Critical points of random branched coverings of the Riemann sphere
Michele Ancona (AGL)

TL;DR
This paper constructs a natural probability measure on branched coverings of a Riemann surface and proves a large deviations principle for the number of critical points, showing they concentrate around a predictable value as degree increases.
Contribution
It introduces a natural probability measure on the space of branched coverings and establishes a large deviations principle for critical points, revealing their typical distribution behavior.
Findings
Probability of no critical points in a set decreases exponentially with degree.
Number of critical points concentrates around 2d times the volume of the set.
Large deviations bound quantifies fluctuations of critical points.
Abstract
Given a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form , we construct a natural probability measure on the space of degree branched coverings from to the Riemann sphere We prove a large deviations principle for the number of critical points in a given open set : given any sequence of positive numbers, the probability that the number of critical points of a branched covering deviates from more than is smaller than , for some positive constant . In particular, the probability that a covering does not have any critical point in a given open set goes to zero exponential fast with the degree.
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.
Critical points of random branched coverings of the Riemann sphere
Michele Ancona Institut Camille Jordan, Umr Cnrs 5208, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1. [email protected]
Abstract
Given a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form , we construct a natural probability measure on the space of degree branched coverings from to the Riemann sphere We prove a large deviations principle for the number of critical points in a given open set : given any sequence of positive numbers, the probability that the number of critical points of a branched covering deviates from more than is smaller than , for some positive constant . In particular, the probability that a covering does not have any critical point in a given open set goes to zero exponential fast with the degree.
Introduction
This paper is concerned with the branched coverings of very large degree from a closed Riemann surface to the Riemann sphere. By the Riemann-Hurwitz formula, the number of critical points of such maps, counted with multiplicity, equals , where denotes the genus of and is the degree of the map.
How do these critical points distribute on , if we pick at random?
In order to answer the question, we first construct a probability measure on the space of degree branched coverings . This probability measure is denoted by and it is associated with a volume form on of total mass (that is ), which is fixed once for all. Later in the introduction we will sketch the construction of the measure , which we will give in details in Section 1.3.
The distribution of the critical points of a map is encoded by the associated empirical measure which we renormalize by , so that its mass does not depend on . More precisely, for any degree branched coverings , we consider the probability measure on defined by
[TABLE]
where stands for the Dirac measure at . The central object of the paper is then the random variable which takes values in the space of probabilities on . The expected value of converges in the weak topology to the volume form of , see Theorem 2.5. It means that, for any continuous function , one has
[TABLE]
The main theorem of the paper is the following large deviations estimate for the random variable .
Theorem 0.1**.**
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of mass . For any smooth function and any sequence of positive real numbers of the form , for some , there exists a positive constant such that the following inequality
[TABLE]
holds.
The key point in the proof of Theorem 0.1 is a large deviations estimate for the -norm of the random variable , see Proposition 2.6. This estimate is obtained by combining Hörmander peak sections and some properties of subharmonic functions.
It turns out that the constant in Theorem 0.1 is of the form , where is a constant which does not depend on , but only on the sequence (and on ).
One of the consequence of Theorem 0.1 is the following large deviations estimate for overcrowding and undercrowding of critical points in a given open set .
Theorem 0.2**.**
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of mass . For any open subset with boundary, there exists a positive constant such that, for any sequence of the form , for some , the following inequality
[TABLE]
holds.
Theorem 0.2 follows from Theorem 0.1 by taking, as test functions, two sequences of functions and which approximate from above and below, in an appropriate way, the characteristic function of the set .
Another consequence of Theorem 0.1 is the following hole probabilities result for critical points of random branched coverings.
Theorem 0.3**.**
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of mass . For every open subset there exists such that
[TABLE]
Remark that Theorem 0.3 is not a formal consequence of Theorem 0.2 for the constant sequence . Indeed, in Theorem 0.3, we do not require any regularity on the boundary of .
