Equivalence of the sharp effectiveness results of strong openness property
Abstract.
In this paper, we show the equivalence of the sharp effectiveness results of the strong openness property of multiplier ideal sheaves obtained in [2] using Bergman kernels and in [8] using minimal integrals.
Key words and phrases:
Bergman kernel, minimal integral, Krull’s lemma, strong openness property2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
32A25, 32A36, 32U051. Introduction
There are two distinct sharp effectiveness results of the strong openness property of multiplier ideal sheaves, proven in [8] by Guan and in [2] by Bao-Guan, using minimal integrals and -Bergman kernels respectively. In the present paper, we will prove that these two effectiveness results are equivalent.
1.1. Notations and conventions
Before we discuss the background and motivation of the present paper, we recall some notations and conventions.
1.1.1. Bergman kernel
We recall the Bergman kernel (a version of generalized Bergman kernel) defined in [2] in the following.
Denote
We also denote
in the present paper. can be seen as , the space of entire functions on , while can be seen as , the space of polynomials on .
Let be a domain in . For any , , and , denote
Definition 1.1 (see [2]).
Let . The Bergman kernel with respect to on is defined as:
where is the Bergman space, and .
It can be checked that (see [2, Lemma 2.3]).
Suppose is an ideal of , the ring of holomorhpic function germs on the origin . Denote
and . is a linear subspace of , where it is not trivial when is a proper ideal of .
Now let be a domain in containing the origin , a proper ideal of , and . Recall the notation
Proposition 1.2 (Proposition 4.6 in [2]).
if and only if .
This proposition was proved in [2] by the separation theorem in the functional analysis theory.
In the present paper, we also denote
Clearly, we have .
1.1.2. Minimal integral
The second author of the present paper introduced the minimal integrals in [8] to establish a sharp effectiveness result of the strong openness property. We recall the definition and notation of the minimal integral below.
Again let be a domain in containing the origin , a proper ideal of , and . Recall the notation of minimal integral ([8])
and if the set in the right hand is empty, then denote . By Montel’s theorem, if , there exists a unique with and . One can also note that if and only if (see [8]).
Denote
which is a closed subspace of . Then there exists a unique closed subspace of , which is the orthogonal complement of in . Moreover, for any , the unique with and is actually the image of under the orthogonal projection from to .
With simple computations, one can check that holds. More precisely, assume that satisfying and . Then for any , and thus
1.2. Background and motivation
Let be a pseudoconvex domain in containing the origin , a negative plurisubharmonic function on with , and a holomorphic function on .
Recall the jumping number
and the multiplier ideal
The strong openness property of multiplier ideal sheaves ([10]) shows that: if , then there must exist some such that , or equivalently, . The effectiveness of the strong openness property was established in [11]. Moreover, [8] gave the following sharp effectiveness result.
Theorem 1.3 ([8]).
Suppose . Then for any satisfying
we have .
Afterwards, [2] proved the following result, which gave the optimal extension approach to the effectiveness result of the strong openness property.
Theorem 1.4 ([2]).
Suppose . Then for any satisfying
we have .
In [2], Theorem 1.4 was proved for bounded pseudoconvex domains , but it is easy to generalize the result to all pseudoconvex domains.
These two effectiveness results of the strong openness property were both shown to be sharp in [8] and [2], respectively. Theorem 1.3 was established by estimating the minimal integrals on the sublevel sets of plurisubharmonic functions in [8], while Theorem 1.4 was proved using the log-plurisubharmonicity of fiberwise -Bergman kernels in [2]. There are differences between minimal integrals and -Bergman kernels. For example, in [6], Bao-Guan-Yuan showed that the log-convexity of the minimal integrals on the sublevel sets of plurisubharmonic functions does not hold generally, but this property is true for -Bergman kernels. This leads naturally to the following question:
Question 1.5.
We provide an affirmative answer to Question 1.5 in the present paper, which completes the optimal extension approach to Theorem 1.3.
Additionally, the proof of Proposition 1.2 (a key step in Theorem 1.4) in [2] relies on the separation theorem from functional analysis, which only guarantees the existence of a desired functional without providing a method to find it. Therefore, it is valuable to find a proof that does not rely on the separation theorem. In this paper, we will present a method for finding the functional in the proof of the main results.
