Semi-algebraic chains on projective varieties and the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles
Kenichiro Kimura

TL;DR
This paper introduces delta-admissible chains to describe the cohomology of smooth quasi-projective varieties and applies this framework to elucidate the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles, connecting algebraic cycles with Hodge theory.
Contribution
It develops a new geometric approach using delta-admissible chains to understand cohomology and the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles, linking algebraic and Hodge-theoretic aspects.
Findings
Cohomology groups described via delta-admissible chains
Abel-Jacobi map characterized through delta-admissible chains
Hodge realization of polylog cycles linked to Abel-Jacobi map
Abstract
We will show that the singular cohomology groups of a smooth quasi-projective complex variety relative to a normal crossing divisor can be described in terms of delta-admissible chains. Roughly speaking, a delta-admissible chain is a simplicial semi-algebraic chain meeting the "faces" properly. As an application, we show that the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles can be described via delta-admissible chains. As an example, we will describe the Hodge realization of the polylog cycles constructed by Bloch-Kriz in terms of the Abel-Jacobi map.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Alkaloids: synthesis and pharmacology · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
\topmargin
-0.3in \oddsidemargin0.12in
Semi-algebraic chains on projective varieties and the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles
Kenichiro Kimura
1. Introduction
The main object of study in this paper is the cohomology groups of smooth quasi-projective complex varieties. The reader may be skeptical about finding anything new in general about this subject. What we are going to do is to describe the cohomology groups of a smooth quasi-projective variety relative to a normal crossing divisor , in terms of -admissible chains. Roughly speaking, a -admissible chain on relative to a subvariety of is a simplicial semi-algebraic chain such that the support of and that of (the boundary of ) meet properly. One of the merits of -admissible chains is that they admit pull-back to . By this property, for a normal crossing divisor on we construct a certain complex of -admissible chains such that we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
The proof is not quite elementary, and we needed to use some sheaf theory.
We can describe the duality pairing between the de Rham and the singular cohomology via integral on -admissible chains. Let be a smooth -form on with compact support which has logarithmic singularity along , and let be a -admissible -chain on . Then in Proposition 3.2 we show that the equality
[TABLE]
holds. For the definition of the differential see Definition 2.16. This formula is a generalization of the Stokes formula, and we call this equality the Cauchy-Stokes formula. Note that the integral of a differential form with log poles on a - chain does not necessarily converge, even if the chain meets the faces properly. See the example in Remark 3.3 (1). By the Cauchy-Stokes formula we have a certain pairing
[TABLE]
which is a map of complexes, and this induces the duality pairing
[TABLE]
Here is a smooth projective complex variety, is a closed subset of such that is isomorphic to . As an application, in §4 we show that the Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles can be described in terms of -admissible chains, which can be regarded as a natural generalization of the original definition by Griffiths of the Abel-Jacobi map for ordinary algebraic cycles. Details are in §4, but we point out one advantage of the admissible chains. Let be a smooth projective complex variety, and be a higher Chow cycle such that . See §4 for the definitions. As is described in [2] and [16], the definition of the Abel-Jacobi map starts with defining a cohomology class of in , which is the cohomology of with support on , relative to the faces of . By using the admissible chains we can construct a certain complex which computes this cohomology group, such that the class of the cycle is represented by itself. If is homologous to zero, then there is a chain which has as the boundary. It is an immediate consequence of the construction that the class of gives the Abel-Jacobi image of . This construction works also for open varieties, and for relative higher Chow cycles. As an example, we will see that the Hodge realization of the cycles of polylogarithms constructed in [3] can be described in terms of the Abel-Jacobi map of certain open varieties.
The problem of describing the Abel-Jacobi maps for higher Chow cycles has been considered by other authors too. This paper is partly inspired by [10] and [11]. Our description of the Abel-Jacobi map can be regarded as a generalization of the geometric interpretation in §5.8 of [10] to quasi-projective varieties. Even in the case of projective varieties, our description is somewhat different from the one given in [10].
2. The complex of admissible chains
Let be a non-negative integer. A -simplex in an Euclidean space is the convex hull of affinely independent points in . A finite simplicial complex of is a finite set consisting of simplexes such that (1) for all , all the faces of belong to , (2) for all , is either the empty set or a common face of and . We denote by the set of -simplexes of . For a finite simplicial complex , the union of simplexes in as a subset of is denoted by .
As for the definition of semi-algebraic set and their fundamental properties, see [4].
Theorem 2.1** ([4], Theorem 9.2.1).**
Let be a compact semi-algebraic subset of . The set is triangulable, i.e. there exists a finite simplicial complex and a semi-algebraic homeomorphism . Moreover, for a given finite family of semi-algebraic subsets of , we can choose a finite simplicial complex and a semi-algebraic homeomorphism such that every is the union of a subset of Here is the interior of , which is the complement of the union of all proper faces of .
