
TL;DR
This paper introduces graded topological spaces, combining topology with sheaves of abelian groups to facilitate graded objects, and develops foundational sheaf theory and duality results for these spaces.
Contribution
It presents the concept of graded topological spaces and establishes their fundamental sheaf-theoretic properties and duality theories, expanding the framework of classical topology.
Findings
Defined graded topological spaces with sheaves of abelian groups
Developed sheaf theory for graded spaces
Established Poincaré-Verdier duality in this context
Abstract
We introduce the notion of a "graded topological space": a topological space endowed with a sheaf of abelian groups which we think of as a sheaf of gradings. Any object living on a graded topological space will be graded by this sheaf of abelian groups. We work out the fundamentals of sheaf theory and Poincar\'e-Verdier duality for such spaces.
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.
\DeclareLabelalphaTemplate\labelelement
inal]shorthand [varwidthlist,strside=left,names=4]labelname
Graded topological spaces
Clemens Koppensteiner
Abstract.
We introduce the notion of a “graded topological space”: a topological space endowed with a sheaf of abelian groups which we think of as a sheaf of gradings. Any object living on a graded topological space will be graded by this sheaf of abelian groups. We work out the fundamentals of sheaf theory and Poincaré–Verdier duality for such spaces.
Contents
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Graded topological spaces
- 3 Ringed graded topological spaces
- 4 Derived categories
- 5 Poincaré–Verdier duality
1. Introduction
Given a topological space , we are interested in graded sheaves on whose grading varies over . We formalize this notion by introducing a sheaf of gradings and then considering sheaves on such that for each open of the sections of over are graded by . In this short note we develop the basic theory of such objects.
We are mainly motivated by questions in logarithmic geometry. However, as we expect that the constructions presented here will be useful in other situations, we chose to give this self-contained exposition of graded spaces. Our main goal is to clarify the definition of -graded objects and functors between categories of such objects, as well as to show that standard results of sheaf theory continue to hold in this generality.
Motivation
Our specific motivation is the wish to classify logarithmic connections and D-modules by some analogue of the Riemann–Hilbert correspondence. In this subsection we discuss in an example why one might expect to obtain graded sheaves in this process. This also informs the level of generality that we have chosen for the constructions in this article. We want to emphasize that the present subsection is not necessary for understanding the remainder of this text and may be safely skipped by the reader not interested in logarithmic connections.
Consider the complex line with coordinate function . A logarithmic connection on is a vector bundle with an action of the subbundle of the tangent bundle generated by . So, for the trivial line bundle we could require that acts on sections by for any fixed .
On this reduces to the usual connections , which only depend on . On the other hand, as logarithmic connections the above connections are genuinely different for each .
Classically, (integrable) connections are equivalent to locally constant sheaves. As does not support any nontrivial locally constant sheaves, one modifies slightly by replacing the origin with a circle (i.e. one takes the real blowup at the origin) [KatoNakayama]. This greatly increases the number of locally constant sheaves at our disposal. However locally constant sheaves on this new space can still only record as the monodromy around the circle. Thus one grades the sheaves in order to record the residue of modulo [Ogus, K].
In order for this construction to generalize the classical situation, one should impose this grading only over the added circle, so that over one obtains just a classical local system. In addition, to make this construction work when one replaces vector bundles by coherent sheaves or D-modules, one needs to not only consider sheaves of -modules, but modules over more general sheaves of -algebras (which themselves are graded), so that one can record the possible appearance of nilpotent sections. Thus one naturally arrives at the notion of ringed graded spaces explored in Section 3.
Classically the Riemann–Hilbert correspondence matches the six functor formalisms of regular holonomic D-modules and (constructible) sheaves of -modules. Of particular importance are the duality functors that exist in both contexts. In Section 5 we show that Poincaré–Verdier duality can be extended to graded sheaves, while duality for logarithmic D-modules is introduced in [KT]. In [K] we give an explicit computation of the dualizing functor for spaces of the form and show that it exactly matches the duality functor for logarithmic D-modules.
Acknowledgments
The author was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DMS-1638352.
