Webs by conics on del Pezzo surfaces and hyperlogarithmic functional identities

Luc Pirio

arXiv: 2212.02556v1 · PDF · 5 December 2022
Categories: math.AG, math.CV, math.DG
Licence: CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

For d ranging from 2 to 6, we prove that the web by conics naturally defined on any smooth del Pezzo surface of degree d carries an interesting functional identity whose components all are a certain antisymmetric hyperlogarithm of weight 7-d. Our approach is uniform with respect to d and at the end relies on classical results about the action of Weyl groups on the set of lines contained in the considered del Pezzo surface. This series of ‘del Pezzo’s hyperlogarithmic functional identities’ is a natural generalization of the famous and well-know 3-term and 5-term identities of the logarithm and dilogarithm (’Abel’s relation’) which correspond to the cases when d=6 and d=5 respectively. This text ends with a section containing several questions and some possibly interesting perspectives.

Items 21

Theorem

Theorem 1.1

YRR6

There exists a \kappa_r-tuple (\epsilon_i)_{i=1}^{\kappa_r}\in \{ \pm 1 \}^{\kappa_r}, unique up to sign, such that for any y\in Y_r and for a suitable choice of the branch of the hyperlogarithm AI_i^{r-2} at y_i=U_i(y)\in \mathbf P^1 for each i=1,\ldots,\kappa_r, the following functional identity holds true on an open neighbourhood of y in Y_r:

{}^{} \hspace{-6cm} \boldsymbol{\big({\bf H Log}(X_r)\big) } \hspace{3.7cm} \sum_{i=1}^{\kappa_r} \epsilon_i \,AI_i^{r-2}\big(U_i\big)=0\, .

Remark

Remark 2.1

W403

In all the discussion above, the choice of the additional base-point x outside \mathfrak B is arbitrary in most cases hence may appear as unnatural. Another approach, encountered in many papers, is to take x as one of the points of \mathfrak B but this requires in addition to specify a non-trivial (real) tangent direction \zeta at x: one then talks of a ‘tangential base point’. By iterated integrations of 1-forms in H_{\mathfrak B} along smooth paths \gamma:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbf P^1 with \gamma(]0,1])\subset \mathbf P^1\setminus \mathfrak B, \gamma(0)=x\in \mathfrak B and \gamma'(0)=\zeta, one defines a class of multivalued holomorphic functions on \mathbf P^1\setminus \mathfrak B which enjoys similar versions of all the properties discussed above. However, a certain technical problem has to be taken into account, namely that a given symbol \boldsymbol{a}\in H^{\otimes \bullet} may be ‘divergent’ FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt The simplest example of such a divergent symbol is \nu_0=du/u in case x=0 and \zeta=\partial/\partial z_1 when z_1 stands for the real part of the variable z\in \mathbf C: for any smooth path \gamma emanating from the origin with tangent vector \zeta at this point, the weight 1 integral \int_\gamma \nu_0 is divergent, precisely because the integrand has a logarithmic singularity at the origin.. For such a symbol, it is necessary to define the iterated integral value \int_\gamma \nu_{\boldsymbol{a}} by means of a certain

‘regularization process’ which is well-known and just mentioned here for the sake of completeness (for more details, see [BanksPanzerPym, §2.1]).

Proposition

Proposition 2.2

JZUO

For (c_i)_{i=1}^d \in \mathbf C^d, the following conditions are equivalent:

1. one has \sum_{i=1}^d c_i\,\Omega_i=0 in \wedge^s H\subset H^{\otimes s};
2. there exists y\in Y, such that \sum_{i=1}^d c_i\,{AI}^s_{i,y_i}(U_i)=0 as a holomorphic germ at y on Y;
3. for any y\in Y, one has \sum_{i=1}^d c_i\,{AI}^s_{i,y_i}(U_i)=0 as a holomorphic germ at y on Y.

