\classno
14E05,37A35, 14C25.
Degrees of iterates of rational maps on normal projective varieties
Nguyen-Bac Dang
[email protected]
Abstract
Let X be a normal projective variety defined over an algebraically closed field of arbitrary characteristic.
We study the sequence of intermediate degrees of the iterates of a dominant rational selfmap of X, recovering former results by Dinh, Sibony [DS05], and by Truong [Tru16].
Precisely, we give a new proof of the submultiplicativity properties of these degrees and of their birational invariance.
Our approach exploits intensively positivity properties in the space of numerical cycles of arbitrary codimension.
In particular, we prove an algebraic version of an inequality first obtained by Xiao [Xia15] and Popovici [Pop16], which generalizes Siu’s inequality (see [Tra95]) to algebraic cycles of arbitrary codimension. This allows us to show that
the degree of a map is controlled up to a uniform constant by the norm of its action by pull-back
on the space of numerical classes in X.
Introduction
Let f:X⇢X be any dominant rational self-map of a normal projective variety X of dimension n defined over an algebraically closed field C of arbitrary characteristic.
If X is not normal then one can always consider its normalization. Moreover, if the field is not algebraically closed, then we shall take its algebraic closure.
Given any big and nef (e.g ample) Cartier divisor HX on X, and any integer 0⩽i⩽n, one defines the i-th degree of f as the integer:
[TABLE]
where π1 and π2 are the projections from the normalization of the graph of f in X×X onto the first and the second factor respectively and where (⋅) denotes the intersection product on this graph.
Our main theorem can be stated as follows.
Theorem 1**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n and let HX be a big and nef Cartier divisor on X.
- (i)
There is a positive constant C>0
such that for any dominant rational self-maps f,g on X, one has:
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
For any big nef Cartier divisor HX′ on X, there exists a constant C>0 such that for any rational self-map f on X, one has:
[TABLE]
Observe that Theorem 1.(ii) implies that the degree growth of f is a birational invariant, in the sense that there is a positive constant C such that for any birational map g:X′⇢X with X′ projective, and any big nef Cartier divisor HX′ on X′, one has
[TABLE]
for any p∈N.
Indeed, by applying Theorem 1.(ii) for the induced action by f on the normalization of the graph of g, one deduces that the growth of the degrees on the graph of g and on X and X′ are controlled by a strictly positive constant.
Fekete’s lemma and Theorem 1.(i) also imply the existence of the dynamical degree (first introduced in [RS97] for rational maps of the projective space) as the following quantity:
[TABLE]
The independence of λi(f) under the choice of HX, and its birational invariance are the consequence of Theorem 1.(ii) .
When C=C, Theorem 1 was proved by Dinh and Sibony in [DS05], and further generalized to compact Kähler manifolds in [DS04].
The core of their argument relied on a procedure of regularization for closed positive currents of any bidegree ([DS04, Theorem 1.1]) and was therefore transcendental in nature.
When C is a field of characteristic zero, there exists an inclusion of the field C in C by Lefschetz principle ([Lef53]) and Dinh and Sibony’s argument proves that the i-th dynamical degree of any rational dominant map is well-defined.
Recently, Truong [Tru15] managed to get around this problem and proved Theorem 1 for arbitrary smooth varieties using an appropriate Chow-type moving lemma.
He went further in [Tru16] and obtained Theorem 1 for any normal variety in all characteristic by applying de Jong’s alteration theorem ([Jon96]).
Note however that he had to deal with correspondences since a rational self-map can only be lifted as a correspondence through a general alteration map.
Our approach avoids this technical difficulty.
To illustrate our method, let us explain the proof of Theorem 1, when X is smooth, i=1 and f, g are regular following the method initiated in [BFJ08, Proposition 3.1].
Recall that a divisor α on X is pseudo-effective and one writes α⩾0 if for any ample Cartier divisor H on X, and any rational ϵ>0, a suitable multiple of the Q-divisor α+ϵH is linearly equivalent to an effective one.
Recall also the fundamental Siu inequality111this inequality is also referred to as the weak transcendantal holomorphic Morse inequality in [LX15] ([Tra95], [Laz04, Theorem 2.2.13], [Cut15]) which states:
[TABLE]
for any nef divisor α, and any big and nef divisor β.
Since the pullback by a dominant morphism of a big nef divisor remains big and nef,
we may apply (1) to the big nef divisors α=g∗f∗HX and β=f∗HX, and we get
[TABLE]
Intersecting with the cycle HXn−1 yields the submultiplicativity of the degrees with the constant C=n/(HXn).
We observe that the previous inequality (1) can be easily extended to complete intersections by cutting out by suitable ample sections.
In particular, we get a positive constant C such that for any big nef divisors α and β, one has:
[TABLE]
Such inequalities have been obtained by Xiao ([Xia15]) and Popovici ([Pop16]) in the case C=C.
Their proof uses the resolution of complex Monge-Ampère equations and yields a constant C=(in).
On the other hand, our proof applies in arbitrary characteristic and in fact to more general classes than complete intersection ones.
We refer to Theorem 3 below and the discussion preceding it for more details.
Note however that we only obtain C=(n−i+1)i, far from the expected optimal constant C=(in) of Popovici.
Once (2) is proved, Theorem 1 follows by a similar argument as in the case i=1.
Going back to the case where X is a complex smooth projective variety, recall that the degree of f is controlled up to a uniform constant by the norm of the linear operator f∙,i, induced by pullback on the de Rham cohomology space HdR2i(X)R ([DS05, Lemma 4]).
One way to construct f∙,i is to use the Poincaré duality isomorphisms ψX:HdR2i(X,R)→H2n−2i(X,R), ψΓf:HdR2i(Γf,R)→H2n−2i(Γf,R) where Hi(X,R) denotes the i-th simplicial homology group of X.
The operator f∙,i is then defined following the commutative diagram below:
[TABLE]
where Γf is a desingularization of the graph of f in X×X, and π1,π2 are the projections from Γf onto the first and second factor respectively.
In order to state an analogous result in our setting, we need to find a replacement for the de Rham cohomology group HdR2i(X)R and define suitable pullback operators.
When X is smooth, one natural way to proceed is to consider the spaces Ni(X)R of algebraic R-cycles of codimension i modulo numerical equivalence.
The operator f∙,i is then simply given by the composition π1∗∘π2∗:Ni(X)R→Ni(X)R.
When X is singular, then the situation is more subtle because one cannot intersect arbitrary cycle classes in general 222an arbitrary curve can only be intersected with a Cartier divisor, not with a general Weil divisor..
One can consider two natural spaces of numerical cycles Ni(X)R and Ni(X)R on which pullback operations and pushforward operations by proper morphisms are defined respectively.
More specifically, the space of numerical i-cycles Ni(X)R is defined as the group of R-cycles of dimension i modulo the relation z≡0 if and only if (p∗z⋅D1⋅…⋅De+i)=0 for any proper flat surjective map p:X′→X of relative dimension e and any Cartier divisors Dj on X′.
One can prove that Ni(X)R is a finite dimensional vector space and one defines Ni(X)R as its dual Hom(Ni(X)R,R).
Note that our presentation differs slightly from Fulton’s definition (see Appendix 9 for a comparison), but we also recover the main properties of the numerical groups. This approach is more suitable to compare cycles using positivity estimates on complete intersections.
As in the complex case, we are able to construct Poincaré duality maps ψX:Ni(X)R→Nn−i(X)R and ψΓf:Ni(Γf)R→Nn−i(Γf)R, but they are not necessarily isomorphisms due to the presence of singularities. As a consequence, we are only able to define a linear map f∙,i as f∙,i:=π1∗∘ψΓf∘π2∗:Ni(X)R→Nn−i(X)R between two distinct vector spaces.
Despite this limitation, we prove a result analogous to one of Dinh and Sibony. The next theorem was obtained by Truong for smooth varieties ([Tru16, Theorem 1.1.(5)]).
Theorem 2**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n. Fix any norms on Ni(X)R and Nn−i(X)R, and denote by ∥⋅∥ the induced operator norm on linear maps from Ni(X)R to Nn−i(X)R. Then there is a constant C>0 such that for any rational selfmap f:X⇢X, one has:
[TABLE]
Our proof of Theorem 2 exploits a natural notion of positive classes in Ni(X)R combined with a strengthening of (2) to these classes that we state below (see Theorem 3).
To simplify our exposition, let us suppose again that X is smooth.
As in codimension 1, one can define the pseudo-effective cone Psefi(X) as the closure in Ni(X)R of the cone generated by effective cycles of codimension i. Its dual with respect to the intersection product is the nef cone Nefn−i(X), which however does not behave well when i⩾2 (see [DELV11]).
Some alternative notions of positive cycles have been introduced by Fulger and Lehmann in [FL14b], among which the notion of basepoint free classes emerges. Basepoint free classes have many good properties such as being both pseudo-effective and nef, being invariant by pull-backs by morphisms and by intersection products, and forming a salient convex cone with non-empty interior. The terminology comes from the fact that the basepoint free classes always have a cycle representing them with intersects any subvariety with the expected dimension.
Denote by BPFi(X) the cone of basepoint free classes. It is defined as the closure in Ni(X)R of the cone generated by R-cycles of the form p∗(D1⋅…⋅De+i) where Dj are ample Cartier R-divisors and p:X′→X is a flat surjective proper morphism of relative dimension e.
For basepoint free classes, we are able to prove the following generalization of (2).
Theorem 3**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n. Then there exists a constant C>0 such that for any basepoint free class α∈BPFi(X), for any big nef divisor β, one has in Ni(X)R:
[TABLE]
Theorem 2 follows from (4) by observing that f∙,iBPFi(X)⊂Psefi(X), so that the operator norm ∣∣f∙,i∣∣ can be computed by evaluating f∙,i only on basepoint free classes.
In the singular case, the proof of Theorem 2 is completely similar but the spaces Ni(X)R and Nn−i(X)R are not necessarily isomorphic in general.
As a consequence, several dual notions of positivity appear in Ni(X)R and Ni(X)R
that make the arguments more technical.
Finally, using the techniques developed in this paper, we give a new proof of the product formula of Dinh, Nguyen, Truong ([DN11, Theorem 1.1],[DNT12, Theorem 1.1]) which they proved when C=C and which was later generalized by Truong ([Tru16, Theorem 1.1.(4)]) to normal projective varieties over any field.
The setup is as follows.
Let q:X→Y be any proper surjective morphism between normal projective varieties, and
fix two big and nef divisors HX, HY on X and Y respectively.
Consider two dominant rational self-maps f:X⇢X, g:Y⇢Y, which are semi-conjugated by
q, i.e. which satisfy q∘f=g∘q. To simplify notation we shall write
X/qYg⇢fX/qY when these assumptions hold true.
Recall that the i-th relative degree of X/qYg⇢fX/qY is given by the intersection product
[TABLE]
where π1 and π2 are the projections from the graph of f in X×X onto the first and the second component respectively.
One can show a relative version of Theorem 1 (see Theorem 5.2.1), and define as in the absolute case, the i-th relative dynamical degree λi(f,X/Y)
as the limit limp→+∞reldegi(fp)1/p.
It is also a birational invariant in the sense that if φ:X′⇢X, ψ:Y′⇢Y such that q′=ψ−1∘q∘φ is regular, then λi(φ−1∘f∘φ,X′/Y′)=λi(f,X/Y), and does not depend on the choices of HX and HY.
When q:X⇢Y is merely rational and dominant, then we define (see Section 6) the i-th relative degree of f by replacing X with the normalization of graph of q.
We prove the following theorem.
Theorem 4**.**
Let X,Y be normal projective varieties.
For any dominant
rational self-maps f:X⇢X, g:Y⇢Y which are semi-conjugated by
a dominant rational map q:X⇢Y, we have
[TABLE]
Our proof follows closely Dinh and Nguyen’s method from [DN11] and relies on a fundamental inequality (see Corollary 7.1.5 below) which follows from Künneth formula at least when C=C.
To state it precisely, consider π:X′→X a surjective generically finite morphism and q:X→Y a surjective morphism where X′, X and Y are normal projective varieties such that n=dimX=dimX′ and such that l=dimY.
We prove that for any basepoint free classes α∈BPFi(X′) and β∈BPFn−i(X′), one has:
[TABLE]
where HY and HX are big and nef divisors on Y and X respectively,
and Uj(α) is the intersection product given by Uj(α)=(π∗(q∗HYl−i+j⋅HXe−j)⋅α).
In the singular case, Truong has obtained this inequality using Chow’s moving intersection lemma.
We replace this argument by a suitable use of Siu’s inequality and Theorem 3 in order to prove a positivity property for a class given by the difference between a basepoint free class in X′×X′ and the fundamental class of the diagonal of X′ in X′×X′ (see Theorem 7.1.1).
Inequality (6) is a weaker version of [DN11, Proposition 2.3] proved by Dinh-Nguyen when Y is a complex projective variety, and was extended to a field arbitrary characteristic by Truong when Y is smooth ([Tru16, Lemma 4.1]).
Organization of the paper
In the first Sections 1 and 2, we review the background on the Chow groups and recall the definitions of the spaces of numerical cycles and provide their basic properties.
In §3, we discuss the various notions of positivity of cycles and prove Theorem 3.
In §4, we define relative numerical cycles and canonical morphisms which are the analogous to the Poincaré morphisms ψX in a relative setting.
In §5, we prove Theorem 1, Theorem 2 and Theorem 4.
Finally we give an alternate proof of Dinh-Sibony’s theorem in the Kähler case ([DS05, Proposition 6]) in §8 using Popovici [Pop16] and Xiao’s inequality [Xia15]. Note that these inequalities allow us to avoid regularization techniques of closed positive currents but rely on a deep theorem of Yau.
In Section 9, we prove that our presentation and Fulton’s definition of numerical cycles are equivalent, hence proving that any numerical cycles can be pulled back by a flat morphism.
Acknowledgements.
Firstly, I would like to thank my advisor C. Favre for his patience and our countless discussions on this subject. I thank also S. Boucksom for some helpful discussions and for pointing out the right argument for the appendix, S. Cantat, L. Fantini, M. Fulger, T. Truong, B. Lehmann, R. Mboro and J. Xie for their precious comments on my previous drafts and for providing me some references.
The author is supported by the ERC-starting grant project "Nonarcomp" no.307856, and is supported by ANR project “Lambda” ANR-13-BS01-0002
1 Chow group
1.1 General facts
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n defined over an algebraically closed field C of arbitrary characteristic.
The space of cycles Zi(X) is the free abelian group generated by irreducible subvarieties of X of dimension i,
and Zi(X)Q, Zi(X)R will denote the tensor products Zi(X)⊗ZQ and Zi(X)⊗ZR.
Let q:X→Y be a morphism where Y is a normal projective variety. Since X and Y are respectively projective, the map q is proper. Following [Ful98], we define the proper pushforward of the cycle [V]∈Zi(X) as the element of Zi(Y) given by:
[TABLE]
where V is an irreducible subvariety of X of dimension i, η is the generic point of V and C(η), C(q(η)) are the residue fields of the local rings Oη and Oq(η) respectively.
We extend this map by linearity and obtain a morphism of abelian groups q∗:Zi(X)→Zi(Y).
Let C be any closed subscheme of X of dimension i and denote by C1,…,Cr its i-dimensional irreducible components. Then C defines a fondamental class [C]∈Zi(X) by the following formula:
[TABLE]
where lA(M) denotes the length of an A-module M ([Eis95, section 2.4]).
For any flat morphism q:X→Y of relative dimension e between normal projective varieties, we can define a flat pullback of cycles q∗:Zi(Y)→Zi+e(X) (see [Ful98, section 1.7]). If C is any subscheme of Y of dimension i, the cycle q∗[C] is by definition the fundamental class of the scheme-theoretic inverse by q:
[TABLE]
Let W be a subvariety of X of dimension i+1 and φ be a rational map on W. Then we define a cycle on X by:
[TABLE]
where the sum is taken over all irreducible subvarieties V of dimension i of W⊂X.
