This paper extends Mumford's conjecture on relations in the cohomology of moduli spaces from smooth to irreducible nodal curves, showing how relations degenerate and computing related invariants.
Contribution
It generalizes Mumford's relations to nodal curves and demonstrates their degeneration from smooth cases, also computing the Hodge-Poincare polynomial.
Findings
01
Relations arise as degenerations of Mumford relations in nodal curves
02
Computed the Hodge-Poincare polynomial for the moduli space on nodal curves
03
Established a link between smooth and nodal curve moduli space relations
Abstract
A conjecture of Mumford predicts a complete set of relations between the generators of the cohomology ring of the moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed odd degree determinant on a smooth, projective curve of genus at least 2. The conjecture was proven by Kirwan. In this article, we generalize the conjecture to the case when the underlying curve is irreducible, nodal. In fact, we show that these relations (in the nodal curve case) arise naturally as degeneration of the Mumford relations shown by Kirwan in the smooth curve case. As a byproduct, we compute the Hodge-Poincare polynomial of the moduli space of rank 2, semi-stable, torsion-free sheaves with fixed determinant on an irreducible, nodal curve.
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.
Full text
Generalization of a conjecture of Mumford
Ananyo Dan
School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheffield, Hicks building, Hounsfield Road, S3 7RH, UK
A conjecture of Mumford predicts a complete set of relations between the generators of the cohomology ring of the moduli space
of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed odd degree determinant on a smooth, projective curve of genus at least 2.
The conjecture was proven by Kirwan in 1992. In this article, we generalize the conjecture
to the case when the underlying curve is irreducible, nodal. In fact, we show that these relations (in the nodal curve case)
arise naturally as degeneration of the Mumford relations shown by Kirwan in the smooth curve case.
As a byproduct, we compute the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial
of the moduli space of rank 2, semi-stable, torsion-free sheaves with fixed determinant on an irreducible, nodal curve.
The underlying field will always be C.
Let C be a smooth, projective curve of genus g≥2, d be an odd integer and L0 be an invertible sheaf on C of degree d.
Denote by MC(2,d) the moduli space of stable, locally-free sheaves of rank 2 and degree d over C
and by MC(2,L0) the sub-moduli space of MC(2,d) parameterizing
locally-free sheaves with determinant L0.
Since it was first constructed by Mumford, almost all aspects of the moduli spaces MC(2,d) and MC(2,L0) have been extensively studied.
Several different methods ranging from topology, number-theory, gauge theory as well as algebraic geometry
have been used to study the cohomology ring H∗(MC(2,L0),Q). The generators of this
ring were given by Newstead in [28] and a complete set of relations between these generators was conjectured by Mumford.
We briefly recall the conjecture.
Choose a symplectic basis e1,e2,...,e2g of H1(C,Z) such that
ei∪ej=0 for ∣j−i∣=g and ei∪ei+g=−[C]∨, where [C]∨ is the
Poincaré dual of the fundamental class of C. Mumford and Newstead [26] showed
that there exists an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures
[TABLE]
induced by the second Chern class of the universal vector bundle U over C×MC(2,L0).
Denote by γi:=ϕ(ei) for 1≤i≤2g and γ=∑i=1gγiγi+g. Newstead in [28]
showed that there exists α∈H2(MC(2,L0),Z)
and β∈H4(MC(2,L0),Z) (again arising from Chern classes of U) such that the
cohomology ring H∗(MC(2,L0),Q) is generated by
α,β and γi for 1≤i≤2g.
Mumford conjectured that there is a decomposition
[TABLE]
where Ik is an ideal of relations between α,β and γ and Pk is the primitive component of ∧kH3(MC(2,L0),Q) with respect to γ (see §5.2
for precise definitions).
The conjecture was proved by Kirwan [24].
In [40] Zagier showed that in fact the relations between the generators can be determined recursively. In particular,
Ik⊂Q[α,β,γ] is generated by
(ξk,ξk+1,ξk+2), where ξ0=1 and recursively,
[TABLE]
This was also proven independently by Baranovskii [2], Siebert and Tian [35], later by Herrera and Salamon [18] and also by King and Newstead [23].
Although the obvious generalization of Mumford’s conjecture to the cases when rank n≥3 is false, Earl and Kirwan in [15] for arbitrary n, give additional relations such that
together with the Mumford relations they form a complete set of relations between the generators of the cohomology ring of
the moduli space of rank n semi-stable sheaves with coprime degree d over C.
However, none of the existing literature studies the above conjecture for a singular curve, even in the case of rank 2.
Let X0 be an irreducible nodal curve with exactly one node.
Denote by UX0(2,L0) the moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves on X0 with determinant L0 (here
L0 is also an invertible sheaf of odd degree) as defined by Sun in [37]
(we use a different notation for the moduli space as the definition of determinant in this case is different from the classical definition). We also know by [22] that the moduli space UX0(2,L0) is non-empty.
One of the difficulties in generalizing the above results to the cohomology ring of UX0(2,L0) arises from the fact that
UX0(2,L0) is singular unlike the moduli space MC(2,L0). As a result,
most of the techniques used for MC(2,L0) fail.
As there is no straightforward way to generalize the techniques in the literature, we
instead embed the nodal curve X0 in a regular family π:X→Δ (here Δ denotes the unit disc),
smooth over Δ∗:=Δ\{0} and central fiber isomorphic to X0 (the existence of such a family follows from the
completeness of the moduli space of stable curves, see [1, Theorem B.2]).
Note that the invertible sheaf L0 on X0 lifts to a relative invertible sheaf LX over X.
There is a well-known relative Simpson’s moduli space, denoted UX(2,LX)
of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with determinant LX over X (see [20, 21] for basic definitions and results).
The (relative) moduli space UX(2,LX) is flat over Δ and has central fiber UX0(2,L0).
For any s∈Δ∗, the fiber UX(2,L)s is isomorphic to MXs(2,L∣Xs) and hence non-singular.
Substituting C by Xs and L0 by L∣Xs in the above discussion, we rewrite Mumford’s conjecture
for the cohomology ring H∗(UX0(2,L0),Q) as follows:
Conjecture** (Generalized Mumford conjecture).**
Denote by Pkmon the subspace of Pk (as before) consisting of all elements that are monodromy invariant (under the
natural monodromy action on H∗(MXs(2,L∣Xs),Q)). Then, Pkmon is independent (up to isomorphism)
of the choice of the family π and the cohomology ring H∗(UX0(2,L0),Q)
decomposes as
[TABLE]
Apart from the obvious motivation of Mumford’s conjecture, one can also use the conjecture to
compute the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial
of the cohomology ring of MXs(2,Ls) for s∈Δ∗, where Ls:=LX∣Xs (see [23]).
Recall, the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial for MXs(2,Ls):
[TABLE]
One of the first results in this direction was by Newstead [27], where he gives a recursive formula for Betti numbers
of MC(2,L0).
This was generalized by Harder, Narasimhan [17], Desale and Ramanan [13] using number-theoretic methods,
in the case of any coprime rank and degree.
Later, Bifet, Ghione and Letizia [7] gave the same formula but using methods from algebraic geometry.
