Hodge filtration, minimal exponent, and local vanishing
Mircea Mustata, Mihnea Popa

TL;DR
This paper establishes bounds on the Hodge filtration's generation level using the minimal exponent, leading to local vanishing theorems for sheaves with log poles, extending to Q-divisors.
Contribution
It introduces new bounds on the Hodge filtration based on the minimal exponent and extends local vanishing results to Q-divisors.
Findings
Bound on the generation level of Hodge filtration in terms of minimal exponent
Local vanishing theorem for sheaves of forms with log poles
Extension of results to Q-divisors
Abstract
We bound the generation level of the Hodge filtration on the localization along a hypersurface in terms of its minimal exponent. As a consequence, we obtain a local vanishing theorem for sheaves of forms with log poles. These results are extended to Q-divisors, and are derived from a result of independent interest on the generation level of the Hodge filtration on nearby and vanishing cycles.
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.
Hodge filtration, minimal exponent, and local vanishing
Mircea Mustaţă
Department of Mathematics, University of Michigan, 530 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
and
Mihnea Popa
Department of Mathematics, Northwestern University, 2033 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA
Abstract.
We bound the generation level of the Hodge filtration on the localization along a hypersurface in terms of its minimal exponent. As a consequence, we obtain a local vanishing theorem for sheaves of forms with log poles. These results are extended to -divisors, and are derived from a result of independent interest on the generation level of the Hodge filtration on nearby and vanishing cycles.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
14F10, 14F17, 14J17, 32S25
MM was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1701622 and a Simons Fellowship; MP was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1700819.
A. Introduction
Let be a smooth complex variety of dimension , and the sheaf of differential operators on . An important invariant of a filtered -module of geometric origin is the complexity of its filtration, namely how many steps are required to fully determine it. Concretely, the filtration is generated at level if
[TABLE]
Here denotes the standard filtration by the order of differential operators.
In this paper we give a bound for the generation level of the Hodge filtration on -modules naturally associated to rational multiples of a reduced effective divisor on , in terms of data provided by the Bernstein-Sato polynomial of . This study was initiated by Saito [Saito-HF], who provided such bounds for special types of singularities. Some general results were later found in [MP1], [MP2]. We improve them here, using the main result of [MP3], and also exploit the fact that they are, somewhat surprisingly, related to local vanishing theorems for sheaves of forms with log poles in birational geometry.
Reduced divisors. To highlight the main points with a minimum amount of technicalities, we first restrict our discussion to the case when we simply deal with a reduced effective divisor . The corresponding -module is the localization , that is, the sheaf of functions with poles of arbitrary order along . It is well known that is regular holonomic, and underlies a mixed Hodge module on ; therefore it comes endowed with a Hodge filtration , with . See e.g. [MP1] for an in-depth study of this filtration. If is smooth, then the filtration is generated at level [math], hence from now on we focus on the case when is singular. We prove:
Theorem A**.**
For every singular divisor , the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
Here is the minimal exponent of , a positive rational number which is defined as the negative of the largest root of the reduced Bernstein-Sato polynomial ; see e.g. [Saito-B]. It is a refined version of the log canonical threshold of the pair , which is equal to . See §1 for further details and references. It was Saito who first pointed out in [Saito-HF] the relevance of the invariant , proving the bound in Theorem A for isolated semi-quasihomogeneous singularities (when can be computed explicitly).
Since , Theorem A recovers in particular the fact that is always generated at level , proved in [MP1, Theorem B]. Note also that it is possible to do better than Theorem A: as an extreme case, if is a singular simple normal crossing divisor, then is generated at level [math], but . The bound is nevertheless sometimes optimal; for instance, this is the case when has an isolated quasihomogeneous singularity by [Saito-HF, Theorem 0.7].
Moreover, Saito [Saito-B, Theorem 0.4] showed that is equivalent to having rational singularities, and therefore:
Corollary B**.**
If and the divisor has rational singularities, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .111As mentioned above, for the filtration is always generated at level [math].
