Singularities of divisors of low degree on simple abelian varieties
Giuseppe Pareschi

TL;DR
This paper proves that divisors with low degree polarizations on simple abelian varieties have mild singularities, extending previous results and confirming a conjecture by Debarre and Hacon.
Contribution
It extends known results on singularities of divisors to polarizations of degree less than the dimension on simple abelian varieties, settling a conjecture.
Findings
Divisors of degree less than the dimension on simple abelian varieties have mild singularities.
Confirmed a conjecture of Debarre and Hacon.
Extended the class of polarizations for which singularity properties are understood.
Abstract
It is known by results of Koll\'ar, Ein, Lazarsfeld, Hacon and Debarre that divisors representing principal and other low degree polarizations on abelian varieties have mild singularities. In this note we extend such results to polarizations of degree on simple -dimensional abelian varieties, settling a conjecture of Debarre and Hacon.
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.
Singularities of divisors
of low degree on simple abelian varieties
Giuseppe Pareschi
Università di Roma Tor Vergata, V.le della Ricerca Scientifica, I-00133 Roma, Italy
Abstract.
It is known by results of Kollár, Ein, Lazarsfeld, Hacon and Debarre that effective divisors representing principal and other low degree polarizations on complex abelian varieties have mild singularities. In this note, we extend these results to all polarizations of degree on simple -dimensional abelian varieties, settling a conjecture of Debarre and Hacon.
Partially supported by the MIUR Excellence Department Project awarded to the Department of Mathematics, University of Rome Tor Vergata, CUP E83C18000100006.
It is known by results of Kollár, Ein, Lazarsfeld, Hacon and Debarre that effective divisors representing principal and other low degree polarizations on complex abelian varieties have mild singularities ([K, Theorem 17.13], [EL], [H1], [H2],[DH]). In this note, we prove another result in the same direction, conjectured by Debarre and Hacon in [DH, §6] and proved by them for and also for low values of .
Theorem A**.**
Let be a complex -dimensional simple polarized abelian variety with . Then
- (1)
every effective divisor representing is prime (Debarre-Hacon, [DH, Proposition 2]) and normal with rational singularities. 2. (2)
Let and let be an effective divisor representing . Then, unless with representing , one has ([DH, Corollary 2]) and the pair is log terminal.
We refer to the previously quoted works, especially the introductions of [EL] and [DH], and to Section 10.1.B of the book [L] for history, motivation, and applications.
The proof makes use of all the ingredients of the previously quoted papers, in particular (generic) vanishing theorems involving adjoint and multiplier ideals and the linearity theorem for their cohomological support loci. In this way, Theorem A is a standard consequence of Theorem B below, which is the main content of the present note.
Let us recall that, given a coherent sheaf on an abelian variety , its cohomological support loci are the following subvarieties
[TABLE]
of , where denotes the line bundle parametrized by via the choice of a Poincaré line bundle. We also set
[TABLE]
Finally, we recall that a subvariety of an abelian variety is said to be geometrically non-degenerate if, for all abelian subvarieties of , ([R, Lemma II.12] , [D1, (1.11)]).
Theorem B**.**
Let be a polarized -dimensional abelian variety and let be a line bundle representing . Let be a non-trivial subscheme of with geometrically non-degenerate support. Assume also that is not a divisor representing .
- (1)
If is empty then . 2. (2)
If is [math]-dimensional then .
The proof of Theorem B is based on the study of the Fourier-Mukai-Poincaré transform of the derived dual of the sheaf . This operation produces (see §1 below) a coherent sheaf in cohomological degree on the dual abelian variety , whose generic rank is . Such a sheaf is usually denoted by . From a body of results on the Fourier-Mukai-Poincaré transform, it follows that in case (1), is an ample vector bundle, while in case (2), it is a -syzygy sheaf, with sufficiently high. Applying to the Le Potier vanishing theorem in the former case and the Evans-Griffith syzygy theorem in the latter case,111Interestingly, the theorems of Le Potier and Evans-Griffith are related. In fact, via linear complexes as in [LP, Remark 4.2], one can show that the application of the Evans-Griffith theorem needed here is in turn implied by Le Potier vanishing via an argument of Ein ([L, Example 7.3.10]). we obtain a lower bound for the generic rank of the sheaf , hence for . This, combined with an upper bound for due to Debarre-Hacon (inequality (2.4) below), proves Theorem B.
**Acknowledgments. ** The author thanks Giulio Codogni, Zhi Jiang, Mihnea Popa, and Stefan Schreieder for their useful and interesting comments.
1. Background on the Fourier-Mukai-Poincaré transform
In this section we briefly recall the necessary background about some sheaf-theoretic properties of the Fourier-Mukai-Poincaré transform on abelian varieties. We refer to the papers quoted below or to the survey [P] for more details.
