This paper classifies certain subcategories of the derived matrix factorization category for Landau-Ginzburg models on schemes and shows the Balmer spectrum corresponds to a newly introduced relative singular locus.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of the relative singular locus and establishes a homeomorphism with the Balmer spectrum of matrix factorizations, linking geometric and categorical structures.
Findings
01
Classification of thick subcategories of ${
m DMF}(X,L,W)$
02
Homeomorphism between Balmer spectrum and relative singular locus
03
New geometric invariant: the relative singular locus ${
m Sing}(X_0/X)$
Abstract
For a separated Noetherian scheme X with an ample family of line bundles and a non-zero-divisor W∈Γ(X,L) of a line bundle L on X, we classify certain thick subcategories of the derived matrix factorization category DMF(X,L,W) of the Landau-Ginzburg model (X,L,W). Furthermore, by using the classification result and the theory of Balmer's tensor triangular geometry, we show that the spectrum of the tensor triangulated category (DMF(X,L,W),⊗21) is homeomorphic to the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X), introduced in this paper, of the zero scheme X0⊂X of W.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Relative singular locus and Balmer spectrum of matrix factorizations
Yuki Hirano
Department of Mathematics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa-Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8502, Japan
For a separated Noetherian scheme X with an ample family of line bundles and a non-zero-divisor W∈Γ(X,L) of a line bundle L on X, we classify certain thick subcategories of the derived matrix factorization category DMF(X,L,W) of the Landau-Ginzburg model (X,L,W). Furthermore, by using the classification result and the theory of Balmer’s tensor triangular geometry,
we show that the spectrum of the tensor triangulated category (DMF(X,L,W),⊗21) is homeomorphic to the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X), introduced in this paper, of the zero scheme X0⊂X of W.
For a given category of algebraic objects associated to a scheme, it is expected that we can extract geometric information of the scheme or the scheme itself from the category. Gabriel reconstructed a Noetherian scheme X from the abelian category QcohX of quasi-coherent sheaves on X [Gab], and later Rosenberg generalized the reconstruction theorem for arbitrary schemes [Ros]. Although we can’t reconstruct a smooth variety from the derived category of coherent sheaves in general,
Balmer reconstructed arbitrary Noetherian scheme X from the tensor triangulated category (PerfX,⊗) of perfect complexes on X with the natural tensor structure ⊗ [Bal]. Balmer’s idea is to associate to any tensor triangulated category (T,⊗) a ringed space Spec(T,⊗)=(Spc(T,⊗),O), and he proved an isomorphism X≅Spec(PerfX,⊗) by using Thomason’s result of classification of thick subcategories of perfect complexes PerfX which are closed under ⊗-action of PerfX.
In addition to the Thomason’s result, classifications of thick subcategories of triangulated categories are studied in many articles.
For example, Takahashi classified thick subcategories of the stable category CM(R) of maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over an abstract hypersurface local ring R [Tak]. Stevenson proved a classification of certain thick subcategories of the singularity category Dsg(X) of a hypersurface singularity X [Ste].
1.2. Relative singular locus
To state our main results, we introduce a new notion of relative singular locus. Let i:T↪S be a closed immersion of Noetherian schemes. We define the relative singular locus, denoted by Sing(T/S), of i as the following subset of T;
[TABLE]
We also consider the locally relative singular locusSingloc(T/S) of i defined by
[TABLE]
By definition, we have the inclusions
[TABLE]
where Sing(T) is the usual singular locus of T. These loci can be different to each other, but, if S is regular, these loci are equal; Sing(T/S)=Singloc(T/S)=Sing(T).
Roughly speaking, the relative singular locus Sing(T/S) is a set of points p in T such that the mildness of the singularity of p in T is worse than the mildness of the singularity of p in S.
In fact, for a quasi-projective variety X over C and a regular function f∈Γ(X,OX) which is non-zero-divisor, we have the following equality of subsets of the associated complex analytic space (Xan,OXan);
[TABLE]
where Crit(fan) denotes the critical locus of the associated function fan∈Γ(Xan,OXan), which is defined by
[TABLE]
and Zero(fan) is the zero locus of fan.
1.3. Main results
A data (X,L,W) is called Landau-Ginzburg model, or just LG-model, if X is a scheme, L is a line bundle on X, and W∈Γ(X,L) is a section of L. To a LG-model (X,L,W) we associate a triangulated category DMF(X,L,W), called the derived matrix factorization category, introduced by Positselski [Pos, EP]. Tensor products of matrix factorizations defines the bifunctor;
[TABLE]
In particular, DMF(X,L,W) has a tensor action from DMF(X,L,0).
The following is our main result of classification of thick subcategories of derived matrix factorization categories.
Let X be a separated Noetherian scheme with an ample family of line bundles, L be a line bundle on X, and let W∈Γ(X,L) be a non-zero-divisor. Denote by X0 the zero scheme of W. Then there is a bijective correspondence
[TABLE]
The bijective map σ sends Y to the thick subcategory consisting of matrix factorizations F∈DMF(X,L,W) with Supp(F)⊆Y.
The inverse bijection τ sends T to the union ⋃F∈TSupp(F).
If X is a regular separated Noetherian scheme, then X has an ample family of line bundles and DMF(X,L,W) is equivalent to the singularity category Dsg(X0). Furthermore, if X=SpecR is affine with R regular local, DMF(X,L,W) is equivalent to the stable category CM(R/W) of maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over the hypersurface R/W. Hence Theorem 1.1 can be considered as a simultaneous generalization of Stevenson’s result in [Ste] and Takahashi’s result in [Tak].
As an application of the above main result, we see that the closedness of the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X) is related to the existence of a ⊗-generator of DMF(X,L,W), where we say that an object G∈DMF(X,L,W) is a ⊗-generator if the smallest thick subcategory that is closed under tensor action from DMF(X,L,0) and contains G is DMF(X,L,W).
Notation is same as in Theorem 1.1. Then the subset Sing(X0/X) of X0 is closed if and only if DMF(X,L,W) has a ⊗-generator.
Furthermore, we construct the relative singular loci from the derived matrix factorization categories. If 2∈Γ(X,OX) is a unit in the ring Γ(X,OX), the derived matrix factorization category DMF(X,L,W) has a natural (pseudo) tensor triangulated structure ⊗21 on it. Using Theorem 1.1 and the theory of Balmer’s tensor triangular geometry,
we prove that the spectrum of the (pseudo) tensor triangulated category (DMF(X,L,W),⊗21) is the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X).
Let X be a separated Noetherian scheme with an ample ample family of line bundles, and let W∈Γ(X,L) be a non-zero-divisor of a line bundle L. Assume that 2∈Γ(X,OX) is a unit. Then we have a homeomorphism
[TABLE]
This result is a generalization of Yu’s result [Yu2, Theorem 1.2], where he proved Theorem 1.3 in the case when X is an affine regular scheme of finite Krull dimension by using the classification result due to Walker.
1.4. Plan of the paper
In section 2 we provide basic definitions and properties about derived matrix factorization categories.
In section 3 we give the definitions of globally/locally relative singular loci and prove some properties about relative singular loci for zero schemes of regular sections of line bundles.
In section 4 we prove tensor nilpotence properties of matrix factorizations which are key properties for our classification result.
In section 5 we prove the main result Theorem 1.1. In section 6 we recall the theory of Balmer’s tensor triangular geometry, and we study the natural tensor triangulated structure on derived matrix factorization categories.
1.5. Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Hokuto Uehara for many useful comments and his continuous support. The author also thank Michael Wemyss and Shinnosuke Okawa for valuable discussions and comments on a draft version of the paper. The author was a Research Fellow of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. He was partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows No.26-6240.
2. Derived matrix factorizations
2.1. Derived matrix factorization categories
In the first subsection, we recall the definition of the derived matrix factorization category of a Landau-Ginzburg model, which is introduced by Positselski (cf. [Pos], [EP]), and provide its basic properties.
Definition 2.1**.**
A Landau-Ginzburg model, or LG model, is data (X,L,W) consisting of
a scheme X, an invertible sheaf L on X, and a section W∈Γ(X,L) of L.
Notation 2.2**.**
If L is isomorphic to the structure sheaf OX, we denote the LG model by (X,W). If X=SpecR is an affine scheme, we denote the LG model by (R,L,W), where L is considered as an invertible R-module and W∈L.
For a LG model, we consider its factorizations which are \rotatebox[origin=C]180.0"twisted” complexes.
Definition 2.3**.**
Let (X,L,W) be a LG model. A factorizationF of (X,L,W) is a sequence
[TABLE]
where each Fi is a coherent sheaf on X and each φiF is a homomorphism such that φ0F∘φ1F=W⋅idF1 and (φ1F⊗L)∘φ0F=W⋅idF0. Coherent sheaves F0 and F1 in the above sequence are called components of the factorization F. If the components Fi of F are locally free sheaves, we call F a matrix factorization of (X,L,W).
Notation 2.4**.**
We can consider any coherent sheaf F∈cohX as a factorization of (X,L,0) of the following form
[TABLE]
By abuse of notation, we will often denote the above factorization by the same notation F.