Remark

Remark 2.3

BI3V

Seen as points in {\bf Pic}(X_r), the elements of \mathcal L_r are the vertices of a semi-regular polytope, the so-called ‘Gosset polytope’ (r-4)_{21} (cf. [Lee1]). The latter enjoys several nice combinatorial and geometric properties which allow to interpret some of the objects discussed above in very concrete ways. For instance W_r is a subgroup of finite index (2) of the group of Euclidean automorphisms of (r-4)_{21}. One can also relate the conical fibrations \mathfrak C_c: X_r\rightarrow \mathbf P^1 to the facets of a special kind of (r-4)_{21}. FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt More precisely, the facets of Gosset’s polytope (r-4)_{21} are of two distinct kinds: some are hypersimplices \alpha_{r-1}, the others are crosspolytopes \beta_{r-1} (also called ‘half-measure polytopes’ and noted by h\gamma_{r-1}). The former facets are associated with morphisms X_r\rightarrow \mathbf P^2 corresponding to the blow-up of r points in general position in the projective plane, the latter are in 1-1 correspondance with the conical fibrations on X_r. See [Lee1] for more details. We do believe that the fact that identity \boldsymbol{\big({\bf H Log}(X_r)\big) } holds true is linked to some deep combinatorial and geometric properties of (r-4)_{21}. But since this aspect of things does not intervene in the proof we give of our main result (namely Theorem 1.1), we will not elaborate further on this in the sequel, the unique exception being the very allusive subsection §? at the very end.

Remark

Remark 3.1

O48A

The formal computations described above serve to verify the existence (and the unicity) of a certain hyperlogarithmic abelian relation for \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{X_r}, which is a regular web on Y_r=X_r\setminus L_r. Since the blow-up b_r: X_r\rightarrow \mathbf P^2 induces an isomophism between Y_r and the complement of b_r(L_r) in the projective plane, one should be able to perform similar computations leading to the same result for the push-forward web (b_r)_*\big( \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{X_r} \big), that is some computations involving data coming from the plane \mathbf P^2 and the images by b_r of the lines in X_r. But since \ell_1,\ldots,\ell_r are contracted, one can expect that they do not play any role regarding the abelian relation under scrutiny and that only the lines elements of \ell\in {\mathcal L}_r\setminus \{\ell_i\}_{i=1}^r, which precisely are those which are not contracted by b_r, are meaningful for that regard. It turns out that it is the case indeed: actually all the computations above can be done starting not with \mathbf Z^{{\mathcal L}_r} but with its quotient by the rank r submodule spanned by the \ell_i’s. This has the advantage of lightening the calculations (a little).

Proposition

Proposition 3.2

JKAI

For r=4,5,6,7,8, one has the following decompositions of \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r} in irreducible W_r-modules:

\begin{aligned} \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_4}=& \, {\bf 1}\oplus V_{[41]}^4\oplus V_{[32]}^5 \\ \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_5}=& \, {\bf 1}\oplus V_{[4,1]}^5\oplus V_{[3,2]}^{10} \\ \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_6}=& \, {\bf 1}\oplus V^{6,1}\oplus V^{20,2} \\ \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_7}=& \, {\bf 1} \oplus V^{7,1}\oplus V^{21,3}\oplus V^{27,2} \\ \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_8}=& \, {\bf 1} \oplus V^{8,1} \oplus V^{35,2} \oplus V^{84,4} \oplus V^{112,3} \, . \medskip \smallskip \end{aligned}

Remark

Remark 3.3

JGCD

1. We use the following notations for the irreducible W_r-modules appearing in the above decompositions: first, {\bf 1} stands for the trivial representation whereas all the other irreducibles are labeled with the same label as the one used in GAP3 for the corresponding characters. For the classical types A_4 and D_5, these labels are the classical ones, namely are given by means of partitions of 4 and of bipartitions of 5 respectively (for D_5, see also Table ? and the paragraph just below in the Appendix). The superscripts appearing there are the degree of the corresponding representations. For instance, the component V_{[3,2]}^{10} appearing in the decomposition of \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_5} stands for the irreducible W(D_5)-module associated to the bipartition (3,2) of 5, which moreover is of degree 10.

For the exceptional types E_6,E_7 and E_8, the labels we use are pairs of integers (d,e) with d standing for the degree of the considered W(E_r)-module and e denoting its ‘b-invariant’, that is the smallest integer m such that the module under scrutiny is contained in the m-th symmetric power of the corresponding reflection representation, which has label (r,1) accordingly.