A Poincaré line bundle on defines a Fourier-Mukai functor
[TABLE]
which is an equivalence of categories (Mukai [M1]). Its inverse is , which can be expressed as
[TABLE]
where denotes the natural involution on . This follows from the fact that ([BL, Lemma 14.1.2]).
Definition 1.1**.**
([PP1, Definition 3.1]) Let be a coherent sheaf of . The gv-index of is the integer
[TABLE]
Moreover:
-
if then is said to be a Generic Vanishing sheaf, or simply GV;
-
if then is said to be Mukai-regular, or simply M-regular;
-
if then is said to verify the Index Theorem with index 0, or simply IT(0).
We set . We have the following duality result.
Theorem 1.2**.**
(Hacon, Pareschi-Popa, see [PP1, Theorem 2.2], [PP2, Theorem A])* Let be a coherent sheaf on an abelian variety . Then is GV if and only if is a sheaf in degree , i.e.*
[TABLE]
If this is the case, following Mukai, we use the following notation
[TABLE]
Remark 1.3**.**
(a) Assume that is GV. By base change and Serre duality the support of the sheaf is . Therefore the subvariety is non-empty as soon as is non-zero, since otherwise would be zero, hence itself would be zero.
(b) For a GV sheaf , the Euler characteristic is equal to the generic value of , for . Therefore and coincides with the generic rank of .
For a GV sheaf , the dictionary between the gv-index and the sheaf-theoretic properties of the transform is summarized in the following statement.
Theorem 1.4**.**
*Let be a coherent sheaf on an abelian variety .
(1) (Pareschi-Popa, [PP1, Corollary 3.2]) For , if and only if is a k-syzygy sheaf.333We refer to [OSS, Chapter 2, §1.1] or the Appendix in [PP1] for -syzygy sheaves. See also [EG2]).
(2) is M-regular if and only if is torsion-free (hence, in particular, ).
(3) is IT(0) if and only if is locally free; equivalently, if and only if .*
Note that (2) is a particular case of (1) since a 1-syzygy sheaf is simply a torsion-free sheaf. Item (3) is elementary: it follows immediately from Grauert’s theorem on cohomology and base-change.
A key ingredient of the proof of Theorems 1.2 and 1.4 is the identification
[TABLE]
consequence of Grothendieck duality, (see [P, Proposition 1.6(b)] or [PP1, Corollary 3.2]).
Remark 1.5**.**
From (1.2) and base-change, it follows that the support of the sheaf is contained in .
Remark 1.6**.**
Clearly the roles of and can be exchanged, and all of the above could have been said for a sheaf on as well, starting from the Fourier-Mukai equivalence . For example, the cohomological support loci of the sheaf are
[TABLE]
Finally we recall that a sheaf on an abelian variety is homogeneous if it has a filtration
[TABLE]
such that is isomorphic to a line bundle in for all . The following proposition is certainly well known, but we could not find a reference.
Proposition 1.7**.**
A sheaf on is a homogeneous vector bundle if and only if and .
Proof.
The direct implication is obvious. Conversely, if is 0-dimensional or empty then is GV. Thus, by Remark 1.3 the condition means that the locus is a proper subvariety of (non-empty if is non-zero). It is known that the GV condition has the following pleasant consequence: any component of of codimension is also a component of (see [PP2, Proposition 3.15] or [P, Lemma 1.8]). Therefore, since has dimension 0, must be [math]-dimensional (in fact an isolated point in ). Therefore, and is a -module of finite length (it is supported at ). By a result of Mukai ([M2, Theorems 4.17 , 4.19]), this means that is a homogeneous vector bundle. Equivalently, is a homogeneous vector bundle. ∎
2. Proof of Theorems A and B
**Proof of Theorem B. ** From the exact sequence
[TABLE]
it follows that for
[TABLE]
Therefore the hypotheses on imply that in both cases (1) and (2), the sheaf is M-regular, hence (see Theorem 1.4(2)). Hence . On the other hand, since otherwise, by Proposition 1.7, the sheaf would be a homogeneous vector bundle, and it is easy to verify that this happens if and only if is a divisor representing . In conclusion, we have
[TABLE]
Note that the generic values of and , for , coincide with and . By a result of Debarre-Hacon, [DH, Lemma 5(e)],444This Lemma is stated under the assumption that the abelian variety is simple, but in fact what is needed is that the support of is geometrically non-degenerate. the inequalities (2.3) imply that
[TABLE]
*Proof of (1). * The hypothesis means that is IT(0) (Definition 1.1). By Theorem 1.4(3), one has
[TABLE]
and is a locally free sheaf on of rank equal to . Therefore, taking the inverse functor,
[TABLE]
This means that the dual vector bundle is a GV sheaf on (by Theorem 1.2 applied to the equivalence , see also Remark 1.6). More, since the sheaf is torsion-free, is M-regular (Theorem 1.4(2)). But a result of Debarre ([D2, Corollary 3.2]) says that a M-regular sheaf is ample. Therefore the vector bundle is ample. Thus, by Le Potier’s vanishing, its cohomological support loci are empty for .