Remark 2.2**.**
- (1)
By **[4]** Remark 9.2.3 (a), the map can be taken so that the map is facewise regular embedding i.e. for each , is a regular submanifold of . 2. (2)
The pair as in Theorem 2.1 is called a semi-algebraic triangulation* of ; we will then identify with . A projective real or complex variety is regarded as a compact semi-algebraic subset of an Euclidean space by [4] Theorem 3.4.4, thus the above theorem applies to .*
We recall some terminology of piecewise-linear topology. Let be a simplicial complex and be a subcomplex of . is a full subcomplex of , if all the vertices of a simplex in belong to , then belongs to . a derived subdivision of mod is obtained by starring each simplex of not contained in . See for example [15] page 20 for more detail. If we star each simplex not contained in at its barycenter, we obtain the barycentric subdivision of mod , which is denoted by mod . The simplicial neighborhood of in , denoted by , is defined to be . Also the simplicial complement of in , denoted by , is defined to be The intersection is denoted by . Suppose that is a full subcomplex of , and let be a derived subdivision of mod . The polytope is said to be a regular neighborhood of in .
Notation 2.3**.**
Let be a simplicial complex. For a subcomplex of , the space is a subspace of . A subset of of the form is also called a subcomplex. If a subset of is equal to for a subcomplex of , then is often denoted by . For two simplexes and we denote if is a face of . For a complex and its subcomplex , by writing we mean that is a full subcomplex of .
Let be a smooth projective variety over of dimension , be a closed subset of and be a strict normal crossing divisor on . We write . The faces of are intersections of several ’s. For a subset of , we write the face by . In the following we suppose that each triangulation of is semi-algebraic , and that the subset is a subcomplex of . Let be a triangulation of . We denote by resp. the chain complex resp. the relative chain complex of . An element of for is written as where the sum is taken over -simplexes of . By doing so, it is agreed upon that an orientation has been chosen for each . By abuse of notation, an element of is often described similarly.
Definition 2.4**.**
For an element of , we define the support of as the subset of given by
[TABLE]
For an element of , is sometimes regarded as a subcomplex of .
Definition 2.5**.**
Let be an integer.
- (1)
(Admissibility) A semi-algebraic subset of is said to be admissible* if for each face , the inequality*
[TABLE]
holds. Here note that and are the dimensions as semi-algebraic sets, and means the codimension of the subvariety of . 2. (2)
Let be an element of . Then is said to be admissible if the support of a representative of in is admissible. This condition is independent of the choice of a representative. 3. (3)
We set
[TABLE]
We call an element of a -admissible chain.
2.1. Subdivision and inductive limit
Definition 2.6**.**
Let be a triangulation of a compact semi-algebraic set . Another triangulation is a subdivision of if :
- (1)
The image of each simplex of under the map is contained in the image of a simplex of under the map . 2. (2)
The image of each simplex of under the map is the union of the images of simplexes of under .
If is a subdivision of a triangulation , there is a natural homomorphism of complexes called the subdivision operator. See for example [14] Theorem 17.3 for the definition. For a simplex of , the chain is carried by , and so that the map sends to . By Theorem 2.1 two semi-algebraic triangulations have a common subdivision. Since the map and the differential commute, the complexes and form inductive systems indexed by triangulations of .
Definition 2.7**.**
We set
[TABLE]
Here the limit is taken on the directed set of triangulations.
A proof of the following Proposition is given in [8] Appendix A.
Proposition 2.8** (Moving lemma).**
The inclusion of complexes
[TABLE]
is a quasi-isomorphism.
Definition 2.9** (Good triangulation).**
We define a family of subsets of by
[TABLE]
where are faces of . In short, a member of is the union of several faces. A finite semi-algebraic triangulation of is called a good triangulation if satisfies the following conditions.
- (1)
The divisor is a subcomplex of . 2. (2)
The map is facewise regular embedding. cf. Remark 2.2. 3. (3)
Each element is a full subcomplex of i.e. there exists a full subcomplex of such that .
In particular, if is a good triangulation, then for any simplex of and , the intersection is a (simplicial) face of . This is the primary reason to consider the condition (3).
Remark 2.10**.**
If is a subcomplex of , then is a full subcomplex of (See for example Exercise 3.2 of [15]). It follows that if is a semi-algebraic triangulation of which is a facewise regular embedding, and such that and each are subcomplexes of , then is a good triangulation.
In the following, each triangulation of is assumed to be good in the sense of Definition 2.9.
2.2. The cap product with a Thom cocycle
2.2.1. Simplicial cap product
Definition 2.11** **(Ordering of complex,
good ordering).
Let be a good triangulation of .
- (1)
A partial ordering on the set of vertices in is called an ordering* of , if the restriction of the ordering to each simplex is a total ordering.* 2. (2)
*Let be a subcomplex of . An ordering of is said to be good with respect to if it satisfies the following condition. If a vertex is on and for a vertex , then .
