This paper investigates strong exceptional collections of line bundles on Fano toric Deligne-Mumford stacks with low Picard rank, proving they generate the entire derived category when of maximal length.
Contribution
It establishes that such collections of line bundles of maximal length generate the derived category on these stacks, extending understanding of their categorical structure.
Findings
01
Strong exceptional collections of line bundles generate the derived category.
02
Maximal length collections correspond to the rank of K-theory.
03
Results apply to stacks with Picard rank at most two.
Abstract
We study strong exceptional collections of line bundles on Fano toric Deligne-Mumford stacks PΣ with rank of Picard group at most two. We prove that any strong exceptional collection of line bundles generates the derived category of PΣ, as long as the number of elements in the collection equals the rank of the (Grothendieck) K-theory group of PΣ.
Equations48
Extt(Fi,Fj)=Hom(Fi,Fj[t])=0
Extt(Fi,Fj)=Hom(Fi,Fj[t])=0
Extt(Fi,Fj)=0
Extt(Fi,Fj)=0
Extt(L1,L2)
Extt(L1,L2)
Extrk(N)(O(d1),O(d2))=0⇔d2−d1=i=1∑maiwi, for some ai∈Z<0;Hom(O(d1),O(d2))=0⇔d2−d1=i=1∑maiwi, for some ai∈Z≥0.
Extrk(N)(O(d1),O(d2))=0⇔d2−d1=i=1∑maiwi, for some ai∈Z<0;Hom(O(d1),O(d2))=0⇔d2−d1=i=1∑maiwi, for some ai∈Z≥0.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Algebraic structures and combinatorial models
Full text
On strong exceptional collections of line bundles of maximal length on Fano toric Deligne-Mumford stacks
We study strong exceptional collections of line bundles on Fano toric Deligne-Mumford stacks PΣ with rank of Picard group at most two. We prove that any strong exceptional collection of line bundles generates the derived category of PΣ, as long as the number of elements in the collection equals the rank of the (Grothendieck) K-theory group of PΣ.
Constructing phantom and quasiphantom subcategories of the derived category of coherent sheaves
on smooth projective varieties has attracted considerable interest over the years. A quasi-phantom subcategory is an admissible subcategory with
trivial Hochschild homology and with a finite Grothendieck group. A phantom subcategory is an admissible subcategory with trivial Hochschild
homology and a trivial Grothendieck group.
The authors of [5, 1, 12] construct some quasi-phantom subcategories as semiorthogonal complements
to exceptional collections of maximal possible length on certain surfaces of general type for which
q=pg=0. Moreover, the Grothendieck group of a quasiphantom is
isomorphic to the torsion part of the Picard group of a corresponding surface.
It is natural to ask whether there exists a phantom as a semiorthogonal complement
to an exceptional collection of maximal length on a simply connected surface of general type with
q=pg=0 like a Barlow surface. It was achieved by Bo¨hning, H-Ch. Graf von Bothmer, L. Katzarkov, and
P. Sosna in [6]. They show that in a small neighbourhood of the surface constructed by Barlow in the moduli space of determinantal Barlow surfaces, the generic surface has a semiorthogonal decomposition of its derived category into a length 11 exceptional sequence of line bundles and a category with trivial Grothendieck group and Hochschild homology.
Moreover, in [11], S. Gorchinskiy and D. Orlov construct geometric phantom categories by
considering admissible subcategories generated by the tensor product of two quasi-phantoms for which
orders of their (Grothendieck) K-theory groups are coprime. They also prove that these phantom
categories have trivial K-motives and, hence, all
their higher K-groups are trivial too.
[21] Under certain
assumptions on the semi-orthogonal decomposition, this result has implications for the structure of the Chow motive of a variety admitting a
phantom category.
However, [18] shows that there are no quasi-phantoms, phantoms or universal phantoms in the derived category of smooth projective curves over a field k. Furthermore, if Conjecture 1.1 given below is confirmed, then it is impossible to build a phantom as a semiorthogonal complement
to an exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length in the derived category of a Fano toric DM stack PΣ. Our main result in the paper shows this in the case of Picard rank less or equal to two.
The subject of exceptional collections on toric varieties and stacks has its own rich history. Kawamata constructed exceptional collections in the bounded derived categories of of coherent sheaves on smooth Deligne-Mumford stacks in [16]. Alastair King conjectured in [17] that every smooth toric variety has a full strong exceptional collection of line bundles. Although the conjecture was proved to be false in [13], rich and varied results related to the conjecture were proved in [4, 14, 19, 9, 15, 20]. In particular, it was proved in [4] that there exist full strong exceptional collections of line bundles on smooth toric Fano DM stacks of Picard number no more than two and of any Picard number in dimension two.