Let us briefly describe the construction of the probability measure , which will be given in details in Section 1.3. The fundamental remark is that the space is fibered over the space of degree line bundles on . Indeed, there is a natural map from to which maps every morphism to the line bundle . The fiber of this map over is denoted by . It is an open dense subset of given by (the class of) pairs of global sections without common zeros. In order to construct a probability measure on , we produce a family of probability measures on each space which restricts to a probability measure on , still denoted by . The probability measure on is the measure induced by the Fubini-Study metric associated with a Hermitian product on . This Hermitian product is a natural -product induced by , see Section 1.2. This family of measures, together with the Haar probability measure on the base , gives rise to the probability measure on .
Large deviations estimates of overcrowding and undercrowding of zeros of random entire functions and random holomorphic sections been intensively studied, see [3, Corollaire 7.4], [4],[7], and [8]. The main difference here is that the equation defining a zero of a holomorphic section or of an entire function is linear, whereas we will see that the one defining a critical points of a branched covering is quadratic and then computations and estimates cannot be done purely by Gaussian methods.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 1 we construct the probability measure on the space of degree branched coverings. In Section 2, we prove a large deviations estimate for the -norm of the random variable , see Proposition 2.6. Hörmander peak sections and Bergman kernel estimates will play an important role in the proof of this large deviations estimate. Finally, in Section 3 we combine these large deviations estimates together with Poincaré-Lelong formula to get the main theorems.
1 Framework and probability measure on
1.1 Branched coverings and line bundles
Throughout all the paper, will denote a smooth closed Riemann surface.
Proposition 1.1**.**
Let be a degree line bundle over and two global sections without common zeros, then the map defined by is a degree branched covering. Two pairs and of global holomorphic sections of define the same branched covering if and only if for some .
Proof.
If for some then it is obvious that we get the same branched covering. Suppose now that two pairs of holomorphic sections of define the same branched covering. In particular the sets and coincide. This implies that and have the same zeros so that for some . Taking the preimage of , with the same argument we get for some . Taking a point in the preimage of we get and . This gives , hence the result. ∎
Definition 1.2**.**
We denote by the space of degree branched coverings from to the Riemann sphere .
Proposition 1.3**.**
The space is fibered over the space of degree line bundles over . The fibration is given by . The fiber over is the dense open subset of given by (the class of) pair of sections without common zeros.
Proof.
Given a degree branched covering , we get a degree line bundle over and two global holomorphic sections without common zeros. Conversely, if we have a degree line bundle and two global sections without common zeros, then the map defined by is a well-defined degree branched covering. By Proposition 1.1, if and only if for some . Hence the result. ∎
1.2 -products and Bergman kernel
Let be a degree line bundle over . In this section we construct a -Hermitian product on . This Hermitian product is associated with a volume form of total volume , which is fixed once for all.
Proposition 1.4**.**
Let be a degree line bundle over and a volume form on of mass . Then, there exists an unique Hermitian metric (up to multiplication by a positive constant) such that .
Proof.
We start with any Hermitian metric of . Its curvature equals , where is its local potential and is any non-vanishing local section. As , by the -lemma we have , for . Then, the curvature of the Hermitian metric equals . If is another Hermitian metric, then we have , where is a real function . If we suppose that , then we obtain , which implies that is constant as is compact. Hence the result. ∎
A Hermitian metric on induces a -Hermitian product on . It is defined by
[TABLE]
for all in . The induced Hermitian product on is still denoted by .
Throughout all the paper, the Hermitian metric on we will consider is the one given by Proposition 1.4.
Let and be respectively a degree and [math] line bundles on . We equip and by the Hermitian metrics given by Proposition 1.4 which we denote by and . In particular the metric on is such that its curvature equals . We denote by the Bergman kernel associated with the Hermitian line bundle . The estimates of the Bergman kernel are well known, see [5, Section 4.2] or [2, 9, 10]. In particular, along the diagonal, we have that , and . For any , let us consider the evaluation map defined by . We denote by the section of unit -norm which generates the orthogonal of . Similarly, we consider the map and we denote by the section of unit -norm generating the orthogonal of . We call and the peak sections at .
Proposition 1.5**.**
Let and be respectively a degree and [math] line bundles on and be a point. Let and be the peak sections at associated with the line bundle . Then and as .