Standing assumptions
All topological spaces are assumed to be locally compact, and hence in particular Hausdorff. By a ring we always mean a commutative ring with unit. We write abelian groups additively with neutral element [math].
2. Graded topological spaces
Definition 2.1**.**
A graded topological space is a pair , consisting of a topological space and a sheaf of abelian groups on . A morphism of graded topological spaces consists of a pair , where is a continuous map and is a morphism of sheaves of abelian groups. Such a morphism is called strict if is an isomorphism.
We will often denote a graded topological space simply by and similarly a map by . Any topological space can be considered as a graded topological space with .
For an abelian group , a -graded -module is a -module with a decomposition for -modules . If is homogeneous of degree , we write .
Definition 2.2**.**
Let be a graded topological space. A presheaf on is an assignment of a -graded -module to each open subset together with restriction maps (of -modules) such that for each . Sometimes we will call such an object a -graded presheaf to emphasize the distinction with ordinary presheaves.
Let , be two presheaves on . A morphism of -graded presheaves is an ordinary morphism of presheaves such that in addition for each open and . We write for the category of presheaves on .
Let and . We write for the presheaf with . An element of is called a morphism of degree .
There exists an obvious forgetful functor . We will sometimes silently treat a graded presheaf as an ordinary presheaf on via this functor.
For one defines the stalk of a presheaf in the usual way. It is a -graded -module.
Definition 2.3**.**
For any and any we let be the ordinary presheaf given by
[TABLE]
Definition 2.4**.**
Let be a graded topological space. A (-graded) sheaf on is -graded presheaf that such that for each open of and each the (ordinary) presheaf is a sheaf. We denote by the full subcategory of consisting of sheaves.
Remark 2.5*.*
The underlying ungraded presheaf of a graded sheaf need not necessarily be a sheaf. For example, one might have two sections and such that but . In this case, disregarding the grading one should be able to glue and . But as and do not glue, one would not be able to assign a grading to the glued section.
As in the ungraded setting a morphism of sheaves is an isomorphism if and only if it is on stalks, see [KS, Proposition 2.2.2]. Similarly, by adding gradings to the standard construction (see [KS, Proposition 2.2.3]) one defines the sheafification functor:
Lemma 2.6**.**
The forgetful functor has a left adjoint, called sheafification. If is a presheaf, then the associated sheaf has the same stalks as .
Definition 2.7**.**
For we set
[TABLE]
This enhances to a -graded category. We denote by the -graded sheaf
[TABLE]
Definition 2.8**.**
For denote by the -graded sheaf associated to the presheaf
[TABLE]
Let be a continuous map of topological spaces and let be a sheaf of abelian groups on . Then we get an obvious morphism of graded topological spaces . The usual functors of sheaves and induce adjoint functors between and .
Definition 2.9**.**
Let be a morphism of graded topological spaces. Define a functor
[TABLE]
by
[TABLE]
Also define a functor
[TABLE]
by
[TABLE]
One checks that these definition indeed make sense, i.e. send graded sheaves to graded sheaves. We note that if , then is the “degree [math] global sections” functor. In particular we have .
Remark 2.10*.*
The pushforward functor will in general not keep finiteness properties of the sheaf . A good example to keep in mind is with constructible such that and . Then the graded pushforward along sends the constant sheaf with fiber to the sheaf with stalk at [math] equal to (and constant with fiber otherwise).
Lemma 2.11**.**
Let be a morphism of graded topological spaces. Then for and there exists a natural isomorphism
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
and is left adjoint to .
Proof.
If , then this follows easily from the classical adjointness of pullback and pushforward. Thus we can assume that the underlying map of topological spaces is the identity. In this case one checks that a morphism of ungraded sheaves is contained in either if it fulfills the same degree conditions on local sections. ∎
The functor is clearly exact, whence is left exact by Lemma 2.11.
Definition 2.12**.**
Let be a morphism of graded spaces and . We define to be the subsheaf of with sections
[TABLE]
We write for with .
Clearly is left exact and when is proper.