The full strong exceptional collections of line bundles constructed in [4] have length equal the rank of the (Grothendieck) K-theory group, which is known to be necessary, see for example [11]. It is natural to ask whether any strong exceptional collection of line bundles of this length is a full strong exceptional collection. That is to say that the subcategory generated by all elements in the strong collection equals Db(coh(PΣ)), and there is no orthogonal complement phantom category. We propose the following conjecture.
Conjecture 1.1**.**
Any strong exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length on a Fano toric DM stack is a full strong exceptional collection.
In this paper, we prove Conjecture 1.1 for rk(Pic(PΣ))=1 (Theorem 3.8) and rk(Pic(PΣ))=2 (Theorem 4.14). Our main idea is to ”shrink” the strong exceptional collection by moving some specific elements successively and eventually obtain a standard full strong exceptional collection given in [4].
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 recalls gives basic knowledge of toric DM stacks
and (strong) exceptional collection of line bundles on PΣ. In Section 3, we prove Conjecture 1.1 for the case of
rk(Pic(PΣ))=1. In Section 4, Conjecture 1.1 for the case of
the rank of Pic(PΣ) equals two is settled. Section 5 contains brief discussion of further directions.
Acknowledgements. This work was prompted by a question of Shizhuo Zhang. Lev Borisov was partially supported by
NSF grant DMS-1601907.
2. (Strong) exceptional collections of line bundles on toric Deligne-Mumford stacks
In this section, we give an overview of toric DM stacks PΣ, the corresponding Grothendieck group and (strong) exceptional collections of line bundles on PΣ. Since all of this is well known, we try to be brief.
Let Σ be a complete fan with m one-dimensional cones in a lattice N which is a free abelian group of finite rank. The assumption that N has no torsion allows us to refrain from the technicalities of the derived Gale duality of [2]. We pick a lattice point v in each of the one-dimensional cones of Σ and get a complete stacky fan Σ=(Σ,{vi}i=1m), see [2]. The toric DM stack PΣ associated to the stacky fan Σ is constructed in [2] as a stack version of the homogeneous coordinate ring construction of a toric variety [7]. Line bundles on PΣ are described in [3, 4] similar to the scheme case of [8, 10].
Proposition 2.1**.**
The Picard group of PΣ is generated by {Ei}i=1m with relations ∑i=1m(wi⋅vi)Ei for all w in the character lattice M=N∗.
An object F in Db(coh(PΣ)) is exceptional if Hom(F,F)=C and Extt(F,F)=Hom(F,F[t])=0 for t=0.
A sequence of exceptional objects (F1,F2,…,Fn) in Db(coh(PΣ)) is called an exceptional collection if
[TABLE]
for all i>j and all t∈Z. An exceptional collection is further called a strong exceptional collection if
[TABLE]
for all i<j and all t∈Z∖{0}.
Remark 2.3**.**
A subset T of Pic(PΣ) can be indexed to form a strong exceptional collection if and only if Extt(L1,L2)=0 for any {L1,L2}∈T and any t>0. The reason is that the existence of nonzero Hom(L1,L2) induces a partial order on the set T which can be extended to a linear order.
Definition 2.4**.**
[4]** Let T be a finite set of line bundles on PΣ (which are always exceptional objects on PΣ). We call T a full strong exceptional collection if
[TABLE]
for any {L1,L2}∈T and any t>0 and the derived category of PΣ is generated by the line bundles in T.
Definition 2.5**.**
A toric DM stack PΣ is called Fano if the chosen points vi are precisely the vertices of a simplicial convex polytope in NR.
Definition 2.6**.**
[3]** Let PΣ be a smooth DM stack.
The (Grothendieck) K-theory group K0(PΣ) is defined to be the quotient of the free
abelian group generated by coherent sheaves F on PΣ by the relations
[F1]−[F2]+[F3] for all exact sequences 0→F1→F2→F3→0.
Lemma 2.7**.**
[11]** Let PΣ be a Fano toric DM stack and (F1,F2,…,Fn) be an exceptional collection of objects in Db(coh(PΣ)). If n=rankK0(PΣ), then F1,F2,…,Fn is a basis of K0(PΣ).
Corollary 2.8**.**
Let (F1,F2,…,Fn) be an exceptional collection of objects in Db(coh(PΣ)). Then n≤rk(K0(PΣ)).
3. The case of rk(Pic(PΣ))=1
In the section, we prove Conjecture 1.1 when the rank of Pic(PΣ) is one.