This was proved when has isolated singularities, and conjectured to be true in general, in [MOP]. The general conjecture was already verified recently by Kebekus-Schnell [KS, §1.3], as a consequence of a local vanishing conjecture; more on this below. Note that could however be much larger than , and is in fact optimally bounded above by in [Saito_microlocal] (see also [MP3, Theorem E]).
It turns out that the generation level of the Hodge filtration on is intimately linked to a result in birational geometry, namely to local vanishing for pushforwards of bundles of forms with log poles. Consider a log resolution of the pair , which is an isomorphism over , and denote . We showed in [MP1, Theorem 17.1] that is generated at level if and only if for , so consequently we obtain:
Corollary C**.**
With the above notation, we have
[TABLE]
When this is shown by elementary methods in [MP1, Theorem B], leading to the coarse bound for the generation level of the Hodge filtration mentioned above. When has rational singularities and , it is proved in [MOP] in the isolated singularities case, and can be deduced in general from a vanishing statement obtained by Kebekus-Schnell [KS, Theorem 1.9], which answers [MOP, Conjecture A]. Using Corollary C, we can in fact obtain a strengthening of this conjecture/statement in the absolute case of a reduced singular hypersurface: by this here we mean a singular complex scheme , reduced but not necessarily irreducible, that can be embedded as a hypersurface in a smooth variety. In this case has an associated minimal exponent , independent of the embedding (since this is the case already for the Bernstein-Sato polynomial). We consider a resolution of singularities , given by the disjoint union of resolutions of the irreducible components of . We further assume that is an isomorphism over the smooth locus of and the reduced inverse image of the singular locus of is a simple normal crossing divisor on . We then have 222Note that has rational singularities if and only if , so the case corresponds to the statements in loc. cit.
Theorem D**.**
With the above notation, if , then
[TABLE]
We emphasize that here the overall strategy is reversed: we first show the generation bound in Theorem A using methods from the theory of (Hodge) -modules, and then deduce the birational Corollary C, which in turn is used to prove Theorem D. At the moment we do not know how to approach the latter vanishing results via more standard methods in birational geometry.
Rational multiples. Following [MP2], [MP3], we also consider a multiple , where is a positive rational number and is a reduced effective divisor on , as above. The set-up is local: assuming that is defined by a regular function , the natural replacement for the localization is the -module
[TABLE]
the free rank module over generated by the formal symbol ; see §1. This is a direct summand of a mixed Hodge module, and so analogously it comes endowed with a Hodge filtration , with . Again, if is smooth, then this filtration is generated at level [math], hence from now on we focus on the case when defines a singular hypersurface.
Theorem A and Corollary C above are then special cases (when ) of the following two statements that will be the focus of the paper.
Theorem E**.**
If defines a singular reduced hypersurface, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
In the special case when has an isolated quasihomogeneous singularity, by analogy with the reduced case in [Saito-HF], this result was conjectured in [Popa] and proved in [Zhang]. Note also that Theorem E recovers the second statement of [MP2, Theorem 10.1], namely that the filtration on is always generated at level .
Consider now a log resolution of the pair as above, and . According to [MP2, Theorem 10.1], the statement of Theorem E is equivalent to the following general form of local vanishing:
Corollary F**.**
With the above notation, we have
[TABLE]
Recall for completeness that it is always the case that
[TABLE]
This is proved in [MP2, Corollary C], still using methods from the theory of mixed Hodge modules, but of a different flavor.
Hodge ideals. The Hodge filtration on is best expressed and studied in terms of the Hodge ideals of . According to [MP2, §4], for each there is a coherent sheaf of ideals on such that
[TABLE]
Therefore Theorem E provides an effective bound describing which higher Hodge ideals of are fully determined by lower ones. This type of result is very useful for concrete calculations of Hodge ideals, see [MP1] and [MP2].
