This paper investigates the Hodge structures of elliptic surfaces derived from bielliptic genus three curves, establishing a Torelli theorem and providing explicit examples of non-isomorphic surfaces with identical Hodge structures.
Contribution
It proves a generic Torelli theorem for these elliptic surfaces and analyzes the degree of their period maps, advancing understanding of their Hodge-theoretic properties.
Findings
01
The period map for second cohomology has one-dimensional fibers.
02
The period map for total cohomology is of degree twelve.
03
Explicit examples of non-isomorphic surfaces with identical Hodge structures.
Abstract
We study the Hodge structure of elliptic surfaces which are canonically defined from bielliptic curves of genus three. We prove that the period map for the second cohomology has one dimensional fibers, and the period map for the total cohomology is of degree twelve, and moreover, by adding the information of the Hodge structure of the canonical divisor, we prove a generic Torelli theorem for these elliptic surfaces. Finally, we give explicit examples of the pair of non-isomorphic elliptic surfaces which have the same Hodge structure on themselves and the same Hodge structure on their canonical divisors.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Advanced Algebra and Geometry · Geometry and complex manifolds
Full text
Bielliptic curves of genus three and the Torelli problem for certain elliptic surfaces
Atsushi Ikeda
Abstract
We study the Hodge structure of elliptic surfaces which are canonically defined from bielliptic curves of genus three.
We prove that the period map for the second cohomology has one dimensional fibers, and the period map for the total cohomology is of degree twelve, and moreover, by adding the information of the Hodge structure of the canonical divisor, we prove a generic Torelli theorem for these elliptic surfaces.
Finally, we give explicit examples of the pair of non-isomorphic elliptic surfaces which have the same Hodge structure on themselves and the same Hodge structure on their canonical divisors.
Let f:Y→B be an elliptic surface with a section.
The Torelli problem asks if the isomorphism class of the surface Y is determined by the isomorphism class of the Hodge structure Hi(Y,Z).
In [8], Chakiris proved that general simply connected elliptic surface with the geometric genus pg(Y)≥2 is determined by the Hodge structure on H2(Y,Z), and it is called generic Torelli theorem.
But we can not find this kind of results in the case when Y has positive irregularity q(Y)≥1.
In this paper, we consider certain elliptic surfaces with pg(Y)=q(Y)=1, which are canonically defined from bielliptic curves of genus 3.
Let C be a nonsingular projective curve of genus 3.
Then the symmetric square C(2) has the involution κ:C(2)→C(2) which is defined as the extension of the birational involution given by q+q′+κ(q+q′)∈∣ΩC1∣ for q+q′∈C(2) with h0(C,OC(q+q′))<2.
In this paper, we consider the case when C has a bielliptic involution σ:C→C, whose quotient E=C/σ is a nonsingular projective curve of genus 1.
Then the involution σ(2):C(2)→C(2) commutes with the involution κ, and we have several quotient surfaces of C(2);
[TABLE]
The quotient X′=C(2)/κ is a projective surface of general type, and it has 28 ordinary double points, which come from the 28 bitangent lines of the non-hyperelliptic case, or the 28 pair of distinct Weierstrass points of the hyperelliptic case.
The quotient Y′=C(2)/σ(2) is a projective surface of Kodaira dimension 1, and it has 6 ordinary double points, which come from the 6 pair of distinct fixed points of the involution σ.
We denote by Y=Y(C/E) the minimal resolution of singularities of Y′, which is the main object of this paper.
The quotient A′=C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ) is a nonsingular projective surface of Kodaira dimension [math].
We denote by A the minimal model of A′.
Then A is isomorphic to the dual abelian surface of the Prym variety Prym(C/E) of the branched double covering C→E, and the Kummer surface of A is isomorphic to the nonsingular minimal model of the quotient Z′=C(2)/⟨σ(2),κ⟩.
Since the abelian surface A and its Kummer surface are investigated by Barth in [2], we can apply their results to the study of the surface Y.
The surface Y has the canonical elliptic fibration f:Y→B by
Y′→E(2)→Pic(2)(E)=B, and the Hodge structure H1(Y,Z)≃H1(B,Z) recovers only the information of the base curve B.
We have to consider the Hodge structure on H2(Y,Z) for the Torelli theorem.
Since the involution κ acts trivially on the space H0(C(2),ΩC(2)2) of holomorphic 2-forms on C(2), we have the coincidence
H0(C(2),ΩC(2)2)σ(2)=H0(C(2),ΩC(2)2)σ(2)∘κ
of the invariant subspaces for the involutions σ(2) and σ(2)∘κ.
It implies that the Hodge structures on H2(Y,Z) and on H2(A,Z) are essentially equivalent.
In fact, we have the isomorphism H2(Y,Q)≃H2(A,Q)⊕Q(−1)⊕8 of rational Hodge structures.
We remark that the integral cohomology H2(A,Z) is not a direct summand of H2(Y,Z), hence we need more technical arguments to compare the integral Hodge structures.
The detail is given in Theorem 4.1.
The Torelli problem for the Prym map asks if the isomorphism class of the double covering C→E is determined by the isomorphism class of the polarized abelian variety Prym(C/E).
In the case for bielliptic curves, it is studied in [14].
In our case, the Torelli theorem does not hold, because the dimension of the moduli space of bielliptic curve of genus 3 is grater than the dimension of the moduli space of polarized abelian surfaces.
Hence we have a nontrivial deformation {Ct→Et}t of the bielliptic curve C→E with the same Prym variety.
By the above observation in Theorem 4.1, we have a family {Y(Ct/Et)}t of surfaces with the constant Hodge structure H2(Y(Ct/Et),Z)≃H2(Y(C/E),Z).
Since the bielliptic curve Ct→Et is recovered from the elliptic surface Y(Ct/Et) by Proposition 2.8, the family {Y(Ct/Et)}t is a nontrivial deformation of the surface Y, and it forms a fiber of the period map for the second cohomology.
Let Fξ be the fiber of the elliptic fibration f:Y→B, and let Dξ be the fiber of the composition C(2)→Y′→B at ξ∈B.
Then Dξ→Yξ is a bielliptic curve of genus 3 for general ξ∈B.
By Pantazis’ bigonal construction [2], [17], we can show that the Prym variety Prym(Dξ/Fξ) is the dual abelian surface of Prym(C/E) (Corollary 3.7).
Since the Hodge structure on the second cohomology of the abelian surface is isomorphic to the Hodge structure of its dual abelian surface by [20], it gives another family {Y(Dξ/Fξ)}ξ of elliptic surfaces which satisfies H2(Y(Dξ/Fξ),Z)≃H2(Y(C/E),Z).
If Prym(C/E) is not a self-dual polarized abelian surface, this family does not contain the original surface Y=Y(C/E), hence the fiber of the period map for H2(Y,Z) has 2 connected components.
Let M be the set of isomorphism classes of bielliptic curves of genus 3, which distinguishes isomorphism classes of corresponding elliptic surfaces, and let H be the set of isomorphism classes of Hodge structures with additional structures (bilinear forms and some effective classes).
Then we have the period map M→H by the Hodge structure of Y or the canonical divisor KY.
We remark that the effective canonical divisor KY of Y is uniquely determined because pg(Y)=1.
Theorem 1.1**.**
(1)
The period map for the Hodge structure H2(Y,Z) has 1 dimensional fibers, and the general fiber consists of 2 connected components
(Theorem 5.5).
2. (2)
The period map for the mixed Hodge structure ⨁i=12Hi(Y,Z) has finite fibers, and the general fiber consists of 12 points
(Theorem 5.6).
3. (3)
The period map for the mixed Hodge structure
\bigl{(}\bigoplus_{i=1}^{2}H^{i}(Y,\mathbf{Z})\bigr{)}\oplus{H^{1}(K_{Y},\mathbf{Z})}
is generically injective
(Theorem 5.7).
We remark that the elliptic surface Y has a section and the non-constant j-function (Proposition 2.11).
Our Theorem 1.1 (1) implies that the differential of the period map for H2(Y,Z) is not injective, and it contradicts to the infinitesimal Torelli theorem by [18].
It seems that there is a gap in the proof of Main Theorem (A) in [18].
Therefore, in Proposition 5.1, we give a direct proof for the failure of the infinitesimal Torelli theorem without using Theorem 1.1 (1).