A cycle α defined this way is rationally equivalent to [math] and in that case we shall write α∼0.
The i-th Chow group Ai(X) of X is the quotient of the abelian group Zi(X) by the free group generated by the cycles that are rationally equivalent to zero. We denote by A∙(X) the abelian group ⊕Ai(X).
We recall now the functorial operations on the Chow group, which result from the intersection theory developped in [Ful98].
Theorem 1.1.1**.**
Let q:X→Y be a morphism between normal projective varieties. Then we have:
- (i)
The morphism of abelian groups q∗:Zi(X)→Zi(Y) induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:Ai(X)→Ai(Y).
2. (ii)
If the morphism q is flat of relative dimension e, then the morphism q∗:Zi(Y)→Zi+e(X) induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:Ai(Y)→Ai+e(X).
Assertion (i) is proved in [Ful98, Theorem 1.4] and assertion (ii) is given in [Ful98, Theorem 1.7].
Remark 1.1.2*.*
Let q:X→Y is a flat morphism of normal projective varieties. Suppose α∈Ai(Y) is represented by an effective cycle α∼∑nj[Vj] where the nj are positive integers. Then q∗α is also represented by an effective cycle.
Any cycle α∈Z0(X)Z is of the form ∑nj[pj] with pj∈X(C) and nj∈Z. We define the degree of α to be deg(α):=∑nj and we shall write:
[TABLE]
The morphism of abelian groups deg:Z0(X)Z→Z induces a morphism of abelian groups deg:A0(X)→Z.
1.2 Intersection with Cartier divisors
Let X be a normal projective variety and D be a Cartier divisor on X. Let V be a subvariety of of dimension i in X and denote by j:V↪X the inclusion of V in X. We define the intersection of D with [V] as the class:
[TABLE]
where D′ is a Cartier divisor on V such that the line bundles j∗OX(D) and OV(D′) are isomorphic.
Observe that D′ exists since the exact sequence
\textstyle{0\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}$$\textstyle{\mathcal{O}^{*}_{V}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}$$\textstyle{\mathcal{M}_{V}^{*}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}$$\textstyle{\mathcal{M}_{V}^{*}/\mathcal{O}_{V}^{*}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}$$\textstyle{0}
induces a surjective map from the divisor subgroups H0(V,MV∗/OV∗) of V onto the Picard group Pic(V)=H1(V,OV∗) where MV∗ is the sheaf of non-zero rational functions on V.
We extend this map by linearity into a morphism of abelian groups D⋅:Zi(X)→Ai−1(X).
Theorem 1.2.1**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety and D be a Cartier divisor on X.
The map D⋅:Zi(X)→Ai−1(X) induces a morphism of abelian groups D⋅:Ai(X)→Ai−1(X).
Moreover, the following properties are satisfied:
-
For all Cartier divisors D and D′ on X, for all class α∈Ai(X), we have:
[TABLE]
2. 2.
(Projection formula) Let q:X→Y be a morphism between normal projective varieties. Then for all class β∈Ai(X) and all Cartier divisor D on Y, we have in Ai−1(Y):
[TABLE]
1.3 Characteristic classes
Definition 1.3.1**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n and L be a line bundle on X. There exists a Cartier divisor D on X such that the line bundles L and OX(D) are isomorphic. We define the first Chern class of L as:
[TABLE]
Definition 1.3.2**.**
For all normal projective varieties X, the group CIi(X) is the free group generated by elements of the form D1⋅…⋅Di where D1, …, Di are Cartier divisors on X.
Definition 1.3.3**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety and E be a vector bundle of rank e+1 on X.
Given any vector bundle E on X, we shall denote by P(E) the projective bundle of hyperplanes in E following the convention of Grothendieck.
Let p be the projection from P(E∗) to X and ξ=c1(OP(E∗)(1)).
We define the i-th Segré class si(E) as the morphism si(E)└⋅:A∙(X)→A∙−i(X) given by:
[TABLE]
Remark 1.3.4*.*
When X is smooth of dimension n, we can define an intersection product on the Chow groups Ai(X)×Al(X)→An−i−l(X) (see [Ful98, Definition 8.1.1]) which is compatible with the intersection with Cartier divisors and satisfies the projection formula (see [Ful98, Example 8.1.7]).
Applying the projection formula to (7), we get
[TABLE]
so that si(E) is represented by an element in An−i(X). To simplify we shall also denote si(E) this element.
As Segré classes of vector bundles are operators on the Chow groups A∙(X), the composition of such operators defines a product.
Theorem 1.3.5**.**
(cf [Ful98, Proposition 3.1]) Let q:X→Y be a morphism between normal projective varieties.
For any vector bundle E and F on Y, the following properties hold.
- (i)
For all α∈Ai(Y) and all j<0, we have sj(E)└α=0.
2. (ii)
For all α∈Ai(Y), we have s0(E)└α=α.
3. (iii)
For all integers j,m, we have sj(E)└(sm(F)└α)=sm(F)└(sj(E)└α).
4. (iv)
(Projection formula) For all β∈Ai(X) and any integer j, we have q∗(sj(q∗E)└β)=sj(E)└q∗β.
5. (v)
If the morphism q:X→Y is flat, then for all α∈Ai(Y) and any integer j, we have sj(q∗E)└q∗α=q∗(sj(E)└α)).
The j-th Chern class cj(E) of a vector bundle E on X is an operator cj(E):A∙(X)→A∙−j defined formally as the coefficients in the inverse power series:
[TABLE]
A direct computation yields for example
c1(E)=−s1(E), c2(E)=(s1(E)2−s2(E)).
Definition 1.3.6**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety.
The abelian group Ai(X) is the subgroup of Hom(A∙(X),A∙−i(X)) generated by product of Chern classes ci1(E1)⋅…⋅cip(Ep) where i1, …, ip are integers satisfying i1+…+ip=i and where E1,…,Ep are vector bundles over X. We denote by A∙(X) the group ⊕Ai(X).
Observe that by definition, Ai(X) contains the image of CIi(X).
Recall that the Grothendieck group K0(X) is the free group generated by vector bundles on X quotiented by the subgroup generated by relations of the form [E1]+[E3]−[E2] where there is an exact sequence of vector bundles:
[TABLE]
Moreover, the group K0(X) has a structure of rings given by the tensor product of vector bundles.
Recall also that the Chern character is the unique morphism of rings ch:(K0(X),+,⊗)→(A∙(X),+,⋅) satisfying the following properties (see [Ful98, Example 3.2.3]).
-
If L is a line bundle on X, then one has:
[TABLE]
2. 2.
For any morphism q:X′→X and any vector bundle E on X, we have q∗ch(E)=ch(q∗E).
For any vector bundle E on X, we will denote by chi(E) the term in Ai(X) of ch(E).
We recall Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch’s theorem for smooth varieties.
Theorem 1.3.7**.**
(see [Ful98, Corollary 18.3.2]) Let X be a smooth variety. Then the Chern character induces an isomorphism:
[TABLE]
We also recall the definition of Schur polynomials.
Definition 1.3.8**.**
Consider a vector bundle E of rank e on X.
Fix two integers e,i and a decreasing partition λ=(λ1,…,λi) of i with terms lower or equal than e.
The Schur class sλ(E) is the class given by:
[TABLE]
If E is a vector bundle of rank e on X, then the Schur class sλ(E)∈Ai(X) is the Schur polynomial in the variables given by the Chern classes c1(E),…,ce(E).
When the vector bundle E is globally generated, then the Schur classes can be interpreted as degeneracy loci (see [Laz04, Example 8.3.6]).
2 Space of numerical cycles
2.1 Definitions
In all this section, X,Y,X1,X2,X3 and X′ are normal projective varieties and X is of dimension n.
Two cycles α and β in Zi(X) are said to be numerically equivalent and we will denote by α≡β if for all flat morphisms p1:X1→X of relative dimension e and all Cartier divisors D1,…,De+i in X1, we have:
[TABLE]
Definition 2.1.1**.**
The group of numerical classes of dimension i is the quotient Ni(X)=Zi(X)/≡.
By construction, the group Ni(X) is torsion free and there is a canonical surjective morphism Ai(X)→Ni(X) for any integer i.
Remark 2.1.2*.*
Observe also that for i=0, two cycles are numerically equivalent if and only if they have the same degree. Since smooth points are dense in X (see [Har77, Theorem 5.3]) and are of degree 1, this proves that the degree realizes the isomorphism N0(X)≃Z.
We set Ni(X)Q and Ni(X)R the two vector spaces obtained by tensoring by Q and R respectively.
Remark 2.1.3*.*
This definition allows us to pullback numerical classes by any flat morphism q:X→Y of relative dimension e.
Our presentation is slightly different from the classical one given in [Ful98, Section 19.1]. We refer to Appendix 9 for a proof of the equivalence of these two approaches.
Proposition 2.1.4**.**
Let q:X→Y a morphism. Then the morphism of groups q∗:Zi(X)→Zi(Y) induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:Ni(X)→Ni(Y).
Proof.
Let n be the dimension of X and l be the dimension of Y, and
let α be a cycle in Zi(X) such that α is numerically trivial.
We need to prove that q∗α is also numerically trivial.
Take p1:Y1→Y a flat morphism of relative dimension e1.
Let X1 be the fibred product X×YY1 and let p1′ and q′ be the natural projections from X1 to X and Y1 respectively.
[TABLE]
Since flatness is preserved by base change ([Har77, Proposition 9.2.(b)]), the morphism p1′ is flat and q′ is proper.
Pick any cycle γ whose class is in CIe1+i(Y1).
We want to prove that (γ⋅p1∗q∗α)=0.
By [Ful98, Proposition 1.7], we have that p1∗q∗α=q∗′p1′∗α in Ze1+i(Y1). Applying the projection formula, we get:
[TABLE]
Because p1′ is flat and q′∗γ∈CIe1+i(X1), we have (q′∗γ⋅p1′∗α)=0 so that (γ⋅p1∗q∗α)=0 as required.
∎
The numerical classes defined above are hard to manipulate, we want to define a pullback of numerical classes by any proper morphism.
We proceed and define dual classes.
We denote by Zi(X)=HomZ(Zi(X),Z) the space of cocycles. If p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1, then any element γ∈CIe1+i(X1) induces an element [γ] in Zi(X) by the following formula:
[TABLE]
Definition 2.1.5**.**
The abelian group Ni(X) is the subgroup of Zi(X) generated by elements of the form [γ] where γ∈CIe1+i(X1) and X1 is flat over X of relative dimension e1.
Remark 2.1.6*.*
By definition, the map deg:Z0(X)→Z is naturally an element of Z0(X).
Moreover, one has using Theorem 1.3.5.(ii) that:
[TABLE]
for any vector bundle E on X.
Hence, deg defines an element of N0(X) by definition of Segré classes (Definition 7).
Proposition 2.1.7**.**
By definition of the numerical equivalence relation, any element of Ni(X) induces an element of the dual HomZ(Ni(X),Z). Hence, we can define a natural pairing between Ni(X) and Ni(X). For any normal projective variety, the pairing Ni(X)×Ni(X)→Z is non degenerate (i.e the canonical morphism from Ni(X) to HomZ(Ni(X),Z) is injective).
Proof.
It follows directly from the definition of Ni(X) and Ni(X).
∎
A priori, an element of Ni(X) is a combination of elements [γ1]+[γ2]+…+[γj].
The following proposition proves one can always take j=1 at least if we tensor all spaces by Q.
Proposition 2.1.8**.**
Any element of Ni(X) is induced by γ∈CIe1+i(X1)Q where p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1.
Proof.
By an immediate induction argument, we are reduced to prove the assertion for the sum of two elements [γ1]+[γ2] where γj∈CIej+i(Xi)Q and pj:Xj→X are flat morphisms of relative dimension e1 and e2 respectively.
Let us consider X′ the fibre product X1×X2 over X and pj′ the flat projections from X′ to Xj for j=1,2.
By linearity , we only need to show that there exists an element γ1′∈CIe1+e2+i(X′) such that [γ1′]=[γ1] in Ni(X).
[TABLE]
Take an ample Cartier divisor HX2 on X2 and λ2 an integer such that p2∗HX2e2∼λ2[X].
Setting γ1′=λ21p1′∗HX2e2⋅p2′∗γ1, we need to prove that for any α∈Zi(X), one has (γ1⋅p1∗α)=(γ1′⋅p2′∗p1∗α).
By [Ful98, Proposition 1.7], we have the equality p2′∗p1′∗HX2e2=p1∗p2∗HX2e2 in Ze2(X2), hence:
[TABLE]
Since X1 is reduced and p1∗[X] is a cycle of codimension [math] in X1, we have p1∗[X]=[X1].
Hence by the projection formula, we have:
[TABLE]
In particular, the degrees are equal and [γ1]=[γ1′]∈Ni(X) as required.
By the same argument, there exists a class γ2′∈CIe1+e2+i(X1×X2) such that [γ2]=[γ2′]∈Ni(X), hence [γ1]+[γ2]=[γ1′]+[γ2′]=[γ1′+γ2′]∈Ni(X) as required.
∎
Definition 2.1.9**.**
We define N∙(X) (resp. N∙(X)) by ⊕iNi(X) (resp. ⊕iNi(X)).
2.2 Algebra structure on the space of numerical cycles
We now define a structure of algebra on N∙(X), and prove that N∙(X) has a structure of N∙(X) module.
Pick γ∈CIe1+i(X1)Q where p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1. The element γ induces a morphism in the Chow group:
[TABLE]
The morphism γ└⋅:Al(X)→Al−i(X) induces a morphism of abelian groups from Nl(X) to Nl−i(X).
Proposition 2.2.1**.**
Any element α∈Ni(X)
induces a morphism α└⋅:N∙(X)→N∙−i(X) such that the following conditions are satisfied.
- (i)
If α is induced by γ∈CIe1+i(X1)Q where p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1,
then for any integer l and any z∈Nl(X), one has in Nl−i(X):
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
For any α,β∈Ni(X) and any z∈Nl(X), we have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us consider α∈Ni(X) and suppose it is induced by γ1∈CIe1+i(X1)Q where p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1.
We define the map α└⋅ as :
[TABLE]
for any z∈Nl(X).
We show that the morphism does not depend on the choice of the class γ1 and (i) is follows from Proposition 2.1.8. Assertion (ii) follows from the linearity of the intersection product whose proof follows closely the proof of Proposition 2.1.8.
Suppose that [γ1]=[γ2]∈Ni(X) where γ2∈CIe2+i(X2)Q and p2:X2→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e2, then we need to prove that:
[TABLE]
for any fixed z∈Zl(X).
Take β∈CIe3+l−i(X3) where p3:X3→X is flat morphism of relative dimension e3, we only need to show that:
[TABLE]
Let X1′ and X2′ the fibre products X1×X3 and X2×X3, and p1′:X1′→X3, p3′:X1′→X1, q2:X2′→X3, q3:X2′→X2 be the corresponding flat projection morphisms such that we obtain the following commutative diagrams:
[TABLE]
As above, we have p3∗p1∗=p1′∗p3′∗, hence:
[TABLE]
By a similar argument, we show that (β⋅p3∗p2∗(γ2⋅p2∗z))=(γ2⋅p2∗p3∗(p3∗z⋅β)) which implies the desired equality:
[TABLE]
∎
Proposition 2.2.2**.**
There exists a unique structure of commutative graded ring with unit (deg) on N∙(X) given by (α,β)∈N∙(X)×N∙(X)↦α⋅β∈N∙(X) which satisfies the following properties:
- (i)
For any α,β∈N∙(X) and any z∈N∙(X), one has:
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
For any z∈N∙(X), we have (deg)└z=z.
