Lyapunov exponents of the Brownian motion on a K\"ahler manifold
Jeremy Daniel, Bertrand Deroin

TL;DR
This paper introduces a method to compute Lyapunov exponents for flat bundles over Kähler manifolds using harmonic measures, establishing inequalities relating these exponents to bundle degrees and exploring conditions for equality.
Contribution
It defines the Lyapunov spectrum for flat bundles on Kähler manifolds and provides a novel computational approach via harmonic measures, along with new inequalities linking exponents and bundle degrees.
Findings
Lyapunov exponents can be computed using harmonic measures on foliated spaces.
Established inequalities relating Lyapunov exponents to degrees of holomorphic subbundles.
Discussed conditions under which the inequalities become equalities.
Abstract
If E is a flat bundle of rank r over a K\"ahler manifold X, we define the Lyapunov spectrum of E: a set of r numbers controlling the growth of flat sections of E, along Brownian trajectories. We show how to compute these numbers, by using harmonic measures on the foliated space P(E). Then, in the case where X is compact, we prove a general inequality relating the Lyapunov exponents and the degrees of holomorphic subbundles of E and we discuss the equality case.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Lyapunov exponents of the Brownian motion on a Kähler manifold
Jeremy Daniel and Bertrand Deroin
Abstract
If is a flat bundle of rank over a Kähler manifold , we define the Lyapunov spectrum of : a set of numbers controlling the growth of flat sections of , along Brownian trajectories. We show how to compute these numbers, by using harmonic measures on the foliated space . Then, in the case where is compact, we prove a general inequality relating the Lyapunov exponents and the degrees of holomorphic subbundles of and we discuss the equality case.
Abstract
Nounours
Introduction
Let be a Kähler manifold of dimension and let be a complex flat vector bundle of rank over . If and satisfies certain assumptions of bounded geometry, then Kingman subadditive theorem shows that the growth of flat sections along Brownian trajectories on is controlled by a number , called the first Lyapunov exponent of . More generally, considering the exterior powers of , one can define numbers . This set is called the Lyapunov spectrum of and can also be defined by an application of Oseledets multiplicative ergodic theorem. By the symmetry of the Brownian motion, the spectrum is symmetric with respect to [math], namely .
Pioneer work [KZ97], formalized in [For02], shows that for variations of Hodge structures of weight over curves of finite type, the sum of the positive Lyapunov exponents equals the degree of the Hodge bundle, up to some normalization. Here, the dynamics on is given by the geodesic flow, rather than the Brownian motion. This formula has been further studied in [EKZ11], [EKZ14]; it has been generalized in [Fil14] for certain variations of Hodge structures of weight and in [KM16] over complex hyperbolic manifolds of higher dimension.
In fact, it has been observed by the second author – in his PhD thesis (see e.g. [Der05]) and more recently in his work with R. Dujardin [DD16] – that in the case of a rank bundle over a curve , there is a cohomological interpretation for the top Lyapunov exponent . Assume for the sake of simplicity that is a compact curve and consider the projectivized bundle over . This space carries a foliation by curves, which is induced by the flat structure on . One can show that there exists a harmonic current on of bidimension , which is positive on the leaves of the foliation. Such a current is not closed in general but still defines a homology class in the dual of , thanks to the equality of Bott-Chern and de Rham cohomologies on the Kähler manifold . The formula
[TABLE]
then holds, where is the anti-canonical line bundle on and is the pullback of the Kähler form.
The goal of this work is threefold. First, we generalize the above formalism to a Kähler manifold of higher dimension and to a flat bundle of higher rank: for every , we construct a pluriharmonic current of bidimension on the Grassmann bundle , which is positive on the leaves of the foliation induced by the flat structure. Denoting by the anti-tautological line bundle on – if is in , then at the point – we show that
[TABLE]
where the Chern form is taken with respect to some metric induced by . If is compact, this equality is purely cohomological.
Then, we consider the case where is compact and we recover and complete a result of [DD16] ( and ) and [EKMZ16] () showing that the Lyapunov spectrum satisfies the following estimates. For any holomorphic subbundle of of co-rank , we have that
[TABLE]
Finally, we interpret the difference between the right and left hand sides of (3), as the intersection , where is the divisor of -planes that intersect non trivially. At the end, we obtain that equality in formula (3) happens if and only if the limit set of the monodromy representation in does not meet .
In the case where is non-compact, everything should still hold with some general assumptions of bounded geometry but some technical difficulties are still unsolved. We nevertheless discuss the case of some monodromy representations over the Riemann sphere minus points, considered in paragraph 6.3 of [EKMZ16]; they are related to the hypergeometric equation. Apart from the non-compactness issue, we show that, if the monodromy is thick, then the inequality in (3) is strict. This leaves the case of thin monodromies open: showing that the equality then holds seems to us one of the most challenging problems in the topic.
Contents
1 The Lyapunov spectrum of a flat bundle
In this section, we define and study the basic properties of the Lyapunov exponents of a flat bundle over a Riemannian manifold. The dynamics is defined by considering Brownian motion on the manifold and we assume that the reader is familiar with its definition and basic notions, as exposed e.g. in [Hsu02].
The results will be used later when the basis manifold is a compact Kähler manifold. Since this does not need extra work, we make the study in a more general setting.
1.1 Brownian motion in Riemannian geometry
Let be a connected -dimensional complete Riemannian manifold. We denote by its universal cover.
Assumption 1**.**
We make the following assumptions of bounded geometry on :
- •
has finite volume;
- •
the Ricci curvature of is uniformly bounded from below.
Let be the space of continuous paths , with its structure of filtered measurable space. Given any probability measure on , there exists a unique -diffusion measure on with initial distribution , where denotes the Laplacian operator on (see e.g. [Hsu02], p.79). If is a Dirac measure , we write instead of .
We recall Dynkin’s formula:
[TABLE]
for any test function .
Let be the (minimal) heat kernel on ; it is the transition density function of Brownian motion. In other words,
[TABLE]
for any . Here, stands for the measure on induced by the metric .
Remark 1.1**.**
By Theorem in [Hsu02], a complete Riemannian manifold whose Ricci curvature is uniformly bounded from below is stochastically complete, meaning that
[TABLE]
for any . Hence, we can forget about Brownian paths exploding in finite time.
This discussion can also be performed on ; we will use similar notations.
Remark 1.2**.**
Let be a point in , living in the fiber of above a point in . The spaces and are endowed with probability measures and . The subspaces and of paths starting at and have total mass and correspond bijectively by the map ; moreover the probability measures and are equal, under this correspondence.
Let denote the shift in :
[TABLE]
We will always consider the probability measure on , defined by normalizing the volume form:
[TABLE]
The shift is measure-invariant and ergodic for the measure .
1.2 The cocycle of a flat bundle
Let be a complex flat vector bundle of rank over . Let be a smooth Hermitian metric on ; we denote by the associated inner product. There is a unique decomposition
[TABLE]
where is a metric connection and is a -form with values in the space , of Hermitian endomorphisms of . We make the following compatibility assumption between the metric and the flat connection:
Assumption 2**.**
The operator norm of , relatively to and , is uniformly bounded on .
We define
[TABLE]
where is in and is the operator norm of the parallel transport along . If is a path in , the operator norms satisfy
[TABLE]
for every . Hence, is a subadditive cocycle in , meaning that
[TABLE]
In order to define the Lyapunov exponent of , we need the following technical result:
Theorem 1**.**
For any , the function is in .
Proof.
We claim that there exists a positive constant such that, for any and in ,
[TABLE]
where is the operator norm of the parallel transport from to on .
Indeed, let be a geodesic from to . If is in the fiber , we write for its parallel transport along . We choose such a satisfying and we consider the function . Since is flat,
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
By Assumption 2, this implies , for some positive constant . Integrating from [math] to , we get \big{|}\log\frac{h(u(T))}{h(u(0))}\big{|}\leq C\int_{0}^{T}|\dot{\omega}_{t}|dt=C\dot{d}_{\tilde{X}}(x,y), proving the claim.
We define functions on in the same way than the functions on . Then,
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary point in over . We have just proved that
[TABLE]
if is a path in starting at . It is thus sufficient to show that
[TABLE]
is bounded, uniformly in .
Here, we quote equation in [Str00]. It says that for every , there is a constant depending only on the dimension of and the bound on the Ricci curvature such that, for every in and radius
[TABLE]
Since the left hand side is integrable as a function of , this concludes the proof. ∎
{comment}
We proceed in two lemmas.