Corollary G**.**
For every nonnegative integers and , with , we have
[TABLE]
Nearby and vanishing cycles. All the above results are consequences of a statement of independent interest regarding the generation level of the Hodge filtration on the graded quotients of the -filtration associated to the regular function . Concretely, the -filtration is defined on the the left -module , the push-forward of via the graph embedding
[TABLE]
with respect to the hypersurface , where is the coordinate on . Recalling that this is a (discrete) decreasing filtration, we consider . These are -modules that underlie Hodge modules supported on the graph embedding of ; in particular they come endowed with a Hodge filtration induced by that on . The cases and are intimately related to the vanishing, respectively nearby, cycles of . For details see §1 and §2. The main result we prove is:
Theorem H**.**
If defines a singular, reduced hypersurface, and is a rational number, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
The proof of this theorem is the technical core of the paper. More precisely, we describe concretely the associated graded quotients of the Hodge filtration on these -modules in the range below the minimal exponent of ; see Proposition 4.5. Using this, we apply a homological criterion for the generation level of the filtration on special filtered -modules via the duality functor. This is proved in Proposition 3.3, and is inspired by a duality approach to generation in [Saito_microlocal]. In order to deduce Theorem E from Theorem H, the key tool is to reinterpret the main result of [MP3] as a connection between the Hodge filtration on and the induced Hodge filtration on ; see Proposition 5.4.
Bounds in terms of singularity invariants in birational geometry. We conclude by noting that the minimal exponent can be bounded below in terms of basic invariants of the singularity, or in terms of discrepancies on a log resolution. This can be translated into bounds of a somewhat different flavor in the statements above.
Consider a log resolution of the pair as above, in the neighborhood of a (singular) point . Assuming in addition that the strict transform of is smooth, we define integers and by the expressions
[TABLE]
where are the prime exceptional divisors, and set
[TABLE]
Denote also by the multiplicity of at , and by the dimension of the singular locus of the projectivized tangent cone (declaring that if is smooth). We then have the following lower bounds in a neighborhood of :
.
.
The first is [MP3, Corollary D] and the second is [MP3, Theorem E(3)]. Note that, unlike , depends on the choice of log resolution. Finally, we also have:
is the -log canonicity level of the pair , according to [MP3, Corollary C].
We recall that is [math]-log canonical if it is log canonical, while being -log canonical for is a refinement of the statement that has rational singularities. It essentially means that the Hodge filtration on is as simple as possible up to level , namely equal to the pole order filtration; the upshot of this paper is that this condition also imposes a bound on the generation level of this Hodge filtration.
Further general properties of the minimal exponent , and open problems, can be found in [MP3, §6].
Acknowledgement. We thank the referee for very useful comments that helped us improve the exposition.
B. Preliminaries
1. Hodge filtration, -filtration, and minimal exponent
Let be a smooth -dimensional complex algebraic variety and a nonzero regular function. Consider the graph embedding
[TABLE]
and the left -module , as well as the corresponding right -module . A detailed discussion of the material in the paragraph below can be found for instance in [MP3, §2]. We denote by the coordinate on . Recall that we have
[TABLE]
with the obvious -module structure. Denoting by the class of , every element in can be written uniquely as
[TABLE]
with , only finitely many nontrivial. We clearly have the relation . With this description, multiplication by is given by
[TABLE]
and the action of a derivation is given by
[TABLE]
Recall also that the (trivial) Hodge filtration on induces a Hodge filtration on given by
[TABLE]
(see, for example, [Saito-B, (1.8.6)]). We note that the shift by is needed in order to ensure compatibility when applying the convention for shifting filtrations as we pass from left to right filtered -modules on and respectively; see §2.
We next consider the rational -filtration on with respect to . Recall that this is an exhaustive, decreasing, discrete, and left continuous filtration . It is defined uniquely by a number of properties listed for instance in [MP3, §2]. The Hodge filtration on induces a filtration on each and thus the Hodge filtration on .