Remark 2.13*.*
Let be a morphism of graded spaces and . Then in general is not equal to . For an extreme example consider , where the former is degree [math] sections, while the latter are all (-graded) sections. The same remark applies to and .
For any subset we set , where we endow with the grading .
Lemma 2.14**.**
Let be a morphism of graded spaces and let . Factor as
[TABLE]
Then for each there exists a canonical isomorphism of -graded modules
[TABLE]
Here we endow with the sheaf of gradings .
Proof.
One easily checks that the above morphism respects the gradings. The fact that it is an isomorphism can then be checked in the usual way, see [KS, Proposition 2.5.2] or [I, Theorem VII.1.4]. ∎
Lemma 2.15**.**
The category of graded spaces admits pullbacks. Concretely, if and are two morphisms of graded spaces, then their pullback is isomorphic to as follows: The underlying topological space is the cartesian product . Let and be the projection maps. The sheaf of abelian groups is the pushout of and :
[TABLE]
Proof.
Follows directly from the universal properties. ∎
Proposition 2.16**.**
Consider a cartesian square
[TABLE]
of graded spaces. Then there is a canonical isomorphism of functors
[TABLE]
Proof.
Using Lemma 2.14, this can be shown as in the ungraded situation while carefully keeping track of gradings using Lemma 2.15, see [KS, Proposition 2.5.11]. ∎
3. Ringed graded topological spaces
Let be a graded topological space. A sheaf of rings111Recall that by “ring” we always mean a commutative ring with unit. (resp. -algebras) on is a -graded sheaf such that each is a -graded ring (resp. a -graded -algebra) and the restriction maps are ring homomorphisms (resp. -algebra homomorphisms).
Definition 3.1**.**
A graded ringed topological spaces is a triple , where is a graded topological space and is a -graded sheaf of commutative rings on . A morphism of graded ringed topological spaces is a triple where is a morphism of graded topological spaces and is morphism of -graded sheaves of rings. Such a morphism is called strict if and are isomorphisms.
Definition 3.2**.**
Let be a graded ringed topological space. We write for the category of -graded sheaves of -modules, i.e. the category whose objects are -graded sheaves such that each is a -graded -module with compatible restriction maps and morphisms are required to respect this additional structure.
Let and be two -modules. Then , , and are defined in the obvious way. We will often simply write , and for the various Hom functors.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let be a morphism of -graded sheaves of commutative rings. Let and be -modules and an -module. Then there is a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
As in the ungraded setting, it suffices to check the isomorphism on presheaves defining the above sheaves, see [KS, Proposition 2.2.9]. There it follows from the corresponding adjunction for graded modules. ∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let be a morphism of graded topological spaces and let be a -graded sheaf of rings on . Then for any -modules and there exists a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
As in the ungraded setting, see [KS, Proposition 2.3.5]. ∎
Clearly, . If is a morphism of graded ringed topological spaces, then as defined in Definition 2.9 enhances to a functor
[TABLE]
and similarly we have a functor
[TABLE]
Remark 3.5*.*
Here we have to be careful to make sure that acts with the correct degrees: If and , then comes from a section in . Via the morphism , comes from a section . A priory there might be many which map to . The section has to be in degree .
Again a good example to keep in mind is as in Remark 2.10, where one endows with the constructible sheaf of rings with stalks on and at [math] with and . Let be the constant sheaf with stalk on and the inclusion . If (with open), then comes from a section . The sheaf contains -many copies of this section. We have to define to be the one in .
Definition 3.6**.**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed topological spaces. Define a functor
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed topological spaces. Then for and there exists a natural isomorphism
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
and is left adjoint to .
Proof.
If , then the statement is proven in the same way as Lemma 2.11. So we can assume that . In this case the statement is just tensor-Hom adjunction (Lemma 3.3). ∎
As is left exact, Lemma 3.7 implies that is right exact.
Definition 3.8**.**
For an -module and a locally closed subset we write for the sheaf satisfying the following conditions
[TABLE]
The sheaf is constructed in the usual way, see [KS, 93]. If is a -graded -module, then so is . The following lemma is standard.