Proof.
We complete the orthonormal family into an orthonormal basis of . Then, equals the Bergman kernel . Similarly, we have . Now, we know that, as goes to infinity, and and that, by the construction of the peak sections and , we have and . Now, it is easy to see that and the latter is a . Hence the result. ∎
1.3 Probability on
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of total mass . In this section, we construct a natural probability measure on the space of degree branched coverings from to .
Given a degree line bundle over , we have seen that a Hermitian metric induces a natural -Hermitian product on and then on . The -product on induces a Fubini-Study metric on . We recall that the Fubini-Study metric is constructed as follows. First we restrict the Hermitian product to the unit sphere of . The obtained metric is then invariant under the action of . The Fubini-Study metric is then the quotient metric on .
Definition 1.6**.**
Let be a line bundle over . We denote by the probability measure on induced by the normalized Fubini-Study volume form. Here, the Fubini-Study metric on is the one induced by the Hermitian metric on given by Proposition 1.4.
Proposition 1.7**.**
The probability measure over does not depend on the choice of the multiplicative constant in front of the metric given by Proposition 1.4.
Proof.
Fix a metric given by Proposition 1.4. If we multiply this metric by a positive constant , then the two -scalar products and induced respectively by and are equal up to a multiplication by a positive scalar, that is . This constant in front of the scalar product does not affect the Fubini-Study metric, once we renormalize the Fubini-Study volume to have total volume . ∎
Proposition 1.8** (Proposition 2.11 of [1]).**
Let be a degree line bundle over . For almost all , the map is a degree branched covering.
Definition 1.9**.**
Let be the space of degree line bundles over . It is a principal space under the action of (by tensor product) and so it inherits a normalized Haar measure that we denote by dH.
Recall that we denote by the fiber of the map given by Proposition 1.3. We will denote by the set of pair of sections of having at least one common zero, so that
Definition 1.10**.**
We define the probability measure on by
[TABLE]
for any measurable function. Here:
- •
denotes (by a slight abuse of notation) the restriction to of the probability measure on defined in Definition 1.6.
- •
dH denotes the normalized Haar measure on .
Remark 1.11**.**
The choice the Haar measure on is natural but not essential: all the results of this paper are still true if we choose any probability measure which is absolute continuous with respect to the Haar measure. In the study of complex zeros of random holomorphic sections of a line bundle over a Riemann surface, a similar construction was given by Zelditch in [11].
1.4 Gaussian vs Fubini-Study measure
Following [6], given a degree line bundle, we equip with a Gaussian measure . In order to do this, we fix a volume form of total volume on and we equip by the metric with curvature (the metric is unique up to a multiplicative constant, see Proposition 1.4).
We have seen that any Hermitian metric induces a -Hermitian product on the space of global holomorphic sections of denoted by and defined by
[TABLE]
for all in . The Gaussian measure on is defined by
[TABLE]
for any open subset . Here is the Lebesgue measures on and denotes the complex dimension of . If , where is the genus of , then and then, by Riemann-Roch theorem, we have .
Proposition 1.12**.**
Let be a function on a Hermitian space which is constant over the complex lines, i.e. for any and any . Denote by the Gaussian measure on induced by and by the normalized Fubini-Study measure on the projectivized . Then, we have
[TABLE]
where is the function on induced by .
Proof.
This is a direct consequence of the construction of the Fubini-Study metric. ∎
The fundamental consequence of Proposition 1.12 is that, if we want to integrate a function on , we could pull-back this function over and integrate this pull-back with respect to the Gaussian measure induced by any Hermitian metric on given by Proposition 1.4. In particular, for any , we have where is the natural projection.
2 Critical points and large deviations estimates
2.1 Wronskian and critical points
Let be a closed Riemann surface and be a degree line bundle over . In this section, we start the study of the critical points of a branched covering by seeing them as zeros of a global section, the Wronskian.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let be a connection on . For any pair of sections , we denote by the Wronskian , which is a global section of .
Remark 2.2**.**
The Wronskian does not depend on the choice of a connection on . Indeed, two connections and on differ by a -form , and then .