In [14], Earl and Kirwan used methods from gauge theory to obtain the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial for MXs(2,d) and
MXs(2,Ls). However, an analogous Hodge-Poincaré polynomial for UX0(2,L0) was yet unknown.
In this article we prove:
Theorem 1.1**.**
The generalized Mumford conjecture holds true. Furthermore,
the cohomology ring H∗(UX0(2,L0),Q) is generated by α,β,γi for 1≤i≤2g−1 and γgγ2g.
See Theorem 7.2 and Remark 7.3 for the precise statements.
We also obtain the Hodge-Poincaré formula: As UX0(2,L0) is singular, the associated
cohomology groups do not have a pure Hodge structure. Then, the
Hodge-Poincaré formula for UX0(2,L0) is
defined as
The Hodge-Poincaré polynomial associated to the moduli space
UX0(2,L0) is
[TABLE]
We now discuss the strategy of the proof.
The idea is to use the theory of variation of mixed Hodge structures by Schmid [32] and Steenbrink [36]
to relate the mixed Hodge structure on the central fiber of the
relative moduli space to the limit mixed Hodge structure on the generic fiber.
Unfortunately, the singularity of the central fiber of UX(2,LX)
is not a normal crossings divisor, hence not a suitable
candidate for using tools from [36, 32]. However, there is a different construction of a relative
moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with determinant LX over X, due to Gieseker [16].
The advantage of the latter family of moduli spaces is that, in this case the central fiber, denoted GX0(2,L0)
is a simple normal crossings divisor, hence compatible with the setup in
[36, 32]. Moreover, the generic fibers
of the two relative moduli spaces coincide.
We study the generators of the cohomology ring of GX0(2,L0)
in a separate article [4], as it does not play any role in the proof of
the generalized Mumford’s conjecture.
Denote by G(2,LX)∞ the generic fiber of the
relative moduli space. By Steenbrink [36], Hi(G(2,LX)∞,Q)
is equipped with a (limit) mixed Hodge structure such that
the specialization morphism
[TABLE]
is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures for all i≥0.
Using the Mumford relations on MXs(2,Ls) shown by Kirwan,
we obtain a complete set of relations between the generators
of the cohomology ring H∗(G(2,L)∞,Q) of
the generic fiber G(2,LX)∞.
However, not all elements in Hi(G(2,LX)∞,Q)
are monodromy invariant. As a result the specialization morphism
spi is neither injective, nor surjective (see Corollary 2.4).
To compute explicitly the kernel and cokernel of spi we
study the Gysin morphism from the intersection of the two
components of GX0(2,L0) to the irreducible
components (see Theorem 4.2). Using this we prove:
We have the following isomorphism of graded rings:
[TABLE]
where Pi,α,β,γ and Ig−i are objects analogous
to Pi,α,β,γ and Ig−i defined earlier after replacing C by X0 and L0 by
L0:=π0∗L0, π0:X0→X0 is the normalization morphism.
Similarly, we obtain the Hodge-Poincaré
formula for GX0(2,L0) (see Theorem 6.2). Finally,
there exists a proper morphism from GX0(2,L0) to UX0(2,L0). Using this
morphism we obtain from Theorem 1.3, the relations between the generators of the cohomology ring of
UX0(2,L0) and compute the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial for UX0(2,L0).
We remark that this article is part of a series of articles in which we study related but different questions pertaining to the moduli space of stable, rank 2 sheaves on an irreducible nodal curve (see [3, 9] for the first two published articles in the series). However, the results in all the articles are independent and overlap only in the background material.
Outline: In §2, we recall the preliminaries on the limit mixed Hodge structures applicable in our setup and use it to compute
the limit mixed Hodge structure associated to the degenerating family π of curves, mentioned above.
In §3, we recall the relative Mumford-Newstead isomorphism as mentioned in [3] which gives us an isomorphism (of mixed Hodge structures) between the limit mixed Hodge structure coming from π and that coming from the associated family of moduli space of semi-stable sheaves.
In §4, we compute a Gysin morphism to relate the cohomology ring of GX0(2,L0) to that of the generic
fiber of the family of moduli spaces. In §5, we prove the generalized Mumford conjecture for GX0(2,L0).
In §6, we compute the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial for GX0(2,L0). In §7,
we prove the generalized Mumford conjecture for UX0(2,L0) and compute the associated Hodge-Poincaré polynomial.
Notation: Given any morphism f:Y→S and a point s∈S, we denote by Ys:=f−1(s).
The open unit disc is denoted by Δ and Δ∗:=Δ\{0} denotes the punctured disc.
Acknowledgements
We thank Prof. J. F. de Bobadilla and S. Basu for numerous discussions.
At the time of writing the article, the first author was supported by ERCEA Consolidator Grant 615655-NMST and also
by the Basque Government through the BERC 2014−2017 program and by Spanish
Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO: BCAM Severo Ochoa
excellence accreditation SEV-2013−0323 and the second author was funded by a fellowship from CNPq Brazil. Currently, the first
author is funded by EPSRC grant number R/162871-11-1 and
the second author is funded by a PNPD-CAPES fellowship, provided by PUC-Rio.
2. Preliminaries: Limit mixed Hodge structure
We recall basic results on limit mixed Hodge structures relevant to our setup.
See [30] for a detailed treatment of the subject.
Let ρ:Y→Δ be a flat family of projective varieties, smooth over Δ∗ and
ρ′:YΔ∗→Δ∗ the restriction
of ρ to Δ∗.
2.1. Hodge bundles
Using Ehresmann’s theorem (see [39, Theorem 9.3]), we have for all i≥0,
HYΔ∗i:=Riρ∗′Z
the local systems over Δ∗ with fiber Hi(Yt,Z), for t∈Δ∗.
One can canonically associate to these local systems the holomorphic vector bundles
HYΔ∗i:=HYΔ∗i⊗ZOΔ∗
called the Hodge bundles.
There exist holomorphic sub-bundles FpHYΔ∗i⊂HYΔ∗i
defined by the condition: for any t∈Δ∗, the fibers
[TABLE]
can be identified respectively with
FpHi(Yt,C)⊂Hi(Yt,C), where Fp denotes the Hodge filtration (see [39, §10.2.1]).
2.2. Canonical extension of Hodge bundles
The Hodge bundles and their holomorphic sub-bundles defined above can be extended to the entire disc. In particular,
there exists a canonical extension, HYi of
HYΔ∗i to Δ (see [30, Definition 11.4]).
Note that HYi is locally-free over Δ. Denote by j:Δ∗→Δ
the inclusion morphism,
FpHYi:=j∗(FpHYΔ∗i)∩HYi.
Note that FpHYi is the unique largest locally-free
sub-sheaf of HYi which extends FpHYΔ∗i.
Consider the universal cover h→Δ∗ of the punctured unit disc.
Denote by e:h→Δ∗jΔ the composed morphism and
Y∞ the base change of the family Y over Δ to h, by the morphism e.
There is an explicit identification of the central fiber of the canonical extensions HYi
and the cohomology group Hi(Y∞,C), depending on the choice of the parameter t on Δ (see [30, XI-8]):
[TABLE]
This induces (Hodge) filtrations on Hi(Y∞,C) as
FpHi(Y∞,C):=(gti)−1(FpHYi)0.