Lemma 3.9**.**
Let be a locally closed subset. The functor is exact. Further, if is open, then we have an exact sequence in
[TABLE]
4. Derived categories
In this section will always be a ringed graded space.
As in the non-graded case one defines the kernel and cokernel of a morphism of -modules and obtains the following lemma (see [KS, Proposition 2.2.4]).
Lemma 4.1**.**
The category is abelian.
We write for the corresponding derived categories, where is one of .
Lemma 4.2**.**
Every -module admits a surjection for some flat -module .
Proof.
For each open and each homogeneous section set . Then has a map to sending to . Thus maps onto . Further is flat since for each the stalk is a sum of shifts of free -modules. ∎
4.1. The derived category via model structures
Let be the category of complexes of -modules.
Proposition 4.3**.**
The category can be endowed with a symmetric monoidal model structure such that the weak equivalences are the quasi-equivalences of complexes and the monoidal product is given by the tensor product of complexes. In particular \bigl{(}\mathbf{D}(X,\Lambda,\mathcal{R}),\otimes^{\mathbb{L}}_{\mathcal{R}},\mathcal{R},\mathbb{R}\underline{\operatorname{Hom}}_{\mathcal{R}}\bigr{)} is a closed monoidal category.
Proof.
The proof of this proposition is along the lines of that for [DS, Proposition 2.18]. Thus we let be the set of sheaves , where runs over all open subsets of and . Then is a flat family of generators in the sense of [CD, Section 3.1]. By [CD, Remark 2.12] we can complete to a descent structure , which is automatically flat by [CD, Proposition 3.7]. Thus the corresponding -model structure on yields a symmetric monoidal model category [CD, Proposition 3.2]. The theorem then follows from [H, Theorem 4.3.2]. ∎
4.2. Acyclic sheaves
In this section we introduce several properties of sheaves and show that they imply acyclicity for various functors.
First, as usual one calls a sheaf injective if is an exact functor.
Lemma 4.4**.**
The category has enough injectives.
Proof.
As in the ungraded situation one reduces to the case of being a single point, see [KS, Proposition 2.4.3]. There the statement follows from the corresponding statement for graded modules, which is classical (see for example [Stacks, Tag 04JD]). ∎
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let be an injective object of . Then is injective for all and is injective in for all open subsets . In particular and are exact functors.
Proof.
The first statement follows from . If is an -module, then
[TABLE]
where is the inclusion. As and are exact, the second statement follows. ∎
Definition 4.6**.**
A sheaf is called flabby if for any open subset and any the sheaf is flabby as an ordinary sheaf. In other words, for any open we require that the restriction morphism is surjective.
Unless is flabby, a flabby graded sheaf will not necessarily be flabby as an ordinary (pre-)sheaf.
Lemma 4.7**.**
Let be injective. Then for every the sheaf is flabby. In particular every injective -module is flabby.
Proof.
Let be open. Consider the short exact sequence
[TABLE]
Applying the exact functor we get a surjection
[TABLE]
We now have
[TABLE]
The statement follows. ∎
Lemma 4.8**.**
Let be an exact sequence in with flabby, and let be a morphism of graded spaces. Then is exact. In particular is a short exact sequence of -graded -modules.
Proof.
It suffices to show that for every the sequence
[TABLE]
is exact. By definition, is flabby as an ordinary sheaf, so this assertion is classical, see [KS, Proposition 2.4.7]. ∎
Definition 4.9**.**
A sheaf is called soft if for any open subset and the sheaf is soft as an ordinary sheaf, i.e. for every compact subset the restriction \Gamma\bigl{(}U,(\mathchoice{\left.\mathcal{F}\right|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}})_{\lambda}\bigr{)}\to\Gamma\bigl{(}K,i^{-1}(\mathchoice{\left.\mathcal{F}\right|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}}{\mathcal{F}|_{U}})_{\lambda}\bigr{)} is surjective.
Every flabby sheaf (and hence every injective sheaf) is soft.
Lemma 4.10**.**
Let be an exact sequence in with soft, and let be a morphism of graded spaces. Then is exact.
Proof.