1.3. Main results and applications
Now we show the main results of the present paper, with several applications.
1.3.1. Main results
The following theorem is the main theorem of the present paper, which provides the affirmative answer to Question 1.5.
Theorem 1.6.
Let be a domain in containing the origin , a proper ideal of , and . Then
1.3.2. Applications of the main results
For any , the functional
is linear and continuous. By Riesz’s representation theorem, there exists some such that for any , where is the inner product on the Hilbert space . It is known that is dense in (see [4, Appendix]).
Theorem 1.6 implies
Corollary 1.8.
For any ideal of , is dense in .
Let be a bounded pseudoconvex domain in containing the origin , a negative plurisubharmonic function on with , and .
For any , the following limit
is called the cse (a generalization of complex singularity exponent, see [5]) of , where it is proved in [5] that the limit always exists (since is convex in ), and independent of the choice of the bounded pseudoconvex domain by the fact: if ,
(1.1) |
Theorem 1.6 also implies
Corollary 1.9.
If , then
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we recall some preliminaries which will be used in the proofs.
2.1. Krull’s lemma
The famous Krull’s lemma for Noetherian local rings is the key ingredient of the proof of Theorem 1.6.
Lemma 2.1 (Krull’s lemma, see [1]).
Let be a Noetherian local ring with the unique maximal ideal . Then for any ideal of ,
It is well-known that the ring is a Noetherian local ring, with the unique maximal ideal .
2.2. Orthonormal basis of the Bergman space
First, we give an order for .
Let be two multi-indices, where , . Denote (and the same for ). We write , if and only if
(1) ; or
(2) , and there exists such that , , , and .
Let be a domain with , and a plurisubharmonic function on . Denote
where .
The following lemma shows that we can have an orthonormal basis of satisfying some specific conditions.
For any , the functional
is linear and continuous. Thus, by Riesz representation theorem, there exists some such that for any , where is the inner product on the Hilbert space . gives an operator from to .
Lemma 2.2 (see the Appendix of [4]).
There exist a subset of , a sequence , and an orthonormal basis of , such that for any ,
(1) ;
(2) ;
(3) ,
where the maximum and minimum in (2) and (3) are w.r.t. ‘’.
Here in fact, is the set containing all such that there exists an with and for all . For example, if is a bounded domain and , then .
3. Proof of Theorem 1.6
Now we prove Theorem 1.6. For any , we denote
which coincides the order of seen as an element in . We first prove a special case of Theorem 1.6.
Lemma 3.1.
Let be a bounded domain in , a proper ideal of and . Assume that for some , where is the maximal ideal of . Then there exists with such that
Proof.
The case is trivial, where we can choose for example. In the following, we assume .
First, we can actually assume that . For the reason, if we take the order part of the Taylor expansion of at , denoted by , then , and since it is a polynomial and is bounded. Now for any , it follows that . Replacing by , it is enough to assume .
Since with , , then there exists a unique such that and . We can write that
where is the orthonormal basis of in Lemma 2.2. Note that for any , then for any with . Thus, if , where is the inner product on . It follows that we have
which is a finite summation. Set
where satisfying such as which in Lemma 2.2. Then , and . In addition, we have
yielding that
Now, we only need to verify . For any , by Taylor’s expansion, for any , we can write that
where with , and . Since is bounded, . We also have , thus . Then by that , it holds that
Since and , we have . Thus, , for all . The proof of is completed, so the desired result holds. ∎
Using Krull’s lemma, we give an approximation result for the minimal integrals.
Lemma 3.2.
Let be a bounded domain in , a proper ideal of , and . Then
(3.1) |
Proof.
Clearly, is an increasing sequence in , and for any . Without loss of generality, we assume . Then there exists with
Since , by Montel’s theorem, we can extract a subsequence of compactly convergent to some . Fatou’s lemma shows . We also have for any (see [7, Chapter 2.2.3]). Krull’s lemma indicates
Then , which implies . This confirms (3.1). ∎
For an unnecessarily bounded domain, we will use the following lemma to approximate the minimal integral.
Lemma 3.3.
Let be a domain in containing , a proper ideal of , and . Let be a sequence of domains such that , , and . Then
Proof.
