Lemma 13.24.7.487BF774470F The series defines a quasi-plurisubharmonic function, and
For every prime divisor $E$ on every smooth compact modification $\pi :Z\to X$, the convergent order profile is
1D7E7321D20CA prescribed divisorial part can determine an ideal envelope's ordinary type even when it has infinitely many components. On the projective plane with a pluriclosed background, the smooth residual determines the mass of every representative of that type. This gives a positivity test directly from divisorial orders.
Let $X=\mathbb P^2$, and let $\kappa $ be the Fubini–Study form with $\int _ X\kappa ^2=1$. Choose distinct hyperplanes $H_ j$ and coefficients $a_ j>0$ with $A=\sum _{j\geq 1}a_ j<\infty $. For unit defining sections $s_ j$, put
Let $\theta $ be a smooth real $(1,1)$-form satisfying $\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}\theta =0$ and $R=\theta -A\kappa >0$.
Lemma 13.24.7.487BF774470F The series defines a quasi-plurisubharmonic function, and
For every prime divisor $E$ on every smooth compact modification $\pi :Z\to X$, the convergent order profile is
Proof. The Poincaré–Lelong formula gives $\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}\ell _ j=[H_ j]-\kappa $. Unitary invariance reduces its integral to the distribution of $x=|Z_0|^2/\| Z\| ^2$, whose density on $[0,1]$ is $2(1-x)$. Thus
The decreasing series has finite $L^1$ norm and a common lower curvature bound $-A\kappa $. Its canonical limit is quasi-plurisubharmonic. Distributional convergence gives the current identities and strict positivity.
Fix $\pi $ and $E$, and choose a Gauduchon form $\gamma $ on the compact surface $Z$. For the tail $r_ N=\sum _{j>N}a_ j\ell _ j$ of total coefficient $A_ N=\sum _{j>N}a_ j$, the closed positive current
has trace mass $A_ N\int _ Z\pi ^*\kappa \wedge \gamma $, by distributional Stokes. The pullback of $r_ N$ is quasi-plurisubharmonic, since $\pi $ is an isomorphism on a dense open set where $r_ N$ is finite almost everywhere. Divisorial removal gives
The denominator is positive and the ratio is finite. Finite additivity of Lelong numbers now identifies the partial profile with $\nu (u\circ \pi ,E)$ up to an error tending to zero. This proves convergence and the asserted equality. $\square$
Proposition 13.24.8.20027E32C14E Let $v\in \mathrm{PSH}(X,\theta )$. The conditions
are equivalent. Under either condition,
and every $w\in \mathrm{PSH}(X,\theta )$ with $w\sim q$ satisfies
027648EDCB33
13.24.9
The background is big and $X$ has the bounded mass property.
Proof. Ideal profile and envelope. Choose an integer $C>A$ with $C\kappa \geq \theta $. Both $u$ and $v$ are $C\kappa $-plurisubharmonic. The projective valuative characterization of all-weight ideal types applies in this closed background: generic orders on all smooth projective modifications recover point Lelong numbers by further point blowups, and equality of those numbers is equivalent to ideal equivalence. The stated profile therefore implies $v\sim _{\mathcal I}u$. Conversely, ideal equivalence pulls back under every compact modification by lemma 5.43.23; the local valuative criterion theorem 5.37.3 then gives equality of generic coefficients on every such modification. The common factor between growth against $\log |z|$ and the book's $\log |z|^2$ convention does not affect these equalities.
The potential $u$ has complex Hessian $S-A\kappa $. By corollary 18.4.9, its ordinary and ideal envelopes agree and are ordinarily equivalent to $u$. Ideal equivalence identifies the defining families for the two ideal envelopes in the statement, proving the assertion about $q$. The inequality $\theta +\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}u\geq R>0$ proves bigness. For any Hermitian form $h$ on $X$, choose $D$ with $D\kappa \geq h$. Bounded $h$-plurisubharmonic potentials are $D\kappa $-plurisubharmonic, and positivity of bounded mixed products bounds their masses by $\int _ X(D\kappa )^2=D^2$. This proves the bounded mass property.