2. The decomposition \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_4}= {\bf 1}\oplus V_{[41]}\oplus V_{[32]} can be found a few lines below the exact sequence (2.1) in [DolgachevFarbLooijenga]. There, it is said that this can be obtained ‘by looking at pairs of complementary pentagons inside of the Petersen graph’. It would be interesting to make this approach clearer/more explicit and to investigate whether it can be generalized to the lower degree del Pezzo surfaces {\rm dP}_d for any d ranging from 5 to 1 or not.

3. For r\leq 7, the set of lines {\mathcal L}_r identifies in a natural way with the set of weights of a minuscule representation of the Lie algebra of type E_r. FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt

FN@sf@gobble@opt This generalizes as follows for r=8: \mathcal L_8 identifies with the set of non zero weights of the quasi-minuscule representation of the Lie algebra \mathfrak e_8, which is the adjoint representation in this case. Hence it is quite natural to wonder what the decomposition of \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r} into irreducible W_r-modules is. However, we have not been able to find an answer to this question in the existing literature (except in the r=4 case as mentioned just above).

Proof

Proof (Proof (sketched)

4CEH

Given r as in the statement of the proposition, we fix a labelling of the lines in X_r which gives rise to a basis \mathcal B_r of \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r} hence to a linear identification \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r}\simeq \mathbf C^{l_r}. For any fundamental root \rho_i of the corresponding root system \mathcal R_r (see (?)), it is straightforward to compute explicitly the matrix of the reflection s_i=s_{\rho_i} (cf. (?)) in the basis \mathcal B_r, denoted by

M_{i}={\rm Mat}_{\mathcal B_r}\big(s_{i}\big) \in {\rm GL}_{l_r}\big(\mathbf Z\big)\, .

Let c_r stand for the number of conjugacy classes in W_r. Next we consider a family of tuples \boldsymbol{i}_k=(i_{k,1},\ldots,i_{k,m_k})\in \{1,\ldots,r\}^{m_k} for k=1,\ldots,c_r and some positive m_k’s such that the group elements s_{\boldsymbol{i}_k}=s_{i_{1,k}}\cdots s_{i_{k,m_k}} form a set of representatives of all the conjugacy classes of W_r.

We denote by \chi_r the character of the W_r-representation \mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r}. For any k=1,\ldots , c_r, one has

\chi_r\big( s_{\boldsymbol{i}_k}\big)={\rm Trace}\Big( M_{i_{1,k}}\cdots M_{i_{k,m_k}} \Big) \, .

Since the r matrices M_i’s are known, one can make \chi_r completely explicit. Using a character table of W_r, it is then straightforward to determine the decomposition of \chi_r as a sum of irreducible W_r-characters.

Lemma

Lemma 3.4

T38X

1. As a group, F_{\mathfrak c} is isomorphic to W(D_{r-1}).

2. The decomposition \mathbf C^{\mathfrak c^{red}}={\bf 1}\oplus \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c} with {\bf 1}=\langle\, 1_{\mathfrak c}\rangle actually is a direct sum of F_{\mathfrak c}-modules.

3. Up to the isomorphism in 1., one has \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c} \simeq V_{[.(r-2)1]} and \wedge ^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c} \simeq {\bf sign} as representations.

Used by Proof

Proof of Lemma 3.4

Since W_r acts transitively on \mathcal K_r, it suffices to prove the lemma when \mathfrak c=h-\ell_1. In this case, one verifies that F_{\mathfrak c} is isomorphic to the subroup of W_r generated by the s_i’s for i=2,\ldots,r. Thus F_{\mathfrak c}=W''_{r-1}=W(D_{r-1}) (with the convention that D_3=A_3).

The second point follows at once from the fact that W''_{r-1} acts by permutations on \mathfrak c^{red}.

To prove 3, we notice that the elements of \mathfrak c^{red} are the conics C_j=[h-l_1-l_j]+[l_j]’s for j=2,\ldots,r, where each element between brackets is an element of {\mathcal L}_r and the notation means that C_j has the two lines h-l_1-l_j and l_j (viewed here as curves contained in X_r) as irreducible components. Direct computations give that as permutations of \mathfrak c^{red}=\{ C_2,\ldots,C_r\}:
{}^{} - s_j is the transposition exchanging C_j and C_{j+1} for j=2,\ldots,r-1;
{}^{} - s_r is the transposition exchanging C_2 and C_{3}.