Definition 2.5**.**
For a LG model (X,L,W), we define an exact category
[TABLE]
whose objects are factorizations of (X,L,W), and whose set of morphisms are defined as follows:
For two objects E,F∈coh(X,L,W), we define Hom(E,F) as the set of pairs (f1,f0) of fi∈HomcohX(Ei,Fi) such that the following diagram is commutative;
[TABLE]
Note that if X is Noetherian, coh(X,L,W) is an abelian category.
We define a full additive subcategory
[TABLE]
of coh(X,L,W) whose objects are matrix factorizations. By construction, MF(X,L,W) is also an exact category.
Since factorizations are \rotatebox[origin=C]180.0"twisted” complexes, we can consider homotopy category of factorizations.
Definition 2.6**.**
Two morphisms f=(f1,f0) and g=(g1,g0) in Homcoh(X,L,W)(E,F) are homotopy equivalent, denoted by f∼g, if there exist two homomorphisms in cohX
[TABLE]
such that f0−g0=φ1Fh0+h1φ0E and f1⊗L−g1⊗L=φ0Fh1+(h0⊗L)(φ1E⊗L).
The homotopy category of factorizations
[TABLE]
is defined as the category whose objects are same as coh(X,L,W), and the set of morphisms are defined as the set of homotopy equivalence classes;
[TABLE]
Similarly, we define the homotopy category of matrix factorizations KMF(X,L,W), i.e.
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Next we define the totalization of a bounded complex of factorizations, which is an analogy of the total complex of a double complex.
Definition 2.7**.**
Let F\textbullet=(⋅⋅⋅→FiδiFi+1→⋅⋅⋅) be a bounded complex of coh(X,L,W). For l=0,1, set
[TABLE]
and let
[TABLE]
be a homomorphism given by
[TABLE]
where n is n modulo 2, and ⌈m⌉ is the minimum integer which is greater than or equal to a real number m.
We define the totalization Tot(F\textbullet)∈coh(X,L,W)) of F\textbullet as
[TABLE]
In what follows, we will recall that the homotopy categories Kcoh(X,L,W) and KMF(X,L,W) have structures of triangulated categories.
Definition 2.8**.**
We define an automorphism T on Kcoh(X,L,W)), which is called shift functor, as follows.
For an object F∈Kcoh(X,L,W), we define an object T(F) as
[TABLE]
and for a morphism f=(f1,f0)∈Hom(E,F) we set T(f):=(f0,f1⊗L)∈Hom(T(E),T(F)). For any integer n∈Z, denote by (−)[n] the functor Tn(−).
Definition 2.9**.**
Let f:E→F be a morphism in coh(X,L,W). We define its mapping cone Cone(f) to be the totalization of the complex
[TABLE]
with F in degree zero.
A distinguished triangle is a sequence in Kcoh(X,L,W) which is isomorphic to a sequence of the form
[TABLE]
where i and p are natural injection and projection respectively.
The following proposition is well known to experts.
Proposition 2.10**.**
The homotopy categories Kcoh(X,L,W) and KMF(X,L,W) are triangulated categories with respect to the above shift functor and the above distinguished triangles.
Following Positselski ([Pos], [EP]), we define derived factorization categories.
Definition 2.11**.**
Denote by Acoh(X,L,W) the smallest thick subcategory of Kcoh(X,L,W) containing all totalizations of short exact sequences in coh(X,L,W). We define the derived factorization category of (X,L,W) as the Verdier quotient
[TABLE]
Similarly, we consider the thick subcategory AMF(X,L,W) containing all totalizations of short exact sequences in the exact category MF(X,L,W), and define the derived matrix factorization category by
[TABLE]
The following proposition is a special case of [BDFIK, Lemma 2.24].
Assume that X=SpecR is an affine scheme. For P∈KMF(R,L,W) and A∈Acoh(R,L,W), we have
[TABLE]
In particular, the Verdier localizing functor
[TABLE]
is an equivalence.
For later use, we consider larger categories of factorizations. Denote by Sh(X,L,W) the abelian category whose objects are factorizations whose components are OX-modules. More precisely, objects of Sh(X,L,W) are sequences of the following form
[TABLE]
where Fi are OX-modules and φiF are homomorphisms such that φ0F∘φ1F=W⋅idF1 and φ1F⊗L∘φ0F=W⋅idF0.
Denote by Qcoh(X,L,W), InjSh(X,L,W), and InjQcoh(X,L,W) the full subcategories of Sh(X,L,W) consisting of factorizations whose components are quasi-coherent sheaves, injective OX-modules, and injective quasi-coherent sheaves respectively.
Then, similarly to Kcoh(X,L,W), we can consider their homotopy categories KSh(X,L,W), KQcoh(X,L,W), KInjSh(X,L,W), KInjQcoh(X,L,W) respectively, and these homotopy categories have natural triangulated structures similar to Kcoh(X,L,W).
Definition 2.13**.**
Denote by AcoSh(X,L,W) (resp. AcoQcoh(X,L,W)) the smallest thick subcategory of KSh(X,L,W) (resp. KQcoh(X,L,W)) containing all totalizations of short exact sequences in Sh(X,L,W) (resp. Qcoh(X,L,W)) and closed under arbitrary direct sums. Following [Pos], [EP], we define the coderived factorization categoriesDcoSh(X,L,W) and DcoQcoh(X,L,W) as the following Verdier quotients
The natural functor KInjSh(X,L,W)→DcoSh(X,L,W) is an equivalence.
(2)
The natural functor KInjQcoh(X,L,W)→DcoQcoh(X,L,W) is an equivalence.
(3)
The natural functor DcoQcoh(X,L,W)→DcoSh(X,L,W) is fully faithful.
(4)
The natural functor Dcoh(X,L,W)→DcoQcoh(X,L,W) is fully faithful.
(5)
The natural functor DMF(X,L,W)→Dcoh(X,L,W) is fully faithful.
Proof.
(1) and (2) follow from [BDFIK, Corollary 2.25]. (3) follows from (1) and (2). (4) and (5) are [EP, Propostion 1.5.(d)] and [EP, Corollary 2.3.(i)] respectively.
∎
2.2. Case when W=0
In this section, we consider cases when W=0. Firstly, we will define cohomologies of factorizations of (X,L,0).
Definition 2.15**.**
For an object F∈Qcoh(X,L,0), we define its cohomologies Hi(F)∈QcohX as
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.16**.**
Let k be any field. Then, for any object F∈KMF(k,0), there are two finite dimensional k-vector spaces V1 and V2 such that F is isomorphic to V1⊕V2[1] in KMF(k,0), where Vi denotes the factorization of the form (0→Vi→0) by Notation 2.4.
Proof.
By [BDFIK, Lemma 2.26], there are two finite dimensional k-vactor spaces V and V′, and a triangle of the following form in Dcoh(k,0)=DMF(k,0)
[TABLE]
But DMF(k,0)=KMF(k,0) by Proposition 2.12, so we have a k-linear homomorphism f:V→V′ such that F is isomorphic to C(f), where f is the morphism in KMF(k,0) represented by the following morphism in MF(k,0)
[TABLE]
By construction of mapping cones, C(f) is isomorphic to the following matrix factorization
[TABLE]
Let I:=Im(f) be the image of f, and let K:=Ker(f) be the kernel of f. Then there is a k-vector space J such that V′=I⊕J. Since V=K⊕I, we have the following isomorphism in MF(k,0)
[TABLE]
But the object \Bigl{(}I\xrightarrow{\sim}I\xrightarrow{0}I\Bigr{)} is zero in KMF(k,0). Hence F≅J⊕K[1] in KMF(k,0).
∎
Corollary 2.17**.**
Let k be a field. Any non-zero morphism f:(0→k→0)→E in KMF(k,0) is a split mono.
In this subsection, we recall tensor products and local homs on derived matrix factorization categories. Let (X,L,W) be a LG model, and V∈Γ(X,L) be another global section.
For E∈MF(X,L,V) and F∈MF(X,L,W), we define the tensor product
[TABLE]
of E and F as
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
This defines an additive functor (−)⊗(−):MF(X,L,V)×MF(X,L,W)→MF(X,L,V+W), and it naturally induces an exact functor
[TABLE]
We define the sheaf Hom
[TABLE]
from E to F as
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
This defines an additive functor Hom(−,−):MF(X,L,V)op×MF(X,L,W)→MF(X,L,W−V), and it induces an exact functor
[TABLE]
The following is standard, so we skip the proof (see [BFK] or [LS] for details) .
Proposition 2.18**.**
Let E∈MF(X,L,V), F∈MF(X,L,W), and G∈MF(X,L,V+W).
(1)
We have a natural isomorphism
[TABLE]
(2)
There is a natural isomorphism in MF(X,L,V+W)
[TABLE]
Recall that OX∈MF(X,L,0) denotes the matrix factorization of the form \Bigl{(}0\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}\rightarrow 0\Bigr{)} by Notation 2.4. For any object F∈MF(X,L,W), we define the dual
[TABLE]
of F. By Proposition 2.18, the functors
(−)⊗F:DMF(X,L,V)→DMF(X,L,V+W) and (−)⊗F∨:DMF(X,L,V+W)→DMF(X,L,V) are adjoint;
[TABLE]
2.4. Supports of matrix factorizations
We study the supports of objects in derived matrix factorization categories. Let (X,L,W) be a LG model.
