Kodaira–Spencer map

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description In mathematics, the Kodaira–Spencer map, introduced by Kunihiko Kodaira and Donald C. Spencer, is a map associated to a deformation of a scheme or complex manifold X, taking a tangent space of a point of the deformation space to the first cohomology group of the sheaf of vector fields on X.

Definition

Historical motivation

The Kodaira–Spencer map was originally constructed in the setting of complex manifolds. Given a complex analytic manifold M with charts Ui and biholomorphic maps fjk sending zk→zj=(zj1,…,zjn) gluing the charts together, the idea of deformation theory is to replace these transition maps fjk(zk) by parametrized transition maps fjk(zk,t1,…,tk) over some base B (which could be a real manifold) with coordinates t1,…,tk, such that fjk(zk,0,…,0)=fjk(zk). This means the parameters ti deform the complex structure of the original complex manifold M. Then, these functions must also satisfy a cocycle condition, which gives a 1-cocycle on M with values in its tangent bundle. Since the base can be assumed to be a polydisk, this process gives a map between the tangent space of the base to H1(M,TM) called the Kodaira–Spencer map.[1]

Original definition

More formally, the Kodaira–Spencer map is[2]

KS:T0B→H1(M,TM)

where

  • ℳ→B is a smooth proper map between complex spaces[3] (i.e., a deformation of the special fiber M=ℳ0.)
  • KS is the connecting homomorphism obtained by taking a long exact cohomology sequence of the surjection Tℳ|M→T0B⊗𝒪M whose kernel is the tangent bundle TM.

If v is in T0B, then its image KS(v) is called the Kodaira–Spencer class of v.

Remarks

Because deformation theory has been extended to multiple other contexts, such as deformations in scheme theory, or ringed topoi, there are constructions of the Kodaira–Spencer map for these contexts.

In the scheme theory over a base field k of characteristic 0, there is a natural bijection between isomorphisms classes of 𝒳→S=Spec⁡(k[t]/t2) and H1(X,TX).

Constructions

Using infinitesimals

Cocycle condition for deformations

Over characteristic 0 the construction of the Kodaira–Spencer map[4] can be done using an infinitesimal interpretation of the cocycle condition. If we have a complex manifold X covered by finitely many charts 𝒰={Uα}α∈I with coordinates zα=(zα1,…,zαn) and transition functions

fβα:Uβ|Uαβ→Uα|Uαβ where fαβ(zβ)=zα

Recall that a deformation is given by a commutative diagram

X→𝔛↓↓Spec(ℂ)→Spec(ℂ[ε])

where ℂ[ε] is the ring of dual numbers and the vertical maps are flat, the deformation has the cohomological interpretation as cocycles f~αβ(zβ,ε) on Uα×Spec(ℂ[ε]) where

zα=f~αβ(zβ,ε)=fαβ(zβ)+εbαβ(zβ)

If the f~αβ satisfy the cocycle condition, then they glue to the deformation 𝔛. This can be read as

f~αγ(zγ,ε)=f~αβ(f~βγ(zγ,ε),ε)=fαβ(fβγ(zγ)+εbβγ(zγ))+εbαβ(fβγ(zγ)+εbβγ(zγ))

Using the properties of the dual numbers, namely g(a+bε)=g(a)+εg′(a)b, we have

fαβ(fβγ(zγ)+εbβγ(zγ))=fαβ(fβγ(zγ))+ε∂fαβ∂zβ(zβ)bβγ(zγ)

and

εbαβ(fβγ(zγ)+εbβγ(zγ))=εbαβ(zβ)

hence the cocycle condition on Uα×Spec(ℂ[ε]) is the following two rules

  1. bαγ=∂fαβ∂zβbβγ+bαβ
  2. fαγ=fαβ∘fβγ

Conversion to cocycles of vector fields

The cocycle of the deformation can easily be converted to a cocycle of vector fields θ={θαβ}∈C1(𝒰,TX) as follows: given the cocycle f~αβ=fαβ+εbαβ we can form the vector field

θαβ=∑i=1nbαβi∂∂zαi

which is a 1-cochain. Then the rule for the transition maps of bαγ gives this 1-cochain as a 1-cocycle, hence a class [θ]∈H1(X,TX).

Using vector fields

One of the original constructions of this map used vector fields in the settings of differential geometry and complex analysis.[1] Given the notation above, the transition from a deformation to the cocycle condition is transparent over a small base of dimension one, so there is only one parameter t. Then, the cocycle condition can be read as

fikα(zk,t)=fijα(fkj1(zk,t),…,fkjn(zk,t),t)

Then, the derivative of fikα(zk,t) with respect to t can be calculated from the previous equation as

∂fikα(zk,t)∂t=∂fijα(zj,t)∂t+∑β=0n∂fijα(zj,t)∂fjkβ(zk,t)⋅∂fjkβ(zk,t)∂t

Note because zjβ=fjkβ(zk,t) and ziα=fijα(zj,t), then the derivative reads as

∂fikα(zk,t)∂t=∂fijα(zj,t)∂t+∑β=0n∂ziα∂zjβ⋅∂fjkβ(zk,t)∂t

With a change of coordinates of the part of the previous holomorphic vector field having these partial derivatives as the coefficients, we can write

∂∂zjβ=∑α=1n∂ziα∂zjβ⋅∂∂ziα

Hence we can write up the equation above as the following equation of vector fields

∑α=0n∂fikα(zk,t)∂t∂∂ziα=∑α=0n∂fijα(zj,t)∂t∂∂ziα+∑β=0n∂fjkβ(zk,t)∂t∂∂zjβ

Rewriting this as the vector fields

θik(t)=θij(t)+θjk(t)

where

θij(t)=∂fijα(zj,t)∂t∂∂ziα

gives the cocycle condition. Hence θij has an associated class in [θij]∈H1(M,TM) from the original deformation f~ij of fij.