We denote by the simplex spanned by . Let be a good ordering of with respect to a subcomplex . We recall the definition of the cap product
. For a simplex such that and , we define
[TABLE]
One has the boundary formula
[TABLE]
where denotes the coboundary of , see [9], p.239 (note the difference in sign convention from [14]). Thus if is a cocycle,
2.2.2. Cohomology class of a subvariety
For a subvariety of of codimension , there exists a cohomology class . In the case of simplicial cohomology, it is described as follows. Let be a triangulation of such that there exists a full subcomplex of with . Let be a derived subdivision of mod . Set and . In this situation the cohomology group is equal to , and by Lefschetz duality Theorem 3.43 [9] we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Here is the fundamental cycle of . The element is the one such that equals the homology class of the cycle . A cocycle in which represents is called a Thom cocycle of , and is denoted by .
Proposition 2.12**.**
Let be a subvariety of of codimension , a triangulation of for which for a full subcomplex . Let be a derived subdivision of mod , be a Thom cocycle of and a good ordering of with respect to .
- (1)
The map and the topological differential commute. 2. (2)
The image of the homomorphism is contained in , As a consequence, we have a homomorphism of complexes
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1). Since is a cocycle of even degree, we have for a simplex .
(2). Let with If , then and since the cochain vanishes on . If , then the vertices are on , and we have since . Thus the assertion holds. ∎
2.2.3. Independence of and ordering
Proposition 2.13**.**
Let be a good triangulation of and be a codimension face of . Set . Let be a Thom cocycle of , a good ordering of with respect to , and be an element of . Then we have the following.
- (1)
The chain is an element in . 2. (2)
The chain is independent of the choice of a Thom cocycle and a good ordering . Thus the map
[TABLE]
induced by (2.2.5) is denoted by . 3. (3)
Let be a good subdivision of . Let be a derived subdivision of mod and be a Thom cocycle of . Then we have the following commutative diagram.
[TABLE]
where the vertical maps are subdivision operators.
Proof.
(1). For an element , we have by Proposition 2.12 (2). By the definition of the cap product, we see that the set . It follows that if is admissible i.e. meets all the faces properly, then meets all the faces of properly. Similarly, if the chain is admissible, then is admissible in . By Proposition 2.12 (1) we have the equality .
(2) A proof is given in [8] Section B.2.
(3) A proof is given in [8] Section B.3.
∎
By taking the inductive limit of the homomorphism
[TABLE]
for subdivisions, we get a homomorphism
[TABLE]
Definition 2.14**.**
The map of (2.2.7) is denoted by , and called the face map of the face .
Proposition 2.15**.**
Let resp. be a face of codimension resp. which meet properly with each other. Set . We have the equality
[TABLE]
Proof.
A proof is given in [8] Section B.4. ∎
Definition 2.16**.**
Let be the double complex defined by
[TABLE]
where the first differential is defined by
[TABLE]
and the second differential is (the topological differential). For a finite set , denotes the cardinality of . The simple complex associated to is denoted by .
Theorem 2.17**.**
For a non-negative integer , we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Here cohomology on the left hand side is the singular cohomology of relative to .
Proof.
Definition 2.18**.**
Let be an open subset of . For a semi-algebraic triangulation of , we denote by resp. the quotient of resp. by the chains contained in . More precisely,
[TABLE]
The associated sheaf to the presheaf resp. is denoted by resp. . Here the limit is taken over semi-algebraic subdivisions of . We define the associated cohomological complex by resp. .
Proposition 2.19**.**
The complexes of sheaves and are resolutions of the constant sheaf .
Proof.
We give a proof of the case of . The proof for is similar and simpler. We recall the following theorem.
Theorem 2.20**.**
*([18] Ch.6, Theorem 15)
Let be a compact -manifold. Let , and be subpolyhedra of such that and (the interior of ). Then there exists an ambient isotopy which fixes and (the boundary of ), and such that is in general position with respect to i.e. the inequality*
[TABLE]
holds. Here for and .
The isotopy can be made arbitrarily small in the following sense. Given a positive number , there exists a isotopy as above such that for any point , the inequality holds. Here is the norm of the Euclidean space in which is contained.
For a point and its neighborhood , let be a cycle i.e. . There exists a subdivision of of which is a vertex of , and the simplicial neighborhood of in is contained in . We replace with the interior of the simplicial neighborhood of . By excision, we have
[TABLE]
It follows that if , there exists such that By applying Theorem 2.20 to the case where and , we can move to a chain keeping fixed, so that and meet the faces properly, and for a smaller neighborhood of , we have . For , the fundamental class of gives the inclusion , the image of which is isomorphic to .
∎
Proposition 2.21**.**
Let be the inclusion map. The complex of sheaves is a complex of fine sheaves.
Proof.
We recall the definition of a fine sheaf from [17] page 74 Definition. A sheaf on a space is fine if, for every locally finite covering of , there exist endomorphisms such that
- (1)
The support of is contained in the closure of . 2. (2)
Let be a locally finite covering of . Let be a semi-algebraic triangulation of the pair such that . Let be the simplicial map defined on each vertex by
[TABLE]
Since , . By abuse of notation, the map of polytopes induced by is also denoted by . Inductively we will construct subdivisions of with the following property.
There is a full subcomplex of such that and each simplex is contained in a
Let be the barycentric subdivision of . Since the polytope is compact, there exists an such that each simplex in is contained in a . The complex is defined to be for the smallest with the property, and is defined to be Suppose that and has been constructed. We denote by the -th barycentric subdivision of .
