Text size

Section 112

The singular point of an A1A_1 fibre

Proposition 112.1. Let pp be the singular point of a fibre with an A1A_1 singularity. Then δp(X)≥144/121>1\delta_p(X)\ge144/121>1.

Lemma 112.2. Let π:Y→X\pi:Y\to X be the blow-up of pp, and let GG be its exceptional plane. There are homogeneous coordinates a,b,ca,b,c on GG such that the refined anticanonical section algebra is generated, in anticanonical degree one, by 1,a,b,c,ab,b2,bc,F,Fa,Fb,Fc,Fab,Fb2,Fbc,F2,F=ac−b2.1,a,b,c,ab,b^2,bc,\qquad F,Fa,Fb,Fc,Fab,Fb^2,Fbc,F^2,\qquad F=ac-b^2. The primary degrees are the ordinary polynomial degrees in a,b,ca,b,c. For every mm, a basis of its anticanonical degree-mm part consists of (37.A1)arbdcqFs,rq=0,n=max{r+q,⌈r+d+q2⌉}≤m,s+n≤2m.a^r b^d c^q F^s,\qquad rq=0,\qquad n=\max\left\{r+q,\left\lceil\frac{r+d+q}{2}\right\rceil\right\} \le m,\qquad s+n\le2m. \tag{37.A1}

Proof. Write the two bilinear forms defining the flag threefold and this fibre as x0y0+x1y1+x2y2,x0y1+x2y2.x_0y_0+x_1y_1+x_2y_2,\qquad x_0y_1+x_2y_2. The singular point is ([0:1:0],[1:0:0])([0:1:0],[1:0:0]). In the chart x1=y0=1x_1=y_0=1 put a=x2a=x_2, b=y1b=y_1, c=y2c=y_2. The flag equation gives x0=−b−acx_0=-b-ac, and the fibre equation becomes f=ac−b2−abc.f=ac-b^2-abc. A basis of the restrictions of bilinear forms can be chosen with the following eight least homogeneous terms: 1,a,b,c,ab,b2,bc,F.1,a,b,c,ab,b^2,bc,F. Indeed one can use the actual functions 1,a,b,c,ab,ac−f,bc+ac2,f1,a,b,c,ab,ac-f,bc+ac^2,f. The other generator gg of the pencil is a unit at pp, since its base curve misses every singular point of a fibre. Rescale it so that g(p)=1g(p)=1. The base coordinate is t=f/gt=f/g. The anticanonical bundle is H+𝒪ℙ1(1)H+\mathcal O_{\mathbb P^1}(1) in the incidence presentation of XX. Its sections are products of the eight bilinear sections with 1,t1,t, modulo the one relation f=tgf=tg. Removing ff from the first group gives precisely the fifteen least terms in the statement. Thus the displayed algebra is contained in the actual associated graded algebra.

We prove equality in every degree, rather than assuming generation of an associated graded ring in degree one. A monomial arbdcqa^r b^d c^q with rq=0rq=0 requires exactly nn factors among a,b,c,ab,b2,bca,b,c,ab,b^2,bc, with nn as in (37.A1). For example, when q=0q=0, pair as many aa’s as possible with bb’s, and use b2b^2 for the remaining pairs of bb’s. Its nn factors may each carry one extra FF, and the remaining m−nm-n slots may carry 1,F1,F, or F2F^2. This proves that every monomial in (37.A1) belongs to degree mm. Conversely, reduce every factor acac by ac=F+b2ac=F+b^2. For the first summand nn decreases by at least one while ss increases by one; for the second nn does not increase. Hence both inequalities are preserved. Normal monomials are independent, since ac−F−b2ac-F-b^2 has leading monomial acac and they are its standard monomials.

For n≥1n\ge1 there are exactly 6n6n normal monomials of cost nn. For r=q=0r=q=0 there are two. For each of the two branches r>0r>0 or q>0q>0, there are 2(n−1)+(n+1)=3n−12(n-1)+(n+1)=3n-1. Consequently the number in degree mm is (2m+1)+∑n=1m6n(2m−n+1)=4m3+6m2+4m+1=h0(X,−mKX).(2m+1)+\sum_{n=1}^m6n(2m-n+1) =4m^3+6m^2+4m+1=h^0(X,-mK_X). The inclusion of graded algebras is therefore equality in every degree. In particular these are the actual refined section spaces. ◻