By elementary character theory of W(D_{r-1}), one gets \mathbf C^{\mathfrak c^{red}}={\bf 1}\oplus V_{[.(r-2)1]} where V_{[.(r-2)1]} is the representation (of degree r-2) associated to the bipartition (-, (r-2)1) where - stands for the empty partition and (r-2)1 for the partition r-1=(r-2)+1. Finally, setting

\varpi_{\mathfrak c}=\Big( \big(C_2-C_r\big)\wedge \cdots \wedge \big(C_{r-1}-C_r\big) \Big) \in \wedge ^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c}\, ,

it follows from the above that s_2\cdot \varpi_{\mathfrak c}=-\varpi_{\mathfrak c}. Since \varpi_{\mathfrak c}\not = 0 and because the trivial and the signature representations are the only two W(D_5)-irreps of degree 1, it follows that \wedge ^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c}\simeq {\bf sign}.

Lemma

Lemma 3.5

PPLN

The tuple \big(\varpi_{\mathfrak c}\big)_{ \mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} is well defined (up to sign) and forms a basis of \oplus_{\mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} \wedge^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c}.

Proof of Lemma 3.5

Since \varpi_{\mathfrak c}\neq 0 and \dim\, \wedge ^{r-2} \mathcal U_{ {\mathfrak c}}=1 for any conic class \mathfrak c, it is clear than \big(\varpi_{\mathfrak c}\big)_{ \mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} is a basis.

For any \mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r, any \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}} \in W_r such that \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}({\mathfrak c}_0)={\mathfrak c} necessarily is written \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}=\sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\,\nu for some \nu \in F_{\hspace{-0.05cm}{\mathfrak c}_0}. Thus one has \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \omega_0= \big( \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\,\nu \big) \bullet \omega_{{\mathfrak c}_0} = \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \big( \nu \bullet \omega_{{\mathfrak c}_0} \big). By Lemma 3.4.3), one has \nu \bullet \omega_{{\mathfrak c}_0}= \boldsymbol{\epsilon} (\nu)\, \omega_{{\mathfrak c}_0} hence \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \omega_0= \boldsymbol{\epsilon} (\nu)\, \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \omega_0 and consequently \boldsymbol{\epsilon} \big(\tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\big)\,\big( \tilde \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \omega_0 \big)= \boldsymbol{\epsilon} \big( \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\big)\,\big( \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}}\bullet \omega_0 \big). This implies that \varpi_{\mathfrak c} does not depend on \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}} but only on the coset \sigma_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0}^ {{\mathfrak c}} F_{\hspace{-0.05cm} {\mathfrak c}_0 }, that is on the associated conic class {\mathfrak c}. Finally, it is straightforward (and left to the reader) to verify that \big(\varpi_{\mathfrak c}\big)_{ \mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} is independent of the choice of the base conic class {\mathfrak c}_0.

Uses Lemma 3.4

Lemma

Lemma 3.6

JMYJ

1. The map \Psi^{r-2} is W_r-equivariant.

2. As W_r-modules, one has \bigoplus_{\mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} \wedge^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c}\simeq \boldsymbol{\epsilon}\otimes \mathbf C^{{\mathcal K}_r}.

Used by Proof

Proof of Lemma 3.6

The first point follows easily from the very definition (?) of the \varpi_{ {\mathfrak c} }’s and the second is a direct consequence of (?).

Proposition

Proposition 3.7

NLCW

1. The element {\bf hlog}^{r-2} spans the signature subrepresentation of \oplus_{\mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} \wedge^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c}.

2. Hence for r=4,\ldots,7, {\bf hlog}^{r-2} lies in {\rm ker}\big( \Psi^{r-2}\big), i.e. one has

\sum_{{\mathfrak c}\in {\mathcal K}_r} \omega_{{\mathfrak c}}=0 in \wedge ^{r-2}\mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r}.