Let PΣ be a Fano toric DM stack such that Pic(PΣ) has no torsion and rank one. In this case PΣ is a weighted projective space which we denote by WP(w1,…,wm), where gcd(w1,…,wm)=1. 111This condition comes from our assumption that N has no torsion. The rank of K0(Pic(PΣ)) is ∑i=1mwi. The Picard group Pic(PΣ) is {O(d)∣d∈Z}, where O(Ei)=O(wi). By [4], we know that PΣ possesses a full strong exceptional collection of line bundles.
Proposition 3.1**.**
[4]** Let T={O(w)∣−rk(K0(PΣ))+1≤w≤0}. Then T forms a full strong exceptional collection in the derived category of WP(w1,…,wm).
In the case of rk(Pic(PΣ))=1, any exceptional collection on X=PΣ is a strong exceptional collection. Indeed, let
[TABLE]
be an exceptional collection on PΣ. We have Hom(O(sj),O(si))=0 for j>i. Then
Extrk(N)(O(si),O(sj))=0 for j>i. Otherwise, we get sj−si=∑i=1maiwi, where ai∈Z<0. This implies sj−si=∑i=1mbiwi, where bi=−ai∈Z≥0, which contradicts Hom(O(sj),O(si))=0.
Main idea. Starting from an exceptional collection T of line bundles of maximal length, i.e., with ∑i=1mwi elements, we construct other exceptional collections
of maximal length in D(T), the subcategory generated by elements in T. Eventually, we will get to the exceptional collection in Proposition 3.1 given in [4].
This allows us to conclude that D(T)=Db(coh(PΣ)).
The main step is to ”move” the smallest element of the exceptional collection T by ∑i=1mwi, see Figure 1.
Specifically: If line bundles O(s1),…,O(sn), where s1<s2<⋯<sn, form a strong exceptional collection T of maximal length,
then
(1)
O(s1+∑i=1mwi) is not in the strong exceptional collection T (Lemma 3.4);
2. (2)
By replacing O(s1) with O(s1+∑i=1mwi) and reordering, we get another strong exceptional collection (Lemma 3.5);
3. (3)
O(s1+∑i=1mwi)∈D(T), so the new collection generates a subcategory of D(T) (Corollary 3.7).
Once we know these that these moves are possible, we can ”shrink” the exceptional collection to make it one from Propostion 3.1 (Theorem 3.8).
Example 3.3**.**
We consider an exceptional collection on WP(5,6)
[TABLE]
of maximal length 11. We replace O(−15) by O(−15+11)=O(−4) to get another strong exceptional collection
[TABLE]
Then we replace O(−13) by O(−13+11)=O(−2) to get
[TABLE]
which is a full strong exceptional collection in Proposition 3.1 given in [4].
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let T={O(s1),…,O(sn)} be a strong exceptional collection. Then O(s1+∑i=1mwi)∈/T.
Proof.
If O(s1+∑i=1mwi)∈T, then Extrk(N)(O(s1+∑i=1mwi),O(s1))=0 since =s1−(s1+∑i=1mwi)=−∑i=1nwi. This contradicts the assumption that T is a strong exceptional collection.
∎
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let T={O(s1),…,O(sn)} be a strong exceptional collection of maximal length on PΣ, where s1<s2<⋯<sn.
By replacing O(s1) with O(s1+∑i=1mwi) and reordering, we get another strong exceptional collection.
Proof.
Let T1 be a collection obtained by replacing O(s1) with O(s1+∑i=1mwi). For any i∈{2,…,n}, we have si−s1−∑i=1mwi>−∑i=1mwi. Thus Extrk(N)(O(s1+∑i=1mwi),O(si))=0. Also for any i∈{2,…,n}, we have Extrk(N)(O(si),O(s1+∑i=1mwi))=0. Otherwise, we get s1+∑i=1mwi−si=∑i=1maiwi, where ai≤−1. Thus s1−si=∑i=1mbiwi, where bi<−1. This implies Extrk(N)(O(si),O(s1))=0, which contradicts the assumption that T is an exceptional collection.
∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let T={O(s1),…,O(sn)} be a strong exceptional collection of maximal length on PΣ, where s1<s2<⋯<sn. Then O(s1+∑j∈Jwj) is in T for any proper subset J⫋{1,2,…,m}.
Proof.
Let s=s1+∑j∈Jwj.
We have Extrk(N)(O(s),O(sk))=0 for all k∈{1,2,…,n}. Otherwise, we have sk−s∈∑i=1mZ<0wm for some k. However, we have sk−s1≥0. So sk−s=sk−s1−∑j∈Jwj>−∑j=1mwj, which leads to contradiction.
We have Extrk(N)(O(sk),O(s))=0 for all k∈{1,2,…,n}. Otherwise, we get s1+∑j∈Jwj−sk=s−sk=∑i=1maiwi for some k, where ai≤−1. Thus s1−sk=∑i=1mbiwi, where bi≤−1. Therefore Extrk(N)(O(sk),O(s1))=0, which contradicts that T is an exceptional collection.