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let be a degree line bundle over and be a pair of sections without common zeros. A point is a critical point of the map is and only if it is a zero of the Wronskian defined in Definition 2.1.
Proof.
Let be a pair of sections without common zeros and . Suppose that . On we consider the coordinate chart , where are the standard homogeneous coordinates of . Under this chart, the branched covering equals the meromorphic function . The differential of equals and then, as , we get that is a critical point of if and only if . If we suppose that , we use the coordinate and the same computation as before gives us that equals the function whose differential is . Hence the result. ∎
Definition 2.4**.**
- •
For any branched covering we denote by the probability empirical measure associated with the critical points of , that is
[TABLE]
Here, is the Dirac measure at .
- •
For any pair of global sections of , the empirical probability measure on the critical points of is simply denoted by (instead of ).
Theorem 2.5**.**
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of total volume equal to . Then
[TABLE]
weakly in the sense of distribution. Here, the expected value is taken with respect the probability measure on defined in Definition 1.10.
Proof.
We fix a degree line bundle over , so that for any there exists an unique such that . We equip and by the Hermitian metrics given by Proposition 1.4. We denote this metric respectively by and . Then, by [1, Theorem 1.5] and by Proposition 1.12, we have
[TABLE]
weakly in the sense of distribution. Here, stands for the expected value of with respect to the probability measure defined in Definition 1.6. The result follows by integrating along the compact base . ∎
2.2 Large deviations estimates
Let be a closed Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of total mass and and be respectively a degree and [math] line bundle over . We fix the Hermitian metrics and on and given by Proposition 1.4 and we will denote by any norm induced by these Hermitian metrics, in particular the Hermitian metric induced on . Let be the curvature form of , which equals . Recall that we denote by the Wronskian of a pair of global sections of , see Definition 2.1. The goal of this section is to prove Proposition 2.6, which is a large deviations estimate for the -norm of . This is a key result for the proof of Theorem 0.1.
Proposition 2.6**.**
Let be a sequence of positive numbers of the form , for some . Then, there exists a positive constant such that
[TABLE]
Here, is the Gaussian measure on constructed in Section 1.4.
In order to prove Proposition 2.6, we need some results on large deviations estimates on the modulus of . For this purpose, we will use Bergman kernel estimates as well as peak sections associated with the Hermitian line bundle of positive curvature .
Proposition 2.7**.**
For any sequence of positive real numbers, we have
[TABLE]
Here, is the Gaussian measure on constructed in Section 1.4.
Proof.
Let be the dimension of . By Riemann-Roch theorem, we have that as , where is the genus of . Let be an orthonormal basis of and write and , for any . Now, if and only if . Now, using first the triangular inequality and then Cauchy-Schwarz, we have
[TABLE]
By Bergman kernel estimates (see [2, 10, 9]), we have for any
[TABLE]
so that the last expression in (1) is bigger than if and this holds if . We then have
[TABLE]
We then have that
[TABLE]
We then estimate the last measure in (2). We write and , for any . By Cauchy-Schwarz we have so that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Combining the last estimate with (2) we have the result. ∎
Proposition 2.8**.**
For any sequences of positive real numbers and any , we have
[TABLE]
Here, is the Gaussian measure on constructed in Section 1.4.
Proof.
Let and be the first two peak sections at , as in Proposition 1.5. Recall that we have the estimates and . We write and where , that is and . In particular, we have . We then have the following inclusion
[TABLE]
Now, the Gaussian measure of the last set equals
[TABLE]
For any we make an unitary trasformation of (of coordinates ) by sending the vector to and the vector to We will write any vector of as a sum with . In these coordinates, the condition reads . The measure appearing in Equation (3) is then equal to
[TABLE]
where .
We pass to polar coordinates with and with . We then have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The first term of the sum in (4) is smaller than
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The second term of the sum in (4) is smaller than
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
We then obtain that the measure (3) is smaller than . ∎
Proof of Proposition 2.6.
Let us fix some notations. For any , we denote the circle of radiur by and the ball of radius by . Finally, we denote by and so that and .