For any point p∈X, we denote by Xp:=Spec(OX,p) the stalk of X at p, and let vectX be the category of locally free sheaves of finite ranks on X.
Taking the stalk (−)p:vectX→vectXp at p induces the functor (−)p:KMF(X,L,W)→KMF(Xp,Wp) defined by
[TABLE]
Since the functor (−)p:vectX→vectXp preserves short exact sequences, the induced functor (−)p:KMF(X,L,W)→KMF(Xp,Wp) maps AMF(X,L,W) to AMF(Xp,Wp). Hence it defines the following functor;
[TABLE]
since we have the natural equivalence KMF(Xp,Wp)∼DMF(Xp,Wp) by Proposition 2.12.
Definition 2.19**.**
For an object F∈DMF(X,L,W), we define its support as
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.20**.**
Let F∈DMF(X,L,W) be an object.
(1)
If X=⋃i∈IUi is an open covering of X, we have the equality of subsets of X
[TABLE]
where F∣Ui is the restriction of F to DMF(Ui,L∣Ui,W∣Ui).
(2)
Supp(F)* is a closed subset of X.*
Proof.
(1) This follows from isomorphisms Fp≅(F∣Ui)p for any p∈Ui.
(2) We show the following equality
[TABLE]
where U:={U∣U is an open subscheme of X such that F∣U=0 in DMF(U,L∣U,W∣U)}. The inclusion Supp(F)c⊃⋃U∈UU is obvious. We verify that Supp(F)c⊆⋃U∈UU. By definition, for any p∈Supp(F)c, Fp=0 in KMF(Xp,Wp). Let h=(h1,h0) be a homotopy giving the homotopy equivalence idFp∼0. Then there is a neighborhood U of p such that there exist morphisms h1:F1∣U⊗LU→F0∣U and h0:F0∣U→F1∣U in cohU with h1p=h1 and h0p=h0. Furthermore, since id(F0)p−(φ1)ph0−h1(φ0)p=0 in cohUp, there exists an open neighborhood V⊆U of p such that idF0∣V−φ1∣Vh1∣V−φ0∣Vh0∣V=0. Then hV=(h1∣V,h0∣V) gives a homotopy equivalence idF∣V∼0. Hence F∣V=0 in KMF(V,L∣V,W∣V), in particular, so is in DMF(V,L∣V,W∣V). Therefore, we have V∈U, which implies that p∈⋃U∈UU.
∎
Definition 2.21**.**
Let F∈DMF(X,L,W) be an object. For any point p∈X, let ιp:Speck(p)→X be a natural morphism, where k(p):=OX,p/mp is the residue field of the local ring (OX,p,mp). Then we denote by W⊗k(p) the pull-back ιp∗W, and we set
[TABLE]
Then (−)⊗k(p) defines an exact functor
[TABLE]
The following lemma is a version of Nakayama’s lemma for matrix factorizations.
Lemma 2.22**.**
Let F∈DMF(X,L,W) be an object, and let p∈X be a point.
Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Recall that we have natural equivalences KMF(k(p),W⊗k(p))∼DMF(k(p),W⊗k(p)) and KMF(Xp,Wp)∼DMF(Xp,Wp). Note that the following diagram of functors is commutative;
[TABLE]
where mp∈Xp is the unique closed point.
Hence, if Fp=0 in KMF(Xp,Wp), then F⊗k(p)=0 in KMF(k(p),W⊗k(p)).
For the other implication, it suffices to show that for a local ring (R,m), an element w∈R, and an object E∈KMF(R,w), if E⊗RR/m=0 in KMF(R/m,w⊗R/m), then E=0 in KMF(R,w). Since R is local, any locally free modules are free. Hence, the object E can be represented by some matrix factorization of the following form
[TABLE]
If E⊗RR/m=0, there exist homotopies h0:(R/m)⊕n0→(R/m)⊕n1 and h1:(R/m)⊕n1→(R/m)⊕n0 such that id(R/m)⊕n0=(φ1⊗R/m)h0+h1(φ0⊗R/m) and id(R/m)⊕n1=(φ0⊗R/m)h1+h0(φ1⊗R/m). Since h0 and h1 can be represented by a matrix of units in R, there exist homomorphisms h0:R⊕n0→R⊕n1 and h1:R⊕n1→R⊕n0 such that hi⊗RR/m=hi for i=0,1. Set
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then the pair α:=(α1,α0) defines an endomorphism of E in the exact category MF(R,w). By construction, α=0 in KMF(R,w). To show that E=0 in KMF(R,w), it is enough to show that α:E→E is an automorphism in MF(R,w). For each i∈{0,1}, we only need to show that αi is an automorphism. Since the tensor product (−)⊗RR/m is a right exact functor and αi⊗RR/m=id, we have
[TABLE]
By Nakayama’s lemma, the above implies that Cok(αi)=0. Hence αi is an automorphism by [Mat2, Theorem 2.4].
∎
For later use, we provide the following lemma.
Lemma 2.23**.**
Let R be a ring, and let F=\Bigl{(}R\xrightarrow{f_{1}}R\xrightarrow{f_{0}}R\Bigr{)}\in{\rm KMF}(R,f_{0}f_{1}) be an object.
Then we have the following equality of subsets of SpecR:
[TABLE]
where Z(fi):={p∈SpecR∣fi⊗k(p)=0}.
Proof.
(⊆) If p∈Supp(F), then F⊗k(p)=0 in KMF(k(p),(f0f1)⊗k(p)) by Lemma 2.22.
Suppose p∈/Z(fi) for some i. Then fi⊗k(p) is a unit in k(p), and hence F⊗k(p) is homotopic to zero. This contradicts to F⊗k(p)=0. Hence p∈⋂i=0,1Z(fi).
(⊇) If p∈⋂i=0,1Z(fi). Then fi⊗k(p)=0 for i=0,1, and so Hi(F⊗k(p))=k(p)=0. Hence by [LS, Proposition 2.30], F⊗k(p)=0. Again by Lemma 2.22, p∈Supp(F).
∎
The following lemma is useful to compute the support of tensor products of matrix factorizations.
Lemma 2.24**.**
Let V,W∈Γ(X,L) be any global sections of L, and let E∈DMF(X,L,V) and F∈DMF(X,L,W) be objects. Let p∈X be a point such that V⊗k(p)=W⊗k(p)=0. Then p∈Supp(E⊗F) if and only if p∈Supp(E)∩Supp(F).
Proof.
We have (E⊗F)⊗k(p)≅(E⊗k(p))⊗(F⊗k(p)) in KMF(k(p),0). By Lemma 2.22, it is enough to show that
for a field k, and for objects M,N∈KMF(k,0), M⊗N=0 if and only if M=0 and N=0. By Lemma 2.16, for i=0,1, we may assume φiM=φiN=0, and then Hi(M)=Mi and Hi(N)=Ni. Then, since φiM⊗N=0 for i=0,1, we have
Hence, by [LS, Proposition 2.30], we see that M⊗N=0 if and only if M=0 and N=0.
∎
At the end of this section, we organize fundamental properties of supports of matrix factorizations.
Lemma 2.25**.**
Let E,F,G∈DMF(X,L,W) be objects. We have the following.
(1)* Supp(E⊕F)=Supp(E)∪Supp(F).*
(2)* Supp(F[1])=Supp(F).*
(3)* Supp(E)⊆Supp(F)∪Supp(G) for any distinguished triangle E→F→G→E[1].*
(4)* Supp(E⊗F)=Supp(E)∩Supp(F).*
Proof.
(1), (2), and (3) are obvious. If p∈Supp(M) for some object M∈DMF(X,L,W), then W⊗k(p)=0, since KMF(k(p),W⊗k(p))=0 if W⊗k(p)=0. Hence (4) follows from Lemma 2.24.
∎
3. Relative singular locus and singularity category
In this section, we define relative singular loci and prove some properties about it.
Let S be a Noetherian scheme and let F∈Db(cohS) be a bounded complex of coherent sheaves. The complex F is called perfect if it is locally quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite rank. PerfS⊂Db(cohS) denotes the thick subcategory of perfect complexes.
We define globally/locally relative singular locus. Recall our notation Sp:=Spec(OS,p) for
any point p∈S.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let S be a Noetherian scheme, and let i:T↪S be a closed immersion.
(1)
The subset Sing(T/S)⊂T, called the singular locus of T globally relative (or just relative) to S, is defined by
[TABLE]
(2)
The subset Singloc(T/S)⊂T, called the singular locus of T locally relative to S, is defined by
[TABLE]
where ip:Tp↪Sp is the closed immersion induced by i:T↪S
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let S be a Noetherian scheme, and let i:T↪S be a closed immersion. Then we have
[TABLE]
Furthermore, if S is regular, globally and locally relative singular loci coincide with usual singular locus;
[TABLE]
Proof.