Lemma 2.22**.**
For sufficiently large , each simplex is contained in a
Proof.
For a simplex of , is either empty or is a face of since . Suppose that is not empty. If , then is the join for a face with Let be the simplicial map such that and . Then we see by induction on that . By the induction hypothesis is contained in a . Hence for a sufficiently large . The set is a compact subset of . It follows that for a possibly larger each simplex of is contained in a . By Lemma 3.3 (a) [15], There is a subdivision of of which is a full subcomplex. Let be such a subdivision, and is defined to be
. ∎
Let . Then is a triangulation of each simplex of which is contained in a . For each , choose one such and define Let be a point, and an element of the stalk of the sheaf at . is the restriction of an element for a neighborhood of and for a triangulation of . We can assume that for an . is a sum . Taking smaller if necessary, we can assume that each contains . Take a common subdivision of and . For each simplex of and of , the intersection is the union of interior of several simplexes of . For a simplex with , we have with each a -simplex of since is an neighborhood of in . For each , let the smallest simplex of which contains . Then we define
[TABLE]
This definition is compatible with subdivisions since we have ∎
Now we can prove Theorem 2.17. For a sheaf , we denote by the canonical resolution of Godement of . As in the proof of Proposition 2.21, let be a semi-algebraic triangulation of the pair such that and be the simplicial map defined on each vertex by
[TABLE]
We denote by the polytope , and by the inclusion of into . We have the following commutative diagram with exact rows.
[TABLE]
See Definition 2.7 for the definition of and .
Lemma 2.23**.**
The map is a quasi-isomorphism.
Proof.
We denote by the polytope . By [14] Lemma 70.1 is a deformation retract of , so that the natural inclusion
[TABLE]
is a quasi-isomorphism. Since is compact, the natural map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism. We have the assertion because . ∎
Since is compact, the map is an isomorphism. It follows that is a quasi-isomorphism. Since is a deformation retract of , by Proposition 2.21 the restriction map is a quasi-isomorphism. Hence the natural map is quasi-isomorphic, and the map is quasi-isomorphic since is a complex of fine sheaves. We have a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Since the maps , and are quasi-isomorphisms, the map is also a quasi-isomorphism. The face maps induce face maps .
Notation 2.24**.**
For a double complex , we denote by the simple complex associated to
We see that the complex is quasi-isomorphic to the simple complex associated to the double complex
[TABLE]
The cohomology of the complex is equal to . ∎
3. The duality
In this section we will show that the duality between the de Rham cohomology and the singular cohomology can be described via integral on admissible chains.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a smooth form on with logarithmic singularity along .
- (1)
Let be a codimension one face of . The Poincare residue of at , which is denoted by , is defined as follows. If is a local equation of and where does not contain , then Note the different sign convention from the one defined in **[6]**. 2. (2)
For a subset of , the residue of at , which is denoted by , is defined by the succession of Poincare residues
[TABLE] 3. (3)
For an element of , the integral
[TABLE]
is denoted by .
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let be a smooth projective variety over , a closed subset of , , a strict normal crossing divisor on and be a smooth -form on with compact support and with logarithmic singularity along .
- (1)
For an admissible -simplex on , the integral
[TABLE]
converges absolutely. 2. (2)
Let be an element of . Under the notation of Notation 3.1, we have an equality
[TABLE]
Remark 3.3**.**
- (1)
The convergence of integrals as in the assertion (1) fails in general for -chains. For example, consider the chain in given by
[TABLE]
If we set the face of to be , then the chain meets the faces of properly, but the integral diverges. is not -admissible in the sense that the boundary of does not meet the face properly, but adding some chains in the imaginary direction we obtain a -admissible chain. 2. (2)
A consequence of Proposition 3.2 is that an element of defines a normal current of intersection type along . See **[12]** and **[11]** for the definition of normal currents of intersection type along .
Proof.
First we consider (1). The same proof as that of [7] Theorem 4.4 works, but we need some modification. The proof of the convergence is reduced to showing “allowability” of a certain semi-algebraic set. The argument given in Section 4 of [7] should be modified as follows. We need to consider the following situation: Let with coordinates . Let be the coordinate hyperplanes. A face of is a subset of the form where is a subset of . A closed semi-algebraic subset of is said to be admissible if for any face , an inequality
[TABLE]
holds. We need to show the following:
Claim. Let be a compact admissible semi-algebraic subset of of dimension . If is an -form on of the shape
[TABLE]
where is a smooth -form on , then the integral
[TABLE]
converges absolutely.
We divide the complex plane in to four sectors
[TABLE]
and make a coordinate change as follows: For , we set . We have
[TABLE]
We have a continuous semi-algebraic map
[TABLE]
We also have equalities
[TABLE]
The form is the sum of forms of type
[TABLE]
Here is a subset of , and is a smooth function on a neighborhood of .
Writing , let
[TABLE]
be the product of the maps and the identity of , still denoted by the same letter. The pull-back of the form (3.0.2) is the sum of the forms
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
where varies over partitions of , and is a smooth function.