2.3. Monodromy transformations
For any s∈Δ∗ and i≥0, denote by
[TABLE]
the local monodromy transformations
defined by parallel transport along a counterclockwise loop about 0∈Δ (see [30, §11.1.1]).
By [12, Theorem II.1.17] (see also [25, Proposition I.7.8.1]) the automorphism extends to a Q-automorphism
[TABLE]
Denote by Ti,C the induced automorphism on Hi(Y∞,C).
2.4. Schmid’s limit mixed Hodge structures
The natural specialization morphism from the cohomology on the central fiber of the family Y to a general fiber Ys, s∈Δ∗
is not in general a morphism of mixed Hodge structures, if one considers the cohomology of Ys with the natural pure Hodge structure.
However, one can define a mixed Hodge structure on the cohomology of Ys, such that the specialization morphism is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures.
More precisely,
Remark 2.1**.**
Let Ni be the logarithm of the monodromy operator Ti.
By [30, Lemma-Definition 11.9], there exists an unique increasing monodromy weight filtrationW∙ on Hi(Y∞,Q) such that,
(1)
for j≥2, Ni(WjHi(Y∞,Q))⊂Wj−2Hi(Y∞,Q) and
2. (2)
the map Nil:Gri+lWHi(Y∞,Q)→Gri−lWHi(Y∞,Q)
is an isomorphism for all l≥0.
Now, [32, Theorem 6.16] states that the induced filtration on Hi(Y∞,C) defines
a mixed Hodge structure (Hi(Y∞,Z),W∙,F∙).
When the central fiber Y0 is a reduced simple normal crossings divisor of Y,
we have the following description of the specialization morphism.
Remark 2.2**.**
Suppose that the central fiber Y0 is a reduced simple normal crossings divisor of Y.
By the local invariant cycle theorem [30, Theorem 11.43], we have the following exact sequence of mixed Hodge structure:
[TABLE]
where spi denotes the specialization morphism.
2.5. Steenbrink’s limit mixed Hodge structures
It is not always easy to compute the monodromy weight filtration defined by Schmid. As a result we will use
the Steenbrink spectral sequences below. Note that we do not give the general form of the spectral sequence, instead we
restrict to the case relevant to this article.
Proposition 2.3** ([30, Corollaries 11.23 and 11.41] and [36, Example 3.5]).**
Suppose Y is regular and Y0 is a reduced simple normal crossings divisor of Y,
consisting of exactly two irreducible components, say Y1 and Y2.
The limit weight spectral sequenceW∞E1p,q⇒Hp+q(Y∞,Q) consists of the following terms:
(1)
if ∣p∣≥2, then W∞E1p,q=0,
2. (2)
W∞E11,q=Hq(Y1∩Y2,Q)(0), W∞E10,q=Hq(Y1,Q)(0)⊕Hq(Y2,Q)(0) and W∞E1−1,q=Hq−2(Y1∩Y2,Q)(−1),
3. (3)
the differential map d1:W∞E10,q→W∞E11,q is the restriction morphism and
[TABLE]
is the Gysin morphism.
The limit weight spectral sequence W∞E1p,q degenerates at E2
and the induced filtration on Hp+q(Y∞,Q) coincides with the monodromy weight filtration as in Remark 2.1 above.
Similarly, the *weight spectral sequence * WE1p,q⇒Hp+q(Y0,Q) on Y0 consists of the following terms:
(1)
for p≥2 or p<0, we have WE1p,q=0,
2. (2)
WE11,q=Hq(Y1∩Y2,Q)(0) and WE10,q=Hq(Y1,Q)(0)⊕Hq(Y2,Q)(0),
3. (3)
the differential map d1:WE10,q→WE11,q is the restriction morphism.
The spectral sequence WE1p,q degenerates at E2 and induces a weight filtration on Hp+q(Y0,Q).
We note that the resulting weight filtrations on Hp+q(Y∞,Q) and Hp+q(Y0,Q) are given by:
[TABLE]
Corollary 2.4**.**
Let Y and Y0 be as in Proposition 2.3. Then, we have the following exact sequence of mixed Hodge structures:
[TABLE]
where fi is the natural morphism induced by the Gysin morphism from Hi−2(Y1∩Y2,Q)(−1) to Hi(Y1,Q)⊕Hi(Y2,Q)
(use the Mayer-Vietoris sequence associated to Y1∪Y2),
spi is the specialization morphism (see [30, Theorem 11.29])
and gi is the natural projection.
Proof.
The corollary is an immediate consequence of Proposition 2.3.
∎
2.6. The curve case
Consider the flat family ρ:X→Δ of projective curves with X regular,
Xt smooth of genus g for all t∈Δ∗ and X0=Y1∪Y2 with Y1≅P1,
Y2 smooth, irreducible and intersecting Y1 transversally at two points, say y1,y2.
We compute the limit mixed Hodge structure associated to this family of curves.
This description will be used later in the article
to give the generators of the weight filtration on the cohomology ring of the moduli space of semi-stable
sheaves with fixed determinant over an irreducible
nodal curve.
Theorem 2.5**.**
Denote by f′∈H2(Y2,Z), the Poincaré dual of the fundamental class of Y2 and
[TABLE]
the specialization morphism as in Corollary 2.4 composed with the isomorphism arising from the Mayer-Vietoris sequence.
Then, there exists a basis e1,e2,...,e2g of
H1(X∞,Z) such that
e1,e2,...,eg−1,eg+1,eg+2,...,e2g−1 form a basis of Gr1WH1(X∞,Q),
3. (3)
ei∪ei+g=sp2(0⊕−f′) and ei∪ej=0 for ∣j−i∣=g.
Before proving the theorem, we note
that when we say “ei1,...,eir generate GrjWH1(X∞,Q)” we always mean that the image of
ei1,...,eir in GrjWH1(X∞,Q) (under the natural projection morphism) generate it.
Proof.
The Mayer-Vietoris sequence associated to the central fiber X0 is
[TABLE]
Since H1(Y1,Z)=0, this gives us the short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
inducing isomorphisms Q≅pGr0WH1(X0,Q) and Gr1WH1(X0,Q)≅qH1(Y2,Q).
Since ρ is a flat family of projective curves with ρ−1(t) of genus g for g∈Δ∗, we have
[TABLE]
where ρa denotes the arithmetic genus (use ρa(Y1)=0). In other words, ρa(Y2)=g−1.
There exists a symplectic basis e1′,e2′,...,eg−1′,eg+1′,eg+2′,...,e2g−1′ of H1(Y2,Z)
such that ei′∪ei+g′=−f′ and ei′∪ej′=0 for ∣i−j∣=g, where f′∈H2(Y2,Z) is the dual of
fundamental class of Y2 (see [8, §1.2]). Let ei′′∈H1(X0,Z) such that
q(ei′′)=ei′. Denote by ei:=sp1(ei′′), where
[TABLE]
is the specialization morphism. Since sp1 maps Gr1WH1(X0,Z)
isomorphically to Gr1WH1(X∞,Z) (Corollary 2.4), we conclude that
e1,e2,...,eg−1,eg+1,eg+2,...,e2g−1 is a basis of Gr1WH1(X∞,Q).