The first assertion Sing(T/S)⊆Singloc(T/S)⊆Sing(T) is obvious.
For the latter assertion, assume that S is regular. If Sing(T)=∅, Sing(T/S)=Singloc(T/S)=Sing(T)=∅ by the former assertion. Assume that Sing(T)=∅, and let p∈Sing(T) be a singular point. It is enough to show that p∈Sing(T/S). Since the projective dimension, denoted by pdOT,pk(p), of k(p) as OT,p-module coincides with the global dimension of OT,p, we have pdOT,p(k(p))=∞. This implies that k(p)∈/PerfTp. Let {a1,…,ar}⊂OT,p be generators of the maximal ideal mp of the local ring OT,p. Then there exist a small open affine neighborhood U=SpecR⊂T of p and elements b1,…,br∈R such that (bi)p=ai. Let I:=⟨b1,…,br⟩ be the ideal of R generated by bi. Then Ip≅mp and (R/I)p≅k(p). Take an extension F∈cohT of the coherent sheaf R/I∈cohU, i.e. F∣U≅R/I. Then Fp≅k(p)∈/PerfTp. Since S is regular, we have Db(cohS)=PerfS, and so i∗(F)∈PerfS. Hence p∈Sing(T/S).
∎
The locally relative singular locus has a local property.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let i:T↪S be a closed immersion of Noetherian schemes. Then we have
[TABLE]
where the sets Singloc(Tp/Sp) on the right hand side are considered as the subsets of T via the natural injective maps jp:Tp↪T.
Proof.
If p∈Singloc(T/S), then mp∈Singloc(Tp/Sp), and jp(mp)=p. This means that p∈Singloc(Tp/Sp), and so Singloc(T/S)⊆⋃p∈TSingloc(Tp/Sp). If q∈Singloc(Tp/Sp) for some p∈T, then, since (Tp)q≅Tjp(q), jp(q)∈Singloc(T/S). Hence ⋃p∈TSingloc(Tp/Sp)⊆Singloc(T/S).
∎
Next we recall singularity categories. Let X be a separated Noetherian scheme with resolution property, i.e. for any F∈cohX, there exist a locally free coherent sheaf E and a surjective homomorphism E↠F. Following [Orl1], we define the triangulated category of singularities Dsg(X) as the Verdier quotient
[TABLE]
In our assumption, PerfX coincides with thick subcategory of complexes which are quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite rank.
We recall that derived matrix factorization categories can be embedded into singularity categories. Let L be a line bundle on X, and W∈Γ(X,L) be a non-zero-divisor, i.e. the induced homomorphism W:OX→L is injective, and denote by X0 the zero scheme of W. Denote by j:X0↪X the closed immersion. Since the direct image j∗:Db(cohX0)→Db(cohX) preserves perfect complexes by [TT, Proposition 2.7.(a)], it induces an exact functor
[TABLE]
As in [Orl2], the cokernel functor Σ:MF(X,L,W)→cohX0 defined by Σ(F):=Cok(φ1F) induces an exact functor
The functor Σ:DMF(X,L,W)→Dsg(X0) is fully faithful, and the essential image of Σ is the thick subcategory consisting of objects F such that j∘(F)=0∈Dsg(X). In particular, if X is regular, Σ is an equivalence.
The following result is the key motivation for our definitions of relative singular loci.
Proposition 3.5**.**
(1)* We have an equality of subsets of X*
[TABLE]
(2)* We have an equality of subsets of X*
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since (2) follows from a similar proof of (1), we prove only (1).
If p∈Sing(X0/X), by definition, there exists A∈Dsg(X0) such that Ap=0 in Dsg((X0)p) and j∘(A)=0 in Dsg(X). Then by Theorem 3.4, there is an object F∈DMF(X,L,W) such that Σ(F)≅A. Then we have Ap≅Σ(F)p≅Σp(Fp), where Σp:KMF(Xp,Wp)→Dsg((X0)p) is the exact functor defined as above. Since Ap=0 and Σp is fully faithful, Fp=0 and hence p∈Supp(F).
Conversely, if p∈Supp(F) for some F∈DMF(X,L,W), then Fp=0∈KMF(Xp,Wp). Since Σp:KMF(Xp,Wp)→Dsg((X0)p) is fully faithful, Σ(F)p≅Σp(Fp)=0, and so Σ(F)p∈/Perf(X0)p. Furthermore, j∗(Σ(F))∈PerfX by Theorem 3.4. Hence p∈Sing(X0/X).
∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let (R,m) be a local ring, and let W∈R be an element.
The category KMF(R,W) has a non-zero object if and only if W∈m2.
Proof.
Assume that W∈m2. Then there exist non-units mi,ni∈m for 1≤i≤r such that W=∑i=1rmini. Set
Ki:=(RmiRniR)∈KMF(R,mini)
and K:=⨂i=1rKi∈KMF(R,W). Then we claim that K=0 in KMF(R,W). Indeed, if K=0 in KMF(R,W), there are morphisms h0:K0→K1, h1:K1→K0 such that idK0=φ1Kh0+h1φ0K. Since each φiK is a matrix whose entries are non-units in R, the equation implies that 1R∈m, which is a contradiction.
For the converse, let F∈KMF(R,W) is a non-zero object. Since R is local, every locally free modules are free modules. Hence each φiF is a r-square matrix (fm,ni)1≤m,n≤r in elements in R. We claim that F is isomorphic to a matrix factorization F′ such that all entries of matrices φiF′ are non-units. Indeed, if there is a unit entry u∈R in the square matrix φ1F=(fm,n1)1≤m,n≤r, applying elementary row/column operations, we may assume that u=f1,11 and fm,11=f1,m1=0 for m=1. Then we see that fm,10=f1,m0=0 for m=1. Hence the object \Bigl{(}R\xrightarrow{u}R\xrightarrow{u^{-1}W}R\Bigr{)} is a direct summand of F, but this is isomorphic to the zero object in KMF(R,W). Since the rank of matrices φiF are finite and F=0, repeating this process, we may assume that all entries of φiF are non-units, and hence W∈m2 since W=φ0Fφ1F.
∎
The following result is useful to compute the relative singular loci of zero schemes of regular sections of line bundles.
Proposition 3.7**.**
Notation is same as above. We have
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from Proposition 3.5.(2) and Lemma 3.6.
∎
Remark 3.8**.**
Recall that the ** critical locus** Crit(φ) of a function φ∈Γ(Y,OY) on a complex analytic space (Y,OY) is defined by
[TABLE]
where mp is the maximal ideal of the local ring OY,p.
Assume that X is a quasi-projective variety over C, and let f∈Γ(X,OX) be a regular function which is a non-zero-divisor. Denote by (Xan,OXan) the complex analytic space associated to X, and let fan∈Γ(Xan,OXan) is the function associated to f. For any p∈Xan, since the morphism of local rings φp:OX,p→OX,pan is flat [Ser], φp induces the isomorphism mp/mp2≅mpan/(mpan)2 (see [Mat1, Theorem 49]), and so fp∈mp2 if and only if fpan∈(mpan)2. Hence
Proposition 3.7 implies the following equality of sets;
[TABLE]
where Zero(fan) is the zero locus of fan.
Recall that the codimension of a Noetherian local ring (R,m) is defined by
[TABLE]
where emb.dim(R):=dimR/m(m/m2) is the dimension of R/m-vector space of m/m2, which is called the embedding dimension of (R,m). The following result provides a numerical characterization of Sing(X0/X).
Proposition 3.9**.**
Assume that for any p∈X0 we have dim(OX,p)−dim(OX0,p)=1. Then we have the following equality of sets;
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let p∈X0 be a point, and denote by mp⊂OX,p and np⊂OX0,p the maximal ideals of OX,p and OX0,p respectively. The surjective homomorphism π:OX,p↠OX0,p induces a surjective map
[TABLE]
Hence we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, since dim(OX,p)−dim(OX0,p)=1, we have codim(OX0,p)>codim(OX,p) if and only if emb.dim(OX0,p)≥emb.dim(OX,p).
Hence, by Proposition 3.7, it is enough to show that
[TABLE]
For (⇒), assume that Wp∈mp2, and let x∈mp with π(x)∈np2. Then, since OX0,p≅OX,p/⟨Wp⟩, there exists y∈OX,p such that
[TABLE]
Hence x∈mp2 by the assumption Wp∈mp2. This means that π is injective.
For (⇐), assume that π is injective. Since p∈X0, Wp∈mp. Since π(Wp)=0 and π is injective, we have Wp∈mp2.
∎
Next, we show some properties describing relationships between relative singular loci and locally relative singular loci.
Proposition 3.10**.**
Let R be a Noetherian ring, and let W∈R is a non-zero-divisor.
Set X:=SpecR and X0:=Spec(R/W).
(1)
We have
[TABLE]
(2)
Let p∈X0 be a point with p∈/Singloc(X0/X). Let q∈X0 be a point and denote by {q} the closure of q. If p∈{q}, then q∈/Sing(X0/X).