If O(s) is not in T, we can get another exceptional collection with ∑i=1mwi+1 elements by inserting O(s) into T. This is impossible by Corollary 2.8.
∎
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let T={O(s1),…,O(sn)} be a strong exceptional collection of maximal length on PΣ, where s1<s2<⋯<sn.
Then we have O(s1+∑i=1mwi)∈D(T).
Then we tensor this complex by O(s1+∑i=1mwi) and get
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.6, we have that O(s1+∑j∈Jwj) is in T for any proper subset J⫋{1,2,…,m}. Thus O(s1+∑i=1mwi)∈D(T).
∎
Theorem 3.8**.**
Let X=PΣ be a Fano toric DM stack with rank(Pic(PΣ))=1.
Assume T={O(s1),…,O(sn)} is a strong exceptional collection of maximal length. Then T is a full strong exceptional collection.
Proof.
Without loss of generality, we assume s1<s2<⋯<sn.
If s1+∑i=1mwi>sn, then ∑i=1mwi>sn−s1. Then (s1,…,sn)=(s1,s1+1,…,s1+∑i=1mwi). So T is a twist of the collection of [4] and is therefore full.
If s1+∑i=1mwi≤sn, we get a new strong exceptional collection
This process decreases sn−s1 and therefore terminates. So eventually we will be in the situation s1+∑i=1mwi>sn.
∎
Remark 3.9**.**
When Pic(PΣ) has torsion, the arguments go without significant changes. The details are left to the reader.
4. The case of rk(Pic(PΣ))=2
In this section, we consider Fano toric Deligne-Mumford stack PΣ associated to a stacky fan Σ=(Σ,{vi}i=1m) in the lattice N with rk(N)=m−2. In this case, the rank of Picard group rk(Pic(PΣ)) equals 2.
Our aim is to prove Conjecture 1.1 in this case. We first assume that
Pic(PΣ) has no torsion for ease of exposition.
[4]** There exists a unique up to scaling collection of rational numbers αi such that ∑i=1mαi=0 and ∑i=1mαivi=0. Moreover, all αi in this relation are nonzero.
We pick one such relation ∑i=1mαivi=0. Let I+={i∣αi>0} and I−={i∣αi>0}. Then we have {1,…,m}=I+⊔I−.
Let E+=∑i∈I+(Ei) and E−=∑i∈I−(Ei).
We consider a linear function α on PicR(PΣ) with α(Ei)=αi from Proposition 4.1. Then α(E+)+α(E−)=0.
Moreover, from [4], we can pick and fix a collection of positive numbers ri, i=1,…,m such that ∑iri=1 and ∑irivi=0. This collection of positive numbers gives a linear function f on PicR(PΣ) with f(Ei)=ri>0.
Let P be a parallelogram in PicR(PΣ) given by
[TABLE]
Pick a generic point p∈PicR(PΣ) so that the lines along the sides of the parallelogram p+P do not contain any points from PicQ(PΣ). Then we have the following.
Proposition 4.2**.**
[4]** The set S of line bundles in p+P forms a full strong exceptional collection on PΣ.
Notation: The following notations will be used in our arguments. Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a collection of line bundles, we will abuse the notation slightly and denote by
max(α(T)) the maximum value of α(Di) for O(Di) in T (and similarly, for min and f). We denote Tmin(f)={Di∈T∣f(Di)=min(f(T))}.
Main idea. The idea of the proof is similar to the case rk(Pic(PΣ))=1.
Starting from an exceptional collection T of line bundles of maximal length, we construct other exceptional collections
of maximal length in D(T), the subcategory generated by elements in T. Eventually, we get to the exceptional collection in Proposition 4.2.
Step 1. The first step is to ”move” the largest elements in terms of the linear function α in the strong exceptional collection by −E+ or E− to construct a new strong exceptional collection in D(T), see Figure 2.
Specifically: let T=(O(D1),…,O(Dn)) be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length. We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Then
(1)
Both O(Di0−E+) and O(Di0+E−) are not in the strong exceptional collection T (Lemma 4.3);
2. (2)
Either replacing O(Di0) with O(Di0−E+) or with O(Di0+E−), we get another strong exceptional collection after reordering (Lemma 4.6, Lemma 4.9 and Lemma 4.10);
3. (3)
The new exceptional collection in (2) is in D(T) (Lemma 4.7 and Lemma 4.8).
By repeating the above step (Theorem 4.11), we can reduce the problem to the strong exceptional collection S in D(T)
such that all the line bundles in S are within a strip of width less than α(E+), i.e., max(α(S))−min(α(S))<α(E+)=α(−E−).