As is standard, we denote by the Bernstein-Sato polynomial of . Assuming that , the polynomial divides , and is the reduced Bernstein-Sato polynomial of . Following [Saito-MLCT], we denote by the negative of the largest root of . This is a positive rational number, and we use the convention that if , which happens precisely when is smooth. This invariant is called the minimal exponent of , see [Saito-B], and is a refined version of the log canonical threshold of , which is equal to . See [MP3, §6] for a detailed discussion.
A crucial point is the following link between the minimal exponent and the -filtration, combining the statements of [MP3, Lemma 5.3] and [MP3, Corollary 6.1].
Lemma 1.2**.**
For an integer and , we have
[TABLE]
For a -divisor on , we denote by its multiplier ideal; see [Lazarsfeld, Chapter 9]. If , is a rational number, and , we will also use the notation for . The main result of [BS] states that for every , we have
[TABLE]
In order to define and study Hodge ideals for -divisors, in [MP2] and [MP3] we considered for each the twisted localization -module
[TABLE]
with , i.e. the free -module of rank with generator the symbol , with the action of derivations of given by
[TABLE]
The -module is a filtered direct summand of a -module underlying a mixed Hodge module; see [MP2, §2]. In particular, it is regular holonomic, with quasi-unipotent monodromy, and admits a Hodge filtration , with . It is shown in [MP2, §4] that if is the support of , then we can write
[TABLE]
for an ideal , the -th Hodge ideal of .
For every , we have an isomorphism of -modules
[TABLE]
which preserves the Hodge filtration; see [MP2, §2]. As a special case, we naturally identify with the usual localization . In particular, when is reduced and , this gives the Hodge ideals considered in [MP1].
An important input for this paper is the main result of [MP3], comparing the Hodge ideals and the -filtration. We only state the case when is reduced. We use the notation , with the convention that .
Theorem 1.5** ([MP3, Theorem A′]).**
If defines a reduced divisor and is a positive rational number, then for every we have
[TABLE]
2. Nearby and vanishing cycles
Later on we will need bounds for the generation level of the Hodge filtration on nearby and vanishing cycles. To this end we will make use of the duality functor on filtered -modules [Saito-MHP, §2.4]. In order to apply duality, we will pass to the corresponding right -modules.
We recall that there is an equivalence of categories between filtered left and right -modules. Given a filtered left -modules , we denote by the corresponding filtered right -module. At the level of -modules we have , while the filtration on is given by
[TABLE]
where .
For right -modules it is customary to use the increasing -filtration. This is related to the -filtration on the corresponding left -module as follows. If is a left -module and we consider the -filtrations with respect to the coordinate on , then
[TABLE]
where we identify in the obvious way with the pull-back of .
It is also customary, for a filtered -module and an integer , to denote (\mathcal{M},F)(q)=\big{(}\mathcal{M},F[q]\big{)}, with
[TABLE]
Let now be the filtered right -module underlying a pure polarizable Hodge module of weight . Recall that the polarization induces an isomorphism . The nearby and vanishing cycles of with respect to are given, respectively, by
[TABLE]
We also use the notation for \big{(}{\rm Gr}_{\beta}^{V}(\mathcal{M}),F\big{)}(1), when , but for \big{(}{\rm Gr}^{V}_{-1}(\mathcal{M}),F\big{)}(1).
It is a general fact that the duality functor commutes with nearby and vanishing cycles. The results that follow can be found in [Saito_duality, Theorem 1.6]. Concretely, we have canonical isomorphisms
[TABLE]
Using the fact that {\mathbf{D}}(\mathcal{M},F)\simeq\big{(}\mathcal{M},F\big{)}(d), we obtain isomorphisms
[TABLE]
We can in fact be more precise about the first of these isomorphisms; there is a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
and for every , there is a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
In what follows, we will only be interested in the case when is the filtered right -module corresponding to . Note that in this case we have , hence the isomorphism (2.1) gives
[TABLE]
while the isomorphism (2.2) gives
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have
[TABLE]
Finally, we note that since the Hodge filtration on is induced by that on , which is the filtered right -module corresponding to , using the convention above on upper and lower indexed -filtrations we have
[TABLE]
3. Generation level
Let be a right -module with a good filtration. The filtration is generated at level if
[TABLE]
or equivalently
[TABLE]
A similar definition holds for left -modules, as in the introduction. Note that such always exists by the definition of a good filtration. Another interpretation is that the filtration is generated at level if and only if is generated in degrees as a graded module over
[TABLE]
where is the tangent sheaf of .