Lemma 1.3**.**
There exist a radius , a time and a constant , depending only on , such that the following estimates on the heat kernel hold:
if , then
[TABLE] 2. 2.
if , then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We need to use an estimate in [ChGrTa]; they use the assumption on the Ricci curvature. Equation says that for
[TABLE]
if . The factors are defined in equation of this paper and they are equal to if is less than half of the injectivity radius of . We will assume that satisfies this assumption so that, if ,
[TABLE]
We define to be . If , by taking in the above equation, we get
[TABLE]
By studying the right hand side as a function of , we obtain the first part of the lemma.
If , we have that
[TABLE]
As a function of , the right hand side increases if is less than , where is some constant. In particular, for , the function increases if is less than . Hence,
[TABLE]
if . This concludes the proof. ∎
{comment}
Moreover, equation says that
[TABLE]
for all and .
Lemma 1.4**.**
There exist positive constants and , depending only on , such that the estimate
[TABLE]
holds, for any points and in satisfying .
Moreover, one can choose such that
[TABLE]
for any and .
Proof.
We use the estimate (at time ) of [ChGrTa]. It says that for a sufficiently small positive , there is a constant such that
[TABLE]
where and the factors are defined in equation of the quoted paper (here, we use the assumption on the Ricci curvature). Moreover, for any point whose injectivity radius is greater than , , by equation in [ChGrTa]. Since we assume that the injectivity radius on is uniformly bounded away from [math], one can choose such that the first estimate in the lemma holds.
The second estimate follows from equation in [ChGrTa]. ∎
Lemma 1.5**.**
There exist positive constants and such that
[TABLE]
for any in and any . Here, denotes the volume of the ball of center and radius in .
Proof.
Since we assume that the Ricci curvature of is uniformly bounded from below, Bishop comparison theorem asserts that the volume of the balls in is less than the volume of the balls in a space with constant curvature. It is well known that this volume has at most exponential growth. ∎
{comment}
Lemma 1.6**.**
There exists a positive constant such that, for any and in ,
[TABLE]
where is the operator norm of the parallel transport from to on .
Proof.
Let be a geodesic from to . If is in the fiber , we write for its parallel transport along . We choose such a satisfying and we consider the function . Since is flat, one obtains
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
By Assumption 2, this implies , for some positive constant . Integrating from [math] to , we get \big{|}\log\frac{h(u(T))}{h(u(0))}\big{|}\leq C_{2}\int_{0}^{T}|\dot{\omega}_{t}|dt=C_{2}\,d_{\tilde{X}}(x,y), concluding the lemma. ∎
{comment}
With these lemmas, we can estimate .
Proof of Theorem 13.1.
We define functions on as the functions on .
[TABLE]
In the passage from the first to the second line, we choose an arbitrary point above and we use Remark 1.2. Let denote the distance from to and let denote the inner integral in (15). By equations (11), (12) and (14),
[TABLE]
The first term is less than ; by Bishop comparison theorem this is bounded by a uniform constant . The second term satisfies
[TABLE]
by equation (13).
This last sum is convergent and does not depend on ; this concludes the proof of the theorem. ∎
Remark 1.7**.**
The same proof shows that is in , for any positive .
1.3 Lyapunov exponents
Since is a subadditive cocycle on satisfying , Kingman subadditive theorem implies:
Proposition 1.8**.**
* converges -almost everywhere to some constant , when goes to .*
The limit is a constant by ergodicity of the shift .
Definition 1.9**.**
We call the (first) Lyapunov exponent of .
The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of some basic and well-known properties of Lyapunov exponents.
Proposition 1.10**.**
Let and be mutually bounded Hermitian metrics on : i.e. there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
holds, for any in and non-zero in . The cocycle , computed with , satisfies the integrability condition of Theorem 13.1 if and only if the same is true for the cocycle computed with . Moreover, the Lyapunov exponents and are then equal.
Proof.
If are in , the operator norms of with respect to and satisfy
[TABLE]
The first point of the proposition easily follows from the proof of Theorem 13.1. Moreover, the Lyapunov exponents satisfy
[TABLE]
which concludes the proof. ∎
Remark 1.11**.**
This statement is weak but is sufficient in the case where is compact. For a more general result, see e.g. Theorem A.5 in [EKMZ16].
Lemma 1.12**.**
The Lyapunov exponent is nonnegative and vanishes if the rank of is .
Proof.
It is convenient to consider the space , where the action of is the diagonal one. This space carries a natural metric, since the metric on is invariant by the action and
[TABLE]
since is invariant for the diagonal action of . By symmetry of the heat kernel, we get:
[TABLE]
Since is the identity, the inequality holds. Morever, it is an equality for a rank vector bundle . Since is the limit of , we get , with equality in the rank case. ∎
Higher Lyapunov exponents
For any from to , we consider the vector bundle . It is endowed with a flat connection and a Hermitian metric , induced from the connection and metric on . We define recursively the higher Lyapunov exponents in the following way:
Definition 1.13**.**
We denote by the first Lyapunov exponent of . The Lyapunov exponents of are defined by
[TABLE]
The -tuple is the Lyapunov spectrum of .
Remark 1.14**.**
The Lyapunov exponent of is well defined since Assumption 2 on is satisfied if it is satisfied on .
Proposition 1.15**.**
The Lyapunov spectrum of is symmetric, that is , for every .
Proof.
Let be an integer between and . If and are points in , we write for the parallel transport on the vector bundle , from to . A similar computation to the one giving equation (16) shows that:
[TABLE]
The statement then follows from the following linear algebra lemma. ∎
Lemma 1.16**.**
Let be an automorphism of a Hermitian vector space of dimension . We endow with the induced metric. One has the following equality of operator norms, for any integer between and :
[TABLE]
Proof.
By the decomposition, one can assume that is a diagonal matrix, with positive entries . Then is diagonal with entries the products , where is a subset of cardinal in . The operator norm of is and the operator norm of is . Hence, the left hand side of equation (17) is and the right hand side is . This concludes the proof of the lemma. ∎
Remark 1.17**.**
The proof also shows that the Lyapunov spectrum is non-increasing: , for any between and .
2 Harmonic measures on
In this section, we use ergodicity of the Brownian motion to compute the Lyapunov exponent of as an integral in space. Assumptions 1 and 2 are still satisfied.
2.1 Existence of harmonic measures
Let be the projectivized bundle of . Since is a flat connection on , carries a -dimensional foliation, where is the dimension of . On the leaves of the foliation, we consider the Brownian motion with respect to the metric . We define the heat semigroup on by
[TABLE]
where is any bounded measurable function on , is the leaf through the point and is the heat kernel on . A fundamental property of this semigroup is the following:
Proposition 2.1**.**
The heat semigroup has the Feller property: if is a continuous bounded function, then is a continuous bounded function.
Proof.
We denote by the projectivized pullback bundle over . Let be the heat semigroup on . Since is simply connected, the foliation on is a product and the Feller property of comes from the regularity of the solution of the heat equation, with respect to the initial condition. More precisely, if we equip with the topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets, then the heat flow preserves the closed subset of fonctions uniformly bounded by a certain positive constant, and acts continously on this set.
Moreover, the semigroups satisfy
[TABLE]
for any bounded measurable on . If is continuous, then the left hand side is continuous; since is a local homeomorphism, itself is continuous. ∎
The heat semigroup acts dually on the space of probability measures by
[TABLE]
for any continuous bounded function .
Definition 2.2**.**
A probability measure on is harmonic if , for every .
The following theorem is folklore. In this setting, it was first proved in [Gar83], in the compact case.
Theorem 2**.**
There exists a harmonic measure on .
Proof.
Let be a probability measure on whose push-forward on is the probability measure . We claim that the set of probability measures is tight. Indeed, let and let be a compact subspace such that . Since is proper, is a compact subspace of . Moreover, the push-forward of every is , since is invariant by heat diffusion. This shows that , for every and concludes the claim.
We define new probability measures on by
[TABLE]
for any positive . The set is also tight. By Prokhorov theorem, there exists a sequence such that has a weak limit . Using the Feller property, one shows that is harmonic; see e.g. the proof of Theorem 6.1 (Krylov-Bogolioubov) in [Hai08]. ∎
Definition 2.3**.**
A subset of is called invariant if it is an union of leaves.
Remark 2.4**.**
Suppose that is a non-empty closed invariant subset of . Then one can begin with a measure with support in . This shows that there exists a harmonic measure with support in .
Remark 2.5**.**
Let be a continuous function with compact support on , which is smooth in the direction of the leaves. By definition of the heat semigroup, converges pointwise to the foliated Laplacian , when goes to zero. By arguments similar to the proof of Proposition 2.1 or Fact 1 in [Gar83], one shows that this convergence is uniform. It follows that, for a harmonic measure , , for any such . The converse holds, at least if is compact, but requires more work: see [Gar83], Fact 4. We will not use this fact in the following.