Proof.
(1) The inclusion Sing(X0/X)∩Max(R/W)⊆Singloc(X0/X)∩Max(R/W) follows from Proposition 3.2. To show the opposite inclusion, let m∈Singloc(X0/X)∩Max(R/W) be a maximal ideal of R/W which is contained in Singloc(X0/X), and let m∈MaxR be the maximal ideal of R such that i(m)=m, where i:X0↪X is the closed immersion. By Proposition 3.7, there exist elements mi,ni,r∈R (1≤i≤r) such that mi∈m, ni∈m, r∈/m, and rW=∑i=1rmini. Since r∈/m and m is maximal, we have ⟨r⟩+m=R, and so there exists an element a∈R such that 1−ar∈m. Then we have
[TABLE]
Consider the following matrix factorizations
[TABLE]
Then, by Lemma 2.23 and Lemma 2.24, we see that m∈⋂i=0rSupp(Ki)=Supp(K). Proposition 3.5.(1) implies that m∈Sing(X0/X).
(2) Assume that q∈Sing(X0/X). Since the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X) is a union of closed subsets by Proposition 3.5.(1), we have {q}⊆Sing(X0/X). Since p∈{q} and Sing(X0/X)⊆Singloc(X0/X), p∈Singloc(X0/X), which contradicts to the assumption of p.
∎
At the end of this section, we compute examples of relative singular loci using the above results.
Example 3.11**.**
We give two examples of the relative singular loci which are not equal to the usual singular loci.
(1) Let R:=C[x,y]/⟨xn⟩ for n>1, and let W:=y∈R. Set X:=SpecR and X0:=Spec(R/W). Although Sing(X0)={pt}=∅, by Proposition 3.7, we have
[TABLE]
(2) Let R:=C[x,y,z,w]/⟨xy−zw⟩, and let W:=w∈R. Set X:=SpecR and X0:=Spec(R/W). Then we have
In this example, all kinds of singular loci are different;
[TABLE]
4. Tensor nilpotence properties
In this section, we prove the tensor nilpotent properties, which will be necessary for our main result.
The properties are analogous to [Tho, Theorem 3.6, 3.8], and the strategy of the proof is similar to loc. cit.
Let X be a Noetherian scheme, and let W∈Γ(X,L) be a global section of a line bundle L on X.
4.1. Mayer-Vietoris sequence
We provide a Mayer-Vietoris sequence for factorizations for the proof of the tensor nilpotence properties in the next section.
For an open immersion i:U↪X, consider an induced LG model (U,L∣U,W∣U). Let i!:ModOU→ModOX be the extension by zero. For an object F=\Bigl{(}F_{1}\xrightarrow{\varphi_{1}^{F}}F_{0}\xrightarrow{\varphi_{0}^{F}}F_{1}\otimes L|_{U}\Bigr{)}\in{\rm Sh}(U,L|_{U},W|_{U}), we define an object i!(F)∈Sh(X,L,W) by
[TABLE]
where σ:i!(F1⊗L∣U)∼i!(F1)⊗L is a natural isomorphism. This defines an exact functor
[TABLE]
Similarly, the inverse image functor i∗:ModOX→ModOU defines an exact functor
[TABLE]
These functors induce an exact functors between homotopy categories;
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since both of i! and i∗ are exact functors and preserve arbitrary direct sums, these functors defines exact functors between coderived categories
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Adjunction i!⊣i∗ of functors between ModOU and ModOX naturally induces adjunction i!⊣i∗ of functors between coderived categories DcoSh(U,L∣U,W∣U) and DcoSh(X,L,W).
Lemma 4.1** (Mayer-Vietoris).**
Let U1 and U2 be open subschemas of X, and suppose X=U1∪U2.
Denote by U1,2 the intersection U1∩U2. Let il:Ul→X and i1,2:U1,2→X be open immersions. Then, for any objects E,F∈DcoSh(X,L,W) and for any k∈Z, we have the following long exact sequence:
where Hom(−) denotes the set of morphisms in DcoSh(−,L∣(−),W∣(−)).
Proof.
For each components Ej (j=0,1), we have the following exact sequence in ModOX:
[TABLE]
These exact sequences induce the following exact sequence in the abelian category Sh(X,L,W):
[TABLE]
By the same argument as in [LS, Lemma 2.7.(a)], the above exact sequence gives rise to a triangle
[TABLE]
in DcoSh(X,L,W). By applying HomDcoSh(X,L,W)(−,F[k]) to the triangle and using the adjunction i(−)!⊣i(−)∗ for open immersions i(−), we obtain the result.
∎
4.2. Tensor nilpotence properties
The following lemma is an analogy of [Tho, Theorem 3.6], and we show it by a similar argument in the proof of loc. cit.
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let f:E→F be a morphism in DMF(X,L,W). If f⊗k(p)=0 in DMF(k(p),W⊗k(p)) for any p∈X, then there is an integer n such that f⊗n=0 in DMF(X,L,nW).
Proof.
The proof will be divided into 5 steps.
Step 1. In the first step, we will reduce to the case that X is affine. Since X is Noetherian, we have a finite number of open affine covering ⋃i=1kUi of X, where Ui=SpecRi. Set Li:=L∣Ui and Wi:=W∣Ui. We will show that, if there are positive integers ni such that (f∣Ui)⊗ni=0∈KMF(Ri,Li,niWi) for every i, there is a positive integer n such that f⊗n=0∈DMF(X,L,nW). We will do this by induction on k. If k=1, then f⊗n1=0. For k>1, suppose that the result is true for k−1. Set V:=⋃i=2kUi. Then by induction hypothesis, there exists n′ such that (f∣V)⊗n′=0 in DMF(V,L∣V,n′W∣V). If we set m:=max{n1,n′}, we have f⊗m∣V=0 and f⊗m∣U1=0.
By Lemma 4.1, there exists a morphism g:j∗E⊗m[1]→j∗F⊗m in DcoSh(U1∩V,L∣U1∩V,W∣U1∩V) such that the following diagram in DcoSh(X,L,W) is commutative:
[TABLE]
where j:U1∩V→X is the open immersion, δ is the morphism corresponding to the third morphism in the above triangle (∗) in the proof of Lemma 4.1, and ε is the adjunction morphism of j!⊣j∗. Since f⊗m⊗j!(g) is identified with j!(j∗(f⊗m)⊗g) via natural isomorphisms, we have f⊗m⊗j!(g)=0. Hence for n:=2m, it follows that f⊗n=0 in DcoSh(X,L,nW), as f⊗n factors through f⊗m⊗j!(g). By Lemma 2.14, we obtain f⊗n=0 in DMF(X,L,nW).
Step 2. By the above step, we may assume that X=SpecR is affine and L is an invertible R-module. Recall that DMF(R,L,W)≅KMF(R,L,W) by Proposition 2.12. In this step, we reduce to the case when W=0 and E=(0→R→0). We have the following adjunction
[TABLE]
Via natural isomorphisms, we can identify Φ(f⊗n) with Φ(f)⊗n and Φ(f⊗k(p)) with Φ(f⊗n)⊗k(p) respectively. Therefore, we may assume that W=0 and E=R.
Step 3. Since the components Fi of F and L are locally free, by the above first step, shrinking X=SpecR if necessary, we may assume that X=SpecR is affine scheme such that each Fi is free R-module and L≅R. Furthermore, by the second step, we may assume that E=R and W=0.
Hence, since the natural isomorphism HomMF(R,0)(R,F)≅Ker(φ0F) induces the isomorphism HomKMF(R,0)(R,F)≅H0(F), we only need to show that if f∈H0(F) satisfies f⊗k(p)=0∈H0(F⊗k(p)) for any p∈SpecR, then f⊗n=0∈H0(F⊗n) for some n>0.
In this step, we reduce to the case when the Noetherian ring R is of finite Krull dimension. Since the components Fi of F are free R-modules, the morphisms φiF can be represented by a matrices whose entries are elements in R. Let {Rα}α∈A be the family of all subrings Rα⊂R of R such that dimRα<∞ and Rα contains all entries of matrices φ1 and φ0.
Then for any α∈A, there is the natural object Fα∈KMF(Rα,0) such that its components (Fα)i are free Rα-modules and πα∗(Fα)≅F in the additive category MF(R,0), where πα:SpecR→SpecRα is the morphism induced by the inclusion Rα⊂R.
Let
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
be the complexes of free modules such that the term F0 and (Fα)0 are of degree [math]. Then we have H0(F\textbullet)=H0(F) and H0(F\textbullet⊗k(p))=H0(F⊗k(p)) for any p∈SpecR.
Since R is the direct colimit of the system {Rα}α∈A; R=limRα,
by the same argument as in the step (3.6.4) in the proof of [Tho, Theirem 3.6], if f⊗k(p)=0 in H0(F⊗k(p)) for any p∈X, there exist β∈A and an element fβ∈H0(Fβ\textbullet)=H0(Fβ) such that πβ∗(fβ)=f and
fβ⊗k(p)=0 in H0(Fβ\textbullet⊗k(p))=H0(Fβ⊗k(p)) for any p∈SpecRβ. Therefore, if the assertion is true for X=SpecRβ, there exists n>0 such that fβ⊗n=0 in H0(Fβ⊗n), and then f⊗n=πβ∗(fβ⊗n)=0 in H0(F⊗n).