Denote by i1:Y1↪X0 and i2:Y2↪X0 the natural inclusions.
Since cup-product commutes with pull-back, we have i1∗(ei′′∪ej′′)=0 for all i,j (use H1(P1)=0), i2∗(ei′′∪ei+g′′)=ei′∪ei+g′=−f′ and
i2∗(ei′′∪ej′′)=ei′∪ej′=0 for any ∣j−i∣=g. This implies ei∪ej=0 for ∣j−i∣=g and ei∪ei+g=sp2(0⊕−f′) under the morphism
[TABLE]
where the first isomorphism follows from the Mayer-Vietoris sequence.
Denote by eg:=sp1∘p(1). Note that eg generates W0H1(X∞,Q) (use Corollary 2.4).
Since the cup-product morphism
[TABLE]
is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures and H2(X∞,Q) is pure, we conclude that
eg∪ei=0 for all 1≤i≤2g−1.
Choose e2g∈H1(X∞,Z) such that e1,e2,...,e2g generates H1(X∞,Z).
Let ei∪e2g=aisp2(0⊕−f′).
As cup-product is skew-symmetric, we have a2g=0.
Moreover, as the cup-product morphism is
a perfect pairing, we have ∣ag∣=1. Replace e2g by
[TABLE]
Note that e2g∈H1(X∞,Z), generates Gr2WH1(X∞,Q), ei∪e2g=0 for i=g and eg∪e2g=sp2(0⊕−f′).
This proves the theorem.
∎
3. Relative Gieseker moduli space and Mumford-Newstead isomorphism
In this section we recall the relative Gieseker moduli space and review results on relative Mumford-Newstead isomorphisms as described in [3, §4].
Notation 3.1**.**
Let X0 be an irreducible nodal curve of genus g≥2, with exactly
one node, say at x0. Denote by π0:X0→X0 be the normalization map.
Since the moduli space of stable curve
is complete, there exists a regular, flat family of projective curves
π1:X→Δ smooth over
Δ∗ and central fiber isomorphic to X0 (see [1, Theorem B.2]).
Fix an invertible sheaf L on X of relative odd degree, say d. Set L0:=L∣X0,
the restriction of L to the central fiber.
Denote by L0:=π0∗(L0). Denote by Ls:=L∣Xs
for any s∈Δ. For s∈Δ∗, denote by MXs(2,Ls)
the moduli space of rank 2, semi-stable sheaves with determinant Ls over Xs.
By [19, Corollary 4.5.5], MXs(2,Ls) is non-singular for every
s∈Δ∗.
3.1. Relative Gieseker moduli space
There exists a regular, flat, projective family
[TABLE]
called the relative Gieseker moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves on X with determinant
L, such that for all s∈Δ∗, G(2,L)s:=π2−1(s)=MXs(2,Ls) and the central fiber π2−1(0), denoted
GX0(2,L0), is a reduced simple normal crossings divisor of G(2,L). See [37, Theorem 2] and [38, §6] for the definition and
construction of the moduli space G(2,L).
In particular, G(2,L) is smooth over Δ∗ and satisfies the conditions of Proposition 2.3.
Denote by MX0(2,L0) the fine moduli space of semi-stable sheaves of rank 2 and with determinant L0 over X0 (see [19, Theorem 4.3.7 and 4.6.6]).
By [38, §6], GX0(2,L0) can be written as the union of two irreducible components, say G0 and G1, and
G1 (resp. G0∩G1) is isomorphic to a P33 (resp. P1×P1)-bundle over MX0(2,L0).
3.2. Mumford-Newstead isomorphism in families
Let us consider the relative version of the construction in [26].
Denote by
[TABLE]
the natural morphism. Recall, for
all t∈Δ∗, the fiber
[TABLE]
There exists a (relative) universal bundle U over W
associated to the (relative) moduli space G(2,L)Δ∗ i.e., U is a vector bundle over W such that for each t∈Δ∗,
U∣Wt is the universal bundle over Xt×MXt(2,Lt) associated to fine moduli space MXt(2,Lt)
(use [29, Theorem 9.1.1]).
Denote by HW4:=R4π3∗ZW the local system associated to W.
Using Künneth decomposition, we have (see §2.1 for notations)
[TABLE]
Denote by c2(U)1,3∈Γ(HXΔ∗1⊗HG(2,L)Δ∗3)
the image of the second Chern class c2(U)∈Γ(HW4) under the natural projection from
HW4 to HXΔ∗1⊗HG(2,L)Δ∗3.
Using Poincaré duality applied to the local system HXΔ∗1 (see [25, §I.2.6]), we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, c2(U)1,3 induces a homomorphism ΦΔ∗:HXΔ∗1→HG(2,L)Δ∗3.
By [26, Lemma 1 and Proposition 1], we conclude that the homomorphism ΦΔ∗
is an isomorphism such that the induced
isomorphism on the associated vector bundles:
[TABLE]
3.3. Limit Mumford-Newstead isomorphism
We now extend the isomorphism ΦΔ∗ to the entire disc Δ and show that the induced morphism
on the central fibers is an isomorphism of limit mixed Hodge structures. We do this using the monodromy operator (see §2).
In order to guarantee that the monodromy operator is unipotent, we want the central fibers of the relevant families of projective varieties
to be reduced simple, normal crossings divisors.
The family π2 of moduli spaces already satisfies this criterion.
Unfortunately, the central fiber of π1 is X0, which is not a simple normal crossings divisor.
We can easily rectify this problem by blowing up X
at the point x0.
Denote by X:=Blx0X and by
[TABLE]
Note that the central fiber of π1 is the union of two irreducible components, the normalization X0 of X0 and
the exceptional divisor F≅Px01 intersecting X0 at the two points
over x0.
Let HXΔ∗1 and HG(2,L)Δ∗3 be the canonical extensions of HXΔ∗1
and HG(2,L)Δ∗3, respectively. Then, the morphism ΦΔ∗ extend to the entire disc:
[TABLE]
Using the identification (2.1) and restricting Φ to the central fiber, we have an isomorphism:
[TABLE]
Recall, Φ0 is an isomorphism of mixed Hodge structures:
Theorem 3.2**.**
For the extended morphism Φ, we have
Φ(FpHX1)=Fp+1HG(2,L)3 for p=0,1 and
Φ(HX1)=HG(2,L)3.
Moreover, Φ0(WiH1(X∞,Q))=Wi+2H3(G(2,L)∞,Q)
for all i≥0.
Proof.
See [3, Proposition 4.1] for a proof of the statement.
∎
4. Computing the kernel of the Gysin morphism
Notations as in Notation 3.1 and §3.1.
The goal of this section is to compute the kernel of the Gysin morphism fi as in (2.4), in the case when the flat family ρ
is the relative Gieseker moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed determinant associated to a degenerating family of
smooth curves (Theorem 4.2).
4.1. Cohomology of the fibers of P0,G1 and G0∩G1
Recall the wonderful compactificationSL2⊂P4≅P(End(C2)⊕C) of SL2 consisting of points [x0:x1:...:x4] such that
x0x3−x1x2=x42 (see [31, Definition 3.3.1] for the general definition of
wonderful compactification).