Lemma 112.3. Fix the primary degree jj and the weight kk for the action (a,b,c)↦(λa,b,λ−1c)(a,b,c)\mapsto(\lambda a,b,\lambda^{-1}c), and put r=|k|r=|k|. The corresponding component is zero unless r≤mr\le m and j≤4mj\le4m. Otherwise put l=max{0,⌈j/2⌉−m},u=min{⌊(j−r)/2⌋,2m−r},D=u−l.l=\max\{0,\lceil j/2\rceil-m\},\qquad u=\min\{\lfloor(j-r)/2\rfloor,2m-r\},\qquad D=u-l. It is zero if D<0D<0. If D≥0D\ge0, it is the complete binary space (37.A2)amax(k,0)cmax(−k,0)bj−r−2uFlSymD⟨b2,F⟩.a^{\max(k,0)}c^{\max(-k,0)}b^{j-r-2u}F^l \operatorname{Sym}^{D}\langle b^2,F\rangle. \tag{37.A2} Its dimension is D+1D+1.

Proof. In (37.A1) the prescribed gradings give q=0q=0, r=kr=k when k≥0k\ge0 (and the symmetric formula when k<0k<0), and d=j−|k|−2sd=j-|k|-2s. The two inequalities in (37.A1) say exactly l≤s≤ul\le s\le u. All integers in this interval occur. Factoring its two endpoints proves (37.A2). This also proves completeness; the argument does not replace a section space by its Newton polygon. ◻

Lemma 112.4. Normalize sums of vanishing orders by mNmmN_m, where Nm=4m3+6m2+4m+1N_m=4m^3+6m^2+4m+1. In the binary spaces (37.A2) the limiting fixed coefficients of a,c,b,Fa,c,b,F and the limiting half movable degree are, respectively, α=524,α=524,β=132,φ=65192,h=67192.\alpha=\frac5{24},\quad\alpha=\frac5{24},\quad \beta=\frac1{32},\quad\varphi=\frac{65}{192},\quad h=\frac{67}{192}. Moreover SX(G)=121/48S_X(G)=121/48.

Proof. Here are explicit finite sums for the calculation. Sum over −m≤k≤m-m\le k\le m, |k|≤j≤4m|k|\le j\le4m, retaining only u≥lu\ge l as in Lemma 112.3. Every summand has weight D+1D+1. The quantities to sum are max(k,0),max(−k,0),j−|k|−2u,l,D.\max(k,0),\quad\max(-k,0),\quad j-|k|-2u,\quad l,\quad D. For even mm the resulting sums, in this order, are Am=Cm=m(m+1)(5m2+5m+2)6,Bm=m(m3+18m2+18m+8)8,Qm=m(65m3+130m2+100m+32)48,Rm=m(67m3+38m2+8m−8)24.\begin{aligned} A_m=C_m&=\frac{m(m+1)(5m^2+5m+2)}6,\\ B_m&=\frac{m(m^3+18m^2+18m+8)}8,\\ Q_m&=\frac{m(65m^3+130m^2+100m+32)}{48},\\ R_m&=\frac{m(67m^3+38m^2+8m-8)}{24}. \end{aligned} These identities follow by substituting the displayed lower and upper endpoints and summing the arithmetic progressions. They also provide a direct calculation of all the constants: divide the first four sums by mNmmN_m and the last by 2mNm2mN_m. Floors and ceilings change only lower-order terms, so the same limits hold without the parity restriction. Finally the average ordinary degree is 2α+β+2φ+4h=12148.2\alpha+\beta+2\varphi+4h=\frac{121}{48}. By definition this is SX(G)S_X(G). The sum of the primary degrees is in fact m(121m3+170m2+113m+28)12\frac{m(121m^3+170m^2+113m+28)}{12} for every m≥0m\ge0. To check this without a parity argument, group the normal monomials by the cost nn in (37.A1). For n≥1n\ge1, the 6n6n monomials arbdcqa^rb^dc^q have total ordinary degree (4n−1)+2((n−1)(4n−1)+3n(n+1)2)=11n2−3n+1.(4n-1)+2\left((n-1)(4n-1)+\frac{3n(n+1)}2\right) =11n^2-3n+1. The first term comes from r=q=0r=q=0; in either remaining branch, 1≤r<n1\le r<n contributes degrees 2n−1,2n2n-1,2n, while r=nr=n contributes degrees n,n+1,…,2nn,n+1,\ldots,2n (and similarly for qq). Writing M=2m−nM=2m-n, summation over 0≤s≤M0\le s\le M consequently gives 2m(2m+1)+∑n=1m((2m−n+1)(11n2−3n+1)+6n(2m−n)(2m−n+1)),2m(2m+1)+\sum_{n=1}^m \left((2m-n+1)(11n^2-3n+1) +6n(2m-n)(2m-n+1)\right), which evaluates to the stated polynomial. Equality of the normal algebra with the actual refinement was proved in Lemma 112.2, so these are the valuation weights. ◻