A class of surfaces whose period map has a positive dimensional fiber is known
in [6], [7], [12], [21], [22].
Theorem 1.1 (3) is motivated by the result on the mixed Torelli theorem for these surfaces in [19].
The global Torelli theorem for the period map in Theorem 1.1 (3) is not true.
We can find the pair of non-isomorphic elliptic surfaces which have the same Hodge structure, and we give several types of examples which are defined over Q in Example 5.11, Example 5.12 and Example 5.13.
This paper proceed as follows.
In Section 2, we show that the pluri-canonical morphism of Y gives the elliptic fibration Y→B, and we describe its singular fibers.
By using the information of the singular fibers and the canonical fiber, we give the way to reconstruct the original bielliptic curve C→E from the elliptic surface Y.
We also compute the j-function of the elliptic fibration.
In Section 3, we review some results in [2] on the Prym varieties for the bielliptic curve C→E of genus 3, and we show that the Prym variety of the bielliptic curve Dξ→Fξ is the dual abelian surface of the Prym variety Prym(C/E).
We compute the explicit equation of the canonical model of the curve Dξ, which is used in the proof of Theorem 1.1 (3), and is useful to find examples for the failure of the global Torelli theorem.
In Section 4, we compute the lattice structure on H2(Y,Z) using a basis of H1(C,Z).
We explain the way to construct the Hodge structure H2(A,Z) from the Hodge structure H2(Y,Z), and also explain the way to construct H2(Y,Z) from H2(A,Z).
In Section 5, first we show that the differential of the period map for H2(Y,Z) is not injective, but it is not used in the proof of the Main theorem (Theorem 1.1).
We prove the Main theorem by using results in Section 3 and Section 4, and we give examples for the failure of the global Torelli theorem.
2 Construction and singular fibers of elliptic surfaces
2.1 Construction
Let E be a nonsingular projective curve of genus 1, and let π:C→E be a double covering branched at distinct 4 points p1,…,p4∈E.
Then C is a nonsingular projective curve of genus 3.
In this paper, the covering π:C→E is called bielliptic curve of genus 3.
We denote by σ:C→C the covering involution of π, and denote by σ(2):C(2)→C(2) the induced involution on its symmetric square C(2).
Then the induced morphism π(2):C(2)→E(2) on the symmetric squares factors through the quotient C(2)/σ(2), and the morphism ϕ:C(2)/σ(2)→E(2) is a finite double covering of E(2) branched along ⋃i=14Γi, where Γi={pi+p∈E(2)∣p∈E}.
Let ν:Y→C(2)/σ(2) be the minimal resolution, and let ψ:E(2)→Pic(2)(E) be the P1-bundle defined by p+p′↦[OE(p+p′)].
Then the composition f=ψ∘ϕ∘ν:Y→Pic(2)(E) gives a fibration of curves of genus 1.
We remark that the proper transform of ϕ−1(Γi) in Y gives a section of the fibration.
Let η∈Pic(2)(E) be the isomorphism class of the invertible sheaf with η⊗2=[OE(p1+⋯+p4)] which is determined by
π∗η=[ΩC1].
First, we prove the following proposition.
Proposition 2.1**.**
Y* is a minimal surface with the numerical invariants pg(Y)=1, q(Y)=1 and KY2=0, and the effective canonical divisor KY of Y is the fiber f−1(η) at η∈Pic(2)(E).*
For p∈E, we set Γp={p+p′∈E(2)∣p′∈E}, and we denote by Λp=ψ−1([OE(2p)]) the fiber of ψ at [OE(2p)]∈Pic(2)(E).
We remark that Γp is a section of the P1-bundle ψ:E(2)→Pic(2)(E).
Lemma 2.2**.**
The canonical sheaf ΩE(2)2 is isomorphic to OE(2)(Λp−2Γp) for any p∈E.
Proof.
We denote by ϵ:E×E→E(2) the natural covering, denote by pri:E×E→E the i-th projection,
and denote by ΔE the diagonal divisor on E×E.
Then we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
for any p′∈E and i=1,2.
By the seesaw theorem [15], we have
[TABLE]
Hence we have
[TABLE]
By the injectivity of ϵ∗:Pic(E(2))→Pic(E×E), we have OE(2)(Λp−2Γp)≃ΩE(2)2.
∎
Let G∈Pic(E(2)) be the isomorphism class of the invertible sheaf with G⊗2=[OE(2)(∑i=14Γi)] which determines the finite double covering ϕ:C(2)/σ(2)→E(2).
Lemma 2.3**.**
ϵ∗G=pr1∗η⊗pr2∗η∈Pic(E×E).
Proof.
The restriction of the covering ϕ:C(2)/σ(2)→E(2) to the divisor E≃Γp↪E(2) is isomorphic to the original covering π:C→E for p∈E∖{p1,…,p4}, hence we have
[TABLE]
for p∈E∖{p1,…,p4} and i=1,2.
By the seesaw theorem [15], we have
ϵ∗G=pr1∗η⊗pr2∗η.
∎
Since the singularities of the branch divisor ⋃i=14Γi of the double covering ϕ:C(2)/σ(2)→E(2) are at most nodes, the minimal resolution ν:Y→C(2)/σ(2) is the canonical resolution in the sense of [10, Lemma 5].
Let p∈E be a point with η=[OE(2p)].
By Lemma 2.3, we have G=[OE(2)(2Γp)], and by Lemma 2.2, we have
[TABLE]
By [10, Lemma 6], we can compute the numerical invariants
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
and the fiber f−1(η) is the canonical divisor of Y.
Let D be a nonsingular rational curve on Y.
Since Pic(2)(E) is not rational, D is contained in a fiber of f.
Then we have (KY.D)=0 and (D2)=−2, hence Y is a minimal surface.
∎
Corollary 2.4**.**
There is an isomorphism of Hodge structures
H1(Y,Z)≃H1(E,Z).
Proof.
By Proposition 2.1, the cokernel of the pull-back
f∗:H1(E,Z)≃H1(Pic(2)(E),Z)→H1(Y,Z)
by f:Y→Pic(2)(E)≃E
is finite.
Since f is connected, it is an isomorphism.
∎
In the following, we denote by B=Pic(2)(E) the base space of the elliptic surface f:Y→B=Pic(2)(E), and we call the point η∈B the canonical point of the covering π:C→E.
Corollary 2.5**.**
The pluri-canonical morphism Φ∣OY(mKY)∣:Y→Pm−1 factors through the elliptic surface f:Y→B.
Proof.
By Proposition 2.1, we have
(ΩY2)⊗m=f∗OB(mη) and
h0(Y,(ΩY2)⊗m)=h0(B,OB(mη))=m.
Hence the composition
[TABLE]
is defined by the pluri-canonical morphism Φ∣OY(mKY)∣.
∎
2.2 Singular fibers
We explain about fibers of f:Y→B.
If ξ∈B=Pic(2)(E) is not the class [OE(pi+pj)] for 1≤i<j≤4, then the fiber f−1(ξ) is the double covering of ψ−1(ξ)≃P1 branched at 4-points ψ−1(ξ)∩⋃i=14Γi, hence f−1(ξ) is a nonsingular curve of genus 1.
The fiber of f at [OE(p1+p2)]∈B=Pic(2)(E) is not irreducible, and it is of type (1I2 if [OE(p1+p2)]=[OE(p3+p4)], or of type (1I4 if [OE(p1+p2)]=[OE(p3+p4)], by the notation of Kodaira [11].
Let Σ⊂B be the set of the critical points of f:Y→B.
Then we have 3≤♯Σ≤6.
The following Lemma is used for recovering the bielliptic curve C→E from the elliptic surface Y in Proposition 2.8.
Lemma 2.6**.**
The image of Σ by the morphism
Φ∣OB(2η)∣:B→P1
is a set of distinct 3 points in P1.
Proof.
It follows from
[TABLE]
where ∼ denotes the linear equivalence on the curve B=Pic(2)(E).
∎
Remark 2.7*.*
Let Δh⊂C(2) be the curve defined by
[TABLE]
which is empty if C is a non-hyperelliptic curve.
Since C is a nonsingular projective curve of genus 3, the symmetric square C(2) has a birational involution
[TABLE]
where κ(q+q′)∈C(2) is defined as the unique member of the linear system ∣ΩC1(−q−q′)∣.