This completes the reduction to the case when the ring R is of finite Krull dimension.
Step 4.
In this step, we reduce to the case when the Noetherian ring R of finite Krull dimension is reduced.
Let N⊂R be the ideal of nilpotent elements in R, and denote by h:SpecR/N→SpecR be the closed immersion. If f⊗k(p)=0 for any p∈SpecR, then h∗(f)⊗k(q)=0 for any q∈SpecR/N. Hence, for the reduction, we claim that, if h∗(f)⊗n′=0∈H0((h∗F)⊗n′) for some n′>0, then there exists n>0 such that f⊗n=0∈H0(F⊗n). Assume that h∗(f)⊗n′=0∈H0((h∗F)⊗n′). Since (h∗F)⊗n′≅h∗(F⊗n′)=F⊗n′⊗RR/N, the assumption implies that there exist elements x∈(F⊗n′)1 and y\in\mathfrak{N}\bigl{(}(F^{\otimes n^{\prime}})_{0}\bigr{)}\subset(F^{\otimes n^{\prime}})_{0} such that f⊗n′=φ1F⊗n′(x)+y in (F⊗n′)0. Since y\in\mathfrak{N}\bigl{(}(F^{\otimes n^{\prime}})_{0}\bigr{)}, there is a positive integer m such that y⊗m=0 in the free R-module \bigl{(}(F^{\otimes n^{\prime}})_{0}\bigr{)}^{\otimes m}. Therefore, it is enough to show the following claim:
Let S be a ring, and let E∈MF(S,0) be an object such that its components Ei are free S-modules. For e∈Ker(φ0E)⊂E0, suppose that there are elements u∈E1 and v∈E0 such that e=φ1E(u)+v and v⊗n=0 in the S-free module (E0)⊗n for some n>0. Then, considering e⊗n as an element in (E⊗n)0 via the natural split mono (E0)⊗n↪(E⊗n)0, there is an element w∈(E⊗n)1 such that φ1E⊗n(w)=e⊗n in (E⊗n)0. In particular, e⊗n=0∈H0(E⊗n).
The element e⊗n=(φ1E(u)+v)⊗n∈(E0)⊗n can be decomposed into the following form
[TABLE]
where wi is an element in (E0)⊗i. For an ordered sequence (i1,i2,...,in) of ik∈{0,1}, set E(i1,i2,...,in):=Ei1⊗Ei2⊗⋯⊗Ein, and set
[TABLE]
Let w:=(u⊗wn−1)⊕(v⊗u⊗wn−2)⊕⋯⊕(v⊗n−2⊗u⊗w1)⊕(v⊗n−1⊗u)∈E, and let w:=ι(w)∈(E⊗n)1 be the image of w under the natural split mono ι:E↪(E⊗n)1. Since φ0E(φ1E(u))=0, φ0E(v)=φ0E(e−φ1E(u))=0, and each wi∈(E0)⊗i is a summation of elements of the form a1⊗a2⊗⋯⊗ai where ak are either φ1E(u) or v, we obtain an equality φ1E⊗n(w)=e⊗n in (E⊗n)0. This completes the proof of the claim.
Step 5.
Now we may assume that X=SpecR is reduced affine scheme of finite Krull dimension, the components Fi of F are free R-modules, L≅R, W=0, and E=R∈KMF(R,0). In this step, we finish the proof by induction on the Krull dimension d:=dimR of R.
If d=0, then R≅⨁p∈Xk(p) and H0(F)≅⨁p∈XH0(F⊗k(p)). Hence, if f⊗k(p)=0∈H0(F⊗k(p)) for any p∈X, then f=0 in H0(F).
Consider a case when d>0, and assume that the result holds for Noetherian rings of dimension less than d. Denote by MinR the finite set of all prime ideals of R of height zero. Then the product ∏p∈MinRk(p) of residue fields is isomorphic to the localization S−1R for the set S of all non zero-divisors in R, as the residue fields k(p) is equal to the local ring Rp for any p∈MinR. By hypothesis, f⊗k(p)=0∈H0(F⊗k(p)) for any p∈MinR, hence f⊗RS−1R=0∈H0(F⊗RS−1R). This means that, for a representative f∈F0 of the equivalence class f∈H0(F), there exist elements y∈F1 and s∈S such that sf=φ1F(y) in F0.
Set Ks:=(RsR0R)∈MF(R,0) and let γ:=(y,f):Ks→F be the morphism defined as the pair of morphisms y:R→F1 and f:R→F0 of R-modules. Denote by i:SpecR/s→SpecR the natural closed immersion. The canonical quotient R→i∗(R/s) naturally defines morphisms δ:Ks→(0→i∗(R/s)→0) and α:(0→R→0)→(0→i∗(R/s)→0) in coh(R,0). Since s:R→R is injective, we have an exact sequence
[TABLE]
in coh(R,0). Since (RidR0R) is zero in Dcoh(R,0), δ is an isomorphism in Dcoh(R,0) by [LS, Lemma 2.7.(a)]. Set β:(0→i∗(R/s)→0)→F be the composition γ∘δ−1 in Dcoh(R,0). Then the composition β∘α:(0→R→0)→F is equal to f:(0→R→0)→F in Dcoh(R,0), since α=δ∘ι and f=δ∘ι in coh(R,0), where ι:(0→R→0)→Ks is the morphism such that ι1=0 and ι0=idR. Hence, for any n>0, we have the following commutative diagram in Dcoh(R,0):
[TABLE]
where R=(0→R→0) and i∗(R/s)=(0→i∗(R/s)→0) by abuse of notation. Since dimR/s<dimR and i∗f⊗R/sk(p)=f⊗Rk(p)=0 in H0(i∗F⊗k(p)), by the induction hypothesis, there exists m>0 such that i∗f⊗m=0 in KMF(R,0), in particular i∗f⊗m=0 in Dcoh(R,0). By the above commutative diagram, we see that f⊗m+1 factors through i∗(i∗f⊗m) in Dcoh(R,0), and hence f⊗m+1=0 in Dcoh(R,0). Then, by Lemma 2.14.(5), f⊗m+1=0 in KMF(R,0), and this completes the proof.
∎
The following lemma is a consequence of the above lemma.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let a:E→F be a morphism in DMF(X,L,0), and let G∈DMF(X,L,W) be an object.
If a⊗k(p)=0 in DMF(k(p),0) for all p∈Supp(G), then there is an integer n>0 such that G⊗(a⊗n)=0 in DMF(X,L,W).
Proof.
Since (G⊗a)⊗k(p)=0 in DMF(k(p),W⊗k(p)) for any p∈X, by Lemma 4.2, there is a positive integer n>0 such that (G⊗a)⊗n=G⊗n⊗a⊗n=0 in DMF(X,L,nW). Hence ((G∨)⊗n−1⊗G⊗n)⊗a⊗n=0, and so it suffices to show that G⊗a⊗n is a retract of ((G∨)⊗n−1⊗G⊗n)⊗a⊗n in DMF(X,L,W).
We will show it by proving that G is a direct summand of (G∨)⊗n−1⊗G⊗n in DMF(X,L,W) by induction on n. The n=1 case is trivial. For n≥2, assume that G is a direct summand of (G∨)⊗n−2⊗G⊗n−1. It is enough to show that (G∨)⊗n−2⊗G⊗n−1 is a direct summand of (G∨)⊗n−1⊗G⊗n. But for n≥3 case, this follows from n=2 case by tensoring (G∨)⊗n−3⊗G⊗n−2. Therefore it suffices to prove that G is a direct summand of G∨⊗G⊗2. The tensor product (−)⊗G:DMF(X,L,0)→DMF(X,L,W) is left adjoint to (−)⊗G∨:DMF(X,L,W)→DMF(X,L,0). Let η:id→(−)⊗G⊗G∨ be its adjunction morphism. Then the functor morphism
[TABLE]
is a split mono. Evaluating OX∈DMF(X,L,0), we see that G is a direct summand of G∨⊗G⊗2.
∎
5. Classification of thick subcategories of DMF(X,L,W)
In this section, we prove our main result. Let X be a separated Noetherian scheme, and let W∈Γ(X,L) be any section of a line bundle L on X. At first, following [TT], we recall the definition of ample families of line bundles.
Definition 5.1**.**
We say a quasi-compact and quasi-separated scheme Shas an ample family of line bundles if there exists a family L:={Lα}α∈A of line bundles on S such that the family {Sf∣f∈Γ(S,Lα⊗n),Lα∈L,n>0} of open subsets form an open basis of S, where Sf:={p∈S∣f(p)=0}.
Remark 5.2**.**
(1) Any scheme with an ample line bundle has an ample family of line bundles. In particular, any affine scheme has an ample family of line bundles. Any separated regular Noetherian scheme has an ample family of line bundles. See [TT, Example 2.1.2] for more examples of schemes with ample families of line bundles.