2.2 Local structure
Following [Gar83], we give a local picture of harmonic measures. The fibers of the map are transverse to the foliation. If belongs to , there is a neighborhood of in such that parallel transport gives a diffeomorphism .
With this identification, the harmonic measure on the neighborhood of disintegrates in the following way: there is a transversal finite measure on and a nonnegative bounded measurable function on such that is leaf-harmonic for -almost all leaves and
[TABLE]
for any bounded measurable function on . We write for the well-defined finite measure on . By definition, if is a bounded measurable function on , then
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.6**.**
If is a harmonic measure on , then the push-forward measure is the probability measure on .
Proof.
The function is harmonic, as can be seen from the local description of . Moreover, is nonnegative and integrable, of integral , by Fubini theorem. By Theorem 1 of [Li84], the condition on the Ricci curvature of implies that is constant. Since , the constant is . ∎
The set of harmonic measures
The set of harmonic (probability) measures is a closed convex subset of the set of probability measures. By Proposition 2.6, the proof of Theorem 2 and Prokhorov theorem, it is a compact subset.
Definition 2.7**.**
A harmonic probability measure on the foliated space is ergodic if any leaf-saturated measurable subset of is of mass [math] or .
Proposition 2.8**.**
The extremal points of the compact convex set of harmonic measures are the ergodic harmonic measures.
Proof.
This is a generalization, when the foliated space may be non-compact, of Lemma F and Proposition 6 of [Gar83]. ∎
2.3 Harmonic measures and Lyapunov exponents
Let be the space of continuous paths , whose images are contained in a single leaf of the foliation. If is in , then the subspace can be identified with the space . Hence, inherits a probability measure of foliated Brownian motion starting at . Given a probability measure on , we define a probability measure on by
[TABLE]
where is a bounded measurable function on .
As before, we define the shift from to itself. In [Can03, §6], the following is shown:
Proposition 2.9**.**
The dynamical system is invariant if and only if is harmonic; it is ergodic if and only if is ergodic.
The cocycle in
Let be the functions defined on by
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary flat lift of to the tautological bundle and is the metric on , induced from the metric on . These functions satisfy the cocycle relation:
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.10**.**
For any probability measure on , the function is in . Moreover,
[TABLE]
Proof.
One has
[TABLE]
If is a path in , we denote by the operator norm of the parallel transport in , along . It follows that
[TABLE]
In particular, |\bar{H}^{t}(\tilde{\gamma})|\leq\big{|}\log||P_{p\circ\tilde{\gamma},0,t}||\big{|}+\big{|}\log||P_{p\circ\tilde{\gamma},t,0}||\big{|}. By using this inequality in equation (24), we obtain:
[TABLE]
The symmetry of the heat kernel then implies that and Theorem 13.1 shows that is in . Inequality (23) is obtained by the same proof, without the absolute values. ∎
Definition 2.11**.**
The (first) Lyapunov exponent with respect to is . It is denoted by .
Proposition 2.12**.**
We assume that is harmonic and ergodic. Then, for -almost every path in , the limit of when goes to exists and is equal to .
Proof.
This is an application of Birkhoff ergodic theorem, since is invariant and ergodic by Proposition 2.9. ∎
The interest of introducing these Lyapunov exponents that depend on a probability measure in lies in the fact that they can be computed as an integral in space.
We define a function on by
[TABLE]
where is the foliated Laplacian in and is a local flat section of in a neighborhood of .
Proposition 2.13**.**
We assume that is bounded on . Then, for any harmonic measure on ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since is harmonic, we have that for any positive . Hence,
[TABLE]
where is the leaf passing through and is a fixed section of over such that .
Writing , is thus equal to . We want to exchange the derivative and the integral. We claim that for short time , the equality holds. This would immediately follows from Dynkin’s formula (4) if the function had compact support; this is not true in general but the equality can be proved using estimates on the Brownian motion, as in the proof of Theorem 13.1.
Since by assumption is bounded, one can derive under the integral. It shows that:
[TABLE]
This concludes the proof. ∎
Criterion of equality
We are primarily interested in the Lyapunov exponent of ; it is thus necessary to determine a criterion for the equality . We follow closely [Fur02, §1].
Definition 2.14**.**
Let be a discrete group. A representation is strongly irreducible if there does not exist a finite union of proper subspaces such that . Equivalently, we ask that the restriction of to any finite index subgroup is irreducible.
We will also say that a flat bundle is (strongly) irreducible if its monodromy is.
Theorem 3**.**
If the flat vector bundle is strongly irreducible, then the equality of Lyapunov exponents holds, for any harmonic measure .
Proof.
Let be a random path in . Let be random independent points in chosen, with probability . By the following lemma, these points give a projective basis of with probability . We write for a unit vector on the line in . There is a positive constant such that the inequalities
[TABLE]
hold for any positive time . Taking the logarithm and dividing by gives the following inequality of cocycles:
[TABLE]
where is the flat lift of starting at . If is ergodic, then with probability one, the extreme terms tend to and the middle term to ; this concludes the proof in this case. For the general case, one can apply Proposition 2.8, noticing that is an affine function in the set of harmonic measures . ∎
Lemma 2.15**.**
Let be a harmonic measure on . Let be a point in and let be independent random points in , chosen with probability . Then, with probability one, is a projective basis of .
Proof.
If not, there is a proper subspace of such that . One can choose such a of minimal dimension. Let be the subgroup of of paths stabilizing by parallel transport and let be the covering space of with fundamental group . On the universal cover , we consider the function , where is the parallel transport of (some pullback of) in . By definition of , is invariant under , hence is well-defined on . We claim that it is constant.
On the one hand, the local description of a harmonic measure implies that is harmonic. On the other hand, is integrable on . Indeed, if we transport along and in , giving subspaces and , then whether these subspaces are equal or their intersection has -measure zero, since is of minimal dimension. It follows that
[TABLE]
By Theorem in [Li84], has to be constant. This implies that is of finite volume; hence is of finite index in , contradicting the assumption of strong irreducibility of the monodromy. ∎
Remark 2.16**.**
Without the assumption of strong irreducibility, we still have the inequality
[TABLE]
if is harmonic. This follows from the cocyle relation (22) and the inequality (23).
Assembing the results of this section, we get the following theorem:
Theorem 4**.**
We assume that the flat bundle over is strongly irreducible and that the function is bounded on . Let be a non-empty closed invariant subset of . There exists a harmonic measure with support in such that the Lyapunov exponent of is given by:
[TABLE]
3 Geometric interpretation over a Kähler manifold
We now assume that is a complex manifold and that the Riemannian metric is associated to a Kähler form . In this section, we relate the Lyapunov spectrum to holomorphic invariants of and . More precisely we show – if is compact – that the sum is greater than the degree of any holomorphic subbundle of of co-rank and we discuss the equality case.
3.1 Harmonic current
The Laplacian is related to the operator by the identity
[TABLE]
as follows from the Kähler identities. We recall that the volume form on is given by , where is now the complex dimension of . We simply write for the pullback of on .
In this setting, we associate a -current to any probability measure on .
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a probability measure on . Let be a -form with compact support on . There exists a unique smooth function with compact support such that the identity
[TABLE]
holds in any leaf of . The current is defined by
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.2**.**
If is a harmonic measure, then is a pluriharmonic current, i.e. it satisfies
[TABLE]
for any smooth function with compact support. Here and are the usual differential operators and , in the leaves of .
Proof.
By definition of and equation (25),
[TABLE]
This vanishes if is harmonic by Remark 2.5. ∎
Remark 3.3**.**
If is harmonic and is compact, vanishes on -exact forms. Thus, defines a linear form on the Bott-Chern cohomology group which is equal to the de Rham cohomology group – since is a compact Kähler manifold. It is useful to think of as a homology -class.
It is also natural to consider the -current , defined by
[TABLE]
for a -form whose restriction to the leaves of is equal to . However, the harmonicity of does not imply the pluriharmonicity of : if is a form, then does not vanish in general. An example arises for instance by considering a (cocompact) torsion free lattice in , acting holomorphically on the complex -dimensional unit ball , preserving the complex hyperbolic metric (see e.g. [Par03]). The complex hyperbolic compact manifold carries a natural (projective) flat bundle of rank whose monodromy is given by the identification of its fundamental group with .