The bounded residual. Fix $w\sim u$ in $\mathrm{PSH}(X,\theta )$ and put $T=C\kappa +\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}w$. Its base divisorial coefficients are $a_ j$, so divisorial removal and passage through increasing finite sums give
The distributional difference has a canonical quasi-plurisubharmonic representative, which is bounded by ordinary equivalence and almost-everywhere order. Thus $K$ has bounded local potentials, and its trace charges no pluripolar set. The current $S$ is carried by the actual pole union $\bigcup _ jH_ j\subset \{ w=-\infty \} $. Thus $\langle T\rangle =K$. For every smooth real $(1,1)$-form $L$ with $\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}L=0$, distributional Stokes gives
Closed top mass and smooth correction. Put $T_ u=C\kappa +\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}u=S+(C-A)\kappa $. For the finite partial sums $u_ N=\sum _{j\leq N}a_ j\ell _ j$, the closed non-pluripolar mass is $(C-\sum _{j\leq N}a_ j)^2$: outside the finite divisor union the current is the smooth residual, and the measure gives that union zero mass. Since $u_0\leq u_ N$, closed-background mass monotonicity, the closed case of theorem 13.17.1, gives
For the reverse inequality, locally write $S=\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}b$ with $b$ plurisubharmonic. The currents $(C-A)\kappa +\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}\max (b,-k)$ have bounded local potentials and dominate $(C-A)\kappa $. Their squared products, restricted to $\{ b>-k\} $, therefore dominate $(C-A)^2\kappa ^2$ on that set. Letting $k$ increase and using the local truncation definition gives $\langle T_ u^2\rangle \geq (C-A)^2\kappa ^2$. The two bounds prove equality of total masses. Closed mass invariance under bounded changes then gives
Set $L=C\kappa -\theta \geq 0$, so $\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}L=0$. Expanding the bounded products of $\max (w,-k)$ in the two backgrounds and restricting to $\{ w>-k\} $ gives, in the limit,
All correction measures are finite: the closed top measure has the mass just computed, the degree-one limit is $K$, and the smooth measure $L^2$ gives the pole set zero mass. The same truncations are used in both backgrounds, so this identity is an equality of Borel measures. Integrating yields
This holds throughout the ordinary type, proving both singularity-volume identities and their strict positivity. $\square$
Example 13.24.10.E76D9C1B44B6 There is a nonclosed pluriclosed background on $\mathbb P^2$ with a nonanalytic ideal type satisfying 13.24.8. Its prescribed divisors are not contained in a single pencil, and both singularity volumes of its ideal model are at least $1/16$.
Proof. In a coordinate ball choose a smooth real cutoff $\chi $ equal to one near the origin, and extend $\alpha =\chi |z_2|^2\mathrm dz_1$ by zero. Put
It is real and smooth, with $\mathrm{dd}^{\mathrm{c}}\tau =0$. Where $\chi =1$,
Choose $\epsilon >0$ small enough that $\theta =\kappa +\epsilon \tau \geq \kappa /2$. Set $A=1/4$, $a_ j=A2^{-j}$, $t_ j=2^{-j}$ and
The Vandermonde determinant shows that any three defining linear forms are independent; hence the hyperplanes are not in one pencil. Here $R=\theta -A\kappa \geq \kappa /4$, so $\int _ XR^2\geq 1/16$. The preceding proposition gives the mass throughout the ordinary type and both singularity volumes. There are infinitely many positive base divisor coefficients. An analytic singularity on a compact manifold has only finitely many prime divisorial components, so no analytic potential has this ideal type. $\square$
Problem 13.24.11.D0837305A3CF For a big nonclosed background $\theta $ on a manifold with the bounded mass property, find criteria for $\underline{\operatorname {vol}}_\theta (P_\theta [u]_{\mathcal I})>0$ in terms of restricted multiplier ideals or divisorial orders. When this lower volume vanishes, which implications between envelope equality and upper-volume equality, conditions (i) and (ii) of proposition 13.24.2, remain valid?
One implication fails: when the ideal envelope has zero lower volume, equality of the upper volumes of a potential and of its ideal envelope does not force equality of the envelopes. In example 18.15.5, the background $\Theta $ is positive and nonclosed on a projective manifold with the bounded mass property, and $q=P_\Theta [a]_{\mathcal I}$ satisfies $\overline{\operatorname {vol}}_\Theta (a)=\overline{\operatorname {vol}}_\Theta (q)=0$ but $P_\Theta [a]\ne q$. The example leaves the other implications in 13.24.11 undecided.
Comments
Corrections, questions, and mathematical discussion are welcome. Sign in with GitHub to comment. Comments are public.