If C is hyperelliptic, then it extends to the regular involution κ:C(2)→C(2), because κ(q+q′)=h(q)+h(q′) for q+q′∈C(2)∖Δh, where h:C→C denotes the hyperelliptic involution.
Then the involution κ commutes with the involution on the base B defined by the double covering Φ∣OB(2η)∣:B→P1, hence we have a fibration Y/κ→P1 of curves of genus 1 in the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Let Y=Y(C/E) be the surface constructed from a bielliptic curve π:C→E.
Proposition 2.8**.**
The isomorphism class of the bielliptic curve π:C→E is recovered from the surface Y.
Proof.
We set E′=Φ∣OY(3KY)∣(Y)⊂P2.
By Corollary 2.5, E′ is isomorphic to E, and by Proposition 2.1, the image of the effective canonical divisor KY of Y by Φ∣OY(3KY)∣ is a point t∈E′.
Let Σ′⊂E′ be the set of critical points of the fibration
Φ∣OY(3KY)∣:Y→E′.
By Corollary 2.5 and Lemma 2.6, we write as Σ′={r1,…,r3,s1,…,s3} with the condition Φ∣OE′(2t)∣(ri)=Φ∣OE′(2t)∣(si)∈P1 for i=1,2,3.
We remark that it is possible that ri=si, if it has a singular fiber of type (1I4.
We define the point r4∈E by
OE′(s1+s2+s3+r4)≃OE′(4t).
Then r1,…,r4∈E′ are distinct 4 points, and we have
[TABLE]
because OE′(ri+si)≃OE′(2t) for i=1,2,3.
Proposition 2.8 is proved by the following Lemma.
∎
Lemma 2.9**.**
Let π′:C′→E′ be the double covering branched at the 4 points r1,…,r4 which is determined by [OE′(t+r4)]∈Pic(2)(E′).
Then π′:C′→E′ is isomorphic to the original covering π:C→E.
Proof.
By Corollary 2.5, there is an isomorphism φ:E′→Pic(2)(E) with φ∘Φ∣OY(3KY)∣=f.
We have to consider two cases for the proof, which depends on the choice of ri from {ri,si}.
First we assume that
φ(ri)=[OE(pi+p4)]
for i=1,2,3.
Then we have
[TABLE]
hence φ(r4)=[OE(2p4)].
Let φ4:E→Pic(2)(E) be the isomorphism defined by p↦[OE(p+p4)].
Then the isomorphism φ4−1∘φ:E′→E satisfies (φ4−1∘φ)(ri)=pi for i=1,…,4, and
[TABLE]
Next we assume that
φ(si)=[OE(pi+p4)]
for i=1,2,3.
Then we have
[TABLE]
hence φ(r4)=[OE(p1+p2+p3−p4)].
Let φ4ˉ:E→Pic(2)(E) be the isomorphism defined by p↦[OE(p1+p2+p3−p)].
Then the isomorphism φ4ˉ−1∘φ:E′→E satisfies (φ4ˉ−1∘φ)(ri)=pi for i=1,…,4, and
[TABLE]
where η∨ denotes the class of the dual invertible sheaf of η.
∎
Proposition 2.10**.**
The effective canonical divisor KY=f−1(η) is singular if and only if C is a hyperelliptic curve.
In this case, the fiber KY=f−1(η) is of type (1I4.
Proof.
Let qi∈C be the ramification point of π:C→E with π(qi)=pi.
If C is a hyperelliptic curve, then the hyperelliptic involution h commutes with the involution σ, hence h acts on the set {q1,…,q4}⊂C.
By [2, Lemma (1.9)], we have h(qi)=qi for 1≤i≤4.
We may assume that q2=h(q1) and q4=h(q3).
Then we have
OC(q1+q2)≃OC(q3+q4),
hence
π∗η=[OC(q1+⋯+q4)]=[OC(2q1+2q2)]=π∗[OE(p1+p2)].
Since π∗:Pic(E)→Pic(C) is injective, we have
η=[OE(p1+p2)]=[OE(p3+p4)],
and the fiber KY=f−1(η) is singular of type (1I4.
Conversely, if KY=f−1(η) is singular, then
η=[OE(pi+pj)] for some 1≤i<j≤4.
We may assume that η=[OE(p1+p2)].
Since
[OC(2q1+2q2)]=π∗η=[OC(q1+⋯+q4)],
we have
OC(q1+q2)≃OC(q3+q4).
It means that the linear system ∣OC(q1+q2)∣ gives the morphism of degree 2 to the projective line.
∎
2.3 The j-function
Proposition 2.11**.**
The j-function j:B→P1 for the elliptic surface f:Y→B is a covering of degree 12, and it is ramified at the canonical point η∈B.
The statement that the j-function is ramified at η∈B follows from Remark 2.7.
For a point ξ∈B∖Σ, the fiber f−1(ξ) is the double covering of ψ−1(ξ)≃P1 branched at 4 points ψ−1(ξ)∩⋃i=14Γi.
Let
iξ:ψ−1(ξ)→P1=C∪{∞}
be the isomorphism
defined by
[TABLE]
We defines the λ-function by
[TABLE]
Then f−1(ξ) is isomorphic to the compactification of
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.12**.**
The λ-function coincides with the morphism
Φ∣OB(2η)∣:B→P1,
by taking the coordinate of P1=C∪{∞} as
[TABLE]
Proof.
We fix a point p0∈E with η=[OE(2p0)].
Let E∖{p0} be defined by the equation y2=g(x) in A2, where g(x) is a separated monic cubic polynomial.
We assume that p1,…,p4∈E∖{p0}, because the case p1=p0 is easier.
We denote the coordinate of the point pi∈E by (x,y)=(ai,bi).
For a point p=(a,b)∈E∖{p0}, we define a rational function by
[TABLE]
which is the morphism given by the linear system
∣OE(p+p0)∣.
Hence we have
[TABLE]
for general ξ=[OE(p+p0)]∈Pic(2)(E).
Let pij∈E be the point with OE(p1+pj+pij)≃OE(3p0).
We assume that pij∈E∖{p0}, because the case p12=p0 is easier.
We denote the coordinate of the point pij∈E by (x,y)=(aij,bij), and we set
r=a4−a1b4−b1+a3−a2b3−b2.
Then we have
[TABLE]
where these equalities are proved from OE(p1+⋯+p4)≃OE(4p0) by the elementary computation.
We set
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where we set c=(a4−a1)(a3−a2)(a4−a2)(a3−a1).
Since (a24,b24)=(a13,−b13), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
Since (a14,b14)=(a23,−b23), by the same way, we have
By Lemma 2.12, the j-function
j(ξ)=28λ(ξ)2(λ(ξ)−1)2(λ(ξ)2−λ(ξ)+1)3
is of degree 12, and it is ramified at η∈B.
∎
Corollary 2.13**.**
If C is not a hyperelliptic, then the Kodaira-Spencer map
TE∣η→H1(KY,TKY) at the canonical fiber KY=f−1(η)
is zero.
Proof.
By Proposition 2.10, the canonical divisor KY is nonsingular, and by Proposition 2.11, the differential of the j-function is zero at η∈B, hence the Kodaira-Spencer map is zero.
∎
3 Prym varieties and duality
3.1 Prym varieties
In this section, we review some results on the Prym varieties [16] for the case when they are defined from bielliptic curves of genus 3.
In this case, the Prym variety is a (1,2)-polarized abelian surface, and it is intensively studied by Barth in [2].
Particularly, we introduce the duality of bielliptic curves of genus 3, which is given in [17], and is called Pantazis’ bigonal construction.
We will give an explanation for the duality through the elliptic surface Y.
Let π:C→E be a bielliptic curve of genus 3, and let σ:C→C be its bielliptic involution.
The Prym variety P=Prym(C/E) is defined as the image of the homomorphism
[TABLE]
where J(C) denotes the Jacobian variety of C.
Since π:C→E has ramification points, the kernel of the norm homomorphism
[TABLE]
is connected, and it coincides with P.
The Prym variety P is a (1,2)-polarized abelian surface by the restriction ΘC∣P of the theta divisor ΘC on J(C).
Let A be the abelian surface defined as the cokernel of the homomorphism
π∗:J(E)→J(C).
Then A is isomorphic to the dual abelian variety Pic(0)(P)
of P.
The natural composition P↪J(C)↠A is an isogeny, which coincides with the polarization isogeny
[TABLE]
where tx:P→P denotes the translation by x∈P.