3. (iii)
The morphism of abelian groups given by
[TABLE]
is bilinear.
Hence, the abelian group N∙(X) has the structure of a graded N∙(X)-module.
Proof.
Take α1∈Ni(X) and α2∈Nl(X) and define φ∈Zi+l(X) by the formula:
[TABLE]
We prove that φ is an element of Ni+l(X).
By linearity, we can suppose that αi is induced by γi∈CIi+ej(Xj) where pj:Xj→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension ej for j=1,2.
Let X′=X1×XX2 be the fibre product, let p1′ and p2′ be the projections from X′ to X1 and X2 respectively such that we have the commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
By the projection formula, we obtain for all z∈Zi+l(X):
[TABLE]
In particular, we have shown that φ is induced by p1′∗γ2⋅p2′∗γ1∈CIe1+e2+i+l(X′), hence φ is an element of Ni+l(X).
Moreover, the commutativity of the intersection product in (10) proves that (α2└(α1└z))=(α1└(α2└z)) for any z∈Ni+l(X), hence α1⋅α2=α2⋅α1.
Pick a vector bundle E on X.
As the element deg∈N0(X) is equal to z→(s0(E)└z) in N0(X) (see Remark 2.1.6), we get using Theorem 1.3.5.(ii) that:
[TABLE]
for any z∈Nl(X) and any α∈Nl(X).
Hence, deg is a unit of N∙(X).
∎
2.3 Pullback on dual numerical classes
Let us consider q:X→Y a proper morphism.
We define for any integer i the pullback q∗:Ni(Y)→HomZ(Ni(X),Z) as the dual of the pushforward operation q∗:Ni(X)→Ni(Y) with respect to the pairing Ni(X)×Ni(X)→Z defined in Proposition 2.1.7.
Proposition 2.3.1**.**
Let q:X→Y be a proper morphism.
The morphism q∗ induces a morphism of graded rings q∗:N∙(Y)→N∙(X) which satisfies the projection formula:
[TABLE]
Proof.
We only need to prove that the image q∗(Ni(Y)) is contained in Ni(X) and that the projection formula is satisfied as it directly implies that q∗:N∙(Y)→N∙(X) is a morphism of rings since:
[TABLE]
for any α∈Ni(Y), β∈Nl(Y) and any z∈Ni+l(X).
Consider a class α∈Ni(Y) which is induced by γ∈CIe1+i(Y1) where p1:Y1→Y is a flat proper morphism of relative dimension e1.
Setting X1 to be the fibre product Y1×X and p1′, q′ the projections from X1 to X and X1 respectively, one remarks using the equality q∗′p1′∗=p1∗q∗ ([Ful98, Proposition 1.7]) that q∗α is induced by q′∗γ, hence q∗α∈Ni(X) as required.
And the projection formula follows easily from the projection formula on divisors (Theorem 1.2.1.(ii)).
∎
Let us sum up all the properties of numerical classes proven so far :
Theorem 2.3.2**.**
Let q:X→Y be a proper morphism. For any integer 0⩽i⩽dimX and 0⩽l⩽dimY:
- (i)
The pushforward morphism q∗:Zi(X)→Zi(Y) induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:Ni(X)→Ni(Y).
2. (ii)
The dual morphism q∗:Zl(Y)→Zl(X) maps Nl(Y) into Nl(X).
3. (iii)
The induced morphism q∗:N∙(Y)→N∙(X) preserves the structure of graded rings.
4. (iv)
(Projection formula)For all α∈Nl(Y) and all z∈Ni(X), we have q∗(q∗α└z)≡α└q∗z in Ni−l(Y).
2.4 Canonical morphism
Theorem 2.4.1**.**
The morphism ψX:α∈Ni(X)↦α└[X]∈Nn−i(X) is the unique morphism which satisfies the following properties.
- (i)
The image of the morphism deg:Z0(X)→Z seen as an element of Z0(X) is given by ψX(deg)=[X].
2. (ii)
The morphism ψX is Ni(X)-equivariant, i.e for all α∈Ni(X) and all β∈Nl(X), we have:
[TABLE]
3. (iii)
Suppose q:X→Y is a generically finite morphism where Y is of dimension n, then we have the following identity:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Recall that deg is the unit in N∙(X), hence ψX(deg)=[X] and (ii) follows directly from the definition and Proposition 2.2.2.
Assertion (iii) is then a consequence of the projection formula (see Theorem 2.3.2.(iv)) and the fact that q∗[X]=deg(q)[Y].
Let us prove that ψX is unique. Suppose that φ:Ni(X)→Nn−i(X) satisfies the hypothesis of the theorem.
Since φ(deg)=[X] and since deg is the unit element of the ring N∙(X), we have that for any α∈Ni(X), α=α⋅deg. By (ii),
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
Now we prove some properties of ψX in some particular cases.
Theorem 2.4.2**.**
The following properties are satisfied.
- (i)
If X is smooth, then for all integers 0⩽i⩽n, the induced morphism ψX:Ni(X)Q→Nn−i(X)Q is an isomorphism.
2. (ii)
If X is smooth and q:X→Y is a surjective generically finite morphism where Y is a normal projective variety. Then we have for all integer i:
[TABLE]
Proof.
(i) Let us show that ψX is surjective.
By the Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch’s theorem (Theorem 1.3.7), the Chern character induces an isomorphism:
[TABLE]
This implies that the morphism ψX:Ni(X)Q→Nn−i(X)Q is surjective because any Chern class is the image of a product of Cartier divisors by a flat map (see Remark 1.3.4).
We now prove that ψX:Ni(X)Q→Nn−i(X)Q is injective.
Take α1∈Ni(X)Q such that ψX(α1)=0. By Proposition 2.1.8, the class α1 is induced by γ1∈CIe1+i(X1)Q where p1:X1→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1.
The condition ψX(α1)=0 is equivalent to the equality p1∗γ1=0∈Nn−i(X).
We need to show that (γ1⋅p1∗z)=0 for any cycle z∈Zi(X).
As X is smooth, we may compute intersection products inside the Chow group A∙(X) directly by Remark 1.3.4 and we get:
[TABLE]
as the class z∈Ni(X) is the image of an element of Nn−i(X)Q by surjectivity of ψX.
(ii) We have the following series of equivalence:
[TABLE]
where the second equivalence follows from Theorem 2.4.2.(iii), the third and the fourth equivalence from the projection formula, and the last equivalence is a consequence of the fact that ψX is self-adjoint :
[TABLE]
where α∈Ni(Y) and β∈Nn−i(Y).
∎
Remark 2.4.3*.*
The proof of Theorem 2.4.2.(i) shows that when X is smooth, Ni(X)Q is the quotient of Zi(X)Q by cycles z∈Zi(X)Q such that for any cycle z′∈Zn−i(X)Q, one has (z⋅z′)=0.
Remark 2.4.4*.*
When X is smooth and when C=C, denote by Algi(X) the subgroup of the de Rham cohomology H2i(X,C) generated by algebraic cycles of dimension i in X. Then there is a surjective morphism Algi(X)→Ni(X)Q
2.5 Numerical spaces are finite dimensional
Theorem 2.5.1**.**
Both Q-vector spaces Ni(X)Q and Ni(X)Q are finite dimensional.
Proof.
If X is smooth, then using Remark 2.4.3, Ni(X)Q is the quotient of Zi(X)Q by the equivalence relation which identifies cycles α and β in Zi(X)Q if for any cycle z∈Zn−i(X)Q, (z⋅α)=(z⋅β).
In particular, the vector-space Ni(X)Q is finitely generated (see [Mil13, Theorem 23.6] for a reference), and so is Ni(X)Q using Theorem 2.4.2.(i).
If X is not smooth, by DeJong’s alteration theorem (cf [Jon96, Theorem 4.1]), there exists a smooth projective variety X′ and a generically finite surjective morphism q:X′→X. We only need to show that the pushforward q∗:Ni(X′)Q→Ni(X)Q is surjective.
Indeed this first implies that Ni(X)Q is finite dimensional. Since the natural pairing Ni(X)Q×Ni(X)Q→Q is non degenerate we get an injection of Ni(X)Q onto HomQ(Ni(X)Q,Q) which is also finite dimensional.
We take V an irreducible subvariety of codimension i in X. If dimq−1(V)=dimV, then the class q∗[q−1(V)] in NdimV(X)Q is represented by a cycle of dimension dimV which is included in V. As V is irreducible, we have q∗[q−1(V)]≡λ[V] for some λ∈N∗.
If the dimension of q−1(V) is strictly greater than V, we take W an irreducible component of q−1(V) such that its image by q∣W:W→V is dominant.
We write the dimension of W as dimV+r where r>0 is an integer.
Fix an ample divisor HX on X.
The class HXr└[W]∈NdimV(X′)Q is represented by a cycle of dimension dimV in W. So the image of the class q∗(HXr└[W])∈NdimV(X)Q is a multiple of [V] which implies the surjectivity of q∗.
∎
Corollary 2.5.2**.**
For any integer 0⩽i⩽n, the pairing Ni(X)R×Ni(X)R→R is perfect (i.e the canonical morphism from Ni(X)R to HomR(Ni(X)R,R) is an isomorphism).
Corollary 2.5.3**.**
Suppose that the dimension of X is 2n, then the morphism ψX:Nn(X)Q→Nn(X)Q is an isomorphism.
Proof.
We apply (11) to an alteration X′ of X where q:X′→X is a proper surjective morphism and where X′ is a smooth projective surface. This proves that ψX:Nn(X)Q→Nn(X)Q is surjective. By duality, this gives that ψX:Nn(X)Q→Nn(X)Q is injective. As a consequence, we have that ψX:Nn(X)Q→Nn(X)Q is an isomorphism.
∎
Corollary 2.5.4**.**
Let X be a complex normal projective variety with at most rational singularities. We suppose that X is numerically Q-factorial in the sense of [BdFFU15]. Then the morphisms ψX:N1(X)Q→Nn−1(X)Q and ψX:Nn−1(X)Q→N1(X)Q are isomorphisms.
Proof.
Using [BdFFU15, Theorem 5.11], then any Weil divisor which is numerically Q-Cartier is Q-Cartier. In particular, ψX:N1(X)Q→Nn−1(X)Q is surjective. Using (11) to an alteration of X′ applied to i=1, we have that ψX:N1(X)Q→Nn−1(X)Q is injective. Hence N1(X)Q and Nn−1(X)Q are isomorphic and by duality Nn−1(X)Q and N1(X)Q are also isomorphic.
∎
Example 2.5.5*.*
When X=X(Δ) be a toric variety associated to a complete fan Δ.
The map ψX:N1(X)Q→Nn−1(X)Q is an isomorphism if and only if Δ is a simplicial fan. Indeed, denote by N the lattice containing Δ and M=Hom(N,Z) its dual.
For any cone σ∈N, we denote by M(σ) the vector space defined by M(σ)={l∈M ∣⟨l,v⟩=0, ∀v∈σ}.
The proposition in [Ful93, §5.1] implies that any class in Nn−1(X)Q is represented by a torus-invariant Weil Q-divisor D=∑ai[Vi] in X(Δ). Since every maximal cone σ in the fan Δ⊂N is full-dimensional, one has M(σ)={0} and there exists an element u(σ)∈M/M(σ)=M such that for any 1-dimensional ray vi∈σ, one has:
[TABLE]
The element u(σ) is uniquely determined if and only if the family of rays vi∈σ are linearly independent (i.e Δ is simplicial).
3 Positivity
The notion of positivity is relatively well understood for cycles of codimension 1 and of dimension 1.
For cycles of intermediate dimension this situation is however more subtle and was only recently seriously considered (see [DELV11], [CC15], [CLO16] and the recent series of papers by Fulger and Lehmann ([FL14a], [FL14b]).
For our purpose, we will first review the notions of pseudo-effectivity and numerically effective classes. Then we generalize the construction of the basepoint free cone introduced by [FL14b] to normal projective varieties. This cone is suitable for stating generalized Siu’s inequalities (see Section 3.4).
3.1 Pseudo-effective and numerically effective cones
As in the previous section, X is a normal projective variety of dimension n.
To ease notation we shall also write Ni(X) and Ni(X) for the real vector spaces Ni(X)R and Ni(X)R.
Definition 3.1.1**.**
A class α∈Ni(X) is pseudo-effective if it is in the closure of the cone generated by effective classes. This cone is denoted Psefi(X).
When i=1, Psef1(X) is the Mori cone (see e.g [KM98, Definition 1.17]), and when i=n−1, Psefn−1(X) is the classical cone of pseudo-effective divisors, its interior being the big cone.
Definition 3.1.2**.**
A class β∈Ni(X) is numerically effective (or nef) if for any class α∈Psefn−i(X), (β└α)⩾0. We denote this cone by Nefi(X).
When i=1, the cone Nef1(X) is the cone of numerically effective divisors, its interior is the ample cone.
We can define a notion of effectivity in the dual Ni(X).
Definition 3.1.3**.**
A class α∈Ni(X) is pseudo-effective if ψX(α)∈Psefn−i(X). We will write this cone as Psefi(X).
Definition 3.1.4**.**
A class z∈Ni(X) is numerically effective if for any class α∈Psefi(X), one has (α└z)⩾0. This cone is denoted Nefi(X).
By convention, we will write α⩽β (resp. α⩽β) for any α,β∈Ni(X) (resp. α,β∈Ni(X) ) if β−α∈Psefi(X) (resp. β−α∈Psefi(X)).
When X is smooth, the morphism ψX induces an isomorphism between Ni(X) and Nn−i(X), and we can identify these cones:
[TABLE]
3.2 Pliant classes
We recall the definition of pliant classes introduced in [FL14b, Definition 3.1] and their main properties. Their definition involve Schur classes which were introduced in Section 1.3.
Definition 3.2.1**.**
The pliant cone PL∙(X) is defined as the convex cone generated by product of Schur classes of globally generated vector bundle.
We denote by PLi(X) the set of pliant classes of codimension i in X.
Theorem 3.2.2**.**
(see [FL14b, Theorem 1.3])
The pliant cone PLi(X) satisfies the following properties.
- (i)
The cone PLi(X) is a closed convex salient cone with non-empty interior in Ni(X)R.
2. (ii)
The cone PLi(X) contains product of ample Cartier divisors in its interior.
3. (iii)
For all integer i,l, we have PLi(X)⋅PLl(X)⊂PLi+l(X).
4. (iv)
For any (proper) morphism q:X→Y, one has that q∗PLi(Y)⊂PLi(X).
We recall another proposition which we will reuse in our proofs.
Proposition 3.2.3**.**
(cf [FL14b, Example 3.13]) Let G be a Grassmannian variety. Then PLi(G)=Psefi(G).
3.3 Basepoint free cone on normal projective varieties
In this section, we define a cone BPFi(X) and prove in Corollary 3.3.4 that this cone is equal to the basepoint free cone defined by Fulger-Lehmann when X is smooth.
This generalizes [FL14b, Theorem 1.7] to normal projective varieties and our proof follows closely Fulger-Lehmann’s approach.
Recall that a complete intersection γ∈CIi+e(X′) on X′ where p:X′→X is a flat morphism of relative dimension e and where X′ is an equidimensional projective scheme induces naturally (see Definition 2.1.5) an element [γ]∈Ni(X)R=HomR(Ni(X)R,R) by intersecting the class γ with the pullback by p of a i-dimensional cycle in X. We also refer to Proposition 2.2.2 for the definition of the product Ni(X)R×Nl(X)R→Ni+l(X)R.
Definition 3.3.1**.**
The cone BPFi(X) is the closure of the convex cone in Ni(X)R generated by products of the form [γ1]⋅…⋅[γl] where each γj is a product of ej+ij ample Cartier divisors on an equidimensional projective scheme Xj which is flat over X of relative dimension ej and where ij are integers satisfying i1+…+il=i.