By Proposition 2.7, we get
[TABLE]
so that we have to prove the following bound
[TABLE]
In order to prove (6), let us cover by a finite number of annuli , each of which is included in a coordinate chart. We can suppose that each annulus, read in these coordinates, is of the form . We fix a holomorphic trivializations and of and over each coordinate chart and then over each annulus. We make the following:
Claim: * For any sequence of positive real numbers, there exists a positive constant and a measurable set with , such that*
[TABLE]
for , , . Here, all the computations are done in the coordinate chart and is the invariant probability measure on the circle .
Before proving the Claim, we end the proof of Proposition 2.6. Since the exceptional set is independent of the radius , we can integrate the inequality (7) over and we get
[TABLE]
for some (independent of ) and any . By summing over the annuli the inequality (8) we get (6) which, together with (5), concludes the proof of the proposition.
We now prove the Claim. The proof follows the lines of [7, Lemma 4.1].
Let us fix some notations. We write if for any sequence , there exists a constant and a set of Gaussian measure smaller than such that for any and any .
Write and so that . Here and are local holomorphic trivializations of and over . In particular, this shows that the potential of the line bundle is .
Finally, we will denote by , for , any constant which does not depend on and .
Step 1: We claim that
[TABLE]
We will use the identity and we treat separately and .
Write and , and then , so that we have
[TABLE]
Now, and, by Proposition 2.7, we also have so that by (10) we have
[TABLE]
We now estimate the part. By Proposition 2.8, we know that and then, by (10), we get
[TABLE]
We denote by the Poisson kernel on the ball of radius . Using the identity and the fact that is subharmonic, we get
[TABLE]
By continuity of , we can find two positive constants such that for any . Then, by (13), we get
[TABLE]
Using the last inequality together with (11) and (12), we prove (9).
Step 2: We cover the unit circle by a family of disjoint union of intervals of length smaller than and denote by the length of each interval so that . Take such that . By Proposition 2.8, we can choose points such that, for any , we have , unless lies in a set of measure smaller than . Now, this measure is smaller than , for some , as .
By the choice of and we have that if then . In particular we get
[TABLE]
where is the differential of , which is a . By the choice of and and since the function is subharmonic, we can use [7, Equation (29)] to find a positive (which does not depend on and ) such that
[TABLE]
Using first (10) and then (14)-(15) we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where is the differential of . By (9), the choice of and (16), we have that
[TABLE]
Using the identity , Equations (17) and Proposition 2.7, we finally get
[TABLE]
which ends the proof of the Claim. ∎
Remark 2.9**.**
Following the proof we can see that, for the case of constant sequence , the constant in the statement of Proposition 2.6 is independent of .
3 Proofs of the main theorems
In this section we will prove Theorems 0.1, 0.2 and 0.3. We will follow the notations of Section 1. We fix a degree line bundle over , so that for any there exists an unique such that . We denote by the branched covering defined by a pair of global sections of without common zeros. A critical point of is a point such that . By Proposition 2.3, this is equivalent to the fact that that is a zero of the Wronskian , where is the cotangent bundle of . For any pair of global sections of , we denote by
[TABLE]
the empirical probability measure on the critical points of . Here, is the Dirac measure at . Finally, we will denote by any norm induced by the Hermitian metric on given by Proposition 1.4.
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let be a Riemann surface equipped with a volume form of mass and . For every smooth function , any degree line bundle and any sequence of the form , for some , there exists a positive constant such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
We denote by the curvature form of with respect to the (induced) metric given by Proposition 1.4. Remark that so that
[TABLE]
Remark that these sets are cones in . By Proposition 1.12, this implies that the Gaussian measure of these sets equals the Fubini-Study measure of their projectivizations. In order to obtain the result, we will then compute the Gaussian measure of the cones appearing in (18).
By Poincaré-Lelong formula we have
[TABLE]
The result then follows from the inequality (19), the inclusion (18) and Proposition 2.6. ∎
Proof of Theorem 0.1.
