Now we move on to the next ingredient in the construction: flattening stratifications. We’ll start with just stating the theorem that Kollár used:
Theorem: Let be a projective scheme and
ample. Let
be a coherent sheaf on
. For every polynomial
there is a locally closed subscheme
with the following property: given any morphism
the pullback
on
is flat over
with Hilbert Polynomial
if and only if
can be factored as
.
What this says, roughly, is that if we have a family , then the base change of
is flat with given Hilbert polynomial if and only if the family was really
. So there is a subscheme depending only on the Hilbert polynomial which all flat maps with fibers of that polynomial map into.
Now, we define a stratification to be a finite set of locally closed subschemes such that every point of
is in exactly one
. We say that a stratification is flattening if for all morphisms
we have that
is flat over
if and only if the morphism
factors
, where
is defined by taking the sheaf
on
and pulling back by
to
.
Proof: First we look at the case . Then
is a coherent sheaf on
. So then
is just
, and it’ll be flat over
if and only if it is locally free over
. So then for all
we define
. Fix a point
and let
and choose
whose images give a basis. Then they extend to sections of
in a neighborhood
of
, and using the
, we get a homomorphism
in
.
Now, the generate
, so what we need is Nakayama’s lemma. In its traditional form, Nakayama’s lemma states that if
is a finitely generated module and
is an ideal contained in every maximal ideal of the ring, then
implies that
. Most often, this is used for local rings, and it’s going to get at least a minipost in the near future, because it’s so important.
Anyway, back on topic: Nakayama’s Lemma can be used to prove that generate
itself, and so the homomorphism is surjective in a possibly smaller neighborhood, which we’ll call
. If we shrink the neighborhood even more, to
, we can assume that the kernel is generated by its sections over
. Thus, we have an exact sequence
for some
. We’ll now denote
.
Now we need to see that is generated by
sections everywhere in
, and so if
, we have that
. Thus, the set
is locally closed. Even better, if
, then we have
if and only if the homomorphism
is zero. Thus, if this map is expressed by an
matrix with elements
of functions on
, then the subscheme
of
defined by the
has support
. In fact, it has the property that if
is any morphism,
noetherian, then
is locally free of rank
if and only if
factors through the closed subscheme
.
So now, is uniquely determined in a neighborhood of a point of
, so the subschemes
all patch together to give a locally closed subscheme
on
. The collection
will then be a stratification of
. And now, by the property, it must be a flattening stratification. We’ve not just proved this, but we’ve in fact indexed the subschemes
which give us
which is locally free of rank
.
We’re now just going to state a lemma, and this won’t be proved, because it’s not that enlightening and becomes mostly an exercise in commutative algebra.
Lemma: Let be a morphism of finite type of noetherian schemes, and let
be a coherent sheaf on
. Assume that
is reduced and irreducible. Then there is a non-empty open subset
such that the restriction of
to
is flat over
.
So now on to the general case. Let be a coherent sheaf on
. Let
be the projection to
and set
. We begin by noting that there is a finite set of locall closed subsets
of
such that
and such that if
is given its reduced subscheme structure, we have
is flat over
.
The following two statements follow from the lemma fairly quickly:
- There is a uniform
such that if
, then for all
, we have
for
and
is isomorphic to
.
- Only a finite number of polynomials appear as Hilbert polynomials of the sheaves
on the fibers
over
.
That second one is the one that’s really useful to us. It lets us turn the statement we were going to get, which assumes that the stratification is finite into the one we wanted, which doesn’t, by saying that it had to have been finite in the first place.
So now we fix obtained from 1 and we take
be any base extension where
is noetherian. Now we suppose that
is flat over
. Then for
, we get a canonical map
where
is the projection. In fact, this canonical map must be na isomorphism, and
is locally free on
. Now, if we instead assume that
is flat for all
, then
will be flat over
because a coherent sheaf on projective is flat over a base if and only if it can be twisted (by tensoring with
for
large enough) to something that pushes forward to a locally free sheaf.
Back to stratifications, if we have two stratifications and
, we can define a new one by
as sets, and giving it the scheme structure by taking the sum of the defining ideal sheaves. From the base case, we have that each
gives an associated flattening stratification. So now we take the flattening stratifications for all
and combine them as above. This will be the flattening stratification we want for
.
Let be the component of the flattening stratification of
where it has rank
. Then let
be the finitely many Hilbert polynomials from 2. Then for all
, we can look at
. So each
is a limit of a descending chain of locally closed subschemes with fixed underlying topological space. Now, we made the hypothesis that things were noetherian. That means that descending chains terminate after finitely many sets, so the
are finite intersections!
So now, give us a flattening stratification. QED
That completes the core of the proof of existence of the Hilbert scheme, at least, the existence of the Hilbert scheme of . Next up, we’ll use the Hilbert scheme of projective space to prove the existence of some more moduli spaces.
July 22, 2008 at 5:31 pm
[...] 22, 2008 I promised a minipost on Nakayama when I talked about Flattening Stratifications, and I’ve got a moment now, so I’ll do it quickly. This post is all commutative [...]
July 23, 2008 at 7:30 pm
[...] by the existence of a flattening stratification (same thing that gave us ) we get a subscheme such that for any the pullback to is flat if and [...]