Let ι:C→A be the composition C↪J(C)↠A, where C↪J(C) is the Abel-Jacobi embedding defined by fixing a point of C.
By [2, Proposition (1.8)], the morphism ι is a closed immersion, and it gives a (1,2)-polarization on A.
By [2, Duality theorem (1.12)], the class [ι(C)]∈H2(A,Z) corresponds to
2[ΘC∣P]∈H2(P,Z) by the pull-back
H2(A,Z)↪H2(P,Z),
which means that the polarizations [ι(C)]∈H2(A,Z) and
[ΘC∣P]∈H2(P,Z) are dual to each other in the sense of [4, Section 14.4].
Lemma 3.1**.**
The morphism
[TABLE]
is a generically finite double covering, and it induces a birational morphism
C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→A,
where κ denotes the involution given in Remark 2.7.
Proof.
Let Δσ⊂C(2) be the curve defined by
[TABLE]
Then Δσ and Δh are contracted by the morphism
C(2)→A.
Since the involution σ(2)∘κ does not have isolated fixed points, the quotient C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ) is a nonsingular surface, and the image of Δσ in C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ) is a (−1)-curve.
If Δh=∅, then the image of Δh in C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ) is also a (−1)-curve disjoint from the image of Δσ.
Since
[TABLE]
for q+q′∈C(2), the morphism C(2)→A factors through the quotient C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ).
For q+q′,r+r′∈C(2)∖(Δσ∪Δh),
we assume that ι(q)+ι(q′)=ι(r)+ι(r′) in A.
Then
[TABLE]
for some x∈C,
hence we have
OC(q+q′+σ(r))=OC(x+σ(x)+r′).
If h0(C,OC(q+q′+σ(r)))=1, then q+q′=r+r′, because q+q′∈/Δσ.
If h0(C,OC(q+q′+σ(r)))=2, then h1(C,ΩC1(−q−q′−σ(r))))=1, hence there is a unique point y∈C such that
q+q′+σ(r)+y∈∣ΩC1∣.
Since x+σ(x)+r′+y,σ(x)+x+σ(r′)+σ(y)∈∣ΩC1∣,
we have OC(r′+y)≃OC(σ(r′)+σ(y)).
If y=σ(r′), then σ(x)=h(x), but it is a contradiction to
[2, Lemma (1.9)].
Hence we have y=σ(r′) and q+q′+σ(r)+σ(r′)∈∣ΩC1∣.
Since q+q′∈/Δh, we have r+r′=σ(2)∘κ(q+q′).
Hence C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→A should be the blow-down of the above (−1)-curves.
∎
Remark 3.2*.*
The fixed locus of the involution σ(2)∘κ on C(2) is given as a component D of the fiber of
ψ∘π(2):C(2)→Pic(2)(E)
at the canonical point η∈B=Pic(2)(E);
[TABLE]
We remark that D is the normalization of the “dual” C∨ of C, which is defined later.
Remark 3.3*.*
When we take a ramification point qi of π:C→E
as the base point of the embedding
[TABLE]
the involution σ(2):C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ) is compatible with the involution (−1)A on A.
Hence the quotient C(2)/⟨σ(2),κ⟩ is birational to the Kummer surface Km(A) of A.
In fact, the quotient Y/κ has 12 ordinary double points, and Km(A) is the minimal resolution of Y/κ;
[TABLE]
By Remark 2.7, we have a fibration
g1:Km(A)→Y/κ→P1=∣OB(2η)∣ of curves of genus 1.
If f:Y→B does not have a singular fiber of type (1I4, then g1:Km(A)→P1 has 6 singular fibers.
They contains 3 singular fibers of type (1I2 which come from the singular fibers of f:Y→B, and the other 3 singular fibers are of type I0∗ which appear at ξ∈B with OB(2ξ)≃OB(2η) and ξ=η.
On the other hand, the linear pencil ∣OA(ι(C))∣ defines a fibration
[TABLE]
of curves of genus 3 by the elimination of the base point of the complete linear system
∣OA(ι(C))∣, where A∼→A is the blow-up at 4 points ι(q1),…,ι(q4).
If the fiber of Ct=Φ−1(t) is not singular, then Ct is a bielliptic curve of genus 3, and the bielliptic involution σt:Ct→Ct is defined from the involution (−1)A by [2, Proposition (1.6)].
Hence the fibration Φ factors through the quotient A∼/(−1)A≃Y/κ, and it gives another fibration g2:Km(A)→P1=∣OA(ι(C))∣ of curves of genus 1.
Let Et be the fiber of g2 at t∈P1.
Then the Prym variety P(Ct/Et) is isomorphic to P=P(C/E) by [2, Proposition (1.10)].
Let π:C→E be a bielliptic curve of genus 3.
We denote by W⊂Pic(2)(C) the image of natural morphism C(2)→Pic(2)(C), and denote by Pξ⊂Pic(2)(C) the fiber of the norm homomorphism N:Pic(2)(C)→Pic(2)(E) at ξ∈Pic(2)(E).
We set Dξ=W∩Pξ.
Since the divisors W and Pξ on Pic(2)(C) is stable under the involution
[TABLE]
it acts on Dξ.
If Dξ is nonsingular, then the quotient morphism
[TABLE]
is a bielliptic curve of genus 3, where we recall the notation in Section 2;
[TABLE]
We define the dual of C by C∨=Dη, and denote by
π∨:C∨→E∨
the quotient by the involution, where η∈Pic(2)(E) is the canonical point of the covering π:C→E.
If C is not hyperelliptic, then by Proposition 2.10, the dual π∨:C∨→E∨ is a nonsingular bielliptic curve.
If C is hyperelliptic, then E∨ is an irreducible rational curve with one node, and C∨ is an irreducible curve of geometric genus 2 with one node, which is given by contracting the hyperelliptic locus Δh form
(ψ∘π(2))−1(η)=D∪Δh in Remark 3.2.
We remark that Pξ is isomorphic to the Prym variety P=Prym(C/E)⊂J(C) by the translation
[TABLE]
where p∈E is a point with ξ=[OE(2p)].
Let Dp⊂P be the image of Dξ=W∩Pξ by the above translation, by abusing the notation.
We fix a point p0∈E with η=[OE(2p0)].
Then the divisor C∨≃Dp0⊂P defines the (1,2)-polarization on the Prym variety P.
We recall that the embedding ι:C↪A defines the (1,2)-polarization on the dual abelian variety A≃Pic(0)(P) of P.
This is the reason that we call C∨ the dual of C.
In fact, we have (C∨)∨≃C for any non-hyperelliptic C by Lemma 3.11.
We remark that the dual bielliptic curve π∨:C∨→E∨ also defines two fibrations gi:Km(P)→P1 in the same way as gi:Km(A)→P1 in Remark 3.3.
Lemma 3.4**.**
Dp⊂P* is contained in the linear system ∣OP(Dp0)∣ for any p∈E.*
Proof.
It is clear that Dp and Dp0 are algebraically equivalent, hence
[OP(Dp−Dp0)]∈Pic(0)(P).
Since Dp0 is an ample divisor on P, the polarization homomorphism
[TABLE]
is surjective, hence there is a point x∈P such that
tx∗OP(Dp0)≃OP(Dp).
We remark that Dp contains π∗(J(E)2)⊂J(C) for any p∈E, where J(E)2 denotes the set of 2-torsion points on J(E)≃Pic(0)(E).
Since (Dp.Dp0)=(Dp02)=4, we have Dp∩Dp0=π∗(J(E)2) or Dp=Dp0.
We consider the case Dp=Dp0.
By [2, (1.5)], the set π∗(J(E)2)=π∗(J(E))∩P is the base locus of the linear system ∣OP(Dp)∣, hence the translation point x∈P should be contained in π∗(J(E)2), which is the kernel of the polarization homomorphism.
It implies
OP(Dp0)≃tx∗OP(Dp0)≃OP(Dp).
∎
Remark 3.5*.*
Let D=W×BE={Dp}p∈E be the algebraic family of the divisor Dp⊂P;
where P∼ denotes the blow-up of P at the base locus π∗(J(E)2)=π∗(J(E))∩P.
Then the morphism E→∣OP(Dp0)∣≃P1
is the double covering defined by the linear system ∣η∣, and the fibrations on the Kummer surfaces are exchanged through the duality as the following diagram;
[TABLE]
Remark 3.6*.*
Here we give a description of special fibers of these fibrations of genus 3.
