ScalingStacks

Subsubsection [04V9]

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 ยท Original author HTML

(3.2.2) It will often be useful to interpret the weight function in terms of logarithmic differential forms. Let ๐’ด\mathscr{Y} be a regular separated RR-scheme of finite type such that ๐’ดk\mathscr{Y}_{k} is a divisor with strict normal crossings. We write S+S^{+} for the log scheme associated to Rโˆ–{0}โ†’RR\setminus\{0\}\to R and ๐’ด+\mathscr{Y}^{+} for the log scheme obtained by endowing ๐’ด\mathscr{Y} with the divisorial log structure associated to ๐’ดk\mathscr{Y}_{k}. Then ๐’ด+\mathscr{Y}^{+} is log smooth over S+S^{+}. If we denote by j:๐’ดKโ†’๐’ดj:\mathscr{Y}_{K}\to\mathscr{Y} the natural open immersion, then a simple computation shows that the sub-๐’ช๐’ด\mathcal{O}_{\mathscr{Y}}-module ฯ‰๐’ด+/S+\omega_{\mathscr{Y}^{+}/S^{+}} of jโˆ—โ€‹ฯ‰๐’ดK/Kj_{*}\omega_{\mathscr{Y}_{K}/K} is equal to ฯ‰๐’ด/Rโ€‹((๐’ดk)redโˆ’๐’ดk)\omega_{\mathscr{Y}/R}((\mathscr{Y}_{k})_{\mathrm{red}}-\mathscr{Y}_{k}) (it suffices to check that these line bundles coincide at the generic points of the special fiber ๐’ดk\mathscr{Y}_{k}). Thus if ฯ‰\omega is an mm-pluricanonical form on XKX_{K} and ๐’ณ\mathscr{X} is an sโ€‹nโ€‹csnc-model of XX over ๐’ž\mathscr{C}, then

wtฯ‰โ€‹(x)=vxโ€‹(div๐’ณ+โ€‹(ฯ‰))+m\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x)=v_{x}(\mathrm{div}_{\mathscr{X}^{+}}(\omega))+m

for every point xx of Skโก(๐’ณ)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X}), where we denote by div๐’ณ+โ€‹(ฯ‰)\mathrm{div}_{\mathscr{X}^{+}}(\omega) the divisor on ๐’ณR\mathscr{X}_{R} associated to ฯ‰\omega viewed as a rational section of the line bundle ฯ‰๐’ณR+/S+โŠ—m\omega^{\otimes m}_{\mathscr{X}^{+}_{R}/S^{+}}.

Lemma 3.2.3.

Let ๐’ณ\mathscr{X} be a dโ€‹lโ€‹tdlt-model of XX and let h:๐’ดโ†’๐’ณh:\mathscr{Y}\to\mathscr{X} be a log resolution of (๐’ณ,๐’ณs)(\mathscr{X},\mathscr{X}_{s}). Denote by ฮ”\Delta the log pullback of (๐’ณs)red(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} to ๐’ด\mathscr{Y}. Let xx be a point of Skโก(๐’ด)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{Y}) such that red๐’ณโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x) does not lie in ๐’ณsnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. Then ฮ”<(๐’ดs)red\Delta<(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} locally at red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x).

Proof.

By the definition of a dโ€‹lโ€‹tdlt-model, we know that ฮ”โ‰ค(๐’ดs)red\Delta\leq(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}. Thus it suffices to show that these divisors are different locally at red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x). Since xx lies on Skโก(๐’ด)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{Y}), its reduction red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x) is a generic point of the intersection of the irreducible components of ๐’ดs\mathscr{Y}_{s} that contain red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x). Thus if we denote by hโ€ฒ:๐’ดโ€ฒโ†’๐’ดh^{\prime}:\mathscr{Y}^{\prime}\to\mathscr{Y} the blow-up of ๐’ด\mathscr{Y} at the closure of red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x), then ๐’ดโ€ฒ\mathscr{Y}^{\prime} is again an sโ€‹nโ€‹csnc-model of XX.

We denote by ฮ”โ€ฒ\Delta^{\prime} the log pullback of ฮ”\Delta to ๐’ดโ€ฒ\mathscr{Y}^{\prime}. The image of the exceptional divisor EE of hโ€ฒh^{\prime} in ๐’ณ\mathscr{X} is the closure of red๐’ณโ€‹(x)=hโก(red๐’ดโ€‹(x))\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x)=h(\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x)) and thus disjoint from ๐’ณsnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. By the definition of a dโ€‹lโ€‹tdlt-model, we know that the multiplicity of EE in ฮ”โ€ฒ\Delta^{\prime} is strictly smaller than 11. Since the log pullback of (๐’ดs)red(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} to ๐’ดโ€ฒ\mathscr{Y}^{\prime} is equal to (๐’ดsโ€ฒ)red(\mathscr{Y}^{\prime}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}, we see that ฮ”<(๐’ดs)red\Delta<(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} locally at red๐’ดโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{Y}}(x). โˆŽ

Proposition 3.2.4.