Consider the map
[TABLE]
given by the product of the maps
[TABLE]
Taking the product of these maps we obtain a map
[TABLE]
We need to show the absolute convergence of the integral
[TABLE]
Let be the form on given by the same formula as (3.0.3). Applying Proposition 2.5 [7] to the set and the map , we are reduced to showing the absolute convergence of the integral
[TABLE]
The argument after this is the same as that in Section 4 of [7]. Note that since the form we consider has a compact support contained in , we can assume that . So the argument is simpler than the case of loc. cit.
Next we prove the assertion (2). First we assume that the set is empty. The proof is in the same line as that of Theorem Theorem 4.3 [8] with some modification. Let be the union of higher codimensional faces i.e.
[TABLE]
First we consider the case where , and then prove the general case by a limit argument. So suppose that Let us write . For a codimension one face , set Then we have
[TABLE]
where . since , for , and so that for each . Here we denote for short. It suffices to prove for each . So we consider the case where . For a simplex , let
[TABLE]
Since is a good triangulation, the intersection of each simplex of with is a simplicial face of . So we have
[TABLE]
By Proposition 4.11 of [8], we have . It suffices to prove for each . So we assume that for a simplex . By taking sufficiently fine subdivision, we can assume that is contained in a coordinate neighborhood of on which is defined by an equation for a function . Under the comparison isomorphism of de Rham and singular cohomology, the class of in is equal to where
[TABLE]
is the boundary map. For , let be a -function such that
[TABLE]
and set Put . For sufficiently small we have on , and and defines the same class of . We use the form as our Thom cocycle.
By the Stokes formula, we have
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
By Lebesgue convergence theorem the right hand side of this equality converges to the right hand side of (3.0.1) as So we need to show that
[TABLE]
The rest of the argument is the same as the proof of Proposition 4.7 [8]. The limit argument which is necessary to prove the general case is the same as the one given in Section 4.4 of [8]. We consider a general case. Let be an element of with . If for are local equations of , and
[TABLE]
where does not conatin , then . If
[TABLE]
then we have
[TABLE]
Since we have and , we have the assertion. ∎
Theorem 3.4**.**
The map
[TABLE]
is a map of complexes, and induces the duality pairing
[TABLE]
Here the function is defined as follows. If is on the face , then where .
Proof.
The fact that the above map is compatible with the differential is a consequence of Proposition 3.2. For the second assertion, first we reduce the problem to the case where There exists a sequence of blow-ups
[TABLE]
such that is a simple normal crossing divisor and induces an isomorphism .
Lemma 3.5**.**
There is a quasi-isomorphism
[TABLE]
which is compatible with the pairing : for and , we have .
Proof.
Let be a good triangulation of . For a -simplex , there is a good triangulation of such that is the union of the interior of some simplexes of by Theorem 2.1. We define to be the sum of -simplexes of contained in . The orientation of each simplex is defined by the compatibility with that of . By (2.2.9) we have a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
From this we see that is a quasi-isomorphism. The compatibility of and the pairing follows from the definition. ∎
By Lemma 3.5 we can replace resp. with resp. the proper transform of . Let be the irreducible components of . We denote the index set by . For a subset of we denote by .
Let be the double complex defined by
[TABLE]
where the differential is defined as follows: for an element of , we have
[TABLE]
Here the map is the inclusion map.
Lemma 3.6**.**
We have an isomorphism .
Proof.
We denote by the complex of sheaves of forms on with logarithmic singularity along . be the double complex of sheaves defined by
[TABLE]
where the map is the inclusion of into , and the differentials are defined in the same way as (3.0.5). Let be the map defined in (2.2.8), and set for . Let be the complex of sheaves on of forms with log singularity along whose supports are contained in . Let . Then we have the equality . We will show that the inclusion
[TABLE]
is a quasi-isomorphism of complexes of sheaves. Then since these are complexes of fine sheaves, this inclusion induces an isomorphism of cohomology groups
[TABLE]
The problem is local, so let be a point on . Near is isomorphic to with the origin where is the open unit disc in , and . Suppose first that . The complex
[TABLE]
where is the inclusion map of into , is quasi-isomorphic to . We need to show that the quotient is acyclic. We proceed as the proof of Poincare Lemma. Let be the deformation retract defined by . There are maps
[TABLE]
Let be the map given by the integration along the fibers of the projection Then we have the equality
[TABLE]
Suppose that is a cocycle of i.e. . Taking sufficiently small we can assume that . By applying 3.0.6 to the form we see that
[TABLE]
Since the restriction of to is constant with respect to , we see that . This concludes the proof for . we can proceed by induction on . Suppose the assertion holds for the case and consider the case . We have the equality
[TABLE]
By induction hypothesis, This is quasi-isomorphic to the complex
[TABLE]
By the same argument as in the proof of the case where , we can show that this complex is quasi-isomorphic to . ∎
The complex is quasi-isomorphic to the simple complex associated to the double complex defined by
[TABLE]
Here the second differential is , the topological boundary, and the first differential is defined by
[TABLE]
where is the inclusion map. By Proposition 2.8, is quasi-isomorphic to the complex defined by
[TABLE]
Hence the complex is quasi-isomorphic to the simple complex associated to the double complex defined by
[TABLE]
The differential of is equal to
[TABLE]
on . Let be the double complex defined by
[TABLE]
The map defined by for is an isomorphism of complexes. By Proposition 3.2, the pairing of Notation 3.1 (2) induces a pairing
[TABLE]
which is a map of complexes. Here the target is the complex concentrated in degree , and the function is defined as follows. If is on , then where We need to show that this pairing induces perfect pairing on cohomology. The above pairing induces a map of double complexes
[TABLE]
which is compatible with the differentials up to sign. There are spectral sequences
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The above pairing induces a map of spectral sequences
[TABLE]
compatible with the differentials up to sign. So it suffices to show that the map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism for each This follows from the assertion of Theorem 3.4 for each since
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Until the end of the proof of Theorem 3.4 we assume that
Lemma 3.7**.**
- (1)
Let be a complex and be a full subcomplex of . Let be a derived subdivision of mod . Then is a regular neighborhood of . 2. (2)
Suppose that is a full subcomplex of . If is a subdivision of inducing a subdivision of , then we have .