Remark 3.3.2*.*
By definition, the cone BPFi(X) contains the products of ample Cartier divisors and Segré classes of anti-ample vector bundles.
Recall also that if q:X→Y is a flat morphism of relative dimension e between projective schemes, then the pushforward is well-defined on numerical cycles
q∗:Ni(X)R→Ni−e(Y)R (see Corollary 9.5).
Theorem 3.3.3**.**
The cone BPFi(X) is satisfies the following properties.
- (i)
The cone BPFi(X) is a salient, closed, convex cone with non-empty interior in Ni(X)R.
2. (ii)
The cone BPFi(X) contains products of ample Cartier divisors in its interior.
3. (iii)
For all integer i and l, we have BPFi(X)⋅BPFl(X)⊂BPFi+l(X).
4. (iv)
For any (proper) morphism q:X→Y, we have q∗BPFi(Y)⊂BPFi(X).
5. (v)
For any integer i, we have BPFi(X)⊂Nefi(X)∩Psefi(X).
6. (vi)
In codimension 1, one has BPF1(X)=Nef1(X).
7. (vii)
For any flat morphism q:X→Y between equidimensional projective schemes of relative dimension e and any integer i⩾e, we have q∗BPFi(X)⊂BPFi−e(Y).
Moreover, BPF(X) is the smallest cone satisfying properties (iii),(vi) and (vii).
Proof.
We prove successively the items (iii), (vii), (v), (vi), (iv), (ii) and (i).
(iii), (vii) This follows from the definition of BPFi(X).
(v) It is sufficient to prove that for any effective cycle z∈Zn−l(X) and any basepoint free class α∈BPFi(X), then α└z∈Psefn−i−l(X). Indeed, apply this successively to z=[X] and z∈Psefi(X) give the inclusions BPFi(X)⊂Psefi(X) and BPFi(X)⊂Nefi(X).
By definition of basepoint free classes and by linearity, we can suppose that α is equal to a product [γ1]⋅…⋅[γp] where γi∈CIej+ij(Xj)R are products of ample Cartier divisors on Xj where pj:Xi→X is a flat proper morphism of relative dimension ej and where ij are integers such that i1+…+ip=i.
By definition, one has
[γ1]└z=p1∗(γ1⋅p1∗z).
Because the cycle z is pseudo-effective, the cycle p1∗z remains pseudo-effective as p1 is a flat morphism. As γ1 is a positive combination of products of ample Cartier divisors, we deduce that the cycle γ1⋅p1∗z is pseudo-effective. Hence, [γ1]└z∈Psefn−l1−l(X). Iterating the same argument, we get that α└z∈Psefn−i−l(X) as required.
(vi) The interior of Nef1(X) is equal to the ample cone of X so by definition:
[TABLE]
As the closure of the ample cone is the nef cone by [Laz04, Theorem 1.4.21.(i)], one gets Nef1(X)⊂BPF1(X). Conversely, the cone BPF1(X) is included in the cone Nef1(X), so we get BPF1(X)=Nef1(X).
(iv) By linearity and stability by products, we are reduced to treat the case of a class [D] induced by an ample Cartier divisor on Y1 where p1:Y1→Y is a flat proper morphism, and prove that q∗[D] is a limit of ample Cartier divisors on a flat variety over X.
Let X1 be the fibre product of Y1 and X and let q′ be the natural projection from X1 to Y1, observe that q∗[D] is induced by q′∗D which remains nef on X1 as q′ is proper.
In particular, it is the limit of ample divisors on N1(X1).
(i)
Take α∈BPFi(X) such that −α∈BPFi(X). Then for all z∈Psefi(X), one has that (α└z)=0 as α is nef by (v).
Since effective classes of dimension i generate Zi(X), it follows that (α└z)=0 for any z∈Ni(X)R which implies by definition that α=0.
This shows BPFi(X) is salient.
(ii) We show now that BPFi(X) contains product of ample divisors in its interior.
To do so we prove that PLi(X)⊂BPFi(X) for any integer i⩾1.
For i=1, BPF1(X)=Nef1(X), and by definition, the divisor h is ample so it is in the interior of the nef cone and we are done.
Take a globally generated vector bundle E of rank r on X and consider the induced morphism ϕ given by:
[TABLE]
Since PLi(X)⊃ϕ∗PLi(G) and since these cones are preserved by pullbacks, we are then reduced to proving that
PLi(G)⊂BPFi(G).
Denote by G=PGL(H0(X,E)∗) the projective special orthogonal group of the vector space H0(X,E)∗ and consider a class α∈Ni(G)R.
Since G is smooth, ψG:Ni(G)R→Nn−i(G)R is an isomorphism by Theorem 2.4.2 and α is represented by an effective cycle z∈Zn−i(G)R.
Consider W the Zariski closure in G×G given by:
[TABLE]
By construction, W is a quasi-projective scheme and the projection p:W→G onto G is a flat morphism.
Denote by q:W→G the projection onto G.
Fix H a very ample divisor on G and denote by M the dimension of the group PGL(H0(X,E)∗). Then there exists an open embedding j:W→PGM such that one has the following diagram:
[TABLE]
where π:PGM→G is the projection onto G and h:PGM→PM is the projection onto PM
By construction the general fiber of q over an element g∈G is numerically equivalent to α and since we can choose H to be a hyperplane of PM, we have:
[TABLE]
Moreover [Ful98, Proposition 1.7] implies that p∗j∗=π∗ in Zn−i(PGM), hence:
[TABLE]
Since H is ample, h∗H is nef and the class h∗HM belongs to BPFn−i(PGM).
Assertion (vii) thus implies that the class π∗h∗HM/(HM)=α belongs to BPFn−i(G)R, as required.
Since PLi(X) has non-empty interior in Ni(X)R by Theorem 3.2.2.(ii), we have proved (ii).
Let us prove that the cone BPFi(X) is the smallest cone satisfying properties (iii),(vi) and (vii).
Denote by BPF′ the minimal cone satisfying these conditions. We have that BPF′i(X)⊂BPFi(X) by minimality.
Take q:X1→X a flat morphism of relative dimension e where X1 is an equidimensional projective scheme and consider α∈CIi+e(X1) a product of ample Cartier divisors on X1.
Since q∗:Ni(X1)R→Ni−e(X)R and since α∈BPF′i+e(X1), we have that q∗α∈BPF′i(X) by (vii), hence BPFi(X)⊂BPF′i(X) as required.
∎
We recall Fulger-Lehmann’s construction of the basepoint free cone.
A class α∈Nn−i(X)R is strongly basepoint free if there is:
- ∙
an equidimensional quasi-projective scheme U of finite type over C,
2. ∙
a flat proper morphism s:U→X
3. ∙
and a proper morphism p:U→W of relative dimension n−i to a quasi-projective scheme W such that each component of U surjects onto W
such that
[TABLE]
where [Fp] is the fundamental class of a general fiber of p.
We denote by BPF′i(X) the closure of the convex cone generated by strongly basepoint free classes in this sense.
The cone BPF′(X) as above was defined by Fulger-Lehmann and they proved that this cone satisfies Theorem 3.3.3 when X is smooth ([FL14b, Theorem 1.7]). The following result proves that the cones BPF′(X) and BPF(X) are equal in this case.
Corollary 3.3.4**.**
Suppose X is smooth, then the cone BPFi(X) is equal to the basepoint free cone BPF′i(X).
Remark 3.3.5*.*
Our construction of the cone BPF(X) allows us to generalize Fulger-Lehmann’s result for normal varieties. This improvement is due to the fact that we are able to pushforward dual numerical classes by flat morphism.
Proof.
By [FL14b, Theorem 1.7], the cone BPF′(X) satisfies the conditions of Theorem 3.3.3, hence BPFi(X)⊂BPF′i(X).
Let us prove the reverse inclusion BPF′i(X)⊂BPFi(X).
Take p:U→W a projective morphism onto an equidimensional quasi-projective variety W where U is a quasi-projective scheme and a flat map s:U→X such that s∗[Fp]=α where Fp is a general fiber of p.
Take HW an ample divisor on W, then the class α satisfies:
[TABLE]
Choose an ample divisor H on U, since the class p∗HW is nef, for any ϵ>0, the divisor p∗HW+ϵH is ample.
Since the morphism s:U→X is also quasi-projective and there exists an integer l (which depends on ϵ) such that the following diagram is commutative
[TABLE]
where fϵ:U→PXl is an immersion induced by p∗HW+ϵH and π:PXl→X is the flat projection onto X.
Let ξ be the relative class c1(OPXl(1)) on PXl, then one has that for any cycle z∈Zi(X)R:
[TABLE]
since fϵ∗ξ=p∗HW+ϵH.
Hence, we obtain:
[TABLE]
Since the class ξi+e is nef and since these cones are stable by flat pushforward, we have π∗(ξi+e)⊂BPFi(X).
Taking the limit as ϵ→0, we have that s∗(p∗HW+ϵH)i+e→α=s∗p∗HWi+e, hence α∈BPFi(X) since each class s∗(p∗HW+ϵH)i+e)∈Ni(X)R belongs to BPFi(X).
∎
We give here a detailed proof of the fact that the pseudo-effective cone is salient (see also [FL14b, Corollary 3.17]). The proof uses a useful proposition that we will use later on.
Proposition 3.3.6**.**
Let α∈Psefn−i(X) be a pseudo-effective class on X and γ∈BPFn−i(X) be class lying in the interior of the basepoint free cone.
Then we have (γ└α)=0 if and only if α=0.
Proof.
Let us fix two basepoint free classes β and γ in Nn−i(X), and a norm ∣∣⋅∣∣ on Nn−i(X)R. As γ is in the interior of BPFn−i(X) by Theorem 3.3.3.(ii), there exists a positive constant C>0 such that for any β∈BPFn−i(X), one has:
[TABLE]
Intersecting with α∈Psefn−i(X) and using Theorem 3.3.3.(v), we have that (β⋅α)=0.
Since the basepoint free cone BPFn−i(X) generates all Nn−i(X)R by Theorem 3.3.3.(i), we have proved that (β′└α)=0 for any β′∈Nn−i(X), hence α=0 as required.
∎
Corollary 3.3.7**.**
The pseudo-effective cone Psefn−i(X) is a closed, convex, full dimensional salient cone in Nn−i(X)R.
Proof.
We take u∈Psefn−i(X) such that −u∈Psefn−i(X), then for any ample Cartier divisor HX on X, the products (HXn−i⋅u) and (−u⋅HXn−i) are non-negative hence (u⋅HXn−i)=0. This implies that u=0 by Proposition 3.3.6.
∎
3.4 Siu’s inequality in arbitrary codimension
We recall Siu’s inequality:
Proposition 3.4.1**.**
([Laz04, Theorem 2.2.13]) Let V be a closed subscheme of dimension r in X and
let A,B be two Q-divisors nef on X such that A∣V is big, then we have in Ni−1(X),
[TABLE]
Remark 3.4.2*.*
The case V=X is a consequence of the bigness criterion given in [Laz04, Theorem 2.2.13], however we will need the result for possibly non-reduced subschemes of X.
Remark 3.4.3*.*
The proof of the previous proposition implies that B∣V⩽r(Ar−1⋅B└[V])/(Ar└[V])×A∣V in the Chow group A1(V). However, since we want to work in the numerical group, we compare these classes in X (we look at their pushforward by the inclusion of V in X).
Proof.
The proof is the same as in [Laz04, Theorem 2.2.13], that is to find a section of the line bundle OV(m(A−B)).
Up to some small pertubations of A and B of the form A+ϵH and B+ϵH of A and B where ϵ→0, we can suppose that A and B are ample.
Moreover, by taking a high multiple of A and B, we can suppose that they are also both very ample.
Since B is very ample, we choose m general elements Ej of the linear system ∣B∣ and consider the exact sequence:
[TABLE]
Taking long exact sequence associated, one obtains the minoration:
[TABLE]
Observe that [∪Ej]=∑j=1m[Ej]=mB└[V].
Applying [GGJ*+*16, Corollary 3.6.3] to the nef divisor A, we get h0(V,OV(mA))=mr/(r!)(Ar└[V])+o(mr) and
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
In particular, this implies the required inequality.
∎
The next result is a key for our approach to controlling degrees of dominant rational maps.
Theorem 3.4.4**.**
Let i be an integer and V be a closed subscheme of dimension r in X. For any Cartier divisors α1,…,αi and β which are big and nef on V, then there exists a constant C>0 depending only on r and i such that:
[TABLE]
Remark 3.4.5*.*
Observe that (βn)>0 since β is big.
Proof.
By continuity, we can suppose that αi and β are ample Cartier divisors.
We apply successively Siu’s inequality by restriction to subschemes representing the classes α2⋅…⋅αi└[V] , β⋅α3⋅…⋅αi└[V], …, βi−1⋅αi└[V]:
[TABLE]
This gives the required inequality:
[TABLE]
∎
Corollary 3.4.6**.**
Let i be an integer, then for any a∈BPFi(X) and any big nef Cartier divisor β on X, one has:
[TABLE]
Proof.
By linearity and stability by product, we just need to prove the inequality for a=D1⋅…⋅De1+i∈CIe1+i(X1), where Di are ample Cartier divisors X1, where p1:X1→X is a flat proper morphism of relative dimension e1. We apply Theorem 3.4.4 to a′=De1+1⋅…⋅De1+i⋅Z and β′=p1∗β∣Z where Z=D1⋅…⋅De1. We obtain:
[TABLE]
As the restriction of p1 on Z is generically finite, by the projection formula, we get:
[TABLE]
∎
The previous inequality can be applied when we have positivity hypothesis on a birational model as follows.
Corollary 3.4.7**.**
Let X,Y be two normal projective varieties of dimension n. Let β be a class in BPFi(Y), we suppose there exists a birational morphism q:X→Y and an ample Cartier divisor A on X such that Ai⩽q∗β. Then there exists a class β∗∈Ni(X)R∩Psefi(X) such that for any class α∈BPFi(X), we have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
We just have to set β∗=(An)(n−i+1)iq∗ψX(An−i).
∎
Remark 3.4.8*.*
We conjecture that for any basepoint free class a∈BPFi(X) and any big nef divisor b, one has
[TABLE]
One can show that this inequality (if true) is optimal since equality can happen when X is an abelian variety.
3.5 Norms on numerical classes
In this section, the positivity properties combined with Siu’s inequality allows us to define some norms on Ni(X)R and on Ni(X)R.
3.5.1 Norms on Ni(X)R
Let i⩽n be an integer and let γ∈BPFi(X) be a basepoint free class on X. Any cycle z∈Ni(X)R can be written z=z+−z− where z+ and z− are pseudo-effective. We define :
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.5.1**.**
For any class γ∈BPFi(X) lying in the interior of the basepoint free cone, the function Fγ defines a norm on Ni(X)R. In particular, if we fix a norm ∣∣⋅∣∣Ni(X)R on Ni(X)R, there exists a constant C>0 such that for any pseudo-effective class z∈Psefi(X), one has:
[TABLE]
Proof.
The only point to clarify is that Fγ(z)=0 implies z=0.
Observe that Proposition 3.3.6 implies the result for z∈Psefi(X).
In general, pick any two sequences
(zp+)p∈N and (zp−)p∈N in Psefi(X) such that z=zp+−zp− and such that
γ⋅zp++γ⋅zp−⟶0.
Since zp+ and zp− are pseudo-effective and γ is basepoint free, it follows from Theorem 3.3.3.(v) that
[TABLE]
As γ lies in the interior of BPFi(X), given any β in BPFi(X), one has that Cγ−β is still in BPFi(X) for some sufficently large constant C>0.