Let ๐’ณ\mathscr{X} be a dโ€‹lโ€‹tdlt-model of XX over ๐’ž\mathscr{C}, let ๐’ด\mathscr{Y} be a proper sโ€‹nโ€‹csnc-model of XX over ๐’ž\mathscr{C} and let h:๐’ดโ†’๐’ณh:\mathscr{Y}\to\mathscr{X} be a morphism of ๐’ž\mathscr{C}-models. Denote by ฮ”\Delta the log pullback of (๐’ณs)red(\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}} to ๐’ด\mathscr{Y}. If we set

S={xโˆˆSkโก(๐’ด)|vxโ€‹(ฮ”)=vxโ€‹((๐’ดs)red)}S=\{x\in\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{Y})\,|\,v_{x}(\Delta)=v_{x}((\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})\}

then Skโก(๐’ณ)=S\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X})=S.

Proof.

Applying [MN13, 3.1.7] to the proper morphism hโˆ’1โ€‹(๐’ณsnc)โ†’๐’ณsnch^{-1}(\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}})\to\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}, we see that Skโก(๐’ณ)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X}) is contained in Skโก(๐’ด)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{Y}). Moreover, it follows from Lemma 3.2.3 that for every point xx of SS, the reduction red๐’ณโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x) must be contained in ๐’ณsnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. Now let xx be any point in Skโก(๐’ด)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{Y}) such that red๐’ณโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x) lies in ๐’ณsnc\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}. We must show that vxโ€‹(ฮ”)=vxโ€‹((๐’ดs)red)v_{x}(\Delta)=v_{x}((\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}) if and only if xx lies in Skโก(๐’ณ)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X}), or, equivalently, xx is equal to its projection

xโ€ฒ=ฯ๐’ณโ€‹(x)x^{\prime}=\rho_{\mathscr{X}}(x)

to the skeleton of ๐’ณ\mathscr{X}. Let ฯ‰\omega be a local generator of ฯ‰๐’ณsnc/๐’ž\omega_{\mathscr{X}^{\mathrm{snc}}/\mathscr{C}} at red๐’ณโ€‹(x)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x). It induces a rational section of the canonical bundle ฯ‰XK/K\omega_{X_{K}/K} by base change. By [MN13, 4.4.5], we know that x=xโ€ฒx=x^{\prime} if and only if

wtฯ‰โ€‹(x)=wtฯ‰โ€‹(xโ€ฒ).\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x)=\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x^{\prime}).

Since the divisor of ฯ‰\omega is zero in a neighbourhood of red๐’ณโ€‹(xโ€ฒ)\mathrm{red}_{\mathscr{X}}(x^{\prime}), we have

wtฯ‰โ€‹(xโ€ฒ)=vxโ€ฒโ€‹((๐’ณs)red)=vxโ€‹((๐’ณs)red).\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x^{\prime})=v_{x^{\prime}}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})=v_{x}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}).

On the other hand, computing wtฯ‰โ€‹(x)\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x) on the model ๐’ด\mathscr{Y} we get

wtฯ‰โ€‹(x)=vxโ€‹(div๐’ดโ€‹(ฯ‰)+(๐’ดs)red)=vxโ€‹((๐’ณs)red)+vxโ€‹((๐’ดs)redโˆ’ฮ”).\mathrm{wt}_{\omega}(x)=v_{x}(\mathrm{div}_{\mathscr{Y}}(\omega)+(\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})=v_{x}((\mathscr{X}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}})+v_{x}((\mathscr{Y}_{s})_{\mathrm{red}}-\Delta).

Thus we see that Skโก(๐’ณ)=S\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X})=S. โˆŽ

Corollary 3.2.5.

Let ๐’ณ1\mathscr{X}_{1} and ๐’ณ2\mathscr{X}_{2} be two dโ€‹lโ€‹tdlt-models of XX over ๐’ž\mathscr{C}. If ๐’ณ1\mathscr{X}_{1} and ๐’ณ2\mathscr{X}_{2} are crepant birational, then Skโก(๐’ณ1)=Skโก(๐’ณ2)\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X}_{1})=\mathrm{Sk}(\mathscr{X}_{2}).

Proof.

This follows immediately from Proposition 3.2.4. โˆŽ

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