For any , let be the harmonic measure on issued from the point (the distribution of the limit in of a Brownian trajectory starting at ). By homogeneity, is a smooth measure on : the only probability measure invariant by the stabilizer of in . These harmonic measures are related to one another by the Poisson kernel whose expression is
[TABLE]
see e.g. [Kor69], page 508 (here and ). More precisely, one has
[TABLE]
Let be the Radon measure on defined by
[TABLE]
where is the complex hyperbolic metric, and its volume. It is harmonic since the Poisson kernel is harmonic in the variable (in fact this is the only harmonic measure here). It is invariant by the diagonal action of on , hence defines a finite measure on the quotient . The associated current is then the quotient of the current
[TABLE]
The Poisson kernel, while harmonic in the variable with respect to the complex hyperbolic metric, is not pluriharmonic when . Hence, the current is not pluriharmonic.
We will use the following notion of degree of holomorphic bundles on non-compact manifolds.
Definition 3.4**.**
A metric on a holomorphic bundle is admissible if the curvature of the Chern connection is bounded, with respect to the Kähler metric on and the metric induced by on .
The Chern form is defined as usual by .
Definition 3.5**.**
Let be an admissible metric on . Then the analytic degree of is
[TABLE]
This is well-defined since the volume of is finite.
Lemma 3.6**.**
If is an admissible metric on the flat bundle and if Assumption 2 is satisfied, then the function of Proposition 2.13 is bounded.
Proof.
Let be a point in . By parallel transport on , defines a flat line subbundle of on a neighborhood of in . The function satisfies
[TABLE]
where is a flat section of in a neighborhood of . Hence, it is sufficient to prove that the Chern curvature of is bounded, uniformly in and .
If and are the Chern curvatures of and , it is well known that the equation
[TABLE]
holds. Here, the restriction is taken with respect to the orthogonal decomposition and A\in\mathcal{C}^{\infty}\big{(}\Lambda^{1,0}\operatorname{Hom}(L_{[v]},L_{[v]}^{\perp})\big{)} is such that is the orthogonal projection of on , for a smooth section of .
We claim that , where is the orthogonal projection from to and is the -part of , defined before Assumption 2. Indeed, the Chern connection on is given by
[TABLE]
as can be easily checked. Computing with a flat section of gives the claim.
Hence, both terms on the right hand side of equation (28) are bounded if is admissible and Assumption 2 is satisfied. This concludes the proof. ∎
Let be the Chern form of the anti-tautological line bundle over , with respect to the metric . We can reinterpret Theorem 2.13 as follows.
Proposition 3.7**.**
Let be a probability measure on . If the metric on is admissible, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be a point in . On a neighborhood of the leaf , we consider a flat section of . The Chern form is given by
[TABLE]
in the directions tangent to . By Lemma 3.11, the function is bounded. Theorem 4 and equation (25) give:
[TABLE]
This concludes the proof. ∎
3.2 Relation with holomorphic subbundles
From now on, we restrict to the case where is a compact Kähler manifold; see Subsection 3.5 for a discussion on the non-compact case.
Let be a holomorphic subbundle of of co-rank . The general case will be treated in Subsection 3.4. Over , we consider the following three line bundles:
- •
the anti-tautological line bundle ;
- •
the line bundle associated to the divisor ;
- •
the pullback of the line bundle over .
Lemma 3.8**.**
The line bundle is isomorphic to .
Proof.
Let be a local non-vanishing section of . There is a unique local section of such that . Outside , is isomorphic to and can be thought as a section of . The section of is well-defined outside .
Locally, is an open set in with coordinates , is trivial with coordinates and is given by . Let be the coordinates in a neighborhood of a point in . We can assume that is non zero in this neighborhood. Then, if is a local section of , and can be taken for the local sections of and . We see that vanishes on with order . ∎
{comment}
We use the following notion of degree of holomorphic bundles on non-compact manifolds.
Definition 3.9**.**
A metric on a holomorphic bundle is admissible if the curvature of the Chern connection is bounded, with respect to the Kähler metric on and the metric induced by on .
The Chern form is defined as usual by .
Definition 3.10**.**
Let be an admissible metric on . Then the analytic degree of is
[TABLE]
This is well-defined since the volume of is finite.
Lemma 3.11**.**
If is an admissible metric on the flat bundle and if Assumption 2 is satisfied, then the function of Proposition 2.13 is bounded.
Proof.
Let be a point in . By parallel transport on , defines a flat line subbundle of on a neighborhood of in . The function satisfies
[TABLE]
where is a flat section of in a neighborhood of . Hence, it is sufficient to prove that the Chern curvature of is bounded, uniformly in and .
If and are the Chern curvatures of and , it is well known that the equation
[TABLE]
holds. Here, the restriction is taken with respect to the orthogonal decomposition and A\in\mathcal{C}^{\infty}\big{(}\Lambda^{1,0}\operatorname{Hom}(L_{[v]},L_{[v]}^{\perp})\big{)} is such that is the orthogonal projection of on , for a smooth section of .
We claim that , where is the orthogonal projection from to and is the -part of , defined before Assumption 2. Indeed, the Chern connection on is given by
[TABLE]
as can be easily checked. Computing with a flat section of gives the claim.
Hence, both terms on the right hand side of equation (28) are bounded if is admissible and Assumption 2 is satisfied. This concludes the proof. ∎
From now on, we will always assume that the metric is admissible for both and . Thanks to the isomorphism given in Lemma 3.8, the line bundle is endowed with a Hermitian metric induced from .
Definition 3.12**.**
The dynamical degree of , with respect to a probability measure on is the quantity
[TABLE]
Theorem 5**.**
Let be a probability measure on . The formula
[TABLE]
holds.
Proof.
By Lemma 3.8, the following equality of Chern forms holds:
[TABLE]
By Proposition 3.7, T_{\nu}\big{(}c_{1}(\mathcal{O}(1))\big{)} is equal to . We claim that equals .
Indeed, is by definition equal to , where satisfies on the leaves of . Since both and come from , is constant in the fibers of and
[TABLE]
The claim then follows from the definition we gave for the degree.
It follows that satisfies the above formula. ∎
3.3 The dynamical degree
Now we give a geometric interpretation of . In fact, we define a geometric intersection between the current associated to a probability measure and a general hypersurface in .
The general definition is technically involved. However, when is transverse to , the idea is quite simple. In that case, one can find foliated coordinates where is given by , while is given by . If is the desintegration of the harmonic current as an integral of harmonic functions along the leaves, the restriction of to has a well-defined meaning: indeed, the functions extends as harmonic functions at for -almost any . In particular, the measure is well-defined on . The total mass of this measure is the intersection . In general, when no transversality holds, it is better to use a partition of unity in order to take into account the multiplicities.
Let be a hypersurface in such that contains no germ of a leaf of the foliation . Let be a partition of unity of ; we assume that the open sets are simply connected so that is diffeomorphic by parallel transport to the product , where is a point in . If is a smooth -form with compact support in , then
[TABLE]
with the notations of equation (18).
Definition 3.13**.**
Let be an equation of in . The geometric intersection of and is defined by
[TABLE]
where the inner integral is understood in the sense of currents. This is well-defined since, by assumption on , the function does not identically vanish on .
The equation gives a divisor in , for any fixed in the fiber . We write
[TABLE]
where is a positive integer and is an analytic hypersurface in the local leaf . Then, the geometric intersection is denoted by and is equal to
[TABLE]
thanks to the Lelong-Poincaré formula.
In the following, we assume that satisfies the weak condition of containing no germ of a leaf. If not, then there is a section of whose parallel transport always stays in by the analytic continuation principle.
Theorem 6**.**
The geometric intersection is finite and equals the dynamical degree . In particular, with equality if, and only if does not encounter the support of the current .
Proof.
The notations are as above, with . The equations define a global section of the line bundle . Over , the following equality of currents holds:
[TABLE]
Then, ; hence it is equal to times
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The first term is the geometric intersection . We claim that the other term vanishes; intuitively this follows from the fact that is a pluriharmonic current and we apply it to a -exact current.
Here is a formal proof. Let be a smooth function on which equals outside a neighborhood of and [math] on a (smaller) neighborhood . Since is a smooth -form, one gets by pluriharmonicity of . On the other hand, the integral
[TABLE]
understood in the sense of currents, tends to [math] when the measure of the neighborhood tends to [math] since is a locally integrable function.
This shows that . The assertions of nonnegativity and positivity then follow from equation (29). ∎
3.4 Higher codimension
The setting is the same as before, except that has codimension in . We explain how to obtain from informations on the partial sum of Lyapunov exponents .
Let be the annihilator of in . The exterior product can be thought as a line bundle in ; let be the annihilator of in , that we identify to the dual of .