A generation criterion using the duality functor is given by the following result; see [Saito_microlocal, Lemma 2.5] and its proof.
Proposition 3.1**.**
If is a filtered right -module underlying a mixed Hodge module such that , then the filtration on is generated at level .
We will also need a refinement of this criterion for (essentially) self-dual , and for this we formulate more precisely the setup provided by duality. The [math]-section of the cotangent bundle corresponds to a surjective morphism . We denote by the corresponding Koszul complex
[TABLE]
placed in degrees , where . Note that we use the opposite of the standard convention for degree-shift, namely . This is a complex of graded free -modules, which gives a free resolution of as an -module.
Suppose now that is a filtered right -module that underlies a mixed Hodge module. In this case we have that is a Cohen-Macaulay -module by [Saito-MHP, Lemme 5.1.13] (and, more generally, one can consider filtered -modules with this property). Recall from [Saito-MHP, §2.2] that is the filtered differential complex
[TABLE]
placed in degrees , such that the level part is given by
[TABLE]
The maps are not -linear, but by taking the associated graded objects, we obtain complexes of -modules. More precisely, we have
[TABLE]
where . Note that represents the object in the derived category of graded -modules.
An important feature of the duality functor is the following isomorphism in the derived category of filtered differential complexes of -modules:
[TABLE]
having the property:
[TABLE]
See [Saito-MHP, §2.4], and also [Saito_microlocal, Remark 2.6].
Suppose now that satisfies for some ; this is for instance the case for the nearby and vanishing cycle modules in the previous section. By combining the above facts, we see that for every we have an isomorphism in the derived category of -modules:
[TABLE]
Denoting , using the discussion at the beginning of the section we see that the filtration on is generated at level if and only if for every . The isomorphism (3.2) gives
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have the first-quadrant spectral sequence
[TABLE]
Recall also that by definition, we have
[TABLE]
Thus for such filtered -modules we obtain the following refinement of the criterion in Proposition 3.1:
Proposition 3.3**.**
If underlies a mixed Hodge module and , then the filtration on is generated at level if
[TABLE]
for every .
C. Main results
We continue to work on a smooth complex variety , endowed with a nonzero regular function . We use the notation of the previous section.
4. Generation level for
We start by proving the key Theorem H; this is split here into Propositions 4.1, 4.2 and 4.7, the last being the most involved. We begin with a generation bound for with . This case only needs the criterion in Proposition 3.1.
Proposition 4.1**.**
For and , the Hodge filtration on is generated at level if . In particular, if defines a singular hypersurface, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
Proof.
It follows from (2.6) that the filtration on is generated at level if and only if the filtration on is generated at level . Using the isomorphism (2.4), we deduce in turn from Proposition 3.1 that this is the case if
[TABLE]
is [math]. The latter condition is equivalent with by another application of (2.6), giving the first assertion in the proposition.
For the second assertion, note that by Lemma 1.2, for every and every we have the equivalence
[TABLE]
In particular, if this holds for , it also holds for . If , then , and we conclude that there is with , such that . In this case we have , hence clearly . ∎
A similar proof works for ; we include it for completeness, even though this is not relevant for the rest of the paper.
Proposition 4.2**.**
If for some , then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level . In particular, if defines a singular hypersurface, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
Proof.