Note that is increasing in and for any , then without loss of generality, we assume . For any , let with and . Then Montel’s theorem implies that there exists a subsequence of which converges to some on any compact subset of . According to Fatou’s lemma, we have . We also have , which implies . Then the proof is completed. ∎
Now we give the proof of Theorem 1.6.
Proof of Theorem 1.6.
We only need to prove , where .
First, we assume is bounded. For the ideal of , since , Lemma 3.1 implies
yielding that
(3.2) |
Combining with Lemma 3.2, we get
If is an unbounded domain, we choose an increasing sequence of bounded domains such that , and , then Lemma 3.3 implies
At last, the case is trivial.
The proof of Theorem 1.6 is completed. ∎
We give some remarks here.
Remark 3.4.
We can reprove Proposition 1.2 by Theorem 1.6 without using the separation theorem in functional analysis theory:
for any proper ideal of , and any , there exists some , such that .
This is due to for a domain containing and .
Remark 3.5.
From the proof of Theorem 1.6, we can see
where can be seen as a finite-dimensional linear subspace of .
4. Proofs of Corollary 1.8 and Corollary 1.9
Proof of Corollary 1.8.
It is clear that .
Now fix any . Then by the definition, . According to Theorem 1.6, we can find a sequence such that
Denote . It follows that
which verifies that
Set
and , where such that . Then , and
Now we deduce that
which implies as in the topology of .
The proof is completed. ∎
5. A weighted version
A weighted version of generalized Bergman kernels was introduced in [3], and used to obtain a (sharp) effectiveness result for the strong openness property, which reproved some results in [9].
For the purpose of comparing the results in [3] and [9], we demonstrate a weighted version of Theorem 1.6 in this section. Let be a domain in containing , and a plurisubharmonic function on . Denote by
the weighted Bergman space and the norm on the space.
For any , the weighted Bergman kernel with respect to on is denoted by (see [3]):
For any proper ideal of satisfying and , set
and
In addition, recall the minimal integral:
One can establish the following weighted version of Theorem 1.6, where the detail of the proof will be omitted here.
Theorem 5.1.
The following equality holds:
Sketch of the proof.
Let for each . Since each does not have singularity, we can repeat the process of the proof of Theorem 1.6, and obtain
Then by approximation, the same equality for can be verified. ∎
Acknowledgements. We thank Dr. Zheng Yuan and Dr. Zhitong Mi for checking this paper. The second named author was supported by National Key R&D Program of China 2021YFA1003100, NSFC-11825101 and NSFC-12425101.
References
- [1] M.F. Atiyah, I.G. MacDonald. Introduction to commutative algebra. 1st ed. CRC Press (1969).
- [2] S.J. Bao and Q.A. Guan. extension and effectiveness of strong openness property, Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series, 38, 1949-1964 (2022).
- [3] S.J. Bao and Q.A. Guan. extension and effectiveness of strong openness property. Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series, 39, 814-826 (2023).
- [4] S.J. Bao, Q.A. Guan. Modules at boundary points, fiberwise Bergman kernels, and log-subharmonicity. Peking Math J (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42543-023-00070-8.
- [5] S.J. Bao, Q.A. Guan, and Z. Yuan. A note on -Bergman kernels. Front. Math (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11464-023-0021-1.
- [6] S.J. Bao, Q.A. Guan, and Z. Yuan. Concavity property of minimal integrals with Lebesgue measurable gain VIII – partial linearity and log-convexity. Preprint, arXiv: 2307.07112v2 [math.CV].
- [7] H. Grauert and R. Remmert. Coherent analytic sheaves. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenchaften, 265, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.
- [8] Q.A. Guan. A sharp effectiveness result of Demailly’s strong openness conjecture. Adv. in Math., 348, 51-80 (2019).
- [9] Q.A. Guan and Z. Yuan. Effectiveness of strong openness property in . Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 151 (2023), no. 10, 4331-4339.
- [10] Q.A. Guan, X.Y. Zhou. A proof of Demailly’s strong openness conjecture. Ann. of Math. 182 (2015), 605-616.
- [11] Q.A. Guan, X.Y. Zhou. Effectiveness of Demailly’s strong openness conjecture and related problems. Invent. Math. 202 (2015), no.2, 635-676.