Step 2. From now on, we consider a strong exceptional collection T=(O(D1),…,O(Dn)) of maximal length within a strip of width less than α(E+). If max(f(T))−min(f(T))<f(E++E−)=1, then T is a full strong exceptional collection in
Proposition 4.2. This allows us to conclude that D(T)=Db(coh(PΣ)).
Now, we assume max(f(T))−min(f(T))≥f(E++E−)=1.
We pick j0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Dj0)=max(α(T)).
Then we can replace O(Di0) with O(Di0−E+) or O(Di0+E−) to get another strong exceptional collection T′ such that (Proposition 4.12):
(1)
max(f(T′))≤max(f(T));
2. (2)
min(f(T′))≥min(f(T));
3. (3)
♯(Tmin(f)′)≤♯(Tmin(f)) if min(f(T′))=min(f(T));
4. (4)
♯({Di∈T′∣f(Di)=min(f(T))})<♯(Tmin(f)) if f(Di0)=min(f(T)).
By repeating the above step (Theorem 4.14), we get a new strong exceptional collection S such that max(α(S))−min(α(S))<α(E+)=α(−E−) and max(f(S))−min(f(S))<f(E++E−)=1 which is one
in Proposition 4.2. This allows us to conclude that D(T)=Db(coh(PΣ)).
Details of proof.
For a divisor class D in Pic(PΣ), we write D=∑i∈I(≥0)Ei if D can be written as D=∑i∈IaiEi with ai∈Z≥0 for all i in a subset I⊆{1,…,m}. We use similar notation for other inequalities.
The nonzero Ext groups between line bundles have been calculated in [4]. We denote by Ext+, Ext− the groups associated to sets I+, I−. Specifically,
for any D1,D2∈Pic(PΣ), we have
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let T=(O(D1),…,O(Dn)) be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles on PΣ.
If i0∈{1,…,n}, then both O(Di0−E+) and O(Di0+E−) are not in T.
Proof.
If O(Di0−E+)∈T, we have Ext−(O(Di0),O(Di0−E+))=0 since Di0−E+−Di0=−E+.
If O(Di0+E−)∈/T, we have Ext+(O(Di0+E−),O(Di0)=0 since Di0−Di0−E−=−E−.
These contradict that T is a strong exceptional collection.
∎
For any subset I⊆{1,…,m}, we denote EI=∑i∈IEi.
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles on PΣ.
We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)). Then for any proper subset J of I+ and any k∈{1,…,n}, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1) We have Extrk(N)(O(Di0−EJ),O(Dk))=0. Otherwise, we get Dk−Di0+EJ=∑i∈{1,…,m}(<0)Ei. Thus Dk−Di0=∑i∈{1,…,m}(<0)Ei−EJ=∑i∈{1,…,m}(<0)Ei. This implies Extrk(N)(O(Di0),O(Dk))=0 which contradicts the assumption that T is a strong exceptional collection.
(2) We have Ext+(O(Di0−EJ),O(Dk))=0. Otherwise, we get Dk−Di0+EJ=∑i∈I−(<0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei. So Dk−Di0=−E−−EJ+∑i∈I−(≤0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei.
We have α(−E−)=α(E+)>α(EJ) since J⫋I+. Also, α(∑i∈I−(≤0)Ei)≥0 and α(∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei)≥0. Thus α(Dk−Di0)>0 which contradicts the assumption that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
(3) We have Ext−(O(Di0−EJ),O(Dk))=0. Otherwise, we have Dk−Di0+EJ=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. Thus Dk−Di0=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei−EJ+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. This implies Ext−(O(Di0),O(Dk))=0, contradiction.
(4) We have Ext+(O(Dk),O(Di0−EJ))=0. Otherwise, we have Di0−EJ−Dk=∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei+∑i∈I−(<0)Ei. Thus Di0−Dk=∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei−∑i∈I−(<0)Ei+EJ=∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei−∑i∈I−(<0)Ei. This implies Ext+(O(Dk),O(Di0))=0, contradiction.
(5) We have Ext−(O(Dk),O(Di0−EJ))=0. Otherwise, we have Di0−EJ−Dk=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. Thus Di0−Dk=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+EJ+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. We get α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei)=∑i∈I+(<0)αi≤∑i∈I+(−1)αi<∑i∈J(−1)αi=α(−EJ) since J⫋I+. So α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+EJ)<0. Also, α(∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei)≤0. This implies α(Di0−Dk)<0 which contradicts the assumption that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
∎
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles on PΣ.