Denote by j1:SL2↪P4 the natural inclusion
as a quadric hypersurface.
Recall that G1 (resp. G0∩G1) is a P33 (resp. P1×P1)-bundle over MX0(2,L0).
Denote by
[TABLE]
the natural projections.
Recall by [38, §6] that there exists an SL2-bundle P0 over MX0(2,L0)
and natural inclusions
[TABLE]
such that for the natural projection ρ3:P0⟶MX0(2,L0), we have
for any y∈MX0(2,L0), identifying the fiber ρ1−1(y)
(resp. ρ2−1(y), ρ3−1(y)) with P1×P1 (resp. P33,SL2), the natural inclusions
i1,y and i2,y, induced by i1 and i2 respectively, sit
in the
following diagram:
[TABLE]
where j2([x0:...:x3])=[x0:...:x3:0] and i1,y (resp. i2,y) is the Segre embedding sending
[TABLE]
Let ξ0 be a generator of H2(P1,Q), pri the natural
projections from P1×P1 to P1 and ξi:=pri∗(ξ0).
Using the Künneth decomposition, we have
[TABLE]
H4(P1×P1,Q)=Qξ1.ξ2.
Since SL2 is a
quadric hypersurface in P4, the Lefschetz hyperplane section theorem implies that
H2i(SL2,Q)≅Q for 0≤i≤3 and
H1(SL2,Q)=0=H5(SL2,Q).
It is also known that H3(SL2,Q)=0.
Denote by ξ∈H2(P4,Z) a generator, ξ′:=j1∗(ξ) and ξ′′:=j2∗(ξ).
4.2. Kernel of the Gysin morphisms
We now compute the kernel of the Gysin morphisms i2,∗ and i3,∗. The first step is to
determine the kernel of i1,∗ and i2,∗ (Proposition 4.1). This is done using the Leray-Hirsch theorem.
Proposition 4.1**.**
We have,
[TABLE]
Proof.
It is easy to check that,
[TABLE]
By the Deligne-Blanchard theorem [11] (the Leray spectral sequence
degenerates at E2 for smooth families), we have
[TABLE]
Since MX0(2,L0) is smooth and simply connected, the local systems
Rjρ1,∗Q, Rjρ2,∗Q and Rjρ3,∗Q are trivial.
Therefore, for any y∈MX0(2,L0), the natural morphisms
[TABLE]
are surjective.
Then, Leray-Hirsch theorem (see [39, Theorem 7.33]), implies that for any closed point y∈MX0(2,L0),
[TABLE]
Using the projection formula (see [30, Lemma B.26]) and the identifications described in the
Leray-Hirsch theorem (identifying certain cohomology classes with
their restrictions to y), we have for any
α∈Hj−2((G0∩G1)y,Q) and β∈Hi−j−2(MX0(2,L0),Q),
[TABLE]
Note that for β=0, (i1,y)∗α∪ρ3∗β=0 (resp. (i2,y)∗α∪ρ2∗β=0) if and only if
(i1,y)∗α=0 (resp. (i2,y)∗α=0).
Using the decompositions above and (4.1), (4.2), this implies ker((i1,∗,i2,∗)) is isomorphic to
Hi−4(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ1⊕−ξ2).
This proves the proposition.
∎
Theorem 4.2**.**
The kernel of the Gysin morphism
[TABLE]
is
isomorphic to Hi−4(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ1⊕−ξ2). In particular, the kernel of the
morphism fi from Hi−2(G0∩G1,Q)(−1) to
Hi(GX0(2,L0),Q) induced by the
Gysin morphism (i3,∗,i2,∗) (use the Mayer-Vietoris
sequence associated to G0∪G1) is isomorphic
to Hi−4(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ1⊕−ξ2).
Proof.
By [38, §6], there exist closed subschemes Z⊂P0 and Z′⊂G0
such that P0\Z≅G0\Z′.
Using [16] (see also [38, P. 27] or [34, Remark 6.5(c), Theorem 6.2]), one can observe that
Z∩Im(i1)=∅=Z′∩Im(i3)
and there exists a smooth, projective variety W along with proper, birational morphisms τ1:W→P0 and τ2:W→G0 such that
[TABLE]
Therefore, there exists a natural closed immersion l:G0∩G1→W such that i1=τ1∘l and i3=τ2∘l.
We claim that, given any ξ∈Hk−2(G0∩G1,Q), we have τ1∗∘i1,∗(ξ)=l∗(ξ)=τ2∗∘i3,∗(ξ).
Indeed, since Im(i1) (resp. Im(i3)) does not intersect Z (resp. Z′), the pullback of l∗(ξ) to τ1−1(Z) and τ2−1(Z′) vanish.
Using the (relative) cohomology exact sequence (see [30, Proposition 5.54]), we conclude that there exists β1∈Hk(P0) and β2∈Hk(G0)
such that τ1∗(β1)=l∗(ξ)=τ2∗(β2). Applying τ1,∗ and τ2,∗ to the two equalities respectively and using
[30, Proposition B.27], we get
[TABLE]
In other words, τ1∗∘i1,∗(ξ)=l∗(ξ)=τ2∗∘i3,∗(ξ). This proves the claim.
Using [30, Theorem 5.41], we then conclude that i1,∗(ξ)=0 (resp. i3,∗(ξ)=0) if and only if l∗(ξ)=0. In other words,
ker(i1,∗)≅ker(i3,∗).
Using Proposition 4.1, we have that ker(fi)≅Hi−4(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ1⊕−ξ2).
This proves the theorem.
∎
5. On a conjecture of Mumford
In Theorem 5.1, we give a complete set of relations between the generators of the cohomology ring of the moduli space of
rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed determinant over an irreducible nodal curve, analogous to a
classical conjecture of Mumford as proved in [24]. We use notations as in Notation 3.1 and §3.1.
5.1. Generators of the cohomology ring H∗(G(2,L)∞,Q)
We first use the classical result of Newstead [28]
to determine the generators of the cohomology ring H∗(G(2,L)∞,Q).
Let ψi∞:=Φ0(ei), where ei∈H1(X∞,Z) as in Theorem 2.5, 1≤i≤2g
and Φ0 as in (3.4).
Fix s∈Δ∗.
Let ψi,s∈H3(G(2,L)s,Z) the image of ψi∞ under the natural isomorphism
[TABLE]
Using [28, Theorem 1], one can observe that for any s∈Δ∗,
there exist elements
[TABLE]
such that the cohomology ring H∗(G(2,L)s,Q) is generated by
αs,βs,ψ1,s,ψ2,s,...,ψ2g,s.
Let
[TABLE]
the preimage of αs and βs, respectively, under the natural isomorphism (5.1).
It is immediate that the cohomology ring H∗(G(2,L)∞,Q) is generated by
α∞,β∞,ψ1∞,ψ2∞,...,ψ2g∞.
5.2. Relations on the cohomology rings H∗(MX0(2,L0),Q) and H∗(G(2,L)s,Q)
Denote by ψi:=Φ1(ψi∞) for 1≤i≤g−1
and ψi:=Φ1(ψi+1∞) for g≤i≤2g−2.