Lemma 3.14**.**
The following equality of degrees holds:
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the exact sequence
[TABLE]
we get that since is flat. Hence, . In the same way, the exact sequence
[TABLE]
implies that . Since is a vector bundle of rank , we also have . This concludes the proof. ∎
By the Plücker embedding, the bundle of plans of dimension in is a subbundle of the projectivized bundle . We have the following geometric description:
Proposition 3.15**.**
The intersection in is the set of -planes in that intersect non trivially.
Proof.
This is a statement in linear algebra. Let be a -plane, with basis . Let be a basis of . In the Plücker embedding, is identified with the point in . Thus, by definition of , is in if and only if . This is equivalent to the non-invertibility of the matrix , hence to the existence of a non-trivial linear combination such that , for every . This happens if and only if is in ; thus such a exists if and only if intersects non trivially. ∎
Remark 3.16**.**
If , then , in accordance with previous subsections.
We now consider a harmonic measure on . From Remark 2.4 and Proposition 2.8, we can assume that is supported on the Grassmannian . From Theorem 7, we known that the Lyapunov exponent satisfies:
[TABLE]
where we write for . Moreover, from Definition 1.13, Remark 2.16 and Theorem 3, the inequality
[TABLE]
holds, with equality if the monodromy is strongly irreducible – we say that is strongly -irreducible. By Theorem 6, we get:
Proposition 3.17**.**
The Lyapunov exponents of satisfy the inequality
[TABLE]
Moreover, if is strongly -irreducible, then the equality
[TABLE]
holds if and only if the the support of the harmonic current does not intersect .
Since the support of can be assumed to be contained in the Grassmannian , the criterion of equality can be used as follows:
Proposition 3.18**.**
We assume that is strongly -irreducible. If there exists a closed invariant subset of such that any -plane in intersects trivially, then the equality (31) holds.
Proof.
This follows from Remark 2.4 and Proposition 3.15. ∎
3.5 On the non-compact case
The case where is non-compact causes a lot of technical complications. In order to simplify the discussion, we assume that is the complement of a normal crossing divisor in a smooth projective variety . Along the divisor, we choose for the metric on the product of hyperbolic metrics on the pointed disk and euclidean metrics on the disk ; see for instance [Moc02], subsection 4.1. This metric satisfies of course Assumption 1. If is a flat bundle over , the local monodromies are given by commuting matrices, where is the number of local equations of the normal crossing divisor.
If moreover underlies a variation of complex Hodge structures, then the local monodromies have eigenvalues of modulus one, by a theorem of Borel. Moreover, the canonical metric on satisfies Assumption 2, thanks to some curvature properties of the period domains. Hence, Proposition 3.7 applies to this situation.
The troubles come with the holomorphic subbundle . There are two possible definitions for what we have called the dynamical degree of : the analytic one
[TABLE]
or the geometric one as in equation (30). In order to have the results of this section, it would be nice to show that the two definitions coincide. But it is already unclear what are the conditions of bounded geometry to impose on , so that the geometric definition makes sense. This needs to be clarify in the future.
In the next section, we summarize the results already contained in the literature, concerning the equality between sum of Lyapunov exponents and the degree of holomorphic subbundles. We give another proof of these results in the case where is a compact Kähler manifold (of arbitrary dimension). In Subsection 4.3, it is assumed that our results are also valid above the sphere minus three points, for the vector bundles that are considered.
4 Applications
The relation between Lyapunov exponents and degrees of holomorphic subbundles has been first observed for a flat bundle carrying a variation of Hodge structures of weight . In the first subsection, we slightly generalize this example and explain how it reduces to a problem in linear algebra. In the second subsection, we discuss about a basic example where we get the equality (31), though the monodromy representation is Zariski dense. In the third subsection, we study the flat bundles that come from the hypergeometric equation and suggest a way to prove the observed phenomena.
4.1 Families of Hodge structures
Definition 4.1**.**
Let be a complex manifold. A family of complex Hodge structures of weight over is the datum of a complex flat vector bundle , a non-degenerate flat Hermitian form on and an -orthogonal decomposition
[TABLE]
such that, writing , the following conditions are satisfied:
the decreasing filtration varies holomorphically; 2. 2.
is positive definite on if is even and negative definite if is odd.
We emphasize that we do not consider variations of Hodge structures – where the axiom of Griffiths’ transversality is added – since it will not be used in the following. The vector is called the type of the family. By changing the signs of on , for odd , we define a Hermitian metric on . We call it the harmonic metric.
The most important examples come by looking at the cohomology of a family of compact Kähler manifolds (see e.g. [Voi02]). The flat bundle then has a real – and in fact integral – structure.
Definition 4.2**.**
Let be a complex manifold. A family of real Hodge structures of weight over is the datum of a real flat vector bundle , a non-degenerate bilinear form which is orthogonal for even and symplectic for odd , and a decomposition such that:
; 2. 2.
Writing if is even and if is odd, the form is Hermitian and we ask that is a family of complex Hodge structures.
We now assume that is a compact Kähler manifold.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let be a family of complex Hodge structures of weight and type over . We assume that and that the monodromy is strongly -irreducible. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
The vector bundle is holomorphic of co-rank . On the Grassmannian bundle , we consider the subset of -isotropic -planes. This is a closed invariant subset of since is flat. Moreover, since is positive definite for , it cannot intersect an isotropic plane. We conclude by applying Proposition 3.18. ∎
Such arguments can also be used in greater weight, as was observed in [Fil14]. We consider a family of real Hodge structures of weight and type over ; such situations arise when looking at the second cohomology group of families of families of surfaces, see [Fil14].
Proposition 4.4**.**
Writing , one has
[TABLE]
Proof.
In the projective bundle , we consider the subset of planes in whose orthogonal is an isotropic real line. We claim that cannot encounter any such plane . Indeed, since , this would imply that . Writing for the orthogonal of , is in particular orthogonal to , hence lives in . Since is real, it has to live in . This is a contradiction since there is no isotropic line in .
From Proposition 3.18, we get that
[TABLE]
We conclude by remarking that , by the symmetry of the Lyapunov spectrum: cf. Proposition 1.15. ∎
In both proofs, the leaf-invariant closed subset that we construct is not only invariant by the monodromy: it is also invariant under its real Zariski closure. This is why we consider that these situations can be reduced to linear algebra. The situation will be very different in the following subsections.
4.2 An example with Zariski dense monodromy
Let be a torsion-free finitely generated Kleinian group: that is, is a discrete subgroup of . We have an action of on the sphere ; we write for the limit set of and for the discontinuity set. By Ahlfors finiteness theorem [Ahl64], the quotient has a finite number of connected components and each is a compact Riemann surface with a finite number of points removed. We assume that some is compact, for simplicity.
Let be the inverse image of in the projection . The universal cover projects on , giving a holomorphic map , which is -equivariant for the canonical representation . To the map corresponds a projective bundle of rank over , with a holomorphic section . We claim that there is a harmonic measure such that the dynamical degree vanishes.
Indeed, the closed subset in is invariant by the monodromy. If is the union of leaves in passing through , it is a closed invariant subset of . Hence, there exists a harmonic measure with support on . The line bundle does not encounter since the map takes its values in . This proves the claim.
On the other hand, it is important to remark that the image of the monodromy will in general be dense in for the real Zariski topology. This is for instance the case for quasi-Fuchshian groups (which are not Fuchsian) or Schottky groups .
4.3 On the hypergeometric equation
In this subsection, we assume that our results are valid in the non-compact case ; see Subsection 3.5 for more details.
Let with its hyperbolic metric. One can consider families of -dimensional Calabi-Yau manifolds over . The degree cohomology of such families gives interesting examples of variations of real Hodge structures of weight and type ; we write . Each is thus a complex line bundle. Following the proof of Theorem 4.4, we consider in the subset of -planes in that are real and isotropic. If did not intersect any -plane in , then we would obtain an equality for the sum . However, this does not work:
Lemma 4.5**.**
The -plane always intersect in a non-trivial way some -plane in .
Proof.
This is a statement in linear algebra. We choose a orthogonal basis of , adapted to the decomposition such that:
- •
;
- •
.
The plane generated by and its conjugate is real and isotropic; hence is in and intersects the -plane . ∎
Hypergeometric cases
Singular families of -dimensional Calabi-Yau manifolds over are studied in [ES05]. A table is given on page 11 of this paper and describes some numerical invariants attached to these families; there are 14 cases where the number of singularities is equal to : they are called hypergeometric cases and can be thought as smooth families over . In [Kon12], the Lyapunov exponents of these 14 families are computed by numerical experiments. The following has been observed: there are 7 good cases and 7 bad cases.