We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)). Then for any proper subset L of I− and any j∈{1,…,n}, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof is analogous to the proof of Lemma 4.4 and is left to the reader.
∎
Note that Lemmas 4.4, 4.5 only cover vanishing of five out of possible six Ext>0 spaces. The next Lemma addresses the remaining space.
Lemma 4.6**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles on PΣ. We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)). Then either Extrk(N)(Dk,Di0−EJ)=0 for all k∈{1,…,n} and all J⊆I+ or Extrk(N)(Di0+EL,Dj)=0 for all j∈{1,…,n} and all L⊆I−, or both.
Proof.
If Extrk(N)(O(Dk),O(Di0−EJ))=0 for some k and some J⊆I+, then
[TABLE]
If Extrk(N)(O(Di0+EL),O(Dj))=0 for some j and some L⊆I−, then
[TABLE]
We add the two equations to get
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
since J⊆I+ and L⊆I−. This implies Extrk(N)(O(Dk),O(Dj))=0 which contradicts the assumption that T is a strong exceptional collection.
∎
Lemma 4.7**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of maximal length on PΣ. We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Assume Extrk(N)(O(Dk),O(Di0−EJ))=0 for all k∈{1,…,n} and all proper subsets J⫋I+. Then O(Di0−E+)∈D(T).
Proof.
We have O(Di0−EJ)∈T for all J⫋I+. Otherwise, there is J⫋I+ such that O(Di0−EJ)∈/T. By Lemma 4.4, we can add O(Di0−EJ) to T to get a strong
exceptional collection with more than rk(K0(PΣ)) elements. This is impossible by Corollary 2.8.
Now we consider the Koszul complex
[TABLE]
We tensor the complex by O(Di0) to get
[TABLE]
Since O(Di0−EJ)∈T for all J⫋I+, we get O(Di0−E+)∈D(T).
∎
Lemma 4.8**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of maximal length on PΣ. We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Assume Extrk(N)(O(Di0+EL),O(Dj))=0 for any j∈{1,…,n} for any subset L⫋I−. Then O(Di0+E−)∈D(T).
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length on PΣ.
We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Assume Extrk(N)(O(Dk),O(Di0−EJ))=0 for any k∈{1,…,n} and any subset J⊆I+. Then we can get a new strong exceptional collection by replacing O(Di0) with O(Di0−E+) and reordering.
Proof.
We will carefully check vanishing of all six Ext>0 spaces with the new element of the collection.
(1) We have Extrk(N)(O(Di0−E+),O(Dk))=0 by the same argument as in (1) of Lemma 4.4.
(2) We have Ext+(O(Di0−E+),O(Dk))=0. Otherwise, we get Dk−Di0+E+=∑i∈I−(<0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei. So Dk−Di0=−E−−E++∑i∈I−(≤0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei.
We have α(−E−−E+)=0. Also, the coefficients in ∑i∈I−(≤0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei cannot be all zero. Otherwise, we have Dk−Di0=−E−−E+. This implies Extrk(N)(Di0,Dk)=0 which contradicts that T is a strong exceptional collection. Now we get α(∑i∈I−(≤0)Ei+∑i∈I+(≥0)Ei)>0. Thus α(Dk−Di0)>0 which contradicts the assumption that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
(3) We have Ext−(O(Di0−E+),O(Dk))=0 by the same argument as in (3) of Lemma 4.4.
(4) By assumption, Extrk(N)(O(Dk),O(Di0−E+))=0 for all k∈{1,…,n}.
(5) We have Ext+(O(Dk),O(Di0−E+))=0 by the same argument as in (4) of Lemma 4.4.
(6) We have Ext−(O(Dk),O(Di0−E+))=0. Otherwise, we have Di0−E+−Dk=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. Thus Di0−Dk=∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+E++∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. If one of the coefficients in ∑i∈I+(<0)Ei is less than −1, then α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei)=∑i∈I+(<0)αi<∑i∈I+(−1)αi=α(−E+). So α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+E+)<0. If all the coefficients in ∑i∈I+(<0)Ei equal −1, then Di0−Dk=∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei. Since Di0=Dk, the coefficients in ∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei cannot be all zero. Thus α(∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei)<0. Now, we obtain that either α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+E+)<0 or α(∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei)<0. Therefore α(Di0−Dk)=α(∑i∈I+(<0)Ei+E++∑i∈I−(≥0)Ei)<0 which contradicts the assumption that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
We have verified that there are no Ext>0 spaces between the new element and other elements of the collection.
∎
Lemma 4.10**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length on PΣ.
We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Assume Extrk(N)(O(Di0+EL),O(Dj))=0 for any j∈{1,…,n} for any subset L⊆I−. Then we can get a new strong exceptional collection in D(T) by replacing O(Di0) with O(Di0+E−) and reordering.