Intersecting with the pseudo-effective classes zp+ and zp− and using Theorem 3.3.3.(v), we have limp→∞(β└zp+)=limp→∞(β└zp−)=0, thus (β└z)=0. Since the basepoint free cone BPFi(X) generates all Ni(X) by Theorem 3.3.3.(i), we conclude that z=0 as required.
∎
3.5.2 Norms on Ni(X)R
Definition 3.5.2**.**
We define the subcone BPF0i(X) of BPFi(X) as the classes α∈BPFi(X) such that for any birational map q:X′→X, there exists an ample Cartier divisor A on X′ such that q∗α⩾Ai.
Proposition 3.5.3**.**
When X is smooth, the cone BPF01(X) is equal to the big nef cone. In particular BPF0i is neither closed nor open in general.
Proof.
Take α∈N1(X)R a big nef divisor. Then for any birational map q:X′→X and any ample Cartier divisor A, one has by Theorem 3.4.4 applied to A and q∗α:
[TABLE]
Hence, α∈BPF01(X).
Conversely, take a class α∈BPF01(X), then there exists an ample divisor A on X such that α⩾A.
Since ample divisors are big, we have that α is big.
Moreover, since BPF1(X)=Nef1(X)∩Psef1(X), we have that α is big and nef as required.
∎
Proposition 3.5.4**.**
The cone BPF0i(X) is a convex open subset of BPFi(X) that contains the classes induced by products of big nef divisors.
Proof.
The cone BPF0i(X) contains the products of big and nef Cartier divisors.
The fact that BPF0i(X) is convex is a consequence of Siu’s inequality. We take two elements α and β in BPF0i(X) and any birational map q:X′→X.
By definition, there exists some ample Cartier divisors A and B on X′ such that q∗α⩾Ai and q∗β⩾bi.
As A and B are ample, there is a constant C>0 such that Ai⩾Cbi using the generalization of Siu’s inequality (Theorem 3.4.4). This proves that q∗(t×α+(1−t)×β)⩾(tC+(1−t))×bi for any t∈[0,1]. Hence t×α+(1−t)×β∈BPF0i(X) and the cone BPF0i(X) is convex.
We prove that BPF0i(X) is an open subset of BPFi(X). We take α∈BPF0i(X). We take any ample Cartier divisor HX on X such that α−tHXi is in BPFi(X) for small t>0. We just need to show that α−tHXi stays in BPF0i(X) when t is small enough.
Let q:X′→X be a birational map where X′ is projective and normal. By definition of α, there exists an ample Cartier divisor A on X′ such that q∗α⩾Ai. By Siu’s inequality, there exists a constant C such that:
[TABLE]
This implies the inequality:
[TABLE]
As Ai⩽q∗α, we have the following upper bound:
[TABLE]
We get the following minoration which depends only on α and HX:
[TABLE]
Using (15) and (16), one gets that for t<C(α⋅HXn−i)(HXn), the class α−tHXi is in BPF0i(X).
∎
Remark 3.5.5*.*
The cone BPF0i(X) is not always equal to the cone generated by complete intersections. Following [LX15, Example 9.6], there exists a smooth toric threefold such that the cone generated by complete intersections in N1(X)R is not convex, so it cannot be equal to BPF02(X) using the following proposition.
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n. Any class α∈Ni(X)R can be decomposed as α+−α− where α+ and α− are basepoint free classes. For any γ∈BPF0n−i(X), we define the function:
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.5.6**.**
For any γ∈BPF0n−i(X), the function Gγ defines a norm on Ni(X)R. In particular, for any norm ∣∣⋅∣∣Ni(X)R on Ni(X)R, there is a constant C>0 such that for any class α∈BPFi(X):
[TABLE]
Proof.
The only fact which is not immediate is the fact that Gγ(α)=0 implies α=0. We are reduced to treat the case where α∈BPFi(X).
Suppose first that X is smooth.
Since γ belongs to the interior of the basepoint free cone by Proposition 3.5.4, one has that for any basepoint free class β∈BPFn−i(X), there exists a constant C>0 such that:
[TABLE]
In particular, since α is nef, one has:
[TABLE]
Hence (β⋅α)=0 for any basepoint free class β∈BPFn−i(X) and α=0∈Ni(X)R since the basepoint free cone generates all Nn−i(X)R by Theorem 3.3.3.(i).
Suppose that X is not smooth. Fix an ample Cartier divisor HX on X.
Take an alteration π:X′→X of X. Since the morphism π∗:Ni(X)R→Ni(X′)R is injective, we are reduced to prove that π∗α=0.
Consider β∈BPFn−i(X), we have by the projection formula that:
[TABLE]
Since γ belongs to the interior of the basepoint free cone, there exists a constant C>0 such that:
[TABLE]
In particular, this implies that:
[TABLE]
Since π∗HX is a big nef Cartier divisor, the class π∗HXn−i belongs to BPF0n−i(X′) by Proposition 3.5.4, hence π∗α=0 by the previous argument.
∎
Remark 3.5.7*.*
In fact, the above proof gives a stronger statement:
for any generically finite morphism q:X′→X and any γ∈BPF0n−i(X), the function Gq∗γ defines a norm on Ni(X′)R.
4 Relative numerical classes
4.1 Relative classes
In this section, we fix q:X→Y a surjective proper morphism between normal projective varieties where dimX=n, dimY=l and we denote by e=dimX−dimY the relative dimension of q.
Definition 4.1.1**.**
The abelian group Ni(X/Y) is the subgroup of Ni(X) generated by classes of subvarieties V of X such that the image q(V) is a point in Y.
Observe that by definition, there is a natural injection from Ni(X/Y) into Ni(X):
[TABLE]
Definition 4.1.2**.**
The abelian group Ni(X/Y) is the quotient of Zi(X) by the equivalence relation ≡Y where α≡Y0 if for any cycle z∈Zi(X) whose image by q is a collection of points in Y, we have (α└z)=0.
Therefore, one has the following exact sequence:
[TABLE]
As before, we write Ni(X/Y)R=Ni(X/Y)⊗ZR, Ni(X/Y)R=Ni(X/Y)⊗R, N∙(X/Y)=⊕Ni(X/Y) and N∙(X/Y)=⊕Ni(X/Y).
Proposition 4.1.3**.**
The abelian groups Ni(X/Y) and Ni(X/Y) are torsion free and of finite type. Moreover, the pairing Ni(X/Y)Q×Ni(X/Y)Q→Q induced by the pairing Ni(X)Q×Ni(X)Q→Q is perfect.
Proof.
Since Ni(X/Y) is a subgroup of Ni(X), it is torsion free and of finite type. The group Ni(X/Y) is also torsion free.
Indeed pick α∈Zi(X) such that pα≡Y0 for some integer p, then for any cycle z whose image by q is a union of points, we have (pα└z)=p(α└z)=0 hence α≡Y0.
Finally, since there is a surjection from Ni(X) to Ni(X/Y), the group Ni(X/Y) is also of finite type.
Let us show that the pairing is well defined and non degenerate.
Take a cycle z∈Zi(X)Q such that q(z) is a finite number of points in Y, then if α∈Ni(X) such that its image is [math] in Ni(X/Y), then (α└z)=0 and the pairing Ni(X/Y)×Ni(X/Y)→Z is well-defined.
Let us suppose that for any α∈Ni(X/Y)Q, (α└z)=0. This implies that for any β∈Ni(X), the intersection product (β└z)=0, thus z≡0.
Conversely, suppose that (α└z)=0 for any z∈Ni(X/Y), then by definition α≡Y0.
∎
Example 4.1.4*.*
When Y is a point, we have Ni(X/Y)=Ni(X) and Ni(X/Y)=Ni(X).
Example 4.1.5*.*
If the morphism q:X→Y is finite, then we have N0(X/Y)Q=N0(X/Y)Q=Q and Ni(X/Y)=Ni(X/Y)={0} for i⩾1 since X is irreducible.
Example 4.1.6*.*
When i=1, the group N1(X/Y) is generated by curves contracted by q so that N1(X/Y) is the relative Neron-Severi group and its dimension is the relative Picard number (see [KM98, Section 2.2, Example 2.16]).
Remark 4.1.7*.*
When i is greater than the relative dimension, the relative classes might not be trivial. For example if q:X→Y is a birational map, then e=0 but the space N1(X/Y)R is generated by classes of exceptional divisors of q.
Proposition 4.1.8**.**
The intersection product on N∙(X) induces a structure of algebra on N∙(X/Y). Moreover, the action from N∙(X) on N∙(X) induces an action from N∙(X/Y) on N∙(X/Y), so that the vector space N∙(X/Y)R becomes a N∙(X/Y)R-module.
Proof.
Observe that if z∈Zi(X) such that q(z) is a union of points in Y and α∈Nl(X), then α└z lies in Ni−l(X/Y). Indeed, by definition, the class α└z is represented by a cycle supported in z, so its image by q is a collection of points in Y.
Let us now prove that the product is well-defined in N∙(X/Y). Take α∈Ni(X) such that α=0 in Ni(X/Y) and β∈Nl(X), we must prove that α⋅β=0 in Ni(X/Y). Pick a cycle z∈Zi+l(X) whose image by q is a collection of points, by the properties of the intersection product, ((α⋅β)└z)=(α└(β└z)). As β└z is in Ni(X/Y), we get that ((α⋅β)└z)=0 as required.
∎
As an illustration, we give an explicit description of these groups in a particular example.
Proposition 4.1.9**.**
Suppose q:X=P(E)→Y where E is a vector bundle of rank e+1 on Y. Then for any integer 0⩽i⩽e, one has:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where ξ=c1(OP(E)(1)).
Proof.
Since the pairing Ni(X/Y)Q×Ni(X/Y)Q→Q is non degenerate and since (ξi└(ξe−i└q∗[pt]))=1, the second equality is an immediate consequence of the first one.
We suppose first that i>0.
Pick α∈Zi(X) which defines a class in Ni(X/Y)Q.
Using [Ful98, Theorem 3.3.(b)], α is rationally equivalent to ∑e−i⩽j⩽eξj└q∗αj where αj is an element of the Chow group Ai−e+j(Y)Q.
Since the image of α by q is a union of points in Y, we have that q∗α=0 in Ai(Y)Q.
Observe that
[TABLE]
and that for any j<e, one has that
[TABLE]
since the support of the cycle αi is of dimension i−e+j<i and q∗(ξe└q∗αj) belongs to Ai(Y).
Hence the conditions q∗α=0 implies that αe=0 in Ai(Y)Q.
Since ξj└α defines also a class in Ni−j(X/Y)Q, this implies also that αe−j=0 in Ai−e+j(Y)Q for any j<i. We have finally that in Ni(X/Y)Q:
[TABLE]
Since αe−i belongs to A0(Y)Q and N0(Y)=Q[pt], the Q-module Ni(X/Y) is generated by ξe−i└q∗[pt] for i>0.
For i=0, the groups N0(X)Q and N0(X/Y)Q are isomorphic to Q, so we get the desired conclusion.
∎
4.2 Pullback and pushforward
In this section, we fix any two (proper) surjective morphisms q1:X1→Y1, q2:X2→Y2 between normal projective varieties.
To simplify the notation, we write X1/q1Y1g→fX2/q2Y2 when we have two regular maps f:X1→X2 and g:Y1→Y2 such that q2∘f=g∘q1 and we shall say that X1/q1Y1g→fX2/q2Y2 is a morphism.
When f:X1⇢X2 and g:Y1⇢Y2 are merely rational maps, then we write X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 and we shall call it a rational map.
Proposition 4.2.1**.**
Let X1/q1Y1g→fX2/q2Y2 be a morphism. Then the morphism of abelian groups f∗:Ni(X1)→Ni(X2) induces a morphism of abelian groups f∗:Ni(X1/Y1)→Ni(X2/Y2).
Proof.
Take a cycle z∈Zi(X1) such that q1(z) is a union of points of Y1.
Then the image of the cycle z by q2∘f is also a union of points of Y2 due to the fact that q2∘f=g∘q1. Hence f∗ maps Ni(X1/Y1) to Ni(X2/Y2).
∎
Proposition 4.2.2**.**
Let X1/q1Y1g→fX2/q2Y2 be a morphism. Then the morphism of graded rings f∗:N∙(X1)→N∙(X2) induces a morphism of graded rings f∗:N∙(X1/Y1)Q→N∙(X2/Y2)Q.
Proof.
This results follows immediately by duality from the previous proposition since the pairing Ni(Xi/Yi)Q×Ni(Xi/Yi)Q→Q is non degenerate.
∎
4.3 Restriction to a general fiber and relative canonical morphism
Recall that dimX=n, dimY=l and that the relative dimension of q:X→Y is e.
Proposition 4.3.1**.**
There exists a unique class αX/Y∈Nl(X)Q satisfying the following conditions.
-
The image ψX(αX/Y) belongs to the subspace Ne(X/Y)Q of Ne(X)Q.
2. 2.
For any class β∈Nl(X)Q, q∗β=(αX/Y└β) [Y].
Moreover, for any open subset V of Y such that the restriction q to U=q−1(V) is flat, and for all y∈V and any irreducible component F of the scheme-theoretic fiber Xy, we have:
[TABLE]
where r is a rational number which only depends on F and
where [Xy] (resp. [F]) denotes the fundamental class of Xy (resp. F) viewed as an element of Ne(X/Y).
More explicitly, the class αX/Y is given by
[TABLE]
where HY is an ample divisor on Y.
Remark 4.3.2*.*
Recall that by generic flatness (see [FGI*+*05, Theorem 5.12]), one can always find an open subset V of Y such that the restriction of q to q−1(V) is flat over V.
Proof.
Fix an ample Cartier divisor HY on Y, we set
[TABLE]
Write the class HYl in A0(Y) as:
[TABLE]
where pj∈V(C) are points in V and aj are positive integers satisfying ∑aj=(HYl).
By the projection formula (Theorem 2.3.2.(iv)), the class αX/Y satisfies (i) and (ii) .
Let us show that any class satisfying (i) and (ii) is unique.
Suppose there is another one α′∈Nl(X)Q.
Then for any class β∈Nl(X)Q, ((αX/Y−α′)└β)=0 so that α=α′ since the pairing Nl(X)Q×Nl(X)Q→Q is non degenerate.
Let us prove the last assertion.
By generic flatness [FGI*+*05, Theorem 5.12],
Let V be an open subset of Y such that the restriction q∣q−1(V):q−1(V)→V is flat and such that the dimension of every fiber is e.
Since HY is ample, we can find some hyperplanes of Hi⊂Y such that H1∩…∩Hl represents the class HYl and such that H1∩…∩Hl⊂V.
In particular, by [Ful98, Proposition 2.3.(d)], the pullback q∗HYl is represented by a cycle in the fiber of H1∩…∩Hl. Denote by u:V→Y and g:U→X the inclusion maps of V and U into Y and X respectively.
The morphisms u and g are open embedding hence are flat. Moreover we have the following commutative diagram.
[TABLE]
Using [Ful98, Example 2.4.2], one has that for any β∈Al(X):
[TABLE]
Using (18), one obtains in Ae(X):
[TABLE]
which is well-defined since the restriction of q on U is flat.
By [Ful98, Theorem 10.2], we have that [Xpj]=[Xy]∈Ne(X) for any pj,y∈V. In particular, we have:
[TABLE]
where y is a point in V, which proves that ψX(αX/Y)=[Xy] in Ne(X)Q for any point y in V.
By the Stein factorization theorem, there exists a morphism q′:X→Y′ with connected fibres and a finite morphism f:Y′→Y such that q′=q∘f.
Since (HYl)[Xy]=q∗HYl=q′∗f∗HYl and since f∗HYl∈Nl(Y′)R which is canonically isomorphism to R, we have that f∗HYl=p⋅[y′]∈Nl(Y′)R where p is an integer and where [y′] is a general point in f−1(y).