Arguing as above, using (2.5) and Proposition 3.1 we see that the Hodge filtration on is generated at level if . This in turn holds if , since Lemma 1.2 implies that there exists such that . ∎
For we need to use a more refined argument. We start by specializing the criterion in Proposition 3.3 to the -module , in which case we have by (2.3), so that the vanishing in the proposition concerns
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Furthermore, the filtration on is generated at level if and only if the filtration on is generated at level . We thus obtain
Corollary 4.3**.**
The Hodge filtration on is generated at level if
[TABLE]
To apply this criterion, we need a better understanding of the terms . To this end, for every we introduce the following coherent ideals of :
[TABLE]
From now on, we will only deal with the -filtration on , hence in order to simplify the notation we often denote and .
We will make use of the fact that for all . In fact, we prove the following more precise result:
Lemma 4.4**.**
If defines a reduced hypersurface, then for every , we have .
Proof.
It is well known that , and so by (1.3) it follows that . We thus have , hence .
It suffices to prove the reverse inclusion on an open subset of such that . Since defines a reduced hypersurface, we can find such a subset on which is smooth. We will therefore assume from now on that is smooth. After passing to a suitable open cover of , we may further assume that we have an algebraic system of coordinates such that .
Recall that in this case the -filtration on only jumps at integers (hence ) and for every , is generated over by . This follows easily by checking that this definition satisfies the defining properties of the -filtration. (For a more general statement valid for arbitrary simple normal crossing divisors, see [Saito-MHM, Theorem 3.4].) In particular, we see that is generated as an -module by , for . Since , we have
[TABLE]
We conclude that given a regular function , we have if and only if there are regular functions such that
[TABLE]
This equality holds if and only if for , , and
[TABLE]
This clearly implies that , completing the proof of the lemma. ∎
We are now able to establish the connection between the Hodge filtration on and the minimal exponent .
Proposition 4.5**.**
If defines a reduced hypersurface and is an integer such that , then
[TABLE]
note that the second statement is vacuous for p=0$${\rm)}.
Proof.
Fix . Since , it follows from Lemma 1.2 that for . This implies that for every such , we have . Note that
[TABLE]
hence give a basis of over . Since all but the last one of these elements lie in , we have a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
If , then by Lemma 1.2, hence . Moreover, via the isomorphisms (4.6), the inclusion
[TABLE]
maps the class of in to the class of in . Indeed, this follows from the fact that
[TABLE]
We thus conclude that
[TABLE]
where the equality follows from Lemma 4.4. Furthermore, as we have already mentioned, if , then , hence .
On the other hand, note that we always have
[TABLE]
where the last equality holds by Lemma 4.4. Furthermore, if . This completes the proof of the proposition. ∎
Proposition 4.7**.**
If defines a singular, reduced hypersurface, then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
Proof.
Equivalently, we need to check that if is a nonnegative integer such that , then the filtration on is generated at level . (Note that since defines a singular hypersurface, we have as mentioned in the introduction, hence our assumption on implies .) It follows then from Corollary 4.3 that it is enough to show:
[TABLE]
Note that we only need to consider and such that .
To see this, we use the isomorphisms in Proposition 4.5. First, the short exact sequence
[TABLE]
gives {\mathscr{E}xt}_{\mathscr{O}_{X}}^{m}\big{(}\mathscr{O}_{X}/(f),\mathscr{O}_{X}\big{)}=0 for all . We thus see that if , we have
[TABLE]
since . On the other hand, if , then , and the short exact sequence
[TABLE]
implies that
[TABLE]
is a quotient of {\mathscr{E}xt}_{\mathscr{O}_{X}}^{n}\big{(}\mathscr{O}_{X}/(f),\mathscr{O}_{X}\big{)}=0. This completes the proof of the proposition. ∎
Remark 4.9**.**
In the statements of Propositions 4.1, 4.2, and 4.7, we assumed that the hypersurface defined by is singular, in order to avoid the case when . If defines a smooth hypersurface, then is nonzero only when is an integer and the Hodge filtration on both and is generated in level [math].
5. The Hodge filtrations on and
Let be the projection onto the first component. Given , we consider the map
[TABLE]
given by
[TABLE]
where (with the convention that ). Note that both sides have -module structure; in fact is naturally a -module.