Proof.
(1). Since is a full subcomplex of , we have , and the assertion follows from the definition of a regular neighborhood.
(2). This is [15] Lemma 3.3 (b). ∎
Lemma 3.8**.**
Let be a complex and let and subcomplexes of such that and are full subcomplexes of . Then equals .
Proof.
Suppose that such that , and By the assumption is a face of . If we are done since and . If there is a vertex since . The simplex spanned by and is in since is a full subcomplex of . ∎
Proposition 3.9**.**
Let be a good triangulation of the pair such that is a regular neighborhood of in . Then the natural inclusion is a quasi-isomorphism.
Proof.
Recall that we set . We proceed by induction on . When i.e. is empty there is nothing to prove. Assume that the assertion holds for and consider the case where . We denote by and by . We set and . Since is a good triangulation, we have , and .
For a complex and a subcomplex of , a derived subdivision of mod is called a derived of near . cf. 3.5 [15]. If , then the polytope is a regular neighborhood of in .
Lemma 3.10**.**
Let be a derived of near , and put and . Let be the fundamental chain of . Then the map
[TABLE]
is quasi-isomorphic. Here we denote by .
Proof.
By Lemma 3.7 and Proposition 3.10 [15] is a manifold with the boundary . The assertion follows from Lefschetz duality Theorem 3.43 [9]. ∎
Notation 3.11**.**
Let be a complex and be a subcomplex of . If is a subdivision of , the subdivision of induced by is denoted by . Similar notations will be used for other superscripts than ′.
Let be the barycentric subdivision of . We see that
[TABLE]
Let be a derived of near , and set . A simplex of which meets but not contained in is of the form where and , since . In is replaced with a complex . Let be the subdivision of obtained by replacing each such simplex with . The union is a subdivision of , and we have .
Lemma 3.12**.**
- (1)
Let and set be the fundamental cycle of . Then the map
[TABLE]
is quasi-isomorphic. 2. (2)
The map
[TABLE]
given by the restriction is a quasi-isomorphism.
Proof.
(1). By the construction we have
[TABLE]
The assertion follows from Lefschetz duality Theorem 3.43 [9].
(2). By (3.0.8) and Lemma 3.7 (2) we see that
[TABLE]
Hence by Lemma 3.8 we see that
[TABLE]
and so is a regular neighborhood of in . The assertion follows from this, since a polytope is a deformation retract of its regular neighborhood . ∎
Let be a derived of near , and set . We see that is a regular neighborhood of in . We denote . Since and are regular neighborhoods of , the map
[TABLE]
induced by the inclusion is quasi-isomorphic. By Lemma 3.8 we have and , so that and are regular neighborhoods of in . Hence the natural map
[TABLE]
is also quasi-isomorphic.
Lemma 3.13**.**
There exists a subdivision of which satisfies the following: There is a subcomplex resp. of resp. of which satisfies the following conditions.
- (1)
The inclusion of into induces an inclusion of into 2. (2)
The inclusion resp. is a quasi-isomorphism. 3. (3)
For each chain , and meet all faces properly.
Proof.
For each take a basis of as follows. First take a basis of the kernel of the map induced by the inclusion. Extend this to a basis of . Take a lift of in and define to be the complex generated by them for each . Extend to a basis of . Take a lift of in . Let be chains in such that for each . Set and . By the construction does not meet so that Hence by Theorem 2.20 can be moved in by an isotopy which keeps fixed, so that meet properly. Similarly the chains can be moved keeping fixed, so that meet properly. Let be the complex generated in degree by and . ∎
We take a good ordering of with respect to We have the following diagram.