We have thus proven that:
[TABLE]
and q′−1(y′) is an irreducible component of Xy as required.
∎
The class previously constructed allows us to define a restriction morphism.
Definition 4.3.3**.**
Suppose that dimY=l and that HY is an ample Cartier divisor on Y, then we define ResX/Y:N∙(X)Q→N∙−l(X/Y)Q by setting:
[TABLE]
This morphism does not depend on the choice of HY.
We shall denote by ResX/Y∗:β∈N∙(X/Y)Q→αX/Y⋅β∈N∙+l(X)Q the dual morphism induced by ResX/Y with respect to the pairing N∙(X/Y)Q×N∙(X/Y)Q→Q.
Proposition 4.3.4**.**
Recall that dimY=l. The following properties are satisfied.
-
For any class α∈N∙(X)Q, one has:
[TABLE]
2. 2.
For any morphism X′/q′Y′g→fX/qY where dimX′=dimX=n and dimY′=dimY=l such that the topological degree of g is d, we have for any α∈Ni−l(X/Y)Q:
[TABLE]
The definition of the restriction morphism gives a natural way to generalize the definition of the canonical morphism ψX:Ni(X)→Nn−i(X) to the relative case.
Definition 4.3.5**.**
Recall that the relative dimension of the morphism q:X→Y is e. For any integer i⩾0, we define the canonical morphism ψX/Y by:
[TABLE]
Remark 4.3.6*.*
When i>e by convention the map ψX/Y is zero.
We give here a situation where this map is an isomorphism.
Proposition 4.3.7**.**
Suppose q:X→Y is a smooth morphism of relative dimension e, then for any integer 0⩽i⩽e, the map ψX/Y:Ni(X/Y)Q→Ne−i(X/Y)Q is an isomorphism.
Proof.
Since the pairing Ni(X/Y)Q×Ni(X/Y)Q→Q is perfect by Proposition 4.1.3, we have that the dual morphism ψX/Y∗:Ne−i(X/Y)Q→Ni(X/Y)Q of ψX/Y is surjective whenever ψX/Y:Ni(X/Y)Q→Ne−i(X/Y)Q is injective.
We are thus reduced to prove the injectivity of ψX/Y:Ni(X/Y)Q→Ne−i(X/Y)Q.
Take a∈Ni(X/Y)Q such that ψX/Y(a)=0, and choose a class α∈Ni(X)Q representing a.
We fix a subvariety V of dimension i in a fiber Xy of q where y is a point in Y.
We need to prove that (α└[V])=0.
By Proposition 4.3.1, the condition ψX/Y(α)=0 implies that:
[TABLE]
As the morphism q:X→Y is smooth, the fiber Xy over y is smooth.
By Theorem 2.4.2, there exists a class β∈Ne−i(Xy)Q such that:
[TABLE]
In particular, we get:
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
Example 4.3.8*.*
If X=P(E) where E is a vector bundle on Y, then Proposition 4.1.9 implies that ψX/Y:Ni(X/Y)Q→Ne−i(X/Y)Q is an isomorphism for any integer 0⩽i⩽e.
Example 4.3.9*.*
If X is the blow-up of P1×P1 at a point and q is the projection from P1×P1 to the first component Y=P1 composed with the blow-down from X to P1×P1. Then the morphism ψX/Y:N0(X/Y)Q→N1(X/Y)Q is not surjective and ψX/Y:N1(X/Y)Q→N0(X/Y)Q is not injective.
5 Application to dynamics
In this section, we shall consider various normal projective varieties Xj and Yj respectively of dimension n and l and we write e=n−l
Recall from Section 4.2 that the notation Xj/qjYj means that qj:Xj→Yj is a surjective morphism of relative dimension e and that X/qYg⇢fX′/q′Y′ means that f:X⇢X′ and g:Y⇢Y′ are dominant rational maps such that q′∘f=g∘q.
We shall also fix HXj and HYj big and nef Cartier divisors on Xj and Yj respectively.
In this section we prove Theorem 1 and Theorem 2.
They will follow from Theorem 5.2.1 and Theorem 5.3.2 respectively.
5.1 Degrees of rational maps
Definition 5.1.1**.**
Let us consider a rational map
X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 and let Γf (resp. Γg) be the normalization of the graph of f (resp. g) in X1×X2 (resp. Y1×Y2).
We denote by Γf~ the normalization of the graph of the map induced by q∘f from Γf to Γg, we thus have the following diagram.
[TABLE]
The i-th relative degree of f is defined by the formula:
[TABLE]
When Y1 and Y2 are reduced to a point, we simply write degi(f)=reldegi(f).
Remark 5.1.2*.*
If e=0, then reldegi(f)=(q1∗HY1l) if i=0 and reldegi(f)=0 for i>0.
Remark 5.1.3*.*
Observe that in the above diagram, the ϖ:Γf~→Γg is a regular surjective morphism.
Note that the degrees always depend on the choice of the big nef divisors, but to simplify the notations, we deliberately omit it.
We now explain how to associate to any rational map X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 a pullback operator (f,g)∙,i.
Definition 5.1.4**.**
Let X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 be a rational map and let π1 and π2 be the projections from the graph of f in X1×X2 onto the first and the second factor respectively.
We define the linear morphisms (f,g)∙,i and (f,g)∙,i by the following formula:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Remark 5.1.5*.*
When Y1 and Y2 are reduced to a point, then we simply write f∙,i(α):=(f,Id{pt})∙,i(α) and f∙,i(β):=(f,Id{pt})∙,i(β).
Remark 5.1.6*.*
Since Ni(X/Y)=0 and Ne−i(X)=0 when i>e, it implies that
(f,g)∙,i and (f,g)∙,i are identically zero for any i>e.
5.2 Sub-multiplicativity
Theorem 5.2.1**.**
Let us consider the composition X1/q1Y1g2⇢f1X2/q2Y2g2⇢f2X3/q3Y3 of dominant rational maps.
Then for any integer 0⩽i⩽e, there exists a constant C>0 which depends only on the choice of HX2, HY2, i, l and e such that:
[TABLE]
More precisely, C=(e−i+1)i/(HX2e⋅q2∗HY2l).
Proof.
We denote by Γf1~ (resp. Γf2~, Γg1,Γg2) the normalization of the graph of q2∘f1 (resp. q3∘f2,g1,g2) and π1, π2 (resp.π3,π4, π1′, π2′ and π3′, π4′) the projections onto the first and the second factor respectively. We set Γ as the graph of the rational map π3−1∘f1∘π1:Γf1~⇢Γf2~, u and v the projections from Γ onto Γf1~ and Γf2~ and ϖi the restriction on Γfi~ of the projection from Xi×Xi+1 to Yi×Yi+1 for each i=1,2. We have thus the following diagram.
[TABLE]
By Proposition 4.3.1 applied to q2∘π2∘u:Γ→Y2, the class ψΓ(u∗π2∗q2∗HY2l) is represented by the fundamental class [V] where V is a subscheme of dimension e in Γ which is a general fiber of q2∘π2∘u.
We apply Theorem 3.4.4 by restriction to V to the class a=v∗π4∗HX3i└[V] and b=u∗π2∗HX2└[V]. We obtain:
[TABLE]
Let us simplify the right hand side of inequality (20).
Since π2∘u=π3∘v, ψΓ(u∗π2∗q2∗HY2l)=[V]∈Ne(Γ) and since the morphism v is generically finite, one has that:
[TABLE]
where d is the topological degree of v.
The same argument gives:
[TABLE]
Using (21), (22), inequality (20) can be rewritten as:
[TABLE]
where C=(e−i+1)i/(HX2e⋅q2∗HY2l). Since the class u∗π1∗HX1e−i∈Ne−i(Γ) is nef, we can intersect this class in the previous inequality to obtain:
[TABLE]
Let us simplify the expressions in inequality (23).
Because π2∗q2∗HY2l=ϖ1∗π2′∗HY2l and
degl(g1)=(π2′∗HY2l), we deduce that:
[TABLE]
Applying (24), the inequality (23) can be translated as:
[TABLE]
We obtain thus:
[TABLE]
This concludes the proof of the inequality after dividing by degl(g1)/(HY1l).
∎
5.3 Norms of operators associated to rational maps
The proof of Theorem 2 relies on an easy but crucial lemma which is as follows.
Lemma 5.3.1**.**
Let us consider (V,∣∣⋅∣∣) a finite dimensional normed R-vector space and let C be a closed convex cone with non-empty interior in V. Then there exists a constant C>0 such that any vector u∈V can be decomposed as v=v+−v− where u+ and u− are in C such that:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us define the map f:V→R+ given by:
[TABLE]
We check easily that f defines a norm on V which is similar to the proof of Proposition 3.5.1.
Since V is finite dimensional, there exists a constant C such that for any v∈V, one has:
[TABLE]
Hence ∣∣v+∣∣⩽C∣∣v∣∣ and ∣∣v−∣∣⩽C∣∣v∣∣.
∎
Theorem 5.3.2**.**
Let X/qYg⇢fX/qY be a rational map.
We fix an integer i⩽e, some norms on Ni(X/Y)R, on Ne−i(X/Y)R.
Then there is a constant C>0 such that for any rational map X/qYg⇢fX/qY, we have:
[TABLE]
In particular, the i-th relative dynamical degree of f satisfies the following equality:
[TABLE]
Moreover, when Y is reduced to a point, we obtain:
[TABLE]
Remark 5.3.3*.*
The proof of Theorem 2 follows directly from Theorem 5.3.2 since Ni(X/Y)=Ni(X) and Ne−i(X/Y)=Ne−i(X) when Y is reduced to a point.
Proof.
We denote by π1 and π2 the projections from the normalization of the graph Γf~ of q∘f onto the first and the second component respectively as in Definition 5.1.1.
Since we want to control the norm of f∙,i by the i-th relative degree of f, we first find an appropriate norm to relate the norm on Ne−i(X)R with an intersection product.
As Ne−i(X/Y)R is a subspace of Ne−i(X)R, we can extend the norm ∣∣⋅∣∣Ne−i(X/Y)R into a norm on Ne−i(X)R.
As Ne−i(X)R is a finite dimensional vector space and since HXe−i is a class in the interior of the basepoint free cone BPFe−i(X), we can suppose by equivalence of norms that the norm on Ne−i(X)R given by
[TABLE]
as in Proposition 3.5.1.
Let us prove that the lower bound of ∣∣(f,g)∙,i∣∣/reldegi(f) is 1.
We denote by φ:Ni(X)→Ni(X/Y) the canonical surjection. Since HXi is basepoint free, it implies that the class (f,g)∙(φ(HXi))∈Ne−i(X/Y)R⊂Ne−i(X)R is pseudo-effective. In particular, this implies that its norm is exactly reldegi(f). We have thus by definition:
[TABLE]
as required.
Let us find an upper bound for ∣∣(f,g)∙,i∣∣/∣∣(f,g)∙,iφ(HXi)∣∣.
First we fix a morphism s:Ni(X/Y)R→Ni(X)R such that φ∘s=Id.
Take α∈Ni(X/Y)R of norm 1, then the class u=s(α)∈Ni(X)R is a representant of α. By construction, the norm of u is bounded by ∣∣u∣∣Ni(X)R⩽C1∣∣α∣∣Ni(X/Y)R=C1 where C1 is the norm of the operator s. Since by Proposition 4.3.4.(ii), ResΓf/Γg∗∘π2∗=(1/degl(g))×π2∗∘ResX/Y∗, we have therefore:
[TABLE]
By Theorem 3.3.3, the pliant cone BPFi(X) has a non-empty interior in Ni(X)R and we can apply Lemma 5.3.1.
There exists a constant C2>0 which depends only on BPFi(X) and the choice of the norm on Ni(X)R such that the class u can be decomposed as u=u1−u2 where ui∈BPFi(X) such that ∣∣ui∣∣Ni(X)R⩽C2∣∣u∣∣Ni(X)R for i=1,2. We set αi=φ(ui) for all i∈{1,2}.
By the triangular inequality, we have:
[TABLE]
We have to find an upper bound of ∣∣(f,g)∙,iαi∣∣Ne−i(X/Y)R for each i=1,2.
Applying Siu’s inequality (Corollary 3.4.6) to a=π2∗ui and b=π2∗HX and then composing with ResX/Y∘π1∗∘ψΓf gives
[TABLE]
where C3 is a positive constant which depends only on the choice of big nef divisors.
This implies by intersecting with HXe−i the inequality:
[TABLE]
In particular we have shown that:
[TABLE]
which concludes the proof.
∎
6 Semi-conjugation by dominant rational maps
In this section, we consider a more general situation than in the previous section. We still suppose that the varieties Xi and Yi are of dimension n and l respectively such that the relative dimension is e=n−l, but we suppose the maps qi:Xi⇢Yi merely rational and dominant: they may exhibit indeterminacy points.
Recall also that HXi and HYi are again big and nef Cartier divisors on Xi and Yi respectively.
Definition 6.0.1**.**
Let f:X1⇢X2, g:Y1⇢Y2, q1:X1⇢Y1 and q2:X2⇢Y2 be four dominant rational maps such that q2∘f=g∘q1.
We define the i-th relative dynamical degree of f (still denoted reldegi(f)) as the relative degree reldegi(f~) with respect to the rational map Γq1/Y1g⇢f~Γq2/Y2 where Γqi are the normalization of the graphs of qi in Xi×Yi for each integer i∈{1,2} respectively and f~:Γq1⇢Γq2 is the rational map induced by f.
Theorem 6.0.2**.**
- (i)
Consider now the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
where fi:Xi⇢Xi+1, gi:Yi⇢Yi+1, q1:X1⇢Y1, q2:X2⇢Y2, q3:X3⇢Y3 are dominant rational maps for any integer j∈{1,2,3} such that qj+1∘fj=gj∘qj for any integer j∈{1,2}. Then there exists a constant C>0 which depends only e,i and the choice of big nef Cartier divisors such that:
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
Consider now the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
where f:X1⇢X2, g:Y1⇢Y2, q1:X1⇢Y1, q2:X2⇢Y2 are four dominant rational maps such that q2∘f=g∘q1.
We consider some birational maps φi:Xi′⇢Xi and ϕi:Yi′⇢Yi for i=1,2 such that f~=φ2−1∘f∘φ1 and g~=ϕ2−1∘g∘ϕ1.
Then for any integer 0⩽i⩽e, there exists a constant C>0 which depends on e,i, on the choice of big nef Cartier divisors and on the rational maps φ1 and φ2 such that:
[TABLE]
Proof.
(i)
Recall that the normalization of the graph of qj in Xj×Yj is birational to Xj for j∈{1,2}, hence one can define f~j:Γqj⇢Γqj+1 the rational maps induced by fj on the graph Γqj of qj for j∈{1,2} respectively. Then (i) results directly from Theorem 5.2.1 applied to the composition Γq1/Y1g1⇢f1~Γq2/Y2g2⇢f2~Γq3/Y3.
(ii) Let us suppose first that the maps qj:Xj→Yj and qj′:Xj′→Yj′ are all regular for j=1,2.
Let us apply successively Theorem 5.2.1 to the composition X1′/q1′Y1′ϕ1⇢φ1X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2ϕ2−1⇢φ2−1X2′/q2′Y2′.
We obtain :
[TABLE]
where C1=(e−i+1)i/(HX1e⋅q1∗HY1l) and C2=(e−i+1)i/(HX2e⋅q2∗HY2l).
This proves that:
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The proof follows easily from the regular case since the maps Γq1′⇢Γq1 and Γq2′⇢Γq2 are birational where Γqi′ are the graphs of qi′ in Xi′×Yi′ for i=1,2.