In scheme theory

Deformations of a smooth variety[5]

X→𝔛↓↓Spec(k)→Spec(k[ε])

have a Kodaira-Spencer class constructed cohomologically. Associated to this deformation is the short exact sequence

0→π∗ΩSpec(k[ε])1→Ω𝔛1→Ω𝔛/S1→0

(where π:𝔛→S=Spec(k[ε])) which when tensored by the 𝒪𝔛-module 𝒪X gives the short exact sequence

0→𝒪X→Ω𝔛1⊗𝒪X→ΩX1→0

Using derived categories, this defines an element in

𝐑Hom(ΩX1,𝒪X[+1])≅𝐑Hom(𝒪X,TX[+1])≅Ext1(𝒪X,TX)≅H1(X,TX)

generalizing the Kodaira–Spencer map. Notice this could be generalized to any smooth map f:X→Y in Sch/S using the cotangent sequence, giving an element in H1(X,TX/Y⊗f∗(ΩY/Z1)).

Of ringed topoi

One of the most abstract constructions of the Kodaira–Spencer maps comes from the cotangent complexes associated to a composition of maps of ringed topoi

X→fY→Z

Then, associated to this composition is a distinguished triangle

f∗𝐋Y/Z→𝐋X/Z→𝐋X/Y→[+1]

and this boundary map forms the Kodaira–Spencer map[6] (or cohomology class, denoted K(X/Y/Z)). If the two maps in the composition are smooth maps of schemes, then this class coincides with the class in H1(X,TX/Y⊗f∗(ΩY/Z1)).

Examples

With analytic germs

The Kodaira–Spencer map when considering analytic germs is easily computable using the tangent cohomology in deformation theory and its versal deformations.[7] For example, given the germ of a polynomial f(z1,…,zn)∈ℂ{z1,…,zn}=H, its space of deformations can be given by the module

T1=Hdf⋅Hn

For example, if f=y2−x3 then its versal deformations is given by

T1=ℂ{x,y}(y,x2)

hence an arbitrary deformation is given by F(x,y,a1,a2)=y2−x3+a1+a2x. Then for a vector v∈T0(ℂ2), which has the basis

∂∂a1,∂∂a2

there the map KS:v↦v(F) sending

ϕ1∂∂a1+ϕ2∂∂a2↦ϕ1∂F∂a1+ϕ2∂F∂a2=ϕ1+ϕ2⋅x

On affine hypersurfaces with the cotangent complex

For an affine hypersurface i:X0↪𝔸n→Spec(k) over a field k defined by a polynomial f, there is the associated fundamental triangle

i∗𝐋𝔸n/Spec(k)→𝐋X0/Spec(k)→𝐋X0/𝔸n→[+1]

Then, applying 𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(−,𝒪X0) gives the long exact sequence

𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(i∗𝐋𝔸n/Spec(k),𝒪X0[+1])←𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/Spec(k),𝒪X0[+1])←𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/𝔸n,𝒪X0[+1])←𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(i∗𝐋𝔸n/Spec(k),𝒪X0)←𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/Spec(k),𝒪X0)←𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/𝔸n,𝒪X0)

Recall that there is the isomorphism

𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/Spec(k),𝒪X0[+1])≅Ext1(𝐋X0/Spec(k),𝒪X0)

from general theory of derived categories, and the ext group classifies the first-order deformations. Then, through a series of reductions, this group can be computed. First, since 𝐋𝔸n/Spec(k)≅Ω𝔸n/Spec(k)1 is a free module, 𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(i∗𝐋𝔸n/Spec(k),𝒪X0[+1])=0. Also, because 𝐋X0/𝔸n≅ℐ/ℐ2[+1], there are isomorphisms

𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(𝐋X0/𝔸n,𝒪X0[+1])≅𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(ℐ/ℐ2[+1],𝒪X0[+1])≅𝐑𝐇𝐨𝐦(ℐ/ℐ2,𝒪X0)≅Ext0(ℐ/ℐ2,𝒪X0)≅Hom(ℐ/ℐ2,𝒪X0)≅𝒪X0

The last isomorphism comes from the isomorphism ℐ/ℐ2≅ℐ⊗𝒪𝔸n𝒪X0, and a morphism in

Hom𝒪X0(ℐ⊗𝒪𝔸n𝒪X0,𝒪X0) send [gf]↦g′g+(f)

giving the desired isomorphism. From the cotangent sequence

(f)(f)2→[g]↦dg⊗1Ω𝔸n1⊗𝒪X0→ΩX0/Spec(k)1→0

(which is a truncated version of the fundamental triangle) the connecting map of the long exact sequence is the dual of [g]↦dg⊗1, giving the isomorphism

Ext1(𝐋X0/k,𝒪X0)≅k[x1,…,xn](f,∂f∂x1,…,∂f∂xn)

Note this computation can be done by using the cotangent sequence and computing Ext1(ΩX01,𝒪X0).[8] Then, the Kodaira–Spencer map sends a deformation

k[ε][x1,…,xn]f+εg

to the element g∈Ext1(𝐋X0/k,𝒪X0).

See also

References

Template:Reflist

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Template:Cite book
  2. ↑ Template:Harvnb
  3. ↑ The main difference between a complex manifold and a complex space is that the latter is allowed to have a nilpotent.
  4. ↑ Template:Cite book
  5. ↑ Template:Cite web
  6. ↑ Template:Cite book
  7. ↑ Template:Cite book
  8. ↑ Template:Cite arXiv