Let α∈H2(MX0(2,L0),Z) (resp. β∈H2(MX0(2,L0),Z)) such that α (resp. α2 and β)
generates H2(MX0(2,L0),Q)
(resp. H4(MX0(2,L0),Z)).
Denote by ψ∞:=∑i=1gψi∞ψi+g∞,
[TABLE]
Given an ordered set (i1,...,ik)=I with 1≤i1<i2<...<ik≤2g, denote by ψI∞:=ψi1∞...ψik∞.
For i≤g, denote by Pi∞ the Q-vector space generated by elements of the form
[TABLE]
such that for all I, if 2g∈I then g∈I.
Define the ideals Ik⊂Q[α,β,ψ] and
Ik∞⊂Q[α∞,β∞,ψ∞]
generated by (ζk,ζk+1,ζk+2) and (ζk∞,ζk+1∞,ζk+2∞) respectively,
where ζi and ζi∞ are recursively defined by ζ0=1,ζ0∞=1,ζi=0=ζi∞ for i<0,
[TABLE]
Using [23, Theorem 3.2], the natural morphism ν0 from k=0⨁g−1Pk⊗Q[α,β,ψ]
to H∗(MX0(2,L0),Q) is surjective with kernel ⊕kPk⊗Ig−k−1.
Denote by
[TABLE]
Similarly as before, the obvious map
[TABLE]
is surjective with kernel isomorphic to ⊕Pk(s)⊗Ig−k,s, where Ig−k,s is defined identically as Ig−k∞ above,
after replacing α∞,β∞ and ψ∞ by αs,βs and ψs, respectively.
5.3. Comparing pure Hodge structures on Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,Q) and H3(MX0(2,L0),Q)
The cohomology ring of MX0(2,L0) will also play an important role in this section and the next. Recall,
[26, Proposition 1] states that there exists an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures:
[TABLE]
Using the short exact sequence (2.5) and Theorem 3.2, we have the composed morphism
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the first isomorphism is given by (3.4), the second and third isomorphisms are given in the proof of Theorem 2.5.
By Theorem 3.2, Φ0 is an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures. Also, note that the last three morphisms in the
composed morphism Φ1 are morphisms of pure Hodge structures. Therefore, Φ1 is an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures.
5.4. Generalized Mumford’s conjecture on H∗(GX0(2,L0),Q)
We briefly discuss the idea of the proof of Theorem 5.1 below. Combining (2.4) with
Theorem 4.2, we prove that ⊕iker(spi) is generated as a polynomial ring over
H∗(MX0(2,L0),Q) by two variables X and Y satisfying X2=Y2=X−Y=0.
Then, §5.2 gives us the relations between the generators of ⊕iker(spi).
To obtain the relations between the generators of ⊕iIm(spi), we use the isomorphism Φ1 above,
along with the description of the generators of Hi(G(2,L)s,Q) for all i≥0, as given in [23, Remark 5.3].
The theorem would then follow immediately.
Theorem 5.1**.**
We have the following isomorphism of graded rings:
[TABLE]
(Note that the multiplicative identity of the ring H∗(GX0(2,L0),Q) lies in the first summand.)
Proof.
For any s∈Δ∗, consider the natural isomorphism ϕs:H1(X∞,Z)∼H1(Xs,Z) (induced by the closed immersion of Xs as a fiber of X∞).
Denote by ei,s:=ϕs(ei), where ei as in Theorem 2.5.
Consider the composed morphism (use (2.6)):
[TABLE]
where f′∈H2(X0,Z) is
the Poincaré dual of the
fundamental class of X0. Since H2(X∞,Z)≅Z is pure, sp2 is surjective.
It follows from the definition of the Gysin morphism that
[TABLE]
hence does not intersect Z(0⊕f′) non-trivially (here f2
as in Corollary 2.4).
Using Corollary 2.4, this implies Im(sp2)=sp2(Z(0⊕f′)).
As ϕs is an isomorphism, this implies ϕs(0⊕f′)
is the Poincaré dual of the fundamental class of Xs (up to a sign), denoted fs. Since pullback commutes with cup-product, Theorem 2.5
implies that e1,s,...,e2g,s is a symplectic basis of H1(Xs,Z) with ei,sei+g,s=−fs for 1≤i≤g.
Using [23, Remark 5.3], Hi(G(2,L)s,Q) has a Q-basis consisting of
monomials of the form
αsj1βsj2ψi1,sψi2,s...ψik,s such that
j1+k<g, j2+k<g, i1<i2<...<ik and 2j1+4j2+3k=i.
By Theorems 2.5 and 3.2, ψ2g∞ (resp. ψg∞) generates Gr4WH3(G(2,L)∞,Q)
(resp. W2H3(G(2,L)∞,Q)). Since cup-product is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures,
we have a basis of WiHi(G(2,L)∞,Q) consisting
of monomials of the form
α∞j1β∞j2ψi1∞ψi2∞...ψik∞
with j1+k<g, j2+k<g, i1<i2<...<ik, 2j1+4j2+3k=i satisfying: if 2g∈{i1,...,ik} then g∈{i1,...,ik}.
Using the isomorphism ⊕ηj, we then obtain the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where ν∞ is the natural morphism and the two rows are exact.
Using the description of WiHi(G(2,L)∞,Q) above, it is easy to check that
Im(ν∞)=WiHi(G(2,L)∞,Q). Therefore,
[TABLE]
Recall by Corollary 2.4 that ker(spi)≅Im(fi)≅Hi−2(G0∩G1,Q)/ker(fi).
Then using the identification (4.3) along with Theorem 4.2 we conclude:
[TABLE]
Hence, ⊕iker(spi)≅H∗(MX0(2,L0),Q)(−2)[X,Y]/(X2,Y2,X−Y) defined by
sending ξ1 (resp. ξ2) to X (resp. Y), where (X2,Y2,X−Y) is the ideal in the ring
H∗(MX0(2,L0),Q)[X,Y] generated X2,Y2 and X−Y. Using [23, Theorem 3.2], we conclude that
[TABLE]
By Corollary 2.4, we have H∗(GX0(2,L0),Q)≅(⊕iWiHi(G(2,L)∞,Q))⊕(⊕iker(spi)).
The theorem follows immediately.
∎
6. Hodge-Poincaré formula
The Hodge-Poincaré formula for moduli spaces of semi-stable sheaves
on smooth, projective curves is well-known and was classically computed
by Earl and Kirwan [14]. It records the Hodge decomposition of the cohomology ring of the
moduli space. In this section, we compute the Hodge-Poincaré formula
for the Gieseker’s moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed determinant. One important difference with
the classical case is the that the cohomology of the Gieseker’s moduli
space is not pure, which make computations more complicated.
We use notations as in Notation 3.1 and §3.1. We briefly discuss the idea of the proof of Theorem 6.2.
Fix s∈Δ∗.
The first step is to use the isomorphism ηi as in (5.1), to prove that there exists ξ∈H2,1(G(2,L)s,C) such that
[TABLE]
Next, we use Newstead’s classical result [28, Theorem 1], which states that the cohomology ring of G(2,L)s
is generated is degrees 2,3 and 4. Since cup-product is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures, we get Proposition 6.1.