(2) If S has an ample family of line bundles, then S satisfies the resolution property by [TT, Lemma 2.1.3].
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let Z⊆X be a closed subset of X. Assume that X has an ample family of line bundles. Then, the following holds.
(1)
There exists a matrix factorization K∈DMF(X,L,0) such that Supp(K)=Z.
(2)
If W is a non-zero-divisor and Z is contained in Sing(X0/X), then there exists a matrix factorization F∈DMF(X,L,W) such that Supp(F)=Z.
Proof.
(1) Since X has an ample family of line bundles, there are finitely many sections fi∈Γ(X,Li) of line bundles Li (1≤i≤l) such that Z=⋂i=1lZ(fi) as closed subsets of X, where Z(fi) is the zero scheme of fi. Let Ki be the object in DMF(X,L,0) of the following form
[TABLE]
By Proposition 2.20.(1) and Lemma 2.23, we have Supp(Ki)=Z(fi). If we set K:=⨂i=1lKi, then K∈DMF(X,L,0) and Supp(K)=⋂Supp(Ki)=Z.
(2) Since X is Noetherian, we can decompose Z into finitely many irreducible components Z=⋃I=1rZi. Then, for each 1≤i≤r, there is a unique generic point pi∈Zi of Zi. By Proposition 3.5, there exists a matrix factorization Ei∈DMF(X,L,W) such that pi∈Supp(Ei). Then Zi⊆Supp(Ei), since pi is a generic point of Zi. By (1), there are matrix factorizations Ki∈DMF(X,L,0), for 1≤i≤r, such that Supp(Ki)=Zi.
Note that Lemma 2.24 implies the equality Supp(Ki⊗Ei)=Supp(Ki)∩Supp(Ei).
If we set F:=⨁i=1r(Ki⊗Ei), then F∈DMF(X,L,W) and we have
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
∎
Definition 5.4**.**
Let T⊂DMF(X,L,W) be a triangulated full subcategory. We say that T is ⊗-submodule if it is closed under tensor action of DMF(X,L,0), i.e. for any F∈DMF(X,L,0) and any T∈T, we have F⊗T∈T. For an object F∈DMF(X,L,W), we denote by
[TABLE]
the smallest thick ⊗-submodule containing F.
We prove the following proposition by using tensor nilpotence properties in the previous section.
Proposition 5.5**.**
For E,F∈DMF(X,L,W), if Supp(E)⊆Supp(F), then E∈⟨F⟩⊗.
Proof.
Let f:OX→F∨⊗F
be the adjunction morphism in DMF(X,L,0) induced by the adjoint pair (−)⊗F⊣Hom(F,−). Set G:=C(f)[−1], and let a:G→OX be a morphism which completes the following distinguished triangle
[TABLE]
Then, since ⟨F⟩⊗ is closed under DMF(X,L,0)-action, E⊗C(a)≅(E⊗F∨)⊗F∈⟨F⟩⊗. We claim that for any n>0, E⊗C(a⊗n)∈⟨F⟩⊗. Indeed, consider the following diagram
[TABLE]
where the top horizontal sequence is the distinguished triangle obtained by tensoring G with the following
triangle
[TABLE]
Then, by the octahedral axiom, we obtain the triangle completing the vertical sequence on the right side in the above diagram
[TABLE]
Considering the triangle obtained by tensoring this triangle with E, we can prove that E⊗C(a⊗n)∈⟨F⟩⊗ by induction on n.
Tensoring E with the above triangle (∗) for any n>0, we have a triangle
[TABLE]
If E⊗a⊗n=0 for some n>0, then E is a direct summand of E⊗C(a⊗n)∈⟨F⟩⊗, which implies that E∈⟨F⟩⊗. Hence it suffices to show that there is an integer n>0 such that E⊗a⊗n=0. By Lemma 4.3, it is enough to show that for any p∈Supp(E), a⊗k(p)=0 in KMF(k(p),0). Since p∈Supp(E)⊆Supp(F), p∈Supp(F∨⊗F). By Lemma 2.22, F∨⊗F⊗k(p)≅Homk(p)(F⊗k(p),F⊗k(p))=0 in KMF(k(p),0). Hence the natural map
[TABLE]
is a split mono by Corollary 2.17, since it is non-zero map. Since f⊗k(p):k(p)→F∨⊗F⊗k(p) is equal to the composition of g:k(p)→Homk(p)(F⊗k(p),F⊗k(p)) and the natural isomorphism Homk(p)(F⊗k(p),F⊗k(p))≅F∨⊗F⊗k(p), f⊗k(p) is also a split mono. Hence the triangle
[TABLE]
implies that a⊗k(p)=0.
∎
Now we are ready to prove the following main result. Recall that a subset S⊆T of a topological space T is called specialization-closed if it is a union of closed subsets of T. We easily see that S is specialization-closed if and only if s∈S implies {s}⊆S.
Theorem 5.6**.**
Let X be a separated Noetherian scheme with an ample family of line bundles, L be a line bundle on X, and W∈Γ(X,L) be a non-zero-divisor. There is one-to-one correspondence:
[TABLE]
The bijective map σ sends Y to the thick subcategory consisting of matrix factorizations F∈DMF(X,L,W) with Supp(F)⊆Y.
The inverse bijection τ sends T to the union ⋃F∈TSupp(F).
Proof.
The map σ is well defined since for any E∈DMF(X,L,0) and F∈DMF(X,L,W), we have Supp(E⊗F)⊆Supp(E)∩Supp(F) by Lemma 2.24. The map τ is also well defined by Proposition 2.20.(2) and Proposition 3.5.(1).
We show that σ and τ are mutually inverse. Let Y be a specialization-closed subset of Sing(X0/X), and let T be a thick ⊗-submodule of DMF(X,L,W). By construction, we have τ(σ(Y))⊆Y and T⊆σ(τ(T)). Hence it is enough to show the inclusions Y⊆τ(σ(Y)) and σ(τ(T))⊆T.
Since Sing(X0/X) is a specialization-closed subset of X by Proposition 3.5.(1), Y is specialization-closed in X. Hence Y can be described as a union of closed subsets Yλ of X; Y=⋃Yλ.
By Proposition 5.3.(2), for each Yλ, there exists Fλ∈DMF(X,L,W) with Supp(Fλ)=Yλ. Since Fλ∈σ(Y), we have Yλ=Supp(Fλ)⊆τ(σ(Y)). Hence Y⊆τ(σ(Y)).
To finish the proof, we show that σ(τ(T))⊆T. Let F∈σ(τ(T)) be an object. Then, by construction, we have Supp(F)⊆⋃Tλ∈TSupp(Tλ). Then, as in the proof of [Tho, Theorem 3.15], there is a finite set {Tλ}λ∈Λ of objects in T such that Supp(F)⊆⋃λ∈ΛSupp(Tλ). Hence Supp(F)⊆Supp(⊕λ∈ΛTλ). Since ⊕λ∈ΛTλ∈T, it follows from Proposition 5.5 that F∈T.
∎
Definition 5.7**.**
We say that an object G∈DMF(X,L,W) is a ⊗-generator of DMF(X,L,W) if ⟨G⟩⊗=DMF(X,L,W).
The following corollary says that the closedness of relative singular locus Sing(X0/X) in X0 is related to the existence of a ⊗-generator of DMF(X,L,W).
Corollary 5.8**.**
Notation is same as in Theorem 5.6. The relative singular locus Sing(X0/X) is closed in X0 if and only if DMF(X,L,W) has a ⊗-generator.
Proof.
Assume that the subset Sing(X0/X) is closed in X0. Since the relative singular locus Sing(X0/X) is the union of supports of all objects in DMF(X,L,W) and X is Noetherian, there is a finite subset {Fi} of objects Fi∈DMF(X,L,W) such that Sing(X0/X)=⋃iSupp(Fi)=Supp(⊕iFi). By Theorem 5.6, there is a specialization-closed subset Y⊆Sing(X0/X) such that σ(Y)=⟨⊕iFi⟩⊗. Since Sing(X0/X)=Supp(⊕iFi)⊆Y, we have Y=Sing(X0/X). Hence ⟨⊕iFi⟩⊗=σ(Sing(X0/X))=DMF(X,L,W).
If DMF(X,L,W) has a ⊗-generator G, for any object F∈DMF(X,L,W), we have Supp(F)⊆Supp(G) by Lemma 2.25. Hence Proposition 3.5.(1) implies that Sing(X0/X)=Supp(G), and so Sing(X0/X) is closed in X0.
∎
Remark 5.9**.**
Let (X,L,W) be the same LG model as in Theorem 5.6. If X is regular and L is ample, any thick subcategory of DMF(X,L,W) is automatically ⊗-submodule. In particular, the set on the right-hand side in Theorem 5.6 is equal to the set of thick subcategories of DMF(X,L,W). Since this fact is proved by Stevenson in a different context [Ste], we do not include the proof here.