It suffices to show that for every the sequence
[TABLE]
is exact. By definition, is soft as an ordinary sheaf, so this assertion is classical, see [KS, Proposition 2.5.8]. ∎
4.3. Identities for derived functors
As in the ungraded setting, one sees that if is a morphism of graded topological spaces and is flabby (resp. soft), then so is (resp. ). If and are two morphisms of graded topological spaces, then (resp. ) can be computed via flabby (soft) resolutions. Thus and . From the following lemma it then follows that also .
Lemma 4.11**.**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed topological spaces. Then for and there exists natural isomorphisms
[TABLE]
and is left adjoint to .
Proof.
By tensor-hom adjunction (Proposition 4.3) we can reduce to . By adjunction the functor sends injective modules to injective modules. Thus both sides are computed via the same derived functor. ∎
Lemma 4.12**.**
Let be an open subset with complement . Then for any there exits a distinguished triangle
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since the restrictions preserve softness, it suffices to show that for any soft sheaf we have a short exact sequence
[TABLE]
This follows from Lemma 3.9. ∎
Proposition 4.13** (Projection formula).**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed spaces. Let and and assume that has a finite flat resolution. Then there exists a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us first assume that .
Assume further that is a flat -module and . Then one shows that with a direct adaptation of the proof in the ungraded case, see [I, \noppVII.2.4] or [KS, Proposition 2.5.13]. On the other hand, if , then it is a simple matter to check that the gradings on the two sides match.
Further, still assuming that is flat, [KS, Lemma 2.5.12] (whose proof again upgrades to the graded setting) implies that both derived functors are computed by a soft resolution of , and hence agree. Resolving a general by flat sheaves, the derived statement follows in the case that .
The general case then follows from
[TABLE]
Similarly one upgrades Proposition 2.16 to a derived statement (compare [KS, Proposition 2.6.7]):
Proposition 4.14**.**
Consider a cartesian square
[TABLE]
of graded spaces. Then there exists a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
Remark 4.15*.*
This base change isomorphism does not upgraded to a base change isomorphism for ringed graded spaces. This is simply because base change doesn’t even hold for general morphisms of ungraded ringed spaces (e.g. complex (analytic) varieties).
5. Poincaré–Verdier duality
Throughout this section we will assume that all rings are noetherian.
Recall that a topological space has cohomological dimension at most if for all and all .
Definition 5.1**.**
A graded topological space has cohomological dimension at most if the underlying topological space has cohomological dimension at most .
Lemma 5.2**.**
A graded space has cohomological dimension at most if and only if for any exact sequence
[TABLE]
in , if are soft then so is .
Proof.
The statement is classical if [I, Proposition III.9.9]. The graded statement follows from this by considering the sequences for . ∎
Recall our standing assumption that all topological spaces we consider are locally compact. The main result of this section is the following duality theorem.
Theorem 5.3**.**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed spaces. Assume that has finite cohomological dimension. Then there exists a functor right adjoint to . Moreover there exists natural isomorphisms
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The proof of Theorem 5.3 is roughly the same as in the ungraded setting. We will highlight the major steps.
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let be an additive functor that sends colimits to limits. Then is representable.
Proof.
We define a presheaf of -graded -modules by for each open subset and . Then is a sheaf. Indeed, if is an open covering of an open subset of and we have an exact sequence
[TABLE]
Applying , we obtain
[TABLE]
which is just the sheaf condition for .
We can write any sheaf functorially as a colimit of sheaves of the form . Namely, we form the category whose objects are pairs with open and a homogeneous element of and with a single morphism if and only if and . For each such pair we have a map defined by the section .
It follows from the assumption on that we have a natural isomorphism . ∎
Lemma 5.5**.**
Let be a morphism of ringed graded topological spaces and assume that has finite cohomological dimension. Then for any flat and soft -module on and any -module the functor
[TABLE]
is representable.
Proof.
By Lemma 5.4, it suffices to show that the functor commutes with colimits. As in the ungraded case the functor commutes with direct sums, so it suffices to show that it is exact. For this it in turn suffices to show that is soft.