For simplicity, we assume that f:Y→B does not have a singular fiber of type (1I4.
As we have seen in Section 2, there are 6 singular fibers of type (1I2 in f:Y→B.
In this case, the number of special fibers of the above bielliptic fibrations of genus 3 are summarized in the following table, where the j-functions is for the corresponding fibration of curves of genus 1, which is computed in Proposition 2.11 for f:Y→B.
Genus 3 fibration
A′=C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→P1W→BD→EP∼→P1
(1) Dual fibers C∨1144
(2) Hyperelliptic fibers
3126
(2)’ Multiple fibers
3
(3) Singular fibers
362412
Genus 1 fibration
Km(A)→g1P1Y→BY×BE→EKm(P)→g2P1
Degree of j-function
6124824
The double covering Φ∣OB(2η)∣:B→P1 has 4 ramification points.
One of them is the canonical point η, at which the fiber is the dual bielliptic curve C∨=Dη.
The other 3 ramification points correspond to hyperelliptic fibers Dξ=W∩Pξ, because the involution κ acts on Dξ as the hyperelliptic involution.
In this case, the quotient Dξ/(σ(2)∘κ) is a nonsingular projective curve of genus 2, which gives a multiple fiber of A′=C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→P1=∣OB(2η)∣.
The ramification points of Φ∣η∣:E→P1 corresponds to 4 dual fibers C∨ in D→E.
The number of singular fibers and hyperelliptic fibers for the pencil P∼→P1=∣OP(Dp0)∣ is already computed in [3, Section 3].
Corollary 3.7**.**
If Dξ=W∩Pξ is nonsingular, then
Prym(Dξ/Fξ)≃A,
where Fξ denotes the fiber of f:Y→B at ξ∈B.
Proof.
The bielliptic involution on Dξ is compatible with the involution (−1)P on P by the embedding Dξ≃Dp⊂P.
By [2, Proposition (1.10)], the embedding of Dξ to the abelian surface is essentially unique, and it should be the embedding to the dual
Prym(Dξ/Fξ)∨ of the Prym variety Prym(Dξ/Fξ).
Hence P≃Prym(Dξ/Fξ)∨ and
A≃Prym(Dξ/Fξ).
∎
Let M be the set of isomorphism class of nonsingular bielliptic curve C→E of genus 3, where two bielliptic curves C→E and C′→E′ is isomorphic if there is an isomorphism C≃C′ which commutes with the bielliptic involutions.
We denote the isomorphism class by
[C→E]∈M.
Let M3 be the moduli space of nonsingular projective curve of genus 3.
Then the map
M→M3;[C→E]↦[C]
is birational to the image, and M is a rational variety of dimension 4 by [1].
Let A1≃A1 be the moduli space of elliptic curves.
Then the map
M→A1;[C→E]↦[J(E)]
is computed by the j-function
j:M→P1;[C→E]↦j(E).
Let A2(1,2) be the moduli space of (1,2)-polarized abelian surface, which is a rational variety of dimension 3 by [5].
The Prym map
[TABLE]
is dominant, and it has 1-dimensional fiber.
Let M(A) be the fiber of the Prym map at (A,[LA])∈A2(1,2), and let (P,[LP]) be the dual of (A,[LA]), where LA and LP denote the invertible sheaves giving their polarizations.
Lemma 3.8**.**
If Aut(P,0,[LP])={±1P}, then the members of the linear system ∣LP∣ gives a covering ∣LP∣⇢M(A) of degree 4.
Proof.
Let D→F be a bielliptic curve in M(A).
By [2, Proposition (1.10)], the curve D is embedded in
Prym(D/F)∨≃P as a member of the linear system ∣LP∣, and if Aut(P,0,[LP])={±1P}, then the embedding is uniquely determined up to the translation by a base point of ∣LP∣.
Since ∣LP∣ has 4 base points, a general bielliptic curve
[D→F]∈M(A) gives 4 different members in ∣LP∣.
Hence the covering ∣LP∣⇢M(A) is of degree 4.
∎
Proposition 3.9**.**
The period map
[TABLE]
is quasi-finite of degree 6.
Proof.
Let (A,[LA])∈A2(1,2) be a (1,2)-polarized abelian variety which is in the image of the Prym map
M→A2(1,2),
and let (P,[LP]) be the dual of (A,[LA]).
As we noted in Remark 3.6, by Proposition 2.11, the j-function
[TABLE]
of the fibration g2:Km(P)→P1=∣LP∣
is of degree 24.
Since the map ∣LP∣⇢M(A) is of degree 4 by Lemma 3.8, the map
[TABLE]
is of degree 6.
∎
Remark 3.10*.*
The Proposition 3.9 can be proved by another way.
Let E∈A1 be a general elliptic curve, and let (A,[LA])∈A2(1,2) be a general (1,2)-polarized abelian surface.
Let K(A)⊂A be the subgroup
[TABLE]
For an isomorphism
χ:J(E)2≃K(A)
of finite groups,
we set a finite subgroup by
[TABLE]
Then
Jχ=(J(E)×A)/Kχ
is a principally polarized abelian variety of dimension 3.
When Jχ is the Jacobian variety of the nonsingular projective curve Cχ, we have a bielliptic curve Cχ→E and an isomorphism A≃Prym(Cχ/E).
Since we have 6 choices of the isomorphism χ, the period map is of degree 6.
3.2 Dual families
We give an explicit equation of the family {Dξ→Fξ}ξ of bielliptic curves for a bielliptic curve C→E.
We assume that C is not hyperelliptic.
Then we can denote the equation of the canonical model of C by
[TABLE]
and the bielliptic involution σ is given by z↦−z.
The quotient E=C/σ is given by
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.11**.**
The dual bielliptic curve C∨ is a non-hyperelliptic curve defined by
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let
Φ:E→P1;[x:y:w]↦[x:y]
be the projection.
Then the canonical point is given by
η=[Φ∗OP1(1)]∈B=Pic(2)(E),
because ΩC1≃(Φ∘π)∗OP1(1).
If q+q′∈C∨⊂C(2),
then π(q)+π(q′)∈∣Φ∗OP1(1)∣,
hence Φ∘π(q)=Φ∘π(q′).
When we denote by q=[x:y:z] and q′=[x:y:z′],
we have
[TABLE]
because π(q)+π(q′)=Φ−1([x:y]).
Then the isomorphism is given by
[TABLE]
∎
By a suitable change of the coordinate, we assume that
[TABLE]
Then E is isomorphic to the plane cubic curve by
[TABLE]
Let p0=[0:1:0]∈E⊂P2 be the point on the cubic curve.
We remark that η=[OE(2p0)]∈Pic(2)(E) is the canonical point of the covering π:C→E.
Then for p=[a:b:1]∈E, we compute the equation of the canonical model of
[TABLE]
where ξ=[OE(p+p0)]∈Pic(2)(E).
Lemma 3.12**.**
[TABLE]
for general ξ∈Pic(2)(E), where
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since ΩC(2)2∣Dξ≃ΩDξ1, we compute the image of Dξ⊂C(2) by the canonical morphism
[TABLE]
For q+q′=[x:1:z]+[x′:1:z′]∈Dξ⊂C(2), we set
[TABLE]
where u and v give the coordinate of the point
Φ∣ΩC(2)2∣(q+q′)=[u:1:v].
Then these variables have relations
[TABLE]
Since π(q)+π(q′)∈∣ξ∣=∣OE(p+p0)∣, we have a linear equivalence
[TABLE]
on the plane cubic curve E⊂P2,
hence we have relations
[TABLE]
By eliminating the variable x,x′,z,z′,m from these relations, we have a relation of u and v.
When we eliminate b2 from this relation by b2=a3+t1a2+t2a+t3, we have the relation
[TABLE]
∎
Corollary 3.13**.**
The j-invariant of the canonical divisor K(Dξ/Fξ)
of Y(Dξ/Fξ) is
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
denotes the discriminant of the equation τ(x)=0.
Proof.
By Lemma 3.11, the dual bielliptic curve
Dξ∨→K(Dξ/Fξ) of Dξ→Fξ is defined by
[TABLE]
We can directly compute the j-invariant of K(Dξ/Fξ) from the polynomial c2(x,y), because K(Dξ/Fξ) is the double covering of P1 branched along
{[x:y]∈P1∣c2(x,y)=0}.