Lemma 112.5. On G=ℙa,b,c2G=\mathbb P^2_{a,b,c} put A0=(a=0)A_0=(a=0), B0=(b=0)B_0=(b=0), C0=(c=0)C_0=(c=0), and Tλ=(ac−λb2=0)T_\lambda=(ac-\lambda b^2=0), with T0=A0+C0T_0=A_0+C_0 and T∞=2B0T_\infty=2B_0. Suppose B=α(A0+C0)+βB0+φT1+∑νλTλ,∑νλ=2h,0≤νλ≤h.B=\alpha(A_0+C_0)+\beta B_0+\varphi T_1+ \sum\nu_\lambda T_\lambda, \qquad \sum\nu_\lambda=2h,\quad0\le\nu_\lambda\le h. For arbitrary nonnegative α,β,φ,h\alpha,\beta,\varphi,h, the pair (G,B)(G,B) is log canonical if α+h,β+2h,φ+h,h≤1,\alpha+h,\quad\beta+2h,\quad\varphi+h,\quad h\le1, and α+β+φ+3h≤2,2α+β+2φ+4h≤3.\alpha+\beta+\varphi+3h\le2,\qquad 2\alpha+\beta+2\varphi+4h\le3.

Proof. The first four quantities bound the coefficients of all components. Away from [0:0:1][0:0:1] and [1:0:0][1:0:0] the support has simple normal crossings. At each of these two points the pencil is a=λb2a=\lambda b^2 in local coordinates. Two successive ordinary blow-ups resolve all its members simultaneously. The exceptional valuations have weights (1,1)(1,1) and (2,1)(2,1), and log discrepancies two and three. Their orders on BB are at most α+β+φ+3h\alpha+\beta+\varphi+3h and exactly 2α+β+2φ+4h2\alpha+\beta+2\varphi+4h, respectively. After the second blow-up all distinct branches meet the last exceptional curve at different points. Thus the stated inequalities give a log resolution with all boundary coefficients at most one. This proves the claim for every valuation, including valuations above the exceptional curves. ◻

Proof of Proposition 112.1. For an arbitrary basis of a complete degree-DD binary space, the sum of the vanishing orders at any prescribed point of ℙ1\mathbb P^1 is at most D(D+1)/2D(D+1)/2, whereas its total degree is D(D+1)D(D+1). Consequently arbitrary bases in the components (37.A2) give divisors of the form in Lemma 112.5. The limiting component bounds are 107192,3548,1116,67192.\frac{107}{192},\quad\frac{35}{48},\quad\frac{11}{16}, \quad\frac{67}{192}. The limiting exceptional orders are 13/813/8 and 121/48121/48, whose ratios to the discrepancies are 13/1613/16 and 121/144121/144. The largest of all six ratios is 121/144121/144. Hence for every τ<144/121\tau<144/121 all sufficiently high-degree basis divisors in these components give log canonical pairs after multiplication by τ\tau, uniformly over the choices of bases.

Now fix a divisorial valuation over GG. In each already fixed primary-degree piece choose a basis compatible with its valuation filtration and the displayed torus-weight filtration; this uses only the two-filtration lemma. Its least-weight terms are bases in (37.A2). Degeneration under this one-parameter subgroup and lower semicontinuity of log canonical thresholds give the same bound for the original valuation-adapted basis. Passing to the limit gives δ(G;WG)≥144121.\delta(G;W^G)\ge\frac{144}{121}. The ordinary point blow-up is a plt extraction and has zero different. Abban–Zhuang adjunction therefore gives δp(X)≥min{3121/48,144121}=144121.\delta_p(X)\ge\min\left\{\frac{3}{121/48}, \frac{144}{121}\right\} =\frac{144}{121}. No Zariski decomposition on YY has been used. The calculation used actual sections, an exact Hilbert count in every degree, and a resolution of a conic pencil on its exceptional plane. ◻

Example 112.6. In anticanonical degree one the primary-degree-two, torus-weight-zero component is ⟨b2,F⟩=⟨b2,ac⟩\langle b^2,F\rangle=\langle b^2,ac\rangle. A basis adapted to T1T_1 is (b2,F)(b^2,F), whereas one adapted to A0A_0 is (b2,ac)(b^2,ac). The two bases illustrate why the complete binary spaces must be retained: choosing just the original monomial basis would miss cancellation along A0A_0.