For good cases, the sum of Lyapunov exponents is rational (up to some normalization) and a formula involving the eigenvalues of the local monodromies (near the singularities) can be given. This does not work in bad cases. Our goal is to give some explanations of this phenomenon in the general framework of our paper.
Thin and thick monodromies
In all 14 examples, the monodromy representation is Zariski dense in the symplectic group and takes values in . One says that the representation is thin if its image has infinite index in ; it is thick otherwise. In [BT14], it was shown that 7 monodromies among the 14 are thin; it had been remarked by M. Kontsevitch that they correspond exactly to the 7 good cases of his numerical experiments.
Sketch of a proof
The formula observed by M. Kontsevitch for good cases is essentially the equality (31). We want to prove the following conjecture:
Conjecture 4.6**.**
There exists a closed invariant subset in such that any -plane in intersects trivially the -plane , if and only if, the monodromy representation is thin.
A proof of this conjecture will explain the numerical observations of [Kon12]. Using Lemma 4.5, we can give a proof of the easy direction.
Proposition 4.7**.**
Suppose that the representation is thick. Then, does not contain any stricly smaller closed invariant subset.
Proof.
Let denote the image of the monodromy in and let be an arbitrary real isotropic -plane in . We observe that the orbit is dense (for the Hausdorff topology) in the set of real isotropic -planes. This is clear if is rational and is true in general using a translation. Since by assumption is of finite index in , there exists a finite number of in such that
[TABLE]
Taking the closure, this gives a partition of in a finite number of closed -invariant subsets. By connectedness of , this is possible only if itself is already dense in . This concludes the proof of the proposition. ∎
The other direction is an interesting challenge. The idea goes as follows: we consider one of the 7 representations with thin monodromy. One has to have a good understanding of this representation in order to construct a proper closed invariant subset in and then prove that the -plane does not meet an arbitrary -plane in . For the first step, some ping-pong lemma arguments, as in [BT14], should lead to a conclusion.
It is not clear to us whether it is possible to compute things directly or if a clever argument is available for the second step.
{comment}
We first recall the general definition of a variation of complex polarized Hodge structures:
Definition 4.8**.**
Let be a complex manifold. A variation of complex polarized Hodge structures over is the datum of a complex flat vector bundle , a non-degenerate flat Hermitian form on and an -orthogonal decomposition
[TABLE]
such that, writing , the following conditions are satisfied:
is positive definite on if is even and negative definite if is odd; 2. 2.
sends to ; 3. 3.
sends to .
The second condition simply says that the filtration of is holomorphic. The third condition is called Griffiths’ transversality and will not be used in the following.
In the last two sections, the proof of the relation between Lyapunov exponents and algebraic degrees of holomorphic subbundles only rely on linear algebra arguments. More precisely, in order to construct a closed leaf-saturated subset that will support a harmonic measure, we only use informations on the Zariski closure of the monodromy, not on the monodromy itself. The following (rather informal) discussion shows that such linear algebra argument can be unsufficient to conclude.
{comment}
5 Trucs techniques
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let be a harmonic measure on and let be a smooth function on such that and its first and second order leafwise derivatives are in . Then, if has bounded geometry of order [math] (bounded Ricci and positive injectivity radius), . Moreover, this also holds if is the complement of a normal crossing divisor in a projective variety and the metric on a local chart of of the form (adapted to the NCD) is the natural hyperbolic one.
Proof.
Let be the smooth function on defined by
[TABLE]
By definition,
[TABLE]
Since the fibers are compact and and its derivatives are continuous, we get . The assumptions on imply that and its first and second order derivatives are in . Otherwise said, belongs to the Sobolev space . If has bounded geometry of order [math], is the closure of the space of smooth functions with compact support (XXX). Since for such a function , vanishes, vanishes too.
For the second assertion, we have to show that we still have this density result, although the injectivity radius of is zero. By standard localizing arguments, it is sufficient to show the following:
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let be a smooth function on the pointed disk , with support is contained in the disk of radius , and such that and its first and second order derivatives are integrable. Then is in the adherence of the space of smooth functions with compact support for the Sobolev norm .
Proof.
Let be a smooth function on , which is decreasing, equal to on and equal to [math] on . Let be in ; we write for the hyperbolic distance from to the boundary . Let be defined by: if and otherwise. It is clear that is smooth with compact support, that and that has its first and second order derivatives uniformly bounded in and . This easily implies that tends to in . ∎
∎
{comment}
Let be a Kähler manifold, that we assume to be compact for simplicity. Let be a complex vector bundle of rank over , endowed with a flat connection. Since is compact, the Lyapunov exponents do not dpeend on the choice of a metric on . We want to deduce lower bounds on the partial sums , from the existence of a holomorphic subbundle of .
Let be a holomorphic subbundle of of co-rank . We denote by its annihilator in . The exterior product can be seen as a line in and we write for the annihilator of in , that we identify to the dual of . Hence, is a holomorphic subbundle of co-rank in .
{comment}
Proposition 5.3**.**
Then,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By definition, , where satisfies in the directions of the leaves, as -forms on . Since all forms come from , is constant in the fibers of and
[TABLE]
This gives the result. ∎
It has already been shown that is convergent (XXX). Hence, is also convergent. We call it the dynamical degree of and write it or simply if and are clear from the context.
Theorem 7**.**
The Lyapunov exponent of is given by
[TABLE]
{comment}
6 Appendix : local study of the harmonic mass of a divisor, near a singularity
Let be the trivial holomorphic vector bundle over the disk . We endow it with a connection with regular singularities such that:
[TABLE]
where is a matrix in . Let be a codimension one holomorphic subbundle of .
{comment}
By the Birkhoff ergodic theorem,
[TABLE]
for -almost every path in . By definition, this limit equals the first Lyapunov exponent of the system, that we write .
6.1 Formula in space
The cocycle relation implies that for every . The infinitesimal generator of the Brownian motion on a Riemannian manifold is , where is the Laplacian operator. Writing for the Laplacian operator in the leaves of , we thus get:
[TABLE]
Hence,
Proposition 6.1**.**
The first Lyapunov exponent of satisfies
[TABLE]
{comment}
Introduction
Let be a complex curve, obtained from a complex compact curve by removing a finite number of points . We assume that is hyperbolic and endow it with the hyperbolic metric. Let be a flat bundle of rank over , coming from a representation by the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence.
The Lyapunov exponent of measures the default of the representation being unitary. Intuitively, it is defined in the following way. We consider a parallel transportation of a Brownian path on . If the bundle carries a metric , we can consider the quantity ; under suitable assumptions on and , this quantity has a limit for almost every path and this limit is almost everywhere constant. This is by definition the Lyapunov exponent of ; we write it .
In this paper, we give a cohomological formula for . Then we use this formula to obtain an interesting relation between and some invariants attached to a holomorphic subbundle of of co-rank .
{comment}
7 Compact case
7.1 Invariant ergodic measure
Let be a compact complex curve endowed with an arbitrary metric; it induces a finite measure on . Let be a flat bundle of rank over ; the bundle is then foliated in -dimensional leaves. The Brownian motion on can be lifted on by parallel transport. This defines a Markov semigroup on . This semigroup has the Feller property: it sends continuous (bounded) functions on continuous (bounded) functions. We recall the following theorem:
Theorem 8** (Krylov-Bogolioubov).**
Let be a Markov semigroup with the Feller property on a Polish space . If there exists a probability measure such that is tight, then there exists a probability measure invariant for .
Since is compact, any set of probability measures is tight; we can thus consider an invariant probability measure on . Moreover, the proof of Theorem 8 shows that we can assume that is . From the structure of the set of invariant measures, we can moreover assume that is ergodic. In conclusion,
Proposition 7.1**.**
There is an ergodic invariant probability measure on , which projects on .
Remark 7.2** (XXX).**
If is a non-compact complex curve of finite type, the proof of Proposition 7.1 still works. First, we endow with an arbitrary metric of finite volume. We claim that there is a probability measure on as in the assumptions of Theorem 8. Indeed, let be any probability measure on such that . Then, since the Brownian motion on preserves . For any , one can choose a compact such that . Then, is compact and satisfies
[TABLE]
This proves the tightness of the family , hence the existence of an invariant measure on . As before, we can assume that this measure is ergodic and projects on .
7.2 Lyapunov exponent
We write for the Wiener space of continuous paths , whose images are contained in a leaf of . The invariant ergodic measure induces a probability measure on , which is invariant and ergodic for the time shift:
[TABLE]
where .