∎
hence
Fξ is the double covering of P1 branched along
{[x:y]∈P1∣c1(x,y)2−c0c2(x,y)=0}, and we can directly compute the j-invariant j(Fξ).
∎
Remark 3.16*.*
The j-function in Corollary 3.15 is already computed at Proposition 2.11, and
it also factors through the P1(a-line);
[TABLE]
Remark 3.17*.*
The following conditions are equivalent;
(1)
C is nonsingular,
2. (2)
C∨ is nonsingular,
3. (3)
disc(τ)⋅disc(τˇ)=0.
4 Hodge structure
In this section, We describe the relation between the Hodge structures of the elliptic surface Y(C/E) and the abelian surface A=J(C)/π∗J(E).
Let S→C(2) be the blow-up at the 6 points qi+qj∈C(2), where q1,…,q4 denote the ramification points of π:C→E.
Then we have a morphism ρ:S→Y in the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
We denote by Eij⊂S the exceptional curve over the point qi+qj.
Since the curve Δσ in the proof of Lemma 3.1 does not meet the blow-up center of S→C(2), we consider Δσ as a curve in S.
Then Δσ+∑1≤i<j≤4Eij is the ramification divisor of the finite double covering ρ.
We denote by Γ~i the proper transform of
{qi+q∈C(2)∣q∈C}
in S.
Then ρ(Γ~i)⊂Y is the component of the ramification divisor of the double covering ϕ∘ν:Y→E(2).
We set a finite subset ΠY⊂H2(Y,Z) by
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.1**.**
The Hodge structure (H2(A,Z),⟨,⟩A,[ι(C)]) with the symmetric form and the ample class is determined by (H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY).
Conversely, the Hodge structure (H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY) with the symmetric form and the finite set of classes is determined by (H2(A,Z),⟨,⟩A,[ι(C)]).
The idea of the proof of this theorem is to compare Hodge structures H2(Y,Z) and H2(A,Z) in H2(S,Z), because we have the double covering λ:S→A by Lemma 3.1.
In fact, we will see that λ∗H2(A,Z) is contained in the primitive closure of ρ∗H2(Y,Z) in H2(S,Z).
In subsection 4.1, we prepare the explicit description for the integral basis of H2(Y,Z).
In subsection 4.2, we construct the Hodge structure (H2(A,Z),⟨,⟩A,[ι(C)]) from the Hodge structure (H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY).
In subsection 4.3, we construct the Hodge structure (H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY) from the Hodge structure (H2(A,Z),⟨,⟩A,[ι(C)]).
Theorem 4.1 is proved by Lemma 4.9 and Lemma 4.10.
4.1 Lattice H2(Y,Z)
Let λ1:H1(C,Z)⟶H1(C(2),Z)
and
λ2:⋀2H1(C,Z)⟶H2(C(2),Z)
be homomorphisms defined by
[TABLE]
for γ,γ′∈H1(C,Z), where
ϵ:C×C→C(2) denotes the natural double covering, and
pri:C×C→C denotes the i-th projection.
Then λ1 is an isomorphism, and λ2 is injective.
We denote by δ∈H2(C(2),Z) the class of the divisor
{q+q′∈C(2)∣q′∈C},
which does not depend on q∈C.
Then H2(C(2),Z) is generated by δ and
λ2(⋀2H1(C,Z)) by [13].
We remark that
[TABLE]
for γ,γ′∈H1(C,Z), where
⟨,⟩C denotes the alternating form on H1(C,Z).
Lemma 4.2**.**
[TABLE]
for
γ1,γ1′,γ2,γ2′∈H1(C,Z).
Proof.
This follows from
⟨ϵ∗x,ϵ∗y⟩C×C=2⟨x,y⟩C(2)
for x,y∈H2(C(2),Z).
∎
We fix a symplectic basis
α1,…,α3,β1,…,β3∈H1(C,Z)
which satisfies
[TABLE]
We set elements in H2(C(2),Z) by
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.3**.**
δ,δ0,…,δ6*
form a Z-basis of the invariant part H2(C(2),Z)σ of the σ∗-action, and the intersection matrix is*
in
H2(S,Z)=H2(C(2),Z)⊕⨁1≤i<j≤4Z[Eij]
are contained in ρ∗H2(Y,Z).
Proof.
Since ρ∣Γ~i:Γ~i→ρ(Γ~i) is a double covering,
δi+6=[Γ~i]=ρ∗[ρ(Γ~i)]
for i=1,…,4.
Since
ρ(Δσ)+∑1≤i<j≤4ρ(Eij)
is the branch divisor of ρ, there is an invertible sheaf F such that
F⊗2≃OY(ρ(Δσ)+∑1≤i<j≤4ρ(Eij)).
By Lemma 4.4,
[TABLE]
where c1(F)∈H2(Y,Z) denotes the first Chern class of F.
Since H2(S,Z) is a free Z-module, we have
δ11=ρ∗c1(F).
∎
Lemma 4.7**.**
H2(Y,Z)* is a free Z-module, and*
[TABLE]
form a Z-basis of the image of the injective homomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
By [9, Corollary (1.48)], the Z-module H2(Y,Z) does not have a non-trivial torsion element, hence ρ∗:H2(Y,Z)→H2(S,Z) is injective.
Let
H⊂H2(S,Z)σ=H2(C(2),Z)σ⊕⨁1≤i<j≤4Z[Eij]
be the Z-submodule defined by
form a Z-basis of H.
Since ⟨ρ∗x,ρ∗y⟩S=2⟨x,y⟩Y
for x,y∈H2(Y,Z),
by Lemma 4.6 we have ρ∗H2(Y,Z)⊂H.
By Lemma 4.3, we can compute the determinant of the symmetric form ⟨,⟩S on H.
Since H has the same rank and the same determinant as ρ∗H2(Y,Z), we have ρ∗H2(Y,Z)=H.
∎
Remark 4.8*.*
By Lemma 4.7, we define a Z-basis
γ1,…,γ14 of H2(Y,Z) by
[TABLE]
Then the intersection matrix is
[TABLE]
and the classes of curves on Y are
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
4.2 Construction of H2(A,Z) from H2(Y,Z)
We set
γ=21([ρ(Γ~1)]+⋯+[ρ(Γ~4)])∈H2(Y,Q),
and we define a Z-submodule of H2(Y,Q) by
[TABLE]
Since
ρ∗(γ)=21(δ7+δ8+δ9+δ10)=2δ−∑1≤i<j≤4[Eij]∈H2(S,Z),
the image of HY by the pull-back ρ∗:H2(Y,Q)→H2(S,Q) is contained in the integral cohomology H2(S,Z).
We define HY′⊂HY as the orthogonal subspace to the classes
[TABLE]
Then the class
cY=[KY+ρ(Δσ)]
is contained in HY′, and the symmetric form
[TABLE]
has integral values on HY′.
We remark that the data (HY′,⟨,⟩Y,cY) is defined from the data (H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY), because we can divide the elements of ΠY into 4 type by their self-intersection numbers
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.9**.**
There is an isomorphism ΨY:(HY′,⟨,⟩Y,cY)→≃(H2(A,Z),⟨,⟩A,[ι(C)]) of Hodge structure which preserve the symmetric forms and the ample classes.
form a Z-basis of HY′.
Since H1(A,Z) is identified with the kernel of the Gysin homomorphism
π∗:H1(C,Z)→H1(E,Z), we have
[TABLE]
By the covering λ:S→C(2)→A which is given in Lemma 3.1, the pull-back
λ∗:H1(A,Z)→H1(S,Z) coincides with the composition
[TABLE]
hence the pull-back
λ∗:H2(A,Z)→H2(S,Z) coincides with the composition
[TABLE]
Then we have ρ∗HY′=λ∗H2(A,Z), because
[TABLE]
Since ρ∗ and λ∗ are injective homomorphisms of Hodge structures, we have the isomorphism of Hodge structures by
ΨY=λ∗∘(ρ∗)−1:HY′→H2(A,Z),
and it satisfies
[TABLE]
for x,x′∈HY′.