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles of maximal length on PΣ. We can construct a new strong exceptional collection S in D(T) such that max(α(S))−min(α(S))<α(E+)=α(−E−).
Proof.
The argument is similar to that of Theorem 3.8.
Let α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
By Lemma 4.6, we have either Extrk(N)(Dk,Di0−EJ)=0 for any k∈{1,…,m} and any J⊆I+ or Extrk(N)(Di0+EL,Dj)=0 for any j∈{1,…,m} and any L⊆I−. By Lemma 4.7, Lemma 4.8, Lemma 4.9 and Lemma 4.10, we get a new strong exceptional collection T′ in D(T) by replacing O(Di0) by O(Di0−E+) or O(Di0+E−), and reordering. See Figure 2.
We have max(α(T′))≤max(α(T)) since α(Di0−E+)=α(Di0+E−)<α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
After a finite number of steps, we replace successively all O(Di) such that α(Di)=max(α(T)) by O(Di−E+) or O(Di+E−) to get a new strong exceptional collection T1 in D(T) such that max(α(T1))<max(α(T)).
If min(α(T1))<min(α(T)), there exists some D such that α(Di)=max(α(T)) and α(Di∓E±)=min(α(T)). Now we have
[TABLE]
If min(α(T1))≥min(α(T)), then max(α(T1))−min(α(T1))<max(α(T))−min(α(T)).
This process decreases max(α(T))−min(α(T)). Eventually we will be in the situation that max(α(T))−min(α(T))<α(E+)=α(−E−).
∎
Proposition 4.12**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles with length n=rk(K0(PΣ)).
Assume
[TABLE]
We pick i0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Di0)=max(α(T)).
Then we can replace O(Di0) with O(Di0−E+) or O(Di0+E−) to get another strong exceptional collection T′ in D(T) such that:
(1)
max(f(T′))≤max(f(T));
2. (2)
min(f(T′))≥min(f(T));
3. (3)
♯(Tmin(f)′)≤♯(Tmin(f))* if min(f(T′))=min(f(T));*
4. (4)
♯({Di∈T′∣f(Di)=min(f(T))})<♯(Tmin(f))* if f(Di0)=min(f(T)).*
Proof.
If
[TABLE]
by Lemma 4.6, Lemma 4.9 and Lemma 4.10, we can replace O(Di0) with O(Di0−E+) or O(Di0+E−) to reach the result.
If Equation 4.1 fails, there are several cases to consider.
Case f(Di0−E+)≤min(f(T)). We have f(Di0+E−)≤max(f(T)) by the assumption that max(f(T))−min(f(T))≥f(E++E−)=1. We show that replacing O(Di0) with O(Di0+E−) is possible and will achieve our goal, see (2) of Figure 3. We have Extrk(N)(Di0+EL,Dj)=0 for all j∈{1,…,m} and L⫋I−. Otherwise, we get Dj−Di0−EL=∑i∈{1,…,m}(<0)Ei=−E+−E−+∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei for some j and some L⫋I−. Thus Dj−Di0+E+=(EL−E−)+∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei. Then f(Dj−Di0+E+)=f((EL−E−)+∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei)<0 which contradicts f(Di0−E+)≤min(f(T)). Then by Lemma 4.7, the line bundle O(Di0+E−)∈D(T).
Also, we have Extrk(N)(Di0+E−,Dj)=0 for all j∈{1,…,m}. Otherwise, we get
Dj−Di0−E−=∑i∈{1,…,m}(<0)Ei=−E+−E−+∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei for some j. Thus Dj−Di0=−E++∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei. If the coefficients in ∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei are not all zero,
then f(Dj−Di0+E+)=f(∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei)<0, which contradicts that f(Di0−E+)≤f(T). If the coefficients in ∑i∈{1,…,m}(≤0)Ei are all zero, then Dj−Di0=−E+. This implies Ext−(O(Di0),O(Dj))=0 which contradicts the assumption that T is a strong exceptional collection.
Then by Lemma 4.9, we get a strong exceptional collection T′ in D(T) by replacing Di0 with O(Di0+E−) which satisfies (2), (3) and (4) of this Proposition. Since f(Di0+E−)≤max(f(T)), then max(f(T′))≤max(f(T)).
**Case ** f(Di0+E−)>max(f(T)). We have f(Di0−E+)>min(f(T)). By the same arguments, we can get a strong exceptional collection T′ in D(T) by replacing Di0 with O(Di0−E+) which satisfies (1), (3) and (4) of this Proposition, see (1) of Figure 3. Since f(Di0−E+)>min(f(T)), then min(f(T′))≥min(f(T)).