By the construction of Lemma 4.2, has a resolution
[TABLE]
such that each is a direct product of sheaves of the form for open and . It follows that is a direct sum of shifts of restrictions of and hence is soft. As is flat, we obtain an exact sequence
[TABLE]
where each is soft. Thus Lemma 5.2 implies that is soft as well. ∎
Lemma 5.6**.**
If has finite cohomological dimension, then the sheaf has a finite resolution by soft and flat modules.
Proof.
This is proven exactly as in the ungraded situation, see [I, Proposition VI.1.3]. Note that this is where the assumption that is noetherian is used (via [I, Lemma VI.1.4]) ∎
Proof of Theorem 5.3.
By Lemma 5.5, for any flat and soft -module and any -module there exists a -module and a canonical isomorphism
[TABLE]
for any -module . As the functor is exact by the proof of Lemma 5.5, if is injective, so is . From here one bootstraps up to the derived statement in the usual manner by taking to be a finite soft and flat resolution of , see [I, Theorem VII.3.1] or [KS, Theorem 3.1.5 and Proposition 3.1.10] for details. ∎
If and are two morphisms of ringed graded topological spaces, then and hence
Let be a commutative ring. Recall that a dualizing complex for is a complex of -modules of finite injective dimension such that the canonical map is an isomorphism [Stacks, Tag 0A7B]. From now on we assume that has a dualizing complex , which we fix [Stacks, Tag 0BFR]. For example if is a field, one can take .
Definition 5.7**.**
Let be a ringed graded topological space of finite cohomological dimension such that is a graded sheaf of -algebras. Let be the canonical map. We call the dualizing complex of and the dualizing functor.
Remark 5.8*.*
Consider a ringed graded space and let be the underlying topological space. Let be the canonical map. Then for any -graded sheaf on and any one has . Suppose we know the dualizing complex . Then,
[TABLE]
Thus, knowing duality for , it is often not too hard to determine the dualizing complex for .
Corollary 5.9**.**
Let be a morphism of graded ringed spaces and assume that has finite cohomological dimension. Then:
- (i)
* for any .* 2. (ii)
. 3. (iii)
.
Proof.
As in the classical case, (i) follows from Theorem 5.3, tensor-hom adjunction and the projection formula (Proposition 4.13), see [KS, Proposition 3.1.13]. Assertion (ii) is immediate from Theorem 5.3 with , while (iii) follows from (i) in the same manner. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[CD] Denis-Charles Cisinski and Frédéric Déglise “Local and stable homological algebra in Grothendieck abelian categories” In Homology Homotopy Appl. 11.1 , 2009, pp. 219–260 URL: http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.hha/1251832567
- 2[DS] Ivo Dell’Ambrogio and Greg Stevenson “On the derived category of a graded commutative Noetherian ring” In Journal of Algebra 373 , 2013, pp. 356–376 DOI: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2012.09.038 · doi ↗
- 3[H] Mark Hovey “Model categories”, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 63 American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1999
- 4[I] Birger Iversen “Cohomology of sheaves”, Universitext Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-82783-9 · doi ↗
- 5[K] Clemens Koppensteiner “The de Rham fiunctor for logarithmic D-modules” In ar Xiv e-prints , 2019 ar Xiv: 1904.07918 [math.AG]
- 6[KN] Kazuya Kato and Chikara Nakayama “Log Betti cohomology, log étale cohomology, and log de Rham cohomology of log schemes over 𝐂 𝐂 {\mathbf{C}} ” In Kodai Mathematical Journal 22.2 , 1999, pp. 161–186 DOI: 10.2996/kmj/1138044041 · doi ↗
- 7[KS] Masaki Kashiwara and Pierre Schapira “Sheaves on manifolds” With a chapter in French by Christian Houzel, Corrected reprint of the 1990 original, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 292 Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1994
- 8[KT] Clemens Koppensteiner and Mattia Talpo “Holonomic and perverse logarithmic D-modules” In Advances in Mathematics 346 , 2019, pp. 510–545 DOI: 10.1016/j.aim.2019.02.016 · doi ↗