The class
[TABLE]
corresponds to cY=[KY+ρ(Δσ)]∈HY′, because
[TABLE]
∎
4.3 Construction of H2(Y,Z) from H2(A,Z)
Let H=⨁i=18Zvi be the lattice defined by
[TABLE]
We set
[TABLE]
and we define a Z-submodule of
H2(A,Q)⊕(Q⊗ZH)
by
[TABLE]
Let HA′⊂HA be the Z-submodule defined by
[TABLE]
Then the symmetric form
[TABLE]
has integral values on HA′, and the finite subset
[TABLE]
is contained in HA′.
Lemma 4.10**.**
There is an isomorphism ΨA:(HA′,⟨,⟩A,ΠA)→≃(H2(Y,Z),⟨,⟩Y,ΠY) of Hodge structure which preserve the symmetric forms and the finite subsets.
Proof.
We extend the homomorphism λ∗:H2(A,Z)↪H2(S,Z) to λ∗:HA↪H2(S,Z)
by
[TABLE]
where we remark that the image λ∗v8 is determined by the relation
v8=2v−[ι(C)]−v1−v2−v3+v4+v5+v6+v7, and it satisfies
[TABLE]
for x,x′∈HA.
Since λ∗H2(A,Z)=ρ∗HY′⊂ρ∗HY
and
[TABLE]
we have λ∗HA⊂ρ∗HY.
Since λ∗HA and ρ∗HY have the same determinants by ⟨,⟩S, we have λ∗HA=ρ∗HY, and
[TABLE]
The finite set ΠY corresponds to ΠA, because
[TABLE]
∎
Corollary 4.11**.**
The transcendental lattice of H2(Y,Z) is isomorphic to the transcendental lattice of H2(A,Z).
Proof.
The transcendental lattice of H2(Y,Z) is defined as
[TABLE]
Since
2(HY∩(C⊗ZHY)1,1)⊂NS(Y),
the transcendental lattice H2(Y,Z)tr is contained in
[TABLE]
For x∈H2(Y,Z) and m∈Z, if
x+mγ∈HY,tr, then
⟨x+mγ,γ7⟩Y=0,
hence we have
⟨x,γ7⟩Y=21m∈Z
and
x+mγ∈H2(Y,Z).
Since NS(Y)⊂HY∩(C⊗ZHY)1,1, we have H2(Y,Z)tr=HY,tr.
In the similar way, we can show that
[TABLE]
By the proof of Lemma 4.10, there is an isomorphism of Hodge structures (HY,⟨,⟩Y)≃(HA,⟨,⟩A), hence we have HY,tr≃HA,tr.
∎
Remark 4.12*.*
Both the Hodge structures H2(Y,Z) and
H2(A,Z)⊕H
are sublattices of index 2 in HY≃HA.
But H2(Y,Z) is not isometric to H2(A,Z)⊕H.
In generic case, we can compute that the Néron-Severi lattice of Y is
NS(Y)≃1⊕(−1)⊕5⊕(−A3),
where (−A3) denotes the negative definite root lattice of type A3.
It is not isomorphic to
NS(A)⊕H≃4⊕(−1)⊕8.
5 Torelli problem
5.1 Infinitesimal Torelli problem
Let Y=Y(C/E) be the surface constructed from a bielliptic curve π:C→E.
Proposition 5.1**.**
The infinitesimal period map
[TABLE]
is not injective.
Proof.
By the duality, we prove that the cup product homomorphism
[TABLE]
is not surjective.
We have the exact sequence
[TABLE]
where K denotes the zeros of a nontrivial section s∈H0(Y,ΩY2).
Since h0(Y,ΩY2)=1, the image of μ coincides with the image of
[TABLE]
Since h2(Y,ΩY1)=1, it is enough to show that
h1(K,(ΩY2⊗ΩY1)∣K)≥2.
By Proposition 2.1, K is the fiber of f:Y→Pic(2)(E) at η∈Pic(2)(E).
If C is not a hyperelliptic curve, then by Corollary 2.13, we have the exact sequence
[TABLE]
Since
ΩY2∣K≃ΩK1⊗(TE∣η)∨≃OK,
we have
[TABLE]
If C is a hyperelliptic curve, then by Proposition 2.10 we denote
K=⋃i=14Ki, where Ki is a (−2)-curve on Y.
Then by Lemma 5.4, we have
[TABLE]
Since Ki is a (−2)-curve on Y,
by the exact sequence
[TABLE]
we have a exact sequence
[TABLE]
Hence we have h0(K,ΩY1(Ki)∣Ki)=1.
By the Serre duality hi(Y,ΩY1(K))=h2−i(Y,ΩY1(−K)), we have
[TABLE]
and by ΩY2∣K≃OK, we have
χ(K,(ΩY2⊗ΩY1)∣K)=χ(K,ΩY1∣K).
Hence we have χ(K,(ΩY2⊗ΩY1)∣K)=0 and
[TABLE]
∎
Remark 5.2*.*
h0(Y,TY)=0, h1(Y,TY)=11 and
h2(Y,TY)=1.
Remark 5.3*.*
If C is not a hyperelliptic curve, then the kernel of the infinitesimal period map is of dimension 1.
If C is a hyperelliptic curve, then the dimension of the kernel is grater than 2.
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let C1,C2 be curves on nonsingular surface Y, and let F be a locally free sheaf of OY-modules.
If C1 and C2 have no common components, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
of the exact sequences of OY-modules, we have the exact sequence
[TABLE]
By the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
of exact sequences, we have a injective homomorphism
[TABLE]
∎
5.2 Global Torelli problem
Let N be the set of isomorphism class of surfaces which have the same topological type as the elliptic surface Y.
By Proposition 2.8, the moduli space M of bielliptic curves of genus 3 is embedded in N, hence we regard as M⊂N.
Let M0 be the inverse image of the self-dual locus of A2(1,2) by the Prym map M→A2(1,2).
Theorem 5.5**.**
For [Y]∈M⊂N, the locus
[TABLE]
is 1-dimensional.
If [Y]∈M0, then M(H2(Y)) is a rational curve.
If [Y]∈/M0, then M(H2(Y)) is a union of two rational curves.
Proof.
We fix [Y]=[Y(C/E)]∈M⊂N.
If [Y′]=[Y′(C′/E′)]∈M(H2(Y)), then by Theorem 4.1, there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
of Hodge structures of corresponding (1,2)-polarized abelian surfaces.
By [20, Theorem I], the abelian surface A′ is isomorphic to A or its dual P=A∨ as complex tori.
When A′ is isomorphic to A, then by [20, Theorem 1], the isomorphism Ψ:H2(A,Z)→H2(A′,Z) is given as Ψ=±ψ∗ by an isomorphism
ψ:A′→A.
Since [ι(C)] and [ι(C′)] are ample classes with Ψ[ι(C)]=[ι(C′)], we have Ψ=ψ∗, and ψ gives an isomorphism of polarized abelian surfaces.
When A′ is isomorphic to P, then by [20, Theorem 2], the isomorphism Ψ:H2(A,Z)→H2(A′,Z) is given as Ψ∘αA=±ψ∗ by an isomorphism
ψ:A′→P, where
αA:H2(P,Z)→H2(A,Z)
is the Hodge isometry defined in [20, Lemma 3].
Since the Hodge isometry αA preserve the class of the (1,2)-polarizations, in the same way as the case A′≃A, we have Ψ∘αA=ψ∗, and ψ gives an isomorphism of polarized abelian surfaces.
Hence we have
[TABLE]
∎
Theorem 5.6**.**
For [Y]∈M⊂N, the locus
[TABLE]
is a finite set.
For general [F]∈M, it consists of 12 points.
Proof.
Since
H1(Y,Z)≃H1(E,Z)
by Corollary 2.4, it follows from Theorem 5.5 and Proposition 3.9.
∎
Theorem 5.7**.**
For general [Y]∈M⊂N, the locus
[TABLE]
consists of 1 point [Y].
For (s0,…,s2,λ)∈A4, we set the bielliptic curve
C(s,λ)→E(s,λ) by
[TABLE]
where the bielliptic involution is given by z↦−z.
We set the open subset U⊂A4 by
[TABLE]
Then we have a dominant morphism
[TABLE]
Lemma 5.8**.**
For general (s0,…,s2,λ)∈U, the map
[TABLE]
is generically injective, where jK and jF are defined for C(s,λ) in Remark 3.14 and Remark 3.16.
Proof.
Let I be the image of
[TABLE]
and let I~ be the normalization of I.