[TABLE]
Here we omitted the superscript (4) which should be put on every simplicial complex appearing in the diagram, and the coefficient . The chain resp. resp. is the fundamental cycle of resp. resp. . By Lefschetz duality Theorem 3.43 [9], the maps for , and are quasi-isomorphic. The map res is the restriction. The map is the inclusion, and is the composition of of Lemma 3.12 (2) and the map in (3.0.9). The maps through are induced by inclusions. All the squares except for the one with an in it is commutative. The one with is homotopy commutative. The complex is defined as follows: Let be the complex defined as in Definition 2.16 for the face . is the subcomplex of which consists of the chains such that and meet properly. By Theorem 2.20 is quasi-isomorphic to . The map is quasi-isomorphic. Since and are quasi-isomorphic, is quasi-isomorphic. The maps and are quasi-isomorphic by similar reasons.
We have the following commutative diagram.
[TABLE]
Here the maps and are natural inclusions. The map is a quasi-isomorphism by the induction hypothesis, and the maps and are quasi-isomorphic by the construction. Hence the map incl is also quasi-isomorphic. Since the map is quasi-isomorphic by the induction hypothesis, the map is a quasi-isomorphism. The complex
[TABLE]
is for . Let be a derived of near . Set and . Then by Lemma 3.7 and the assumption that , is a regular neighborhood of . It follows that the map of complexes
[TABLE]
induced by the inclusion is a quasi-isomorphism. By the uniqueness of regular neighborhood Theorem 3.24 [15], we have the assertion. ∎
We have the following commutative diagram.
[TABLE]
Here the map is the one defined in Notation 3.1. In this diagram all the vertical arrows are quasi-isomorphic, and the bottom line of this diagram induces the duality pairing
[TABLE]
by de Rham Theorem. Hence the pairing of the first line also induces perfect pairings on cohomology groups. ∎
4. The Abel-Jacobi map for higher Chow cycles
In the following we consider the case where with a smooth projective complex variety of dimension . Let be the affine coordinates of . The faces are intersections of subvarieties and for . The divisor at infinity equals . The complement is denoted by , and the union of all faces of is denoted by . For and , let be the face . We define the ordering of codimension one faces of by
[TABLE]
Here the numbering starts from 0. We denote the set of the indices of codimension one faces of by . For a subset of , the face is denoted by .
The group acts naturally on as follows. The subgroup acts by the inversion of the coordinates , and the symmetric group acts by permutation of ’s. Let be the character which sends to . The idempotent in the group ring is called the alternating projector. For a -module M, the submodule
[TABLE]
is called the alternating part of . The product resp. will be written resp. for short. We recall the definition of the cubical version of higher Chow groups and of the Abel-Jacobi map. We denote by the free -vector space generated by subvarieties of meeting faces properly. The differential is defined to be
[TABLE]
Here the map resp. is the face map of the face resp. By definition
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let be an element of .
- (1)
* for .* 2. (2)
There is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Here the intersection on the right hand side is taken over all codimension one faces of .
Proof.
There is a spectral sequence
[TABLE]
Since meets every face properly, we have for and
[TABLE]
The assertion follows from this. ∎
There is a localization sequence of mixed Hodge structures
[TABLE]
As we will see shortly, there is an isomorphism . The map induces an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Suppose that Since , we have for each codimension one face and so we have a class . If is homologous to zero i.e. , there is a class whose image under the boundary map is . We denote by the subspace of .
Definition 4.2**.**
The map
[TABLE]
is called the Abel-Jacobi map.
Remark 4.3**.**
One can also define the Abel-Jacobi map in terms of Deligne-Beilinson cohomology. The equality of the two definitions is proved in Theorem 7.11 [5].
4.1. An explicit description of the Abel-Jacobi map
We will give a more explicit description of the map . Let be an element of . We replace the complex with a smaller complex . In the following, the coefficients of the complex will be .
Definition 4.4**.**
Let be the simple complex associated to the double complex
[TABLE]
where the first differential is and the second differential is .
Proposition 4.5**.**
Let the map be the map defined as
[TABLE]
Then the map is a quasi-isomorphism.
Proof.
We can argue as in [16] 1.7. That the map is a map of complexes can be checked directly. The cohomology group can be computed in terms of the spectral sequence
[TABLE]
By the homotopy invariance one sees that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
On the other hand, the cohomology of is computed by the spectral sequence
[TABLE]
We see that unless . We see the map induces an isomorphism on the -terms of the spectral sequences. ∎
Proposition 4.6**.**
Let
- (1)
We have
[TABLE]
for , and
[TABLE] 2. (2)
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1). There is a spectral sequence
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
By purity, for . It follows that
[TABLE]
The assertion (1) follows this and Lemma 4.1 (2).
(2). We have exact sequences
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
We have a map of complexes induced by the map . The assertion (2) follows from the five lemma. ∎
As is defined in [2], the cohomology class is represented by the cocycle
[TABLE]
Since , there is an element such that . By definition is the class of in . We will give a description of in terms of currents.
We have
[TABLE]
We denote by the meromorphic form on . The map
[TABLE]
is a canonical quasi-isomorphism. Here the map is the projection.
Proposition 4.7**.**
Let be a smooth -form on and be an element of . Then under the notation of Notation 3.1, we have the equality
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof is essentially the same as that of Theorem 4.3 [8], with the necessary modification similar to the case of the proof of Proposition 3.2. ∎
Corollary 4.8**.**
Let be a function on which takes the value on Then the pairing
[TABLE]
which sends with and to is a map of complexes.