The (additive) cocycle is defined by
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary flat lift of to and is an arbitrary fixed Hermitian metric on , that induces a metric on .
By the Birkhoff ergodic theorem,
[TABLE]
for -almost every path in . By definition, this limit equals the first Lyapunov exponent of the system, that we write .
7.3 Formula in space
The cocycle relation implies that for every . The infinitesimal generator of the Brownian motion on a Riemannian manifold is , where is the Laplacian operator. Writing for the Laplacian operator in the leaves of , we thus get:
[TABLE]
Hence,
Proposition 7.3**.**
The first Lyapunov exponent of satisfies
[TABLE]
7.4 Cohomological interpretation
We write for the pullback of the Kähler form of to . Let be a -form on . At any point , the restriction of to the leaf of the foliation passing through is proportional to ; hence a smooth function on satisfying the equality on the directions tangent to the leaves is well-defined. We define the harmonic current by
[TABLE]
By the definition of , only depends on the values of in the directions tangent to the leaves. Let be a smooth function on ; the equality
[TABLE]
holds, all differential operators being computed in the directions of the foliations. We thus get
[TABLE]
since is an invariant measure.
Hence, defines an element in the dual space of Bott-Chern cohomology . Since is a Kähler manifold, the lemma implies that lives in .
On the other hand, the curvature form of a line bundle with metric is given by
[TABLE]
where is a local holomorphic section.
Hence,
[TABLE]
where is the curvature form of the bundle . Writing for the first Chern class of , we finally find that
Theorem 9**.**
The first Lyapunov exponent of is given by
[TABLE]
where the intersection sign stands for duality.
7.5 Computations in cohomology
Let be a holomorphic subbundle of codimension in . We consider as a divisor in and write for its cohomology class. We write also for the cohomology class of a fiber of . The class restricts on each fiber to the Poincaré dual of the hyperplane; by the Leray-Hirsch theorem applied to the fibration , any class in the cohomology of can be uniquely written as a linear combination of the , , with coefficients in the cohomology of the basis .
In particular, any class in is a linear combination (with real coefficients) of (that comes form the curve) and . We write .
Proposition 7.4**.**
.
Proof.
First, let be the cohomology class of a line in a fiber of . We have and . This gives .
Next, we consider . We have . Moreover, . Indeed, by the Grothendieck definition of Chern classes, one has and is flat. Hence,
[TABLE]
This is also equal to , where is the Chern class of over . Using again the definition of Chern classes, this is . But is simply times the class of a fiber in ∎
From theorem 9, we deduce
[TABLE]
The number is since is represented in cohomology by the pullback of . We write
Proposition 7.5**.**
**
Proof.
XXX ∎
Finally,
Theorem 10**.**
[TABLE]
The number is the total mass of the harmonic measure ; by assumption this is the volume of the curve , that is if we consider the Poincaré metric (normalized with ).
[TABLE]
The game is now to compute et .
8 Harmonic current
Métrique sur ?
8.1 Metric on the bundle
We endow with a metric and write for the Kähler form. (A priori pas d’hypothèse de complétude). We want to define a good metric in the neighborhoods of the punctures. Let be such a neighborhood. By assumption, the local monodromy of around [math] has eigenvalues of modulus one. Let be the decomposition in generalized eigenspaces. If is the monodromy on , we can write , where is a nilpotent operator on .
Let be the weight filtration of .
8.2 Lyapunov exponent
Let be a flat bundle of rank over . We fix a Kähler metric on satisfying conditions XXX and write for the corresponding Kähler form. The total space carries a tautological bundle, written . We endow with a Hermitian metric satisfying XXX and we still denote by the induced metric on the line bundle . From the flat connection on , inherits a foliation by -dimensional leaves.
We write for the Wiener space of continuous paths , whose images are contained in a leaf of . There exists a measure on , called the harmonic measure such that the induced measure on is invariant by time shift (XXX):
[TABLE]
where .
The cocycle is defined by
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary flat lift of to .
Proposition 8.1**.**
The cocycle is in .
Proof.
XXX ∎
By Birkhoff ergodic theorem,
[TABLE]
for -almost every path in . By definition, this limit equals the first Lyapunov exponent of the system, that we write . Moreover, the cocycle relation implies that for every .
Since (XXX), this gives
[TABLE]
for -almost every path in .
We want to interpret this equality in cohomology. First we can assume that the projection of on is the measure given by the volume form. We still write for the pullback of to . Let be a -form on . At any point , the restriction of to the leaf of the foliation passing through is proportional; hence a smooth function on satisfying the equality on the directions tangent to the leaves is well-defined. We define the harmonic current by
[TABLE]
By the definition of , only depends on the values of in the directions tangent to the leaves. Now let be a smooth function on ; we compute . By a formula above, ( usual Laplacian Hodge Laplacian)
[TABLE]
all differential operators being computed in the directions of the foliations.
By the fundamental property of the harmonic measure , this proves that vanishes on exact -forms. Hence, defines an element in the dual space of Bott-Chern cohomology . (XXX : tout faire dans le cas non compact)
Remark 8.2**.**
In fact, it is certainly more natural to look at foliated cohomology spaces.
Since is a Kähler manifold, the lemma implies that lives in . (XXX)
On the other hand, the curvature form of a line bundle with metric is given by
[TABLE]
for a local holomorphic section.
Hence,
[TABLE]
where is the curvature form of the bundle . Writing for the first Chern class of , we finally find that (XXX : revoir dans le cas non-compact)
Theorem 11**.**
The first Lyapunov exponent of is given by
[TABLE]
where the intersection sign stands for duality.
8.3 Harmonic current and formula
9 Holomorphic subbundle
9.1 Discussion on some invariants
Let be a holomorphic subbundle of . For the moment, we assume that the local monodromy of around the punctures are semisimple. The following discussion is local; we have a flat bundle with semisimple monodromy over and a holomorphic subbundle of co-rank one. Let be some point on . We choose an identification such that the monodromy is given by a diagonal matrix , with diagonal entries . From the discussion XXX, we assume that .
By a logarithm of , we mean a matrix such that . We will only consider logarithms given by diagonal matrices , where the are real numbers satisfying . Once a logarithm is chosen, the other logarithms differ from it by a vector in . Let denote the canonical basis of ; we write for the parallel transport of : it is a multivalued section of the bundle . Let be a logarithm of . We define , where a determination of is chosen, once and for all, at . By construction, is in fact a univalued section of and the sections give a trivialization of , hence a compactification of over . We write for this compactification.
We assume that the bundle extends to a holomorphic subbundle of . XXX (this condition does not depend on the compactification). In the coordinates , is given by a holomorphic function , we write . The valuation of , written is then well-defined, up to some global integer.
Proposition 9.1**.**
There exists a unique logarithm (up to some global integer) such that all valuations of the corresponding are the same.
Proof.
We choose an arbitrary logarithm , and another . For every , there is an integer such that . The function satisfies . Hence, . If is an equation of , an equation of is given by
[TABLE]
Hence, and the result is clear. ∎
Definition 9.2**.**
A logarithm satisfying the above property for is called a multi-angle (XXX terminologie) for . It is well-defined up to an addition by a global integer.
9.2 Computations in cohomology
9.3 Proof of the main theorem
10 Discussion on some examples
10.1 Rank 2
10.2 Variations of Hodge structures of weight one
10.3 Kontsevich’s examples
11 Some remarks on the equality case
11.1 Algebraic preliminaries
Let be a complex vector space of dimension and let be a subspace of co-dimension . The set induces a hypersurface in the Grassmannian . It can be defined in two ways:
- •
is defined by the vanishing of linear forms in . Their wedge defines a canonical element in . Identifying with the dual of , the vanishing of defines a hyperplane in , hence in . By the Plücker embedding, is a closed submanifold of and we define .
- •
is the set of -planes in that meet non-trivially in .
Both descriptions will be useful in the sequel.
Example 11.1**.**
If is of codimension , then . If is of dimension , then is the set of hyperplanes that contain , in .
11.2 Inequalities in codimension
Let be a flat bundle of rank on a compact curve . Let be a holomorphic subbundle of , of co-rank . We consider the bundle above , foliated in curves. The subbundle induces a divisor , by the previous subsection. Above lives a tautological bundle of rank , we write for the dual of its determinant. Let be a harmonic current on .
Proposition 11.2**.**
The sum equals , where is the intersection .
Proof.
We can whether prove the equality directly by working in the cohomology of the Grassmannian; or we can use the co-rank case and work in . That the Lyapunov exponents coincide in the two descriptions should come from a uniqueness statement and might be wrong in general… XXX (mais je ne pense pas) ∎
11.3 Some cases of equalities
From the above proposition, we have an interesting equality between dynamical and holomorphic invariants when we can find a holomorphic subbundle such that . We study some geometric situations where this appears; we are guided by variations of Hodge structures but we do not use the full structure of these flat bundles.