We then use the isomorphism Φ1 to prove that GriWHi+1(G(2,L)∞,Q) can be
identified with Hi−2(MX0(2,L0),Q) as pure Hodge structures. Theorem 6.2 then follows
from the exact sequence (2.4) combined with Theorem 4.2.
Proposition 6.1**.**
For any s∈Δ∗, we have the following equality:
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any s∈Δ∗, we have the natural isomorphism
[TABLE]
for all i≥0, as in (5.1).
Given a subspace W of Hi(G(2,L)s,Z) (resp. Hi(G(2,L)∞,Q)), denote by
WTG(2,L)s (resp. WTG(2,L)) the subspace of W consisting of elements that are invariant under
the action of the monodromy operator TG(2,L)s (resp. TG(2,L)), where the monodromy operators are described in
(2.2) and the discussion before that.
We claim that there exists ξ∈F2H3(G(2,L)s,C) such that TG(2,L)s(ξ)=ξ.
Indeed, H3(G(2,L)s,C)=F2H3(G(2,L)s,C)⊕F2H3(G(2,L)s,C).
Since TG(2,L)s commutes with conjugation, we observe that if the entire
F2H3(G(2,L)s,C) is invariant under TG(2,L)s, then so is H3(G(2,L)s,C).
Since TG(2,L) is a canonical extension of TG(2,L)s, this implies H3(G(2,L)∞,C) is
TG(2,L)-invariant. But, Propositions 2.3 and 4.1 imply that Gr4WH3(G(2,L)∞,C)≅C,
which is not TG(2,L)-invariant by the invariant cycle theorem (Remark 2.2). This proves the claim.
Since GriWHi(G(2,L)∞,C) is TG(2,L)-invariant,
[25, p. 66, Lemma 2.4.12 and p. 69, Theorem 6.6]
implies that ηi(Hp,i−pGriWHi(G(2,L)∞,C))⊂Hp,i−p(G(2,L)s).
Since
[TABLE]
Hp,pGr2pW(G(2,L)∞,C)=H2p(G(2,L)∞,C) for p=1,2 (by Remark 2.1, any one dimensional limit mixed Hodge structure is pure),
this implies η2p(H2p(G(2,L)∞,C))=Hp,p(G(2,L)s,C) for p=1,2 and
F2H3(G(2,L)s,C)=η3(F2Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C))⊕Cξ,
with ξ as before.
Therefore, F2H3(G(2,L)s,C)=η3(F2Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C))⊕Cξ,
where ξ denotes the conjugate of ξ.
Let ψi∞ for 1≤i≤2g be the generators of H3(G(2,L)∞,C) as defined in §5. Recall, by
Theorems 2.5 and 3.2, we have Gr4WH3(G(2,L)∞,Q)=Qψ2g∞ and
Gr2WH3(G(2,L)∞,Q)=Qψg∞. As
Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C)≅F2Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C)⊕F2Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C),
we can assume that ξ=η3(λ1ψg∞+λ2ψ2g∞) for some λ1,λ2∈C.
Since TG(2,L)s(ξ)=ξ, λ2=0 (ψg∞ is TG(2,L)-invariant).
Replace ξ by ξ/λ2. Then, ξ=η3(λψg∞+ψ2g∞) for some λ∈C.
Since (ψg∞)2=0=(ψ2g∞)2
and ψg∞ψ2g∞∈Gr6WH6(G(2,L)∞,C),
ξ2,ξ2 and ξξ must belong to η6(Gr6WH6(G(2,L)∞,C)).
Using the isomorphism Φ1 (see §5) of pure Hodge structures from Gr3WH3(G(2,L)∞,C)
to H3(MX0(2,L0),C), we can then conclude that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
(use cup-product is a morphism of Hodge structures, ξ is of type (2,1)
and H∗(G(2,L)s,Q) is generated in degrees 2,3 and 4 as mentioned before).
This proves the proposition.
∎
Theorem 6.2**.**
The Hodge-Poincaré formula for the cohomology ring H∗(GX0(2,L0),C) is
[TABLE]
Proof.
Using Theorem 4.2 and the identification (4.3), the exact sequence (2.4) become the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and Hp,qGrp+qWHp+q+1(GX0(2,L0),C)≅Hp,qGrp+qWHp+q+1(G(2,L)∞,C).
Using [23, Remark 5.3], Grp+qWHp+q+1(G(2,L)∞,Q) has a Q-basis consisting of
monomials of the form
[TABLE]
i1<i2<...<ik and 2j1+4j2+3(k+1)=p+q+1 (cup-product is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures).
Define the morphism
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and extend linearly, where Φ1 is the isomorphism defined in §5. Since ψg∞ is of Hodge type (1,1) and Φ1 is an isomorphism of Hodge structures,
[23, Remark 5.3] implies that Φp+q+1 is an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures which sends Hodge type (i,p+q−i) to (i−1,p+q−1−i). Note that the (p,q)-th part of the
cohomology ring H∗(GX0(2,L0),C)
is given by
[TABLE]
Using the isomorphism Φp+q+1, the exact sequence (6.1) and Proposition 6.1 we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
By [10, Corollary 2.9], the Hodge-Poincaré formulas for G(2,L)s and MX0(2,L0)
are given by
[TABLE]
respectively. This implies, the Hodge-Poincaré formula for
GX0(2,L0) is given by
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This proves the theorem.
∎
7. Simpson’s moduli space with fixed determinant
In this section
we prove the analogue of the Mumford conjecture for the Simpson’s moduli space of rank 2 semi-stable sheaves with fixed odd degree determinant on an irreducible nodal curve
and compute the associated Hodge-Poincaré formula (Theorem 7.2). We use Notation 3.1 and notations as in §4.1.
7.1. Simpson’s moduli spaces with fixed determinant
Let E be a rank 2, torsion-free sheaf on X0 of degree d and L0 an invertible sheaf on X0 of degree d.
We say that Ehas determinantL0 if
there is a OX0-morphism ∧2(E)→L0 which is an isomorphism outside the node x0.
Note that if E is locally free then this condition implies
∧2E≅L0.
Let UX0(2,d) be the moduli space of stable rank 2, degree d torsion free sheaves on X0 (see [33]).
Denote by UX0(2,d)0 the sublocus
parameterizing locally free sheaves. Note that UX0(2,d)0 is an open subvariety of UX0(2,d).
We have a well defined morphism \mboxdet:UX0(2,d)0→Pic(X0) defined
by E↦∧2E. Denote by UX0(2,L0)0:=\mboxdet−1([L0]).
Denote by UX0(2,L0):={[E]∈UX0(2,d)∣E\mboxhasdeterminantL0}.
By [37, Theorem 1.10], the Zariski closure UX0(2,L0)0 of UX0(2,L0)0 in UX0(2,d) is UX0(2,L0).
7.2. Stratification on the moduli space
Let mx0 denote the maximal ideal of OX,x0. In [5], Bhosle shows
there exists a stratification U0⊂U1⊂U2:=UX0(2,d) of
UX0(2,d) by locally closed subschemes, where
[TABLE]
This induces the stratification
U0(L0)⊂U1(L0)⊂UX0(2,L0), where Ui(L0):=Ui∩UX0(2,L0).