Corollary 4.9**.**
Let and be an element such that .
- (1)
*The map gives a well defined element of *
. 2. (2)
Modulo this element of (1) is independent of the choice of . Hence this map defines a well defined element of , which is equal to .
Proof.
(1). If a closed form is exact, for an element by Hodge theory. We have
[TABLE]
for reason of type.
(2). If , then defines an element of
[TABLE]
∎
We will describe how the chain looks. Since for , there is an element with . Since , if there is an element with . One inductively finds chains , such that . The chain defines the homology class of in up to sign. Since , there is a chain such that . Then the chain equals the sum . Hence we have the following.
Corollary 4.10**.**
[TABLE]
Next we consider the Abel-Jacobi map for open varieties, and of the relative higher Chow cycles. Let be a smooth projective variety, and suppose that and are strict normal crossing divisors such that is also a strict normal crossing divisor. We denote , and . The subvariety of of the form for a subset of , is called a -face. A face of is called a cubical face. The variety itself is a cubical face. For a subset of and a subset of , a face of is the product of a -face and a cubical face. Let be the subspace of which consists of the cycles which meet all the faces of properly. By the moving Lemma ([1], [13]), the complex with the differential is quasi-isomorphic to Let be the complex defined by the equality
[TABLE]
where the differential is defined by
[TABLE]
on . Then the higher Chow group of relative to is defined by the equality
[TABLE]
Accordingly we consider the following complex of admissible chains.
[TABLE]
Here is the subspace of which consists of the chains such that and meet all the faces of properly. The differential is defined by
[TABLE]
Then we have
[TABLE]
In this case we also have a description of the Abel-Jacobi map in terms of the admissible chains. Probably it is more adequate to give an example than writing down the general formula. In the next subsection we will describe the case of polylog cycles rather explicitly.
4.2. The case of polylogarithms
We will see that the Hodge realization of polylog cycle constructed in [3] can be described in terms of the Abel-Jacobi map. Fix an integer , and for let with the affine coordinates . Let . For and let be the divisor on defined by . Then the closed subset
[TABLE]
is a normal crossing divisor of . We write the set of indices of the irreducible components of
[TABLE]
by , and define an ordering on by
[TABLE]
where the numbering starts from zero. We denote by . We have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
with the differential on . The group acts on in a similar way as acts on , so there is an action of the product on . The character sign naturally extends to the product character on , and let be the associated projector. For a -module , we denote by the module Let be the complex defined by the equality
[TABLE]
The differential of is defined as follows. For and , let be the inclusion defined by Let
[TABLE]
be the map . The map is a differential i.e. , and it induces a map on the alternating part: we have . Let
[TABLE]
be the homomorphism defined as follows. For a subset of , let be the corresponding face of . We identify with in the natural way. Then on , we define
[TABLE]
One sees that the map is a homomorphism of complexes.
Let be an element of given parametrically
[TABLE]
we have the equality for . Let be the element . Then we have .
For or we have So we can find chains
[TABLE]
for and such that
[TABLE]
Explicitly,
[TABLE]
with suitable orientation. A complex computing the cohomology group is given by
[TABLE]
where the differential is given by on Let be the complex defined by
[TABLE]
with the differential given by on The map defined in (4.2.3) is a homomorphism of complexes. The element can be regarded as a cocycle of Let be the element of defined as the sum
[TABLE]
where . Then we have
[TABLE]
Let be the divisor
[TABLE]
of . For each irreducible component of , the pull-back of and of to is zero for each and . Hence defines an element of the relative higher Chow group and we have
[TABLE]
in . We have
[TABLE]
The dual space of is . The form on defines an element of . We have
[TABLE]
When , the integral for reason of type, and
[TABLE]
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Bloch,S., The moving lemma for higher Chow groups , J. Algebraic Geom. 3 , (1994), 537–568.
- 2[2] Bloch, S., Algebraic cycles and the Beilinson conjectures , Contemporary Mathematics 58 (1) (1986), 65-79.
- 3[3] Bloch, S., Kriz, I., Mixed Tate Motives , Ann. Math. 140 , 557-605.
- 4[4] Bochnak, J., Coste, M., Roy, M., Real Algebraic Geometry, Springer, 1998
- 5[5] Esnault, H., Vieweg, E., Deligne-Beilinson cohomology , in Beilinson’s Conjectures on Special Values of L 𝐿 L -functions.
- 6[6] Griffiths, A. P., On the periods of certain rational integrals: I , Ann. Math., 90 , 460-495, (1969).
- 7[7] Hanamura, M., Kimura, K., Terasoma, T., Integrals of logarithmic forms on semi-algebraic sets and a generalized Cauchy formula , Part I: convergence theorems. ar Xiv:1509.06950.
- 8[8] Hanamura, M., Kimura, K., Terasoma, T., Integrals of logarithmic forms on semi-algebraic sets and a generalized Cauchy formula , Part II: generalized Cauchy formula (detailed version). ar Xiv: 1604.03216.