XXX : In what follows, we assume that there is a unique harmonic measure on the considered Grassmannian.
Proposition 11.3**.**
Assume that admits a flat Hermitian inner product of signature , . If there exists a holomorphic subbundle of co-rank such that is definite on , then is zero.
Proof.
We consider the Grassmannian . The subbundle of totally isotropic -planes is invariant by the foliation, hence carries the support of the current , by the general assumption. Moreover, does not intersect since is definite on and is totally isotropic. ∎
Remark 11.4**.**
This is exactly the situation arising in variations of complex of Hodge structures of weight .
Proposition 11.5**.**
Assume that comes from a real Hodge structure of weight and type . We write for the holomorphic subspace of codimension , defined in . Then is zero.
(XXX : I recall that admits a real lattice , with an orthogonal form of signature . It induces a Hermitian form of signature on . The Hodge decomposition writes as , with , and . The Hodge decomposition is orthogonal for the Hermitian form, positive definite on and negative definite on .)
Proof.
Let be the set of real isotropic vectors. Then is invariant by the foliation, hence carries the support of the current , by the general assumption. Moreover, does not intersect : this means that does not contain any real isotropic vector. Indeed, a real vector in has to be , which is definite negative for . ∎
Remark 11.6**.**
This was obtained by Simion Filip.
XXX : Kontsevich’s example. Variation of real Hodge structures, weight , type . of codimension . is the set of real isotropic planes. If is adapted to the Hodge decomposition, then is a basis of . Take any isotropic in . Then is a real isotropic plane that encounters , that is : encounters and it seems that one cannot conclude.
12 Higher-dimensional base
In fact, everything that has been done over a compact curve can be done over a compact Kähler manifold . I sketch the important modifications.
12.1 Lyapunov exponent
Let be a flat bundle over a compact Kähler manifold . The definition of the Lyapunov exponent is the same and we get the formula
[TABLE]
where is a local holomorphic section of over .
We write for the Kähler form on . The -form is then a volume form on and induces a volume form on the leaves of the foliation on . The harmonic current is defined in the following way: if is a -form, there is a well-defined function such that, on restriction to the leaves, . Then
[TABLE]
On the other hand, the curvature of is given by
[TABLE]
We recall that on a Kähler manifold, the following formula holds:
[TABLE]
for any function . (XXX : everywhere, is the usual Laplacian, not the Hodge one)
This gives
[TABLE]
since .
Hence,
Theorem 12**.**
[TABLE]
.
Remark 12.1**.**
We should emphasize that is not well-defined as an element of . Indeed, does not a priori vanish on , where is a -form. However, vanishes on , for any function , since is harmonic. In particular, the above formula is independent of the choice of a class representing .
12.2 Cohomological formula
Let be a holomorphic subbundle of , of co-rank . There are three interesting classes in : , (more precisely its pullback) and the class of . In this setting, the following cohomological formula holds:
Proposition 12.2**.**
[TABLE]
12.3 Final formula
In the above formula, we can wedge by and evaluate on . As above, this is really a cohomological computation. This gives:
[TABLE]
We write . The last term is . The second term is . Hence:
Theorem 13**.**
[TABLE]
In particular, we get the inequality , thanks to the following proposition.
Proposition 12.3**.**
[TABLE]
Proof.
XXX ∎
13 Brownian motion and ergodic theory
Let be a compact Kähler manifold, endowed with the canonical volume measure . Let be the space of continuous paths . We endow it with a probability measure such that is a homogeneous Markov process with initial law given by and transition functions given by the heat kernel . This defines the Brownian motion on . The shift is well-known to be ergodic with respect to .
Let be a complex flat vector bundle of rank over . Let be an arbitrary metric on . We define
[TABLE]
where is in and is the operator norm of the parallel transport along .
Proposition 13.1**.**
* is in .*
Proof.
Let denote the universal cover of . If is a point in , let be the space of continuous paths , starting at , endowed with the probability measure . If is a positive function on , then
[TABLE]
Hence, it is sufficient to show that is finite and independent of in .
Let be in and let be some point in , above . The parallel transport of a path in depends only on the homotopy class of . Writing for the lift of starting at , we get
[TABLE]
We still write for the heat kernel on (XXX) and for the volume form on . Then:
[TABLE]
Lemma 13.2**.**
There are constants and such that: if satisfies , then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be arbitrary and assume that . If is in , we write for the isoperimetric constant of . By Theorem 9, page 198 of Cha (XXX), one has the following estimate:
[TABLE]
By the following lemma, one can find a constant and such that, for every in , . For such an , one can absorb all the constants in and get
[TABLE]
as soon as . If , then and
[TABLE]
concluding the proof. ∎
Lemma 13.3**.**
There exist and such that, for every in , .
Proof.
Let be some positive number. Then, any ball in is isometric to a ball in ; hence it is sufficient to show the result in . Let be in . By the exponential map , there is an open set in which is diffeomorphic to . Moreover, the euclidean metric on and are mutually bounded since is relatively compact in . Since the isoperimetric constant of for the euclidean metric is positive, it follows that the isoperimetric constant of for is positive too.
By compactness of , one can write , with each . By the Lebesgue number lemma, there exists such that any ball is contained in one of the balls . Then , concluding the proof. ∎
Lemma 13.4**.**
Let be in and denote by its lift to , beginning at . Let be a non-zero vector in and let be its parallel transport along . Denote by the function . Then there is a constant , independent of , such that , for every in .
Proof.
We write , where is a metric connection and is a -form with values in the Hermitian operators. Since is flat, one has
[TABLE]
Let be the operator norm of considered as an operator from to . Then,
[TABLE]
so that by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.
Since everything comes from , one has . By compactness of , is uniformly bounded by a constant ; this concludes the proof. ∎
We can conclude the proof of Proposition 13.1. Let be in and let be in , such that , where is obtained by parallel transport of along any path from to . Integrating the inequality in the above lemma (using a geodesic path), we get:
[TABLE]
Using the above inequality for the heat kernel, we thus obtain
[TABLE]
where .
[TABLE]
where and are some positive constants. The last inequality is obtained in the following way: since is the universal cover of the compact Riemannian manifold , its Ricci curvature is bounded from below by some negative constant. Then, Bishop comparison theorem (REF Cha) implies that the volume of balls in is bounded from above by the volume of balls in some hyperbolic space; moreover the volume of these balls grows exponentially (REF?).
Since this last sum is convergent, this concludes Proposition 13.1. ∎
{comment}
Definition 13.5**.**
The holomorphic subbundle is said to be admissible with respect to the metric if the integral
[TABLE]
is convergent. Here is the Chern form of with respect to . The integral is called the analytic degree of (with respect to ).
Proposition 13.6**.**
We recall that satisfies Assumption 2. The integral
[TABLE]
is convergent.
Proof.
We compute , if is a local flat section of . We recall that , with a metric connection and a Hermitian form, and we write for its type decomposition.
[TABLE]
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[Ahl 64] L. V. Ahlfors. Finitely Generated Kleinian Groups. American Journal of Mathematics , 86(2), 1964.
- 2[BT 14] C. Brav and H. Thomas. Thin monodromy in Sp(4). Compositio Mathematica , 150(3):333–343, 2014.
- 3[Can 03] A. Candel. The harmonic measures of Lucy Garnett. Advances in Mathematics , 176:187–247, 2003.
- 4[DD 16] B. Deroin and R. Dujardin. Complex projective structures: degree, Lyapunov exponent, and harmonic measure. preprint , 2016.
- 5[Der 05] B. Deroin. Hypersurfaces Levi-plates immergées dans les surfaces complexes de courbure positive. Annales Scientifiques de l’École normale supérieure , 38(1):57–75, 2005.
- 6[EKMZ 16] A. Eskin, M. Kontsevitch, M. Möller, and A. Zorich. Lower bounds for lyapunov exponents of flat bundles on curves. preprint , 2016.
- 7[EKZ 11] A. Eskin, M. Kontsevitch, and A. Zorich. Lyapunov spectrum of square-tiled cyclic covers. Journal of modern dynamics , 5(2):319–353, 2011.
- 8[EKZ 14] A. Eskin, M. Kontsevitch, and A. Zorich. Sum of Lyapunov exponents of the hodge bundle with respect to the Teichmüller geodesic flow. Publications mathématiques de l’I.H.É.S , 120:207–333, 2014.