Lemma 5.1**.**
The map is a morphism of -modules. Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the equalities hold via the identification in 1.4.
Proof.
We may and will assume that is affine. The fact that for every and every global section of is clear. Suppose now that and is a -derivation of . We have
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where we used the fact that and
[TABLE]
By the definition of the -filtration, if , then (and for , multiplication by induces an isomorphism of -modules ). In order to prove (5.2), note first that if , then
[TABLE]
We thus have
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
and , we conclude that via (1.4).
Suppose now that , hence . We then have
[TABLE]
which proves (5.3). ∎
Proposition 5.4**.**
If is a reduced divisor, then for every the morphism is surjective, and the Hodge filtration on the image is, up to a shift by , the induced filtration from that on . More precisely, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Thanks to (1.1), the elements of are the sums that belong to . The fact that for all we have
[TABLE]
is then precisely the content of Theorem 1.5. Since the Hodge filtration on is exhaustive, we deduce that is surjective. ∎
Remark 5.5**.**
The same statement holds more generally when is not necessarily reduced, but is such that is reduced. For this one simply needs to refer to [MP3, Theorem A] instead.
6. Proof of the main result
We begin with the following general (and well-known) fact:
Lemma 6.1**.**
If is such that for some , then .
Proof.
Certainly if , then . We may assume that and choose which is largest with this property, so that . If , then we are done. Otherwise , and vanishes in . Recall however that an easy consequence of the definition of the -filtration is that for every , the map
[TABLE]
is bijective. It follows that vanishes in , a contradiction. ∎
Next, using the result of the previous section, we show that in order to bound the generation level of for any , it suffices to study the Hodge filtration on the associated graded terms , for special rational .
Corollary 6.2**.**
If is a rational number and is such that the Hodge filtration on is generated at level for all , then the Hodge filtration on is generated at level .
Proof.
We need to show that for every . Given such and , it follows from Proposition 5.4 that we can find such that . The -filtration is discrete, hence after using the hypothesis finitely many times, we obtain
[TABLE]
Since maps to , we may clearly assume that . In this case we can write for some ; see for instance (the proof of) [MP3, Lemma 4.5]. Furthermore, by the definition of , we can write , for some and . Note that , hence , and thus . By Lemma 6.1, we have , so in particular . Since , we have
[TABLE]
where the last equality follows from (5.2) and (5.3). But , which follows for example from Proposition 5.4, since by (1.3). Also, since , it follows from Proposition 5.4 that . We conclude that , completing the proof. ∎
We are finally able to give the proof of the main result:
Proof of Theorem E.
According to Corollary 6.2, it suffices to know that is generated at level for all . But this follows from Propositions 4.1 and 4.7, which show that each is generated at level . ∎
7. Proof of Theorem D
Consider a reduced complex scheme , which can be embedded as a hypersurface in a smooth variety , with minimal exponent . We consider a resolution of singularities . (Recall that by this we mean the disjoint union of resolutions of the irreducible components of .) We further assume that is an isomorphism over the smooth locus of and that the reduced inverse image of the singular locus of is a simple normal crossing divisor on .
We start with the following observation:
Lemma 7.1**.**
The statement of Theorem D is independent of the choice of such a resolution.
Proof.
A standard argument shows that it is enough to compare the assertion for and for another resolution with the same properties of the form , for some morphism . Note that if is the reduced inverse image of on , then and is an isomorphism over . In this case, we have for all
[TABLE]
by [EV, Lemmas 1.2 and 1.5]; cf. also [MP1, Theorem 31.1(i)]. The assertion in the lemma thus follows via the Leray spectral sequence. ∎
If is smooth, then is an isomorphism, and we trivially have for all and all . From now on, we focus on the case when is singular (in which case recall, as mentioned in the Introduction, that , where ).
The proof of Theorem D is inspired by the proof of [MOP, Theorem E], which partly treats the case . We begin with an auxiliary result:
Lemma 7.2**.**
Let be the blow-up of a smooth variety along a smooth, irreducible subvariety , of codimension . Let be a reduced simple normal crossing divisor on , having simple normal crossings with as well, and denote by the strict transform of and by the exceptional divisor on . Then for every , the following hold:
[TABLE]
Proof.