∎
Proof of Theorem 1:
(i) We apply Theorem 5.2.1 to Y1=Y2=Y3=Spec(C), X1=X2=X3=X and HX1=HX2=HX3=HX, we get thus the desired conclusion:
[TABLE]
(ii) Applying Theorem 6.0.2.(ii) to the varieties X1′=X2′=X1=X2=X, Y1′=Y2′=Y1=Y2=Spec(C), to the choice of big nef divisors HX1′=HX2′=HX′, HY1′=HY2′=HY′, HX1=HX2=HX and to the rational maps φ1=φ2=IdX, ϕ1=ϕ2=g=IdSpec(C), f:X⇢X yields the desired result.
7 Mixed degree formula
Let us consider three dominant rational maps f:X⇢X, q:X⇢Y, g:Y⇢Y such that q∘f=g∘q. Theorem 6.0.2.(i) implies that for any integer i⩽e the sequence reldegi(fn) is submultiplicative. Define i-th relative dynamical degree as follows.
[TABLE]
When Y is reduced to a point, then we simply write λi(f):=λi(f,X/{pt}).
Remark 7.0.1*.*
Since reldegi(fp)∈N is an integer, one has that λi(f,X/Y)⩾1.
Remark 7.0.2*.*
Theorem 6.0.2.(ii) implies that λi(f,X/Y) is invariant by birational conjugacy, i.e λi(f,X/Y) does not depend on the choice of big nef Cartier divisors and on any choice of varieties X′ and Y′ which are birational to X and Y respectively.
Our aim in this section is to prove Theorem 4.
To that end, we follow the approach from [DNT12]. The main ingredient (Corollary 7.1.5) is an inequality relating basepoint free classes which generalizes to arbitrary fields (see [DN11, Proposition 2.3] and [DNT12, Proposition 2.5]).
This inequality is a direct consequence of Theorem 7.1.1 which estimates the positivity of the diagonal in a quite general setting.
After this, we prove in Theorem 7.2.3 the submultiplicativity formula for the mixed degrees.
Once the submultiplicativity of these mixed degrees holds, the proof follows from a linear algebra argument.
7.1 Positivity estimate of the diagonal
In this section, we prove the following theorem.
Theorem 7.1.1**.**
Let q:X→Y be a surjective morphism such that dimY=l and such that q is of relative dimension e. There exists a constant C>0 such that for any surjective generically finite morphism π:X′→X and any class γ∈BPFl+e(X′×X′):
[TABLE]
where p1 and p2 are the projections from X×X to the first and the second factor respectively, HX=p1∗HX+p2∗HX and HY=p1∗q∗HY+p2∗q∗HY, and where ΔX′ (resp. ΔX) is the diagonal of X′ (resp. of X) in X′×X′ (resp. in X×X).
Remark 7.1.2*.*
The fact that the constant C>0 does not depend on π but only on HX, HY is crucial in the applications.
Theorem 7.1.1 implies that the difference (π×π)∗(HXe⋅HYl)−[ΔX′] belongs to the dual cone of the cone BPFe+l(X′×X′)R with respect to the intersection product, however we conjecture that this class should be pseudo-effective:
[TABLE]
We shall use several times the following lemma which is proved at the end of this section.
Lemma 7.1.3**.**
Let X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 be two dominant rational maps where dimY1=dimY2=l and dimX1=dimX2=e+l and where q1,q2 are regular surjective morphisms.
We denote by Γf and Γg the normalizations of the graph of f and g in X1×X2 and Y1×Y2 respectively, π1,π2,π1′,π2′ are the projections from Γf and Γg on the first and the second factor respectively.
Then there exists a constant C>0 such that for any surjective generically finite morphism π:X′→Γf, any integer 0⩽j⩽l and any class β∈BPFe+l−j(X′), one has:
[TABLE]
where degj(g) is the j-th degree of the rational map g with respect to the divisors HY1 and HY2.
Proof of Theorem 7.1.1.
By Siu’s inequality, we can suppose that both the classes HX and HY are ample in X and Y respectively.
We proceed in three steps. Fix π:X′→X.
Step 1: We suppose first that X=Pl×Pe, Y=Pl and q is the projection onto the first factor.
Since X×X is smooth, the pullback (π×π)∗ is well-defined in Nl+e(X×X)R because the morphism ψX×X:Nl+e(X×X)R→Nl+e(X×X)R is an isomorphism.
Our objective is to prove that there exists a constant C1>0 such that
[TABLE]
As X×X is homogeneous, we apply the following lemma analogous to [Tru16, Lemma 4.4] which we prove at the end of the section.
Lemma 7.1.4**.**
Let X be a homogeneous projective variety of dimension n and let π:X′→X be a surjective generically finite morphism. Then one has that :
[TABLE]
We denote by p1′,p2′ (resp. p1′′,p2′′) the projections from Y×Y (resp. from X×X) onto the first and the second factor respectively.
Since the basepoint free cone has a non-empty interior by Theorem 3.3.3.(i) and since the class p1′∗HY+p2′∗HY is ample on Y×Y, there exists a constant C2>0 such that the class −[ΔY]+C2(p1′∗HY+p2′∗HY)l∈Nl(Y×Y)R is basepoint free.
Since ΔX=ΔY×ΔPe and by intersection and by pullback, we have that the class:
[TABLE]
is basepoint free where p denotes the projection from X×X to Pe×Pe.
By the same argument, there exists a constant C3>0 such that the class −p∗[ΔPe]+C3HXe∈Ne(X×X)R is basepoint free.
We have proved that the class:
[TABLE]
is basepoint free.
Since the basepoint free cone is stable by pullback, we have thus:
[TABLE]
where C1=C2×C3 as required.
Step 2: We now suppose that X=Y×Pe.
Since Y is projective, there exists a dominant rational map ϕ:Y⇢Pl (ϕ can be chosen as the composition of an embedding in PN with a linear projection on a linear hypersurface).
Let Y′ be the normalization of the graph of ϕ in X×Pe×Pl and we denote by ϕ1 and φ1 the projections from Y′ onto the first and the second factor respectively.
Let φ2:Y′×Pe→Pl×Pe (resp. ϕ2:Y′×Pe→X) the map induced by φ1 (resp. ϕ1).
Let X′′ be the fibred product of X′ with Y′×Pe so that ϕ3, π′ are the projections from X′′ onto X′ and Y′×Pe respectively.
We obtain the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
where pY′ and pPl are the projections from Y′×Pe and Pl×Pe onto Y′ and Pl respectively and where the horizontal arrows are birational maps.
Let us prove that there exists a constant C4>0 which does not depend on the morphism π:X′→X such that for any basepoint free class γ′∈BPFe+l(X′′×X′′), one has:
[TABLE]
Fix a class γ′∈BPFe+l(X′′×X′′).
We apply the conclusion of the first step to the surjective generically finite morphism π′′:=φ2∘π′:X′′→Pl×Pe.
There exists a constant C1>0 such that
[TABLE]
where HPl×Pe is an ample Cartier divisor in (Pl×Pe)2 and HPl is the pullback by pPl×pPl of an ample Cartier divisor in Pl×Pl.
Let us apply Theorem 3.4.4 to the class (π′′×π′′)∗HPl×Pee and to the class (π′×π′)∗(ϕ2×ϕ2)∗HX, there exists a constant C5>0 such that:
[TABLE]
Since ((π′×π′)∗α)=deg(π′)(α) for any class α∈N2l+2e((Y′×Pe)2)R, we have thus:
[TABLE]
where C6=C5((ϕ2×ϕ2)∗HX2l+e⋅(φ2×φ2)∗HPl×Pee)/((ϕ2×ϕ2)∗HX2l+2e)>0 does not depend on π:X′→X.
Using (30) and (29), we obtain:
[TABLE]
where C7=C6×C1.
Since the basepoint free cone is contained in the nef cone by Theorem 3.3.3.(v), we have thus:
[TABLE]
Let us denote by X1=(Y×Pe)2, X2=(Pl×Pe)2, Y1=Y×Y, Y2=Pl×Pl and let f:=(φ2∘ϕ2−1×φ2∘ϕ2−1):X1⇢X2 and g:=(φ1∘ϕ1−1×φ1∘ϕ1−1):Y1⇢Y2 be the corresponding dominant rational maps.
Let us apply Lemma 7.1.3 to the class (π′×π′)∗(φ2×φ2)∗HPll and to the class (π′×π′)∗(ϕ2×ϕ2)∗HYl, there exists a constant C8>0 which is independent of the morphism π′×π′:X′′×X′′→(Y′×Pe)2 such that for any class β∈BPF2e+l(X′′×X′′):
[TABLE]
Using (32) and (33) to the class β=γ′⋅(ϕ3×ϕ3)∗(π×π)∗HXe∈BPFl+2e(X′′×X′′), we obtain:
[TABLE]
where C4=C4×C8(degl(g))/(HY2l)>0 does not depend on π.
The conclusion of the theorem follows from the projection formula and from the fact that ϕ3×ϕ3 is a birational map.
Indeed, we apply the previous inequality to γ′=(ϕ3×ϕ3)∗γ where γ∈BPFl+e(X′×X′), we obtain
[TABLE]
as required.
Step 3: We prove the theorem in the general case.
Suppose q:X→Y is a surjective morphism of relative dimension e and fix a class β∈BPFl+e(X′×X′).
Since X is projective over Y, there exists a closed immersion
i:X→Y×PN such that q=pY′∘i where pY′ is the projection of Y×PN onto Y.
Let us choose a projection Y×PN⇢Y×Pe so that the composition with i gives a dominant rational map f:X⇢Y×Pe.
Let us denote by Γf the normalization of the graph of f in X×Y×Pe and π1,π2 the projections of Γf onto the first and the second factor respectively.
We set X′′ the fibred product of X′ with Γf and we denote by π′ and ϕ the projection of X′′ to Γf and X′ respectively.
We get the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
where pY is the projection of Y×Pe onto Y.
We apply the result of Step 2 to the class (ϕ×ϕ)∗β∈BPFl+e(X′′×X′′) and to the diagonal of X′′.
There exists a constant C4>0 which does not depend on π such that:
[TABLE]
Let us apply Theorem 3.4.4 to the class ((π2∘π′)×(π2∘π′))∗HY×Pee and to the class (ϕ×ϕ)∗(π×π)HX.
There exists a constant C9>0 such that:
[TABLE]
Since ((π′×π′)∗((π2×π2)∗HY×Pee⋅(π1×π1)∗HX2l+e))/((π′×π′)∗(π1×π1)∗HX2l+2e)=dege(f×f)/(HX2l+2e)and using (34), we obtain:
[TABLE]
where C=C4C9dege(f×f)/(HX2l+2e).
Since the morphism π1:Γf→X is birational, the map ϕ:X′′→X′ is also birational and we conclude using the projection formula and since (ϕ×ϕ)∗[ΔX′′]=[ΔX′]:
[TABLE]
∎
Recall that X,Y are normal projective varieties and HX,HY are ample divisors on X and Y respectively.
Corollary 7.1.5**.**
Let q:X→Y be a surjective morphism of relative dimension e where dimY=l. Then there exists a constant C>0 such that for any surjective generically finite morphism π:X′→X such that for any class α∈BPFi(X′) and any class β∈BPFl+e−i(X′), one has:
[TABLE]
where Uj(π∗ψX′(α))=(HXe−j⋅q∗HYl−i+j└π∗ψX′(α)).
Remark 7.1.6*.*
Note that when i⩽e, then the inequality is already a consequence of Siu’s inequality (Theorem 3.4.4).
Indeed, the term on the right hand side of (35) with j=i corresponds exactly to the term C(π∗HXn−i⋅α)×π∗HXi.
Remark 7.1.7*.*
Equation (35) proves that the class
[TABLE]
is in the dual of the basepoint free cone BPFn−i(X′).
Moreover, if (28) is satisfied, then this class is pseudo-effective.
Proof.
We apply Theorem 7.1.1 to the class γ=p1∗β⋅p2∗α∈BPFn(X′×X′).
There exists a constant C1>0 such that for any surjective generically finite morphism π:X′→X and any class γ∈BPFn(X′×X′), one has:
[TABLE]
We denote by p1 and p2 the projections of X′×X′ onto the first and the second factors respectively.
Fix α∈BPFi(X′) and β∈BPFn−i(X′).
Let us apply the previous inequality to γ=p1∗β⋅p2∗α∈BPFn(X′×X′).
We obtain:
[TABLE]
Since (p1∗π∗(HXm⋅q∗HYj)⋅p2∗(π∗(q∗HYl−m⋅HXe−j)⋅γ))=0 when m+j=i, we obtain :
[TABLE]
where C=C_{1}\left(1+\max\left(\left(\begin{array}[]{l}e\\
j\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}[]{l}l\\
i-j\end{array}\right)\right)\right).
Hence by the projection formula, we have proved the required inequality:
[TABLE]
∎
Proof of Lemma 7.1.4: (see [Tru16, Lemma 4.4])
Since X is homogeneous, it is smooth.
Let G be the automorphism group of X×X, we denote by ⋅ the (transitive) action of G on X×X.
By generic flatness (see [FGI*+*05, Theorem 5.12]), there exists a non empty open subset V⊂X×X such that the restriction of π×π to U:=(π×π)−1(V) is flat over V.
Recall that two subvarieties F⊂X×X and W⊂X×X intersect properly in X×X if dim(F∩W)=dimF+dimW−2n.
Since G acts transitively on X×X, there exists by [Ful98, Lemma B.9.2] a Zariski dense open subset O⊂G such that for any point g∈O,
the cycle g⋅[ΔX] intersects properly every component of X×X∖V.
In particular, there exists a one parameter subgroup τ:Gm→G such that τ(1)=Id∈G and such that τ maps the generic point of Gm to a point in O.
Let S be the closure in X′×X′×P1 of the set {(x′,t)∈U×Gm ∣ (π×π)(x′)∈τ(t)⋅ΔX}.
Let p:X′×X′×P1→X′×X′ be the projection onto X′×X′ and let f:S→P1 be the morphism induced by the projection of X′×X′×P1 onto P1.
As in [Ful98, Section 1.6], we denote by St:=p∗[f−1(t)]∈Zn(X′×X′) for any t∈Gm.
By construction the cycle S1∈Zn(X′×X′) is effective and its support contains the diagonal ΔX′ in X′×X′, hence:
[TABLE]
Let t∈Gm such that τ(t)∈O.
Since S1=St∈An(X′×X′) for any t∈P1, we have thus:
[TABLE]
Since the cycle τ(t)⋅[ΔX] intersects properly every component of X×X∖V and since the restriction of π×π to U=(π×π)−1(V) is flat over V, [Ful98, Example 11.4.8.(b)] asserts that the pullback of (π×π)∗τ(t)⋅[ΔX] is rationnally equivalent to the cycle [(π×π)∣U−1(τ(t)⋅ΔX)]. We have thus:
[TABLE]
Hence:
[TABLE]
∎
Proof of Lemma 7.1.3.
Observe that one has the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
Fix a class β∈BPFe+l−j(X′).
By linearity and by Proposition 2.1.8, we can suppose that the class β is induced by a product of nef divisors D1⋅…⋅De1+e+l−j where Di are nef divisors on X1′ where p:X1′→X′ is a flat morphism of relative dimension e1.
The intersection (β⋅π∗π2∗q2∗HY2j) is thus given by the formula:
[TABLE]
Take A an ample Cartier divisor on X1′ and set αϵ=(D1+ϵA)⋅…(De1+e+ϵA)∈Ne1+e(X1′)R for any ϵ>0.
Since the class αϵ is a complete intersection and since the morphisms qi are surjective, there exists a cycle Vϵ∈Zl(X1′)R such that ψX1′(αϵ)={Vϵ}∈Nl(X1′)R and such that the restrictions of the morphisms π1∘π∘p and π2∘π∘p to the support of Vϵ are surjective and generically finite onto Y1 and Y2 respectively.