Denote by π:X0→X0 the normalization morphism.
By [6, Proposition 4.9], there exists a natural isomorphism from MX0(2,d−2) to U0, sending [E] to [π∗E].
Denote by L0:=π∗L0 and D:=π−1(x0).
Then, MX0(2,L0(−D)) maps isomorphically to U0(L0) (see proof of [38, (6.1)]).
7.3. Comparison between Gieseker’s and Simpson’s moduli spaces
Recall, there exists a natural proper morphism
[TABLE]
defined by
pushing forward a rank 2, locally-free sheaf defined over a curve semi-stably equivalent to X0, via the natural contraction map to X0
(see [37, Theorem 3.7(3)]). Denote by GX0(2,L0)0⊂G0 the sub-locus of GX0(2,L0)
parameterizing locally-free sheaves on X0.
Using [34, Remark 5.2], we conclude that θ maps the irreducible component G1
into U0(L0) and GX0(2,L0)0 maps isomorphically to UX0(2,L0)0 (use the description of the irreducible components of
GX0(2,L0) as given in [38, §6] and [37, Theorem 3.7]).
By the properness of θ, we note that θ maps G1 surjectively to U0(L0).
Moreover, since U0(L0)≅MX0(2,L0(−D)), it is non-singular (see [19, Corollary 4.5.5]).
7.4. Generalized Mumford’s conjecture and Hodge-Poincaré formula for Simpson’s moduli space
We briefly discuss the idea of the proof of Theorem 7.2.
Using the restriction of the proper morphism θ to G1 and the identifications (4.3) and (4.4),
we compute the kernel and the cokernel of the pull-back morphism θ∗ (see Proposition 7.1).
Combining (2.4) and Proposition 4.1, we obtain an explicit
description of the kernel of the specialization morphism spi.
We use this to show that Hi(UX0(2,L0),Q) can be identified with
the image of spi as mixed Hodge structures. Theorem 7.2 then follows from
Theorems 5.1 and 6.2.
Proposition 7.1**.**
The natural morphism θ∗:Hi(UX0(2,L0),Q)→Hi(GX0(2,L0),Q) is injective
with Gri−1WHi(UX0(2,L0),Q)θ∗∼Gri−1WHi(GX0(2,L0),Q)
and cokernel isomorphic to j=1⨁3Hi−2j(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ′′)j
such that the resulting (cokernel) morphism factors as
[TABLE]
where r:G1→GX0(2,L0) is the natural inclusion.
Proof.
Recall, UX0(2,L0)\U0(L0)≅GX0(2,L0)\G1≅G0\G0∩G1.
Since G0 and G1 are an
excessive couple ([30, Example B.5(2)]), we have for all i≥0,
[TABLE]
where the last two isomorphisms follow from [30, Corollary B.14].
The morphism θ induces the following commutative
diagram where every morphism is a morphism of mixed Hodge structures (use [30, Proposition 5.46]):
[TABLE]
Using the identification (4.4) and U0(L0)≅MX0(2,L0),
we have the following short exact sequence of pure Hodge structures:
[TABLE]
Using the identifications (4.3) and (4.4) observe that the image of the composition
[TABLE]
is isomorphic to j=1⨁3Hi−2j(MX0(2,L0),Q)(ξ′′)j with
kernel Hi−4(MX0(2,L0),Q)(−2) (see proof of Theorem 4.2). This implies that the natural morphism
[TABLE]
is surjective. Since this morphism factors through coker(θ∗) (use the diagram (7.3)), we conclude that the natural morphism from coker(θ∗) to
coker((θ′)∗) is a surjective. By diagram chase of (7.3), we have the natural morphism from coker(θ∗)
to coker((θ′)∗) is injective, hence an isomorphism.
Using the diagram (7.3) and the analogous diagram after replacing i by i−1, one can observe by diagram chase that θ∗ is injective.
The proposition then follows immediately.
∎
Moreover, the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial associated to the moduli space UX0(2,L0) is
[TABLE]
Proof.
Observe that by Corollary 2.4 the image of the composition
[TABLE]
coincides with the image of the Gysin morphism from
Hi−2(G0∩G1,Q) to Hi(G1,Q).
Under the notations of §4.1, the Gysin morphism
from H∗(P1×P1,Q) to
H∗+2(P33,Q) sends 1 (resp. ξ1+ξ2,ξ1ξ2)
to ξ′′ (resp. (ξ′′)2,(ξ′′)3), up to multiplication by
a non-zero rational number. Using the identification
(4.3), this implies that the image of (7.4) is isomorphic to
induced by ker(spi)↪Hi(GX0(2,L0),Q)→Hi(GX0(2,L0),Q)/Im(θ∗)=coker(θ∗), is an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures.
Therefore, by Corollary 2.4 we have
[TABLE]
(Hi(UX0(2,L0),Q)
has weights at most i as UX0(2,L0) is compact). The first part of the theorem
then follows directly from (5.2).
Note that the (p,q)-th part of the
cohomology ring H∗(UX0(2,L0),C) is given by
[TABLE]
In the proof of Theorem 6.2 we constructed an isomorphism of pure Hodge structures
[TABLE]
sending
a class of type (p,q) to that of type (p−1,q−1).
Then, Proposition
6.1 along with (7.5) implies that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Let Pg(x,y) and Q(x,y) be the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial G(2,L)s and MX0(2,L0) respectively, defined in (6.2). Then, the Hodge-Poincaré polynomial of UX0(2,L0) is given by
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This proves the theorem.
∎
Remark 7.3**.**
Under the identification (7.5) above, the cohomology ring H∗(UX0(2,L0),Q)
is generated by α∞,β∞, ψi∞ for 1≤i≤2g−1 and ψg∞ψ2g∞.
Bibliography40
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] M. Baker. Specialization of linear systems from curves to graphs. Algebra & Number Theory , 2(6):613–653, 2008.
2[2] V. Baranovsky. Cohomology ring of the moduli space of stable vector bundles with odd determinant. Izv. Russ. Acad. Nauk , 58(4):204–210, 1994.
3[3] S. Basu, A. Dan, and I. Kaur. Degeneration of intermediate Jacobians and the Torelli theorem. Documenta Mathematica , 24:1739–1767, 2019.
4[4] S. Basu, A. Dan, and I. Kaur. Generators of the cohomology ring, after Newstead. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1908.01330 , 2019.
5[5] U. N. Bhosle. Generalised parabolic bundles and applications to torsionfree sheaves on nodal curves. Arkiv för Matematik , 30(1):187–215, 1992.
6[6] U. N. Bhosle. Seminormal varieties, torsionfree sheaves, and Picard groups. Communications in Algebra , 36(3):821–841, 2008.
7[7] E. Bifet, F. Ghione, and M. Letizia. On the Abel-Jacobi map for divisors of higher rank on a curve. Mathematische Annalen , 299(1):641–672, 1994.
8[8] J. Carlson, S. Müller-Stach, and C. Peters. Period mappings and period domains , volume 168. Cambridge University Press, 2017.