For the assertion is clear and for it follows from [MP1, Theorem 31.1(ii)], so from now on we assume , hence . We argue by induction on . If , then the assertion holds for all , using again [EV, Lemmas 1.2 and 1.5]. Suppose now that is not contained in . Since the assertion is local on , we may assume that we have algebraic coordinates on such that is defined by and all components of are defined by some , with . Let be the smooth divisor on defined by and consider the induced morphism , where is the strict transform of on . Consider the standard residue short exact sequence on :
[TABLE]
Note that is the blow-up of along , with exceptional divisor . Moreover, the strict transform of is . Since , the inductive assumption thus gives
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
On the other hand, since it follows, again from the reference above, that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The long exact sequence for higher direct images associated to (7.3) gives
[TABLE]
together with an exact sequence
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
which compared to the standard residue sequence gives the assertions in the lemma. ∎
In order to apply the previous lemma, we will need to control the codimension of the blow-up centers when we have a lower bound on . This is provided by:
Proposition 7.4**.**
If is a singular effective divisor on such that for some nonnegative integer , then we have the following lower bound for the codimension of the singular locus of :
[TABLE]
To see this, we first prove a general lemma concerning the behavior of under restriction to a general hypersurface.
Lemma 7.5**.**
If is an effective divisor on and is a general smooth hypersurface in (for example, a general member of a basepoint-free linear system), then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We may assume that is reduced: otherwise , hence and for general we have
[TABLE]
where the second inequality follows, for example, from the Generic Restriction theorem for multiplier ideals, see [Lazarsfeld, Theorem 9.5.35]. Supposing now that is reduced, we appeal to results on Hodge ideals (for -divisors). If we write , for some and some nonnegative integer , it follows from [MP3, Corollary C] that and since is general, according to [MP2, Theorem 13.1] we have
[TABLE]
Another application of [MP3, Corollary C] gives . ∎
Proof of Proposition 7.4.
We may assume that is an affine variety. We denote . If and is a general hyperplane section of , then is smooth, is singular, and \dim\big{(}(D|_{H})_{\rm sing}\big{)}=r-1. Moreover, it follows from Lemma 7.5 that . After iterating this times, we obtain a smooth subvariety of , with , such that is a singular effective divisor and . Since , we conclude that , hence
[TABLE]
∎
We can finally approach our main goal for this section.
Proof of Theorem D.
Let be a smooth variety in which embeds as a hypersurface. We need to show, equivalently, that if is a nonnegative integer such that , then
[TABLE]
By Lemma 7.1, the assertion in the theorem is independent of the choice of resolution . We thus first construct a log resolution of the pair , as a composition
[TABLE]
where
- i)
Each with is the blow-up of a smooth, irreducible subvariety of that lies over . We denote by the exceptional divisor of and by the strict transform of on . 2. ii)
Each with has simple normal crossings with .
In particular, we see inductively that each is smooth and is a simple normal crossing divisor. We may assume that is smooth, so that the induced morphism is a resolution of that is an isomorphism over . Furthermore, if , and , then and this is a simple normal crossing divisor on .
Claim. For every , we have
[TABLE]
To see this, using the Leray spectral sequence, it is enough to show that for every we have
[TABLE]
If , then this follows from [EV, Lemmas 1.2 and 1.5] (or [MP1, Theorem 31.1(i)]). On the other hand, if , then is equal to the strict transform of its image in . By construction and Proposition 7.4, it follows that , and (7.7) then follows from Lemma 7.2. This proves our claim.
Consider now the residue short exact sequence
[TABLE]
on , and the following piece in the corresponding long exact sequence for higher direct images:
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
the first term vanishes because of Corollary C. Since the third term vanishes by the above Claim, we conclude that the middle term vanishes as well. This completes the proof of the theorem. ∎
References