On the other hand, by (1.2) and Remark 1.5, the cohomological support locus contains the support of . As soon as has an -codimensional component such a sheaf is non-zero, hence is non-empty. Therefore
[TABLE]
Together with (2.4), this proves (1).
*Proof of (2). * For a coherent sheaf on , we set
[TABLE]
Assume first that . By hypothesis, this implies that its gv-index (Definition 1.1) is
[TABLE]
Therefore, by Theorem 1.4(1), is a non-locally free ()-syzygy sheaf. Therefore, by the Evans-Griffith syzygy theorem ([EG1, Corollary 1.7], see also [PP1, Appendix]) its generic rank is , i.e.
[TABLE]
As we know that , (2) follows in this case.
Assume otherwise that . As above, we have
[TABLE]
Again by Theorem 1.4(1) and Evans-Griffith, we get
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by (2.2), we have . Therefore
[TABLE]
Together with (2.4), this proves (2) and concludes the proof of Theorem B.
Remark 2.1**.**
(a) In Theorem B, the hypothesis that is not a divisor representing the polarization is clearly necessary.
(b) The inequalities of Theorem B are sharp in both cases (1) and (2), as it is shown by taking for a point . Indeed a general polarized abelian variety of type is base point free ([DHS, Proposition 2]). Since the line bundles are the translates of , this is easily seen to be equivalent to the fact that is empty. Similarly, a general polarized abelian variety of type has a 0-dimensional base locus ([DHS, Remark 3(a)]). As above, this means that is 0-dimensional.
**Proof of Theorem A. ** The fact that Lemma B implies Theorem A is known. We review this for the sake of self-containedness, referring to [L, §10.1.B] and [DH] for more details. Indeed the last assertion of (1) (respectively the last assertion of (2)) of Theorem A is equivalent to the triviality of the adjoint ideal of (respectively of the multiplier ideal of the -divisor ). We claim that both ideals satisfy all hypotheses of Lemma B and therefore Lemma B implies Theorem A. To prove the claim, let us denote both ideals.
To begin with, cannot be , where is a divisor representing . This is obvious for the adjoint ideal, and it holds for the multiplier ideal of (if is not equal to , with representing ) because ([DH, Corollary 3]).
Moreover, by definition, any subvariety of a simple abelian variety is geometrically non-degenerate.
It remains only to prove that the locus is either empty or [math]-dimensional. This follows from the hypothesis that the abelian variety is simple and the fact that satisfies the following property:
(*) * the locus is either empty or a proper linear subvariety, i.e. a finite union of translates of proper abelian subvarieties of . *
To prove (), we recall that the generic vanishing and linearity theorems of Green and Lazarsfeld ([GL],[EL, Remark 1.6]), combined with the Grauert-Riemenschneider vanishing theorem, say that for a smooth projective variety , equipped with a generically finite morphism , the locus is either empty or a proper linear subvariety, i.e. a finite union of translates of proper abelian subvarieties of . Hence for the adjoint ideal, the property () follows from via the exact sequence
[TABLE]
where is any resolution of singularities of ([L, Proposition 9.3.48]). If instead is the multiplier ideal of the -divisor , property () follows from the same theorems of Green and Lazarsfeld via the fact that such a multiplier ideal (twisted by the canonical bundle of , which is trivial) is a direct summand of the pushforward of the canonical bundle of a smooth variety via a generically finite morphism. This in turn goes back to the work of Esnault-Viehweg ([EV, (3.13)]). A more explicit reference is [DH, page 226].555See also [B, Theorem 1.3] for a more general linearity theorem along these lines. This proves ().
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BL] C. Birkenhake and H. Lange, Complex abelian varieties , 2nd ed., Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 302, Springer, 2004.
- 2[B] N. Budur, Unitary local systems, multiplier ideals, and polynomial periodicity of Hodge numbers, Adv. Math. 221 (2009) 217 - 250.
- 3[D 1] O. Debarre, Théorèmes de connexité et variétés abéliennes, Amer. J. Math. 117 (1995) 787 - 805.
- 4[D 2] O. Debarre, On coverings of simple abelian varieties, Bull. Soc. Math. France 134 (2006) 253 - 260.
- 5[DH] O. Debarre and Ch. Hacon, Singularities of divisors of low degree on abelian varieties, Manuscripta Math. 122 (2007) 217 - 228.
- 6[DHS] O. Debarre, K. Hulek and J. Spandaw, Very ample linear systems on abelian varieties, Math. Ann. 300 (1994) 181 - 202.
- 7[EG 1] E.G. Evans and P. Griffith, The syzygy problem, Ann. of Math. 114 (1981) 323 - 333.
- 8[EG 2] E.G. Evans and P. Griffith, Syzygies , London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 106 , Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.