Example 5.10**.**
Let (X,W) and X0 be same as in the Example 3.11.(2). Then Sing(X0/X)={⟨x,y,z−a⟩∣a∈C∖{0}}. In this case, using the above results we see the following:
(1) Since any point in Sing(X0/X) is a closed point, by Theorem 5.6 the set of thick ⊗-submodules of DMF(X,W) is bijective to the set of arbitrary subsets of C∖{0}.
(2) Since Sing(X0/X) is not a closed subset of X0, by Corollary 5.8DMF(X,W) does not have a ⊗-generator. In particular, DMF(X,W) does not have a classical generator, i.e. there is no object F∈DMF(X,W) such that ⟨F⟩=DMF(X,W). This was proved in [EP, Section 3.3] by a different argument.
6. Tensor structures on matrix factorizations and its spectrum
Using the classification result in the previous section, we will construct the relative singular loci from derived matrix factorization categories by considering tensor structures induced by tensor products.
6.1. Balmer’s tensor triangular geometry
Following [Bal] and [Yu1, Chapter 4], we will recall some basic definitions and results of the theory of tensor triangular geometry.
Definition 6.1**.**
A pseudo tensor triangulated category(T,⊗) consists of a triangulated category T and symmetric associated bifunctor ⊗:T×T→T which is exact in each variable. For the precise definition, see [Yu1, Definition 4.1.1].
Remark 6.2**.**
We don’t assume that a pseudo tensor triangulated category has a unit 1⊗, and this is the only difference from the original definition of tensor triangulated categories in [Bal].
Definition 6.3**.**
Let (T,⊗) be a pseudo tensor triangulated category.
(1)
A thick subcategory I⊂T is called ⊗-ideal if the following implication holds:
A∈T and B∈I⇒A⊗B∈I.
(2)
A ⊗-ideal P is called prime if the following holds
A∈/P and B∈/P⇒A⊗B∈/P.
(3)
A ⊗-ideal I is called radical if I=I, where I is the radical of I, i.e.
[TABLE]
For a pseudo tensor triangulated category (T,⊗), we can consider the Zariski topology on the set of all prime ideals of (T,⊗).
Definition 6.4**.**
The spectrum, denoted by Spc(T,⊗), of (T,⊗) is defined as the set of all prime ⊗-ideals
Spc(T,⊗):={P∣P is a prime ⊗-ideal }
The Zariski topology on Spc(T,⊗) is defined by the collection of closed subsets of the form Z(S):={P∈Spc(T,⊗)∣S∩P=∅} for any family of objects S⊆T.
Definition 6.5**.**
A support data on a pseudo tensor triangulated category (T,⊗) is a pair (X,σ) of a topological space X and an assignment σ:ObT→{closedsubsetsofX} satisfying the following conditions:
(1)
σ(0)=∅ and ⋃A∈Tσ(A)=X.
(2)
σ(A⊕B)=σ(A)∪σ(B).
(3)
σ(A[1])=σ(A).
(4)
σ(A)⊆σ(B)∪σ(C) for any triangle A→B→C→A[1].
(5)
σ(A⊗B)=σ(A)∩σ(B).
We say that a support data (X,σ) is classifying if the following properties hold:
(a)
The topological space X is Noetherian and any non-empty irreducible closed subset has a unique generic point.
(b)
There is the following bijective correspondence:
[TABLE]
defined by Θ(Y):={A∈T∣σ(A)⊆X}, with Θ−1(I)=⋃A∈Iσ(A).
Remark 6.6**.**
Because of the lack of the unit 1⊗ in (T,⊗) in our setting, we replace the condition σ(1⊗)=X in the original definition of support data in [Bal, Definition 3.1 (SD1)] with ⋃A∈Tσ(A)=X.
The following result is essentially due to Balmer [Bal], and it is the key result for the result in the next subsection. See also [Yu1, Theorem 4.1.16].
Assume that (X,σ) is a classifying support data on a pseudo tensor triangulated category (T,⊗). Then we have the canonical homeomorphism
[TABLE]
defined by f(x):={A∈T∣x∈/σ(A)}.
6.2. Construction of relative singular loci from matrix factorizations
In this section, using our classification result, we construct relative singular loci from pseudo tensor triangulated structures on derived matrix factorization categories. This kind of observation is also discussed in [Yu2].
Following [Yu2], we consider the natural pseudo tensor triangulated structure on derived matrix factorization categories.
Throughout this section, X is a separated Noetherian scheme with an ample family of line bundles, L is a line bundle on X, and W∈Γ(X,L) is a non zero-divisor. Denote by X0 the zero scheme of W, and assume that 2∈Γ(X,OX) is a unit of the ring Γ(X,OX).
For any unit λ∈Γ(X,OX)× in the ring Γ(X,OX), we have a natural functor
[TABLE]
defined by \lambda\bigl{(}F_{1}\xrightarrow{\varphi_{1}}F_{0}\xrightarrow{\varphi_{0}}F_{1}\bigr{)}:=\bigl{(}F_{1}\xrightarrow{\varphi_{1}}F_{0}\xrightarrow{\lambda\varphi_{0}}F_{1}\bigr{)}, and it is a triangulated equivalence (see [Yu1, Proposition 4.1.19]).
Definition 6.8**.**
Suppose that 2∈Γ(X,OX) is a unit. Then we define a bifunctor
[TABLE]
as the composition DMF(X,L,W)×DMF(X,L,W)⊗DMF(X,L,2W)21DMF(X,L,W).
As in [Yu1, Proposition 4.1.22], we see that the pair (DMF(X,L,W),⊗21) is a pseudo tensor triangulated category.
Consider an assignment
[TABLE]
defined by the supports of objects in DMF(X,L,W).
Theorem 6.9**.**
\bigl{(}{\rm Supp},\,{\rm Sing}(X_{0}/X)\bigr{)}* is a classifying support data on \bigl{(}{\rm DMF}(X,L,W),\otimes^{\frac{1}{2}}\bigr{)}.*
Proof.
Since the functor 21:DMF(X,L,2W)→DMF(X,L,W) is an equivalence and commutes with taking stalks, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, it follows from Lemma 2.25 and Proposition 3.5 that \bigl{(}{\rm Supp},{\rm Sing}(X_{0}/X)\bigr{)} is a support data. We will show that the support data satisfies the conditions (a) and (b) in Definition 6.5.
We check the condition (a). Note that X satisfies the condition (a). It follows that Sing(X0/X) is a Noetherian topological space, since so is X. Note that any irreducible closed subset Z of Sing(X0/X) is closed in X. Indeed, since Z is closed in a specialization-closed subset of X, Z is specialization-closed in X. Hence Z is a union of irreducible closed subsets Zλ of X; Z=⋃λZλ. Since Z is irreducible in Sing(X0/X), there is an irreducible closed subset Zλ′ of X such that Z=Zλ′. Hence Z is an irreducible closed subset of X, and it has a unique generic point.
Next, we verify the condition (b). By Theorem 5.6,
it is enough to show that for a thick subcategory T of DMF(X,L,W)
T is ⊗-submodule ⇔T is radical ⊗21-ideal.
The implication (⇒) follows immediately from Theorem 5.6 and Lemma 2.25.(4).
We show the other implication (⇐). For this, let I⊂DMF(X,L,W) be a radical thick ⊗21-ideal. For objects E∈DMF(X,L,0) and F∈I, it suffices to prove that E⊗F∈I. We have
[TABLE]
and the object in the bottom line is in I since E⊗F⊗E∈DMF(X,L,W) and I is ⊗21-ideal. Hence E⊗F∈I as I is radical.
∎
Theorem 6.7 and Theorem 6.9 imply the following result.
Corollary 6.10**.**
There is a homeomorphism
[TABLE]
Remark 6.11**.**
By Proposition 2.12 and Proposition 3.2, we see that Corollary 6.10 is a generalization of [Yu2, Theorem 1.2], where Yu consider the case when X is a regular affine scheme of finite Krull dimension.
Bibliography19
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[BFK] M. Ballard, D. Favero and L. Katzarkov, A category of kernels for equivariant factorizations and its implications for Hodge theory , Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes E ´ ´ E \acute{\rm E} tudes Sci. 120 (2014), 1-111.
2[BDFIK] M. Ballard, D. Deliu, D. Favero, M. U. Isik, and L. Katzarkov, Resolutions in factorization categories , Adv. in Math. 295 (2016), 195-249.
3[Bal] P. Balmer, The spectrum of prime ideals in tensor triangulated categories , J. Reine Angew. Math. 588 (2005), 149-168.
4[EP] A. I. Efimov and L. Positselski, Coherent analogues of matrix factorizations and relative singularity categories , Algebra Number Theory 9 (2015), no. 5, 1159-1292.
5[Gab] P. Gabriel, Des catégories abélinnes , Bull. Soc. Math. France, 90 (1962), 323-448.
6[LS] V. A. Lunts and O. M. Schn u ¨ ¨ u \ddot{\rm u} rer, Matrix factorizations and semi-orthogonal decompositions for blowing-ups , J. Noncommut. Geom. 10 (2016), no. 3, 907-979.
8[Mat 2] H. Matsumura, Commutative ring theory , second ed. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1989).