If the induced morphism P1(a-line)→I~ is not an isomorphism, then it has ramification points, hence (s0,…,s2,λ) is contained in
[TABLE]
It is a proper closed subset of U by Example 5.11.
∎
Let (A,[LA])∈A2(1,2) be a general point,
and let [D→F]∈M(A) be a point such that
D is not hyperelliptic.
Then we may assume that D is defined by
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.11, the dual bielliptic curve D∨ of D
is equal to C(s,λ).
By Lemma 3.8, the bielliptic fibration
P∼→P1=∣LP∣
gives a covering ∣LP∣⇢M(A) of degree 4, where (P,[L]) denotes the dual of (A,[LA]).
By comparing the bielliptic fibration
A′=C(2)/(σ(2)∘κ)→∣OB(2η)∣=P1(a-line)
for C=C(s,λ) with
P∼→P1=∣LP∣
in the diagram of Remark 3.5,
the locus M(A) is identified with an open subset of the P1(a-line).
By Lemma 5.8 and Lemma 5.9,
[TABLE]
is generically injective, and
[TABLE]
By Theorem 5.5,
if jA([Y]) is not contained in the singular locus of
Image(j(s,λ))∪Image(jˇ(s,λ)),
then the set M(H2(Y)⊕H1(Y)⊕H1(KY)) consists of 1 point.
∎
5.3 Examples
Example 5.10**.**
Let π:C→E be the bielliptic curve defined by
[TABLE]
which is isomorphic to its dual C∨ by Lemma 3.11.
In this locus, the bielliptic curve C is uniquely determined by the base E.
Since C has the automorphism
z↦iz,
we can compute the period matrix of C explicitly.
Then we have
[TABLE]
and the (1,2)-polarization [LA] is given by the Hermitian form
[TABLE]
We remark that the polarized abelian surface (A,[LA]) does not depend on T(x,y), and it has the automorphism
[TABLE]
of order 12.
Since jF=jK:P1(a-line)→P1(j-line),
the map
j=(jF,jK):P1(a-line)→P1×P1
is not generically injective,
but
jA:M(A)⊂P1(j-line)→P1×P1
is injective.
Example 5.11**.**
Let π:C→E be the bielliptic curve defined by
[TABLE]
Then the j-function j(0,0,1,5) in Lemma 5.8 is computed by
[TABLE]
Here we can check that jK and jF has no common ramification points on the a-line, and it is used in the proof of Lemma 5.8.
Since
[TABLE]
we can check that
(j(E),j(K_{Y(C/E)}))=\bigl{(}\frac{2^{4}\cdot 3^{3}\cdot 7^{3}}{5^{2}},2^{8}\cdot 3^{3}\cdot 7\bigr{)}\in\operatorname{Image}{(\check{\mathbf{j}}_{(0,0,1,5)})}
is not contained in Image(j(0,0,1,5)).
Hence we have
Image(j(0,0,1,5))=Image(jˇ(0,0,1,5)),
and it is used in the proof of Lemma 5.9.
By Lemma 3.12, the bielliptic curve C→E defines a family {Da→Fa}a of bielliptic curves by
[TABLE]
whose Prym variety P=Prym(Da/Fa) is the dual of the Prym variety A=Prym(C/E).
The image of the j-function j(0,0,1,5):P1(a-line)→P1×P1 has many singular points, which give counter examples to the global Torelli theorem.
For example, the point
[TABLE]
is a node of Image(j(0,0,1,5)).
This means that, elliptic surfaces
Y−31 and Y65
are not isomorphic each other, but their Hodge structures are isomorphic
[TABLE]
where we set Ya=Y(Da/Fa).
Example 5.12**.**
Let π:C→E be the bielliptic curve defined by
[TABLE]
Then the j-function j(1,−1,0,−3) in Lemma 5.8 is computed by
[TABLE]
and the family {Da→Fa}a of bielliptic curves is defined by
[TABLE]
Then for a=−1,9,−31,53,59,113,
[TABLE]
and for a=∞,−5,−23,53,−73,−715,
[TABLE]
where Da∨→Fa∨ denotes the dual of Da→Fa.
The 12 elliptic surfaces
[TABLE]
have the same Hodge structure as Y=Y(C/E);
[TABLE]
and they give the set
M(H2(Y)⊕H1(Y)) of 12 points in
Theorem 5.6.
The elliptic surface
[Y∞∨]∈M(H2(Y)⊕H1(Y))
is the only member which have the same canonical divisor
as Y;
H1(KY∞∨,Z)≃H1(KY,Z).
Since C→E is isomorphic to D∞∨→F∞∨,
the elliptic surface Y=Y(C/E) is determined by the Hodge structure
H1(KY,Z)⊕H1(Y,Z)⊕H2(Y,Z).
Next we gives an example corresponds to the point of
Image(j(1,−1,0,−3))∩Image(jˇ(1,−1,0,−3)),
by using this family.
Since
[TABLE]
the point
\bigl{(}\frac{2^{6}\cdot 7^{3}}{3^{2}},\frac{2^{4}\cdot 3^{3}\cdot 7^{3}}{5^{2}}\bigr{)}
is contained in
Image(j(1,−1,0,−3))∩Image(jˇ(1,−1,0,−3)).
It means that Y−23 and
Y9∨ has the same Hodge structure and same canonical divisor;
[TABLE]
But in this case, the Prym varieties are not isomorphic;
[TABLE]
Example 5.13**.**
Let π:C→E be the bielliptic curve defined by
[TABLE]
Then the j-function j(1,−2,3,3) in Lemma 5.8 is computed by
[TABLE]
and the family {Da→Fa}a of bielliptic curves is defined by
[TABLE]
Since C→E is isomorphic to D97→F97, the original bielliptic curve is contained in this family.
It means that the Prym variety Prym(C/E) is isomorphic to its dual
Prym(Da/Fa)=Prym(C∨/E∨).
We remark that C→E is not isomorphic to its dual C∨→E∨.
Using this family, we give an example of elliptic surface which has the same Hodge structure as its dual.
Since
[TABLE]
is a node of
Image(j(1,−2,3,3))=Image(jˇ(1,−2,3,3)),
the elliptic surfaces Y−34 and Y1121
are not isomorphic each other, but their Hodge structures are isomorphic
[TABLE]
We remark that the bielliptic curves D−34→F−34 and
D1121→F1121
are dual to each other, and by suitable change of the coordinate, D−34 and D1121 are defined by the following equation;
[TABLE]
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank Juan Carlos Naranjo and Gian Pietro Pirola
for giving lectures on Prym varieties and Galois covering in Pragmatic 2016 at the University of Catania.
The idea of using the Prym varieties was motivated by their lectures.
This paper was prepared when the author stayed at the University of Pavia, and he is grateful for the hospitality.
He also thanks Masa-Hiko Saito, Sampei Usui and Kazuhiro Konno for responding to a question about the paper [18].
Bibliography22
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] F. Bardelli and A. Del Centina, Bielliptic curves of genus three: Canonical models and moduli space, Indag. Math. N. S. 10 (1999), 183–190.
2[2] W. Barth, Abelian surfaces with ( 1 , 2 ) 1 2 (1,2) -polarization, Algebraic geometry, Sendai, 1985 Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 10 (1987), 41–84.
3[3] F. Bastianelli, G. Pirola, L. Stoppino, Galois closure and Lagrangian varieties, Adv. Math. 225 (2010), 3463–-3501.
4[4] C. Birkenhake, H. Lange, Complex abelian varieties, Second edition, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, 302 , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, (2004).
5[5] C. Birkenhake, H. Lange, Moduli spaces of abelian surfaces with isogeny, Geometry and analysis, Tata Inst. Fund. Res., Bombay, (1995), 225–-243.
6[6] F. Catanese, The moduli and the global period mapping of surfaces with K 2 = p g = 1 superscript 𝐾 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑔 1 K^{2}=p_{g}=1 : a counterexample to the global Torelli problem, Compos. Math. 41 (1980), 401-–414.
7[7] K. Chakiris, Counterexamples to global Torelli for certain simply connected surfaces, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N. S.) 2 (1980), 297–-299.
8[8] K. Chakiris, A Torelli theorem for simply connected elliptic surfaces with a section and p g ≥ 2 subscript 𝑝 𝑔 2 p_{g}\geq 2 , Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N. S.) 7 (1982), 227–232.