We fix a degree line bundle over , so that for any there exists an unique such that . The result then follows by integrating the inequality appearing in Theorem 3.1 along the compact base (the last isomorphism is given by the choice of the degree line bundle ). ∎
Remark 3.2**.**
Following the proof of Theorem 3.1 we see that we have prove a slight more precise result: for any sequence , there exists a positive constant such that for every smooth function we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, thanks to Remark 2.9, for the case of constant sequence , the constant in the statement is also independent of .
Proof of Theorem 0.2.
Fix an open set with piecewise boundary. Let be two families of functions such that
- •
;
- •
;
- •
- •
\norm{\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{d}^{+}}_{\infty}=O\big{(}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{d}^{2}}\big{)} and \norm{\partial\bar{\partial}\psi_{d}^{-}}_{\infty}=O\big{(}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{d}^{2}}\big{)}.
These functions can be constructed as follows. Let be a smooth function such that for and for . Then we define and , which are -functions thanks to the hypothesis on the boundary of .
By Theorem 0.1 for and by Remark 3.2, there exists a constant and a set of measure smaller than , such that for outside , we have
[TABLE]
Using again Theorem 0.1 and Remark 3.2 for , we can find and a set of measure smaller than , such that for outside we get This shows that, for any sequence and any , there exists a positive constant (any constant smaller than ) and a set of measure smaller than (the union of and ), such that for outside , \big{|}\frac{1}{2d}\#(\textrm{Crit}(u)\cap U)-\textrm{Vol}(U)\big{|}\leq\epsilon_{d}, which proves the theorem. ∎
Proof of Theorem 0.3.
The proof follows the lines of the proof of Theorem 0.2. Fix any open set. Let be two smooth functions such that
- •
;
- •
;
- •
By Theorem 0.1 for and by Remark 3.2, there exists a constant and a set of measure smaller than , such that for outside , we have
[TABLE]
Using again Theorem 0.1 and Remark 3.2 for , we can find and a set of measure smaller than , such that for outside we get This shows that, for any and any , there exists a positive constant and a set of measure smaller than , such that for outside , \big{|}\frac{1}{2d}\#(\textrm{Crit}(u)\cap U)-\textrm{Vol}(U)\big{|}\leq\epsilon. Taking we have the result. ∎
Acknowledgments.
I would like to thank Jean-Yves Welschinger for useful discussions. This work was performed within the framework of the LABEX MILYON (ANR-10-LABX-0070) of Université de Lyon, within the program "Investissements d’Avenir" (ANR-11-IDEX-0007) operated by the French National Research Agency (ANR).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Michele Ancona. Expected number and distribution of critical points of real Lefschetz pencils. To appear at Annales de l’Institut Fourier , ar Xiv:1707.08490.
- 2[2] Robert Berman, Bo Berndtsson, and Johannes Sjöstrand. A direct approach to Bergman kernel asymptotics for positive line bundles. Ark. Mat. , 46(2):197–217, 2008.
- 3[3] Tien-Cuong Dinh and Nessim Sibony. Distribution des valeurs de transformations méromorphes et applications. Comment. Math. Helv. , 81(1):221–258, 2006.
- 4[4] Manjunath Krishnapur. Overcrowding estimates for zeroes of planar and hyperbolic Gaussian analytic functions. J. Stat. Phys. , 124(6):1399–1423, 2006.
- 5[5] Xiaonan Ma and George Marinescu. Holomorphic Morse inequalities and Bergman kernels , volume 254 of Progress in Mathematics . Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2007.
- 6[6] Bernard Shiffman and Steve Zelditch. Distribution of zeros of random and quantum chaotic sections of positive line bundles. Comm. Math. Phys. , 200(3):661–683, 1999.
- 7[7] Bernard Shiffman, Steve Zelditch, and Scott Zrebiec. Overcrowding and hole probabilities for random zeros on complex manifolds. Indiana Univ. Math. J. , 57(5):1977–1997, 2008.
- 8[8] Mikhail Sodin and Boris Tsirelson. Random complex zeroes. III. Decay of the hole probability. Israel J. Math. , 147:371–379, 2005.
