 2.12] to the d​l​tdlt-pair (𝒴,(𝒴s)red)(\mathscr{Y},(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}), we see that XX has a good minimal d​l​tdlt-model. Condition (1) of [HX13, 2.12] follows from our assumption, and condition (2) follows from the following observation. Let mm be a positive integer such that m⁡(K𝒴+(𝒴s)red)m(K_{\mathscr{Y}}+(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) is Cartier. Over a sufficiently small open neighbourhood of ss in 𝒞\mathscr{C}, we have an isomorphism of 𝒪𝒞\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{C}}-algebras

R⁡(𝒴/𝒞,m⁡(K𝒴+(𝒴s)red))≅R⁡(𝒴/𝒞,m⁡(K𝒴+(𝒴s)red)−𝒴s),R(\mathscr{Y}/\mathscr{C},m(K_{\mathscr{Y}}+(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}))\cong R(\mathscr{Y}/\mathscr{C},m(K_{\mathscr{Y}}+(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})-\mathscr{Y}_{s}),

where R⁡(𝒴/𝒞,L):=⨁j≥0π∗​(𝒪𝒴​(j​L))R(\mathscr{Y}/\mathscr{C},L):=\bigoplus_{j\geq 0}\pi_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{Y}}(jL)) with π:𝒴→𝒞\pi:\mathscr{Y}\to\mathscr{C} the structural morphism. Thus it suffices to show that

𝒜=R⁡(𝒴/𝒞,m⁡(K𝒴+(𝒴s)red)−𝒴s)\mathcal{A}=R(\mathscr{Y}/\mathscr{C},m(K_{\mathscr{Y}}+(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})-\mathscr{Y}_{s})

is a finitely generated 𝒪𝒞\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{C}}-algebra. If we denote by MM the maximum of the multiplicities of the components in 𝒴s\mathscr{Y}_{s} then we may assume that m>Mm>M, so that

(𝒴,(𝒴s)red−1m​𝒴s)(\mathscr{Y},(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}-\frac{1}{m}\mathscr{Y}_{s})

is a k​l​tklt pair. Hence, the finite generation of 𝒜\mathcal{A} follows from [BCHM10].

(2) It is already observed in Definition 15 of [dFKX12] that this follows from the proof of [KM98, 3.52]. ∎

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