∎
Remark 4.13**.**
Let T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles with length n=rk(K0(PΣ)).
Assume all line bundles in T are within a strip of α with width less than α(E+) and max(f(T))−min(f(T))≥f(E++E−)=1.
After doing the move in Proposition 4.12, we can guarantee that all line bundles in the new strong exceptional collection is within a strip of α with width less or equal to α(E+). After replacing all Dj in T such that α(Dj)=max(α(T)), we get the width of the strip of α to be less than α(E+).
Theorem 4.14**.**
Let PΣ be a Fano toric DM stack with rank(Pic(PΣ))=2.
Assume T={O(D1),…,O(Dn)} be a strong exceptional collection of line bundles with length n=rk(K0(PΣ)). Then T is a full strong exceptional collection.
Proof.
Without of loss of generality, we can assume that max(α(T))−min(α(T))<α(E+)=α(−E−) by Proposition 4.11.
Let Dj be an element in T such that f(Dj)=min(f(T)). If α(Dj)=max(α(T)), then by Proposition 4.12, after replacing O(Dj) with O(Dj−E+) or O(Dj+E−), we get another strong exceptional collection T′ such that ♯({Di∈T′∣f(Di)=min(f(T))})<♯(Tmin(f)). If α(Dj)<max(α(T)), then by repeating the process in Proposition 4.12 several times, we will get to the situation that α takes maximal value at Dj, see Figure 4.
After replacing all elements in Tmin(f), we get min(f(T)) increase. Then we continue to apply Proposition 4.12. During the process, we assure that max(f(T)) does not increase and min(f(T)) increases. Thus max(f(T))−min(f(T)) decreases. Therefore, we will eventually be in the situation max(f(T))−min(f(T))<1.
Also, by Remark 4.13, we get a new strong exceptional collection S of line bundles in D(T) such that max(α(S))−min(α(S))<α(E+) and max(f(S))−min(f(S))<1. So S is a full strong exceptional collection by Proposition 4.2. Thus D(T)⊇D(S)=Db(coh(PΣ)).
∎
Remark 4.15**.**
When Pic(PΣ) has torsion, the arguments of this section go through without significant change. The details are left to the reader.
5. Comments
We expect our main result to be valid without the assumption on the rank of Picard group, as stated in Conjecture 1.1.
Also, in the case of rk(Pic(PΣ))=1, we know that any exceptional collection of line bundles is a strong exceptional collection by Remark 3.2. However, in the case of rk(Pic(PΣ))=2, Theorem 4.14 does not tell us that every exceptional collection of maximal length is a full exceptional collection. Thus we hope we can drop strong assumption to ask whether every exceptional collection of maximal length is a full exceptional collection.
The possible future directions include dimension two rk(Pic(PΣ))=3 Fano case, and dimension two non-Fano case.
We hope that techniques of this paper can be modified to settle them.
Moreover, in our proofs when we replace j0∈{1,…,n} such that α(Dj0)=max(α(T))
with O(Di0−E+) or O(Di0+E−), the strong exceptional collection ”shrinks” in Pic(PΣ).
We would like to find a more geometric meaning of this phenomenon.
Bibliography21
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] V. Alexeev, D. Orlov, Derived categories of Burniat surfaces and exceptional collections . Math. Ann. 357 (2013), no. 2, 743-759.
2[2] L. Borisov, L. Chen, G. G. Smith, The orbifold Chow ring of toric Deligne-Mumforrd stacks . J. Amer. Math. Soc. 18(2005), no. 1, 193-215.
3[3] L. Borisov, R. Horja, On the K 𝐾 K -theory of smooth toric DM stacks . Snowbird lectures on string geometry, 21-42, Contemp. Math., 401, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006.
4[4] L. Borisov, Z. Hua, On the conjecture of King for smooth toric Deligne-Mumford stacks . Adv. Math. 221(2009), 277-301.
5[5] Ch. B o ¨ ¨ o \ddot{\mathrm{o}} hning, H-Ch. Graf von Bothmer, P. Sosna, On the derived category of the classical Godeaux surface. Adv. Math. 243(2013), 203-231.
6[6] Ch. B o ¨ ¨ o \ddot{\mathrm{o}} hning, H-Ch. Graf von Bothmer, L. Katzarkov, P. Sosna, Determinantal Barlow surfaces and phantom categories . J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 17(2015), no. 7, 1569-1592.
7[7] D. Cox, The homogeneous coordinate ring of a toric variety . J. Algebraic Geom. 4(1995), no. 1, 17-50.
8[8] V. I. Danilov, The geometry of toric varieties . Russian Math. Surveys 33 (1978), no. 2, 97-154.