Proof of Proposition 3.7

For w\in W_r, it follows from (?) and the very definition of {\bf hlog}^{r-2} that

w\circ {\bf hlog}^{r-2}= \sum_{{\mathfrak c}\in {\mathcal K}_r} w\circ \varpi_{{\mathfrak c}}= \sum_{{\mathfrak c}\in {\mathcal K}_r} \boldsymbol{\epsilon}(w)\, \varpi_{w({\mathfrak c})}= \boldsymbol{\epsilon}(w)\, \left( \sum_{{\mathfrak c}\in {\mathcal K}_r} \varpi_{w{\mathfrak c}} \right)=\boldsymbol{\epsilon}(w)\, {\bf hlog}^{r-2}\,.

Since {\bf hlog}^{r-2} is not trivial, it spans a W_r-subrepresentation of \oplus_{\mathfrak c \in {\mathcal K}_r} \wedge^{r-2} \mathcal U_{\mathfrak c} isomorphic to \boldsymbol{\epsilon}. Since there is a unique such subrepresentation (as it follows immediately from Lemma 3.6.2 and (?)), one gets the first point.

To get the second point, recall that \Psi^{r-2} is a morphism of W_r-representations according to Lemma 3.6.1. If {\bf hlog}^{r-2} were not zero, then it would span a sub-module of \wedge ^{r-2} \mathbf C^{ {\mathcal L}_r } isomorphic to \boldsymbol{\epsilon} according to 1. Since there is no such submodule in \wedge ^{r-2}\mathbf C^{{\mathcal L}_r} for r=4,\ldots,7 according to the fact just below,

we necessarily have \Psi^{r-2}\big( {\bf hlog}^{r-2}\big)=0.

Uses Lemma 3.6

Fact

Fact 3.8

CRU0

For r=4,\ldots,8, let m^{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}_r be the multiplicity of the signature representation in the decomposition of \wedge ^{r-2} \mathbf C^{ {\mathcal L}_r} into W_r-irreducibles. Then

m^{\boldsymbol{\epsilon}}_r= \begin{cases} \, 0 \hspace{0.3cm} \mbox{for } \, r=4,\ldots,7 \\ \, 5 \hspace{0.3cm} \mbox{for } \, r=8\, . \end{cases}

Proof of Fact 3.8

This has been obtained by means of formal computations in GAP (verified using Maple as well), see at the end of the Appendix for more details.

Remark

Remark 4.1

1TH9

1. Without additional explanations, the statements above may sound cryptic for non-specialists of web geometry. We will come back in detail to all of this in [WdP4].

{}^{} 2. Only very few of the statements above were known before:

\boldsymbol{-} by means of explicit computations on a computer, we established in [PThese, §7.3.3] that the standard model of \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\rm dP}_4} on the projective plane has maximal rank hence is exceptional. But nothing else was known about its space of ARs at that time;
\boldsymbol{-} in [Pereira], Pereira introduced a way to associate a ‘resonnance web’ \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{}^{} \hspace{-0.05cm}\mathcal A} to any arrangements of lines in the plane \mathcal A. When specializing this constuction to a certain arrangement {\bf K}_5, one recovers the planar model of \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\rm dP}_4}. Then Pereira showed that the ‘hyperlogarithmic rank FN@sf@gobble@opt
FN@sf@gobble@opt
FN@sf@gobble@opt
FN@sf@gobble@opt This is the immediate ‘hyperlogarithmic’ generalization of the notion of ‘polylogarithmic rank’ considered in [ClusterWebs, §1.4.3.2]. of \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\bf K}_5} is (20,15,1) which shows in particular that this web carries a unique hyperlogarithmic AR of weight 3. However, this AR was not explicited by Pereira.

Theorem

Theorem (Bol)

4RJU

Bol’s web is characterized by r_{ \boldsymbol{\mathcal B}}: any 5-web \boldsymbol{\mathcal W} such that r_{ \boldsymbol{\mathcal W},3}\equiv 1 and r_{ \boldsymbol{\mathcal W},5}\leq 5 is equivalent to Bol’s web.

Theorem

Theorem (Burau)

U2I3

The class of 27-webs \boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\rm dP}_3}’s is characterized by r_{\boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\rm dP}_3},3}: any 27-web \boldsymbol{\mathcal W} such that r_{ \boldsymbol{\mathcal W},3}\sim r_{\boldsymbol{\mathcal W}_{{\rm dP}_3},3} is equivalent to the 27-web in conics on a cubic surface in \mathbf P^3.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2212.02556v1 by Luc Pirio, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2212/2212.02556.jsonl.