We apply Theorem 3.4.4 to the class (p∗π∗π2∗q2∗HY2j)∣Vϵ and to (p∗π∗π1∗q1∗HY1)∣Vϵ, we get:
[TABLE]
By the projection formula applied to the morphism π∘p, we have that
[TABLE]
hence:
[TABLE]
We intersect with the class (De1+e+1⋅…⋅De1+e+l−j)∈Nl−j(X1′)R and take the limit as ϵ tends to zero. We obtain:
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
7.2 Submultiplicativity of mixed degrees
Definition 7.2.1**.**
Let X1/q1Y1g⇢fX2/q2Y2 be rational maps where e=dimXi−dimYi and l=dimYi for i=1,2. We fix some ample divisors HXi and HYi on each variety respectively. We define for any integer 0⩽i⩽n:
[TABLE]
Remark 7.2.2*.*
For j=0, it is the i-th relative degree ai,0(f)=reldegi(f) and
when j=l, it corresponds to the i-th degree of f, ai,l(f)=degi(f).
Theorem 7.2.3**.**
Let q1:X1→Y1, q2:X2→Y2, q3:X3→Y3 be three surjective morphisms such that dimXi=e+l and dimYi=l for all i∈{1,2,3}.
Then there exists a constant C>0 such that for any rational maps X1/q1Y1g1⇢f1X2/q2Y2, X2/q2Y2g2⇢f2X3/q3Y3 and for all integers 0⩽j0⩽l:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since we are in the same situation as Theorem 5.2.1, we can consider the diagram (19) and we keep the same notations.
We denote by n=e+l the dimension of Xi.
Let us denote by d the topological degree of the map f2.
We apply Corollary 7.1.5 to the pliant class α:=(1/d)v∗π4∗HX3i∈BPFi(Γ), to the class β:=u∗π1∗(HX1e−i+j0⋅q1∗HY1l−j0)∈BPFn−i(Γ) and to the morphism π=φ∘π3∘v.
There exists a constant C1>0 which depends only on the choice of divisors HY2×Pe and HY2 such that:
[TABLE]
where Uj(γ)=(HX2e−j⋅q2∗HY2l−i+j└γ) for any class γ∈Nn−i(X2)R.
We observe that Uj(π∗ψΓ(α))=ai,i−j(f2).
We have thus:
[TABLE]
Applying Lemma 7.1.3 to the class u∗π2∗q2∗HY2i−j∈BPFi−j(Γ) and to β′=β⋅u∗π2∗HX2j∈BPFn−i+j(Γ), there exists a constant C2>0 such that :
[TABLE]
Since the map u:Γ→Γf1 is birational, we have that:
[TABLE]
Finally, (36) and (37) imply:
[TABLE]
where C=C2C1>0 is a constant which is independent of f1 and f2 as required.
∎
7.3 Proof of Theorem 4
Recall that we want to prove the following formula:
[TABLE]
By definition of the relative degrees, we are reduced to prove the theorem when q:X→Y is a proper surjective morphism.
Recall that dimX=n and dimY=l such that q:X→Y has relative dimension e=n−l.
Let us consider the following commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
where f:X⇢X, g:Y⇢Y are dominant rational maps, Γf,Γg are the normalization of the graph of f and g respectively, π1,π2,π1′,π2′ are the projections from Γf and Γg onto the first and second factor respectively and ϖ:Γf→Γg is the restriction of q×q to Γf.
The following lemma proves that maxj⩽i(λj(f,X/Y)λi−j(g))⩽λi(f).
Lemma 7.3.1**.**
For any integer max(0,i−l)⩽j⩽min(i,e), there exists a constant C>0 such that for any rational map X/qYg⇢fX/qY, we have degi−j(g)reldegj(f)⩽Cdegi(f).
Granting the above lemma, then we obtain the lower bound on λi(f) as:
[TABLE]
Proof.
It suffices to consider the product (π1∗(HXe−j⋅q∗HYl−i+j)⋅π2∗(HXj⋅q∗HYi−j)). Since πi∘q=ϖ∘πi′ for i∈{1,2}, we obtain:
[TABLE]
Moreover, one has that π1′∗HYl−i+j⋅π2′∗HYi−j=(π1′∗HYl−i+j⋅π2′∗HYi−j) [p0]=degi−j(g) [p0] where p0 is a general point in Γg.
We can hence apply Proposition 4.3.1 to the morphism ϖ:Γf→Γg and obtain:
[TABLE]
Since π1′ is a birational morphism, a general fiber of ϖ is equal to a general fiber of π1′∘ϖ.
In other words, we have that ResΓf/Γg=ResΓf/Y and since π1∗HXe−j⋅π2∗HXj└[Γfp0]=ResΓf/Γg(π1∗HXe−j⋅π2∗HXj), we obtain:
[TABLE]
As HX is ample, we apply Theorem 3.3.3 to the classes π2∗q∗HY and π2∗HX:
[TABLE]
where C1=(n−i+j+1)i−j(q∗HYi−j⋅HXn−i+j)/(HXn) depends only on n,i and the choice of big nef Cartier divisors.
Intersecting with π1∗HXn−i⋅π2∗HXj, one obtains:
[TABLE]
By the same argument, there exists a constant C2>0 which depends only on HY, HX and i such that:
[TABLE]
Hence, we obtain:
[TABLE]
where C=C1C2.
∎
Let us prove the converse inequality.
We fix an integer 0⩽i⩽n.
Let us apply Theorem 7.2.3 to f1=f, f2=fp, g1=g and g2=gp, we can rewrite the inequality as:
[TABLE]
Let us denote by Ui(f) the column vector given by:
[TABLE]
Let us also denote by Mi(f) the (l+1)×(l+1) lower-triangular matrix given by:
[TABLE]
where χA denotes the characteristic function of the set A.
Therefore, (39) can be rewritten as:
[TABLE]
where ⋅ denotes the linear action on Zl+1.
A simple induction proves:
[TABLE]
Since the (l+1)-th entry of the vector Ui(fp) corresponds to degi(fp), we deduce that:
[TABLE]
where (e0,…,el) denotes the canonical basis of Zl+1.
In particular, degi(fp)1/p is controlled up to a constant by the eigenvalues of the matrix Mi(f) which are degj(g)reldegi−j(f) for max(0,i−e)⩽j⩽min(i,l) since Mi(f) is lower-triangular.
Applying (40) to fr, we get:
[TABLE]
We conclude by taking the limsup as r→+∞,p→+∞:
[TABLE]
Remark 7.3.2*.*
Note that the previous theorem gives information only on the dynamical degrees of f. Lemma 7.3.1 provides a lower bound on the degree of fp. However, one cannot find an upper bound for degi(fp) which would only depend on the relative degrees and the degree on the base. If X=E×E is a product of two elliptic curves and if f:(z,w)∈E×E→(z,z+w) is an automorphism of X, then the degree growth of fp is equivalent to p2 whereas the degree on the base and on any fiber are trivial.
8 Kähler case
We prove the submultiplicativity of the k-th degrees in the case where (X,ω) is a complex compact Kähler manifold. For any closed smooth (p,q)-form α on X, we denote by {α} its class in the Dolbeault cohomology Hp,q(X)R.
Definition 8.0.1**.**
Let (X,ω) be a compact Kähler manifold. A class α∈H1,1(X)R is nef if for any ϵ>0, the class α+ϵ{ω} is represented by a Kähler metric.
A class α of degree (i,i) is pseudo-effective if it can be represented by a closed positive current T. Moreover, one says that α is big if there exists a constant δ>0 such that T−δω is a closed positive current and we write T⩾δωi.
Theorem 8.0.2**.**
(cf [Xia15, Remark 3.1], [Pop16])Let (X,ω) be a compact Kähler manifold of dimension n. Let k be an integer and α,β be two nef classes in H1,1(X) such that αi∈Hi,i(X) is big and such that \int_{X}{\alpha^{n}}-\left(\begin{array}[]{l}n\\
i\end{array}\right)\int_{X}\alpha^{n-i}\wedge\beta^{i}>0. Then the class αi−βi is big.
Recall that the degree of a meromorphic selfmap f:X⇢X when (X,ω) is given by:
[TABLE]
where Γf is the desingularization of the graph of f and πj are the projections from Γf onto the first and the second factor respectively.
Remark 8.0.3*.*
When X is a projective variety and ω represents the class of a hyperplane section HX, then the intersection of the form coincides with the cup-product in cohomology, hence degi(f)=degi,HX(f).
Corollary 8.0.4**.**
Let (X1,ωX1), (X2,ωX2) and (X3,ωX3) be some compact Kähler manifolds of dimension n. Then there exists a constant C>0 which depends only on the choice of the Kähler classes ωXj such that for any dominant meromorphic maps f1:X1⇢X2 and f2:X2⇢X3, one has:
[TABLE]
Moreover, the constant C may be chosen to be equal to \left(\begin{array}[]{l}n\\
i\end{array}\right)/(\int_{X_{2}}\omega_{X_{2}}^{n}).
Proof.
The previous theorem gives that for any big nef class βi∈Hi,i(X), for any nef class α∈H1,1(X), one has:
[TABLE]
Then, the proof is formally the same as Theorem 5.2.1. Indeed, one only needs to consider the diagram (19) where Y1=Y2=Y3 are reduced to a point and where Γf1,Γf2,Γ are the desingularizations of the graph of f1,f2 and π3−1∘f1∘π1 respectively.
We apply (41) to α=v∗π4∗ωX3 and β=v∗π3∗ωX2 to obtain:
[TABLE]
By intersecting the previous inequality with the class u∗π1∗ωX1n−i, we finally get:
[TABLE]
∎
9 Comparison with Fulton’s approach
In [Ful98, Chapter 19], a cycle z∈Zi(X) on a variety X is defined to be numerically trivial if (c└z) for any product c=ci1(E1)⋅…⋅cip(Ep)∈Ai(X) of Chern classes cij(Ej) where Ej is a vector bundle on X and i1+…+ip=i. This appendix is devoted to the proof of the following result:
Theorem 9.1**.**
Let X be a normal projective variety of dimension n. For any z∈Zi(X), the following conditions are equivalent:
- (i)
For any product of Chern classes c=ci1(E1)⋅…⋅cip(Ep)∈Ai(X)R where Ej are vector bundles on X and i1+…+ip=i, we have (c└z)=0.
2. (ii)
For any integer e, any flat morphism p1:X1→X of relative dimension e where X1 is a projective scheme and any Cartier divisors D1,…,De+i on X1, we have (D1⋅…⋅De+i└p1∗z)=0.
3. (iii)
For any integer e, any flat morphism p1:X1→X of relative dimension e between normal projective varieties and any Cartier divisors D1,…,De+i on X1, we have (D1⋅…⋅De+i└p1∗z)=0.
The implication (ii)⇒(i) follows immediately from the definition of Chern classes.
The implication (ii)⇒(iii) is also straightforward.
For the converse implications (i)⇒(ii) and (i)⇒(iii), we rely on the following proposition.
Proposition 9.2**.**
Let q:X→Y be a flat morphism of relative dimension e where X is a projective scheme and Y is a normal projective variety. For any Cartier divisors D1,…,De+i be some ample Cartier divisors on X, there exist vector bundles Ej, and a homogeneous polynomial c=P(ci1(E1),…,cip(Ep)) of degree i with respect to the weight (i1,…,ip), with rational coefficients such that for any cycle z∈Zi(X), (c⋅z)=(D1⋅…⋅De+i⋅q∗z).
Proof.
We take some ample Cartier divisors D1,…,De+i on X. We denote by Li the line bundle OX(Di).
By Grauert’s Theorem (cf [Har77, Corollary 12.9]), the sheaves Riq∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i) are locally free.
By [Har77, Theorem 8.8], we have that Riq∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i)=0 for i>0 and mi large enough since the line bundle Li are ample.
So the sheaf q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i) is locally free and we have in K0(Y):
[TABLE]
Lemma 9.3**.**
For any j⩽i:
-
The function (m1,…,me+i)→chj(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i))∈Nj(Y)R is a polynomial of degree e+j with coefficients in Nj(Y).
2. 2.
For any cycle z∈Zj(Y), the coefficient in m1⋅…⋅me+i in (chj(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i))└z) is ((D1⋅…⋅De+i)└q∗z).
Proof.
Let us set F=L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i. We prove the result by induction on 0⩽j⩽i.
For j=0, choosing a point y∈Y(C), the number ch0(q∗(F)) is equal to h0(Xy,F∣Xy).
By asymptotic Riemann-Roch, for m1,…,me+i large enough, it is a polynomial of degree dimXy=e. Moreover, Snapper’s theorem (see [Deb01, Definition 1.7]) states that the coefficient in m1⋅…⋅me+i is the number (D1⋅…⋅De+i└[Xy]).
We suppose by induction that chi(q∗(F)) is a polynomial of degree e+i for any i⩽j where j⩽i−1. For any subvariety V of dimension j+1 in Y, we denote by W its scheme-theoretic preimage by q.
For any scheme V, let us denote by τV the morphisms:
[TABLE]
We refer to [Ful98, Theorem 18.3] for the construction of this morphism and its properties.
We apply Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch’s theorem for singular varieties (see [Ful98, Theorem 18.3.(1)]) and using (42), we get in A∙(Y)Q:
[TABLE]
The term in A0(Y)Q in the left handside of the previous equation is equal to:
[TABLE]
where τV,i(OV) is the term in Ai(Y) of τV(OV).
By the induction hypothesis, every chi(q∗F) is a polynomial of degree e+i, and the right hand side of equation (43) is a polynomial of degree e+j+1, so chj+1(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i)) is also a polynomial of degree e+j+1. Now we identify the coefficients in m1⋅…⋅me+i of the term in N0(Y) in equation (43).
It follows from [Ful98, example 18.3.11] that τW(OW)=[W]+RW where RW is a linear combination of cycles of dimension <e+i. Therefore, the coefficient in m1⋅…⋅me+i of the right hand side of equation (43) in N0(Y) is ((D1⋅…⋅De+i)└[W]) if j+1=i or [math] otherwise.
We have proved that the coefficient of chj+1(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i))└[V] is ((D1⋅…⋅De+i)└[W]) if dimV=i or [math] otherwise. Extending it by linearity, one gets the desired result.
∎
We have that chi(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i)) is by definition a polynomial in Chern classes of vector bundles on Y. Using the previous lemma, the coefficient U(D1,…,De+i) in m1⋅…⋅me+i of chi(q∗(L1m1⊗…⊗Le+ime+i)) is equal to P(ci1(E1),…,cip(Ep)) where P is a homogeneous polynomial with rational coefficients of degree i with respect to the weight (i1,…,ip) and Ei are vector bundles on Y. We have proven that for any cycle z∈Zi(Y):
[TABLE]
As any Cartier divisor can be written as a difference of ample Cartier divisors. The proposition provides a proof for the implication (i)⇒(ii) of Theorem 9.1.
∎
Remark 9.4*.*
In codimension 1, the intersection product (D1⋅…⋅De+1└q∗z) is represented by Deligne’s product IX(OX(D1),…,,OX(De+1))∈N1(X)R (see [Gar00] for a reference). Indeed, one has by [Gar00, Section 6] that for any cycle z∈N1(X):
[TABLE]
This gives an answer to the question of numerical pullback formulated in [FL14b, section 1.2].
Corollary 9.5**.**
Let q:X→Y be a flat morphism of relative dimension e between normal projective varieties. Then the morphism q∗:A∙(Y)Q→Ae+∙(X)Q induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:N∙(Y)Q→Ne+∙(X)Q.
By duality, the morphism q∗:A∙(X)Q→A∙−e(Y)Q induces a morphism of abelian groups q∗:N∙(X)Q→N∙−e(Y)Q.