Newer
Older
with $k_{v,q}$ being the least $k\in\ZZ_{>0}$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
k \equiv -\aa\bb \frac{m}{\gcd(m,2n^2)}
\mod{\gcd\left(
\frac{n^2\gcd(m,2)}{\gcd(m,2n^2)},
\frac{mn\aa}{\gcd(m,2n^2)}
\right)}
\end{equation*}
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
\end{lemmadfn}
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following sequence of logical implications.
The one-way implication follows from
$\aa r + \bb \equiv 0 \pmod{n}$,
and the final logical equivalence is just a simplification of the expressions.
\begin{align}
\frac{ x }{ \lcm(m,2) }
- \frac{
(\aa r+2\bb)\aa
}{
2n^2
}
= \frac{ k }{ \lcm(m,2n^2) }
\quad \text{for some } x \in \ZZ
\span \span \span \span \span
\label{eqn:finding_better_eps_problem}
\\ \nonumber
\\ \Leftrightarrow& &
- (\aa r+2\bb)\aa
\frac{\lcm(m,2n^2)}{2n^2}
&\equiv k &&
\nonumber
\\ &&&
\mod \frac{\lcm(m,2n^2)}{\lcm(m,2)}
\span \span \span
\nonumber
\\ \Rightarrow& &
- \bb\aa
\frac{\lcm(m,2n^2)}{2n^2}
&\equiv k &&
\nonumber
\\ &&&
\mod \gcd\left(
\frac{\lcm(m,2n^2)}{\lcm(m,2)},
\frac{n \aa \lcm(m,2n^2)}{2n^2}
\right)
\span \span \span
\nonumber
\\ \Leftrightarrow& &
- \bb\aa
\frac{m}{\gcd(m,2n^2)}
&\equiv k &&
\label{eqn:better_eps_problem_k_mod_n}
\\ &&&
\mod \gcd\left(
\frac{n^2\gcd(m,2)}{\gcd(m,2n^2)},
\frac{mn \aa}{\gcd(m,2n^2)}
\right)
\span \span \span
\nonumber
\end{align}
In our situation, we want to find the least $k>0$ satisfying
Equation \ref{eqn:finding_better_eps_problem}.
Since such a $k$ must also satisfy eqn \ref{eqn:better_eps_problem_k_mod_n},
we can pick the smallest $k_{q,v} \in \ZZ_{>0}$ which satisfies this new condition
(a computation only depending on $q$ and $\beta$, but not $r$).
We are then guaranteed that $k_{v,q}$ is less than any $k$ satisfying Equation
\ref{eqn:finding_better_eps_problem}, giving the first inequality in Equation
\ref{eqn:epsilon_q_lemma_prop}.
Furthermore, $k_{v,q}\geq 1$ gives the second part of the inequality:
$\epsilon_{v,q}\geq\epsilon_v$, with equality when $k_{v,q}=1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{sagesilent}
from plots_and_expressions import main_theorem2
\end{sagesilent}
\begin{theorem}[Bound on $r$ \#3 for Problem \ref{problem:problem-statement-2}]
\label{thm:rmax_with_eps1}
Let $X$ be a smooth projective surface with Picard rank 1 and choice of ample
line bundle $L$ with $c_1(L)$ generating $\neronseveri(X)$ and
$m\coloneqq\ell^2$.
Let $v$ be a fixed Chern character on this surface with positive rank
(or rank 0 and $c_1(v)>0$), and $\Delta(v)\geq 0$.
Then the ranks of the pseudo-semistabilisers $u$ for $v$,
which are solutions to Problem \ref{problem:problem-statement-2},
with $\chern_1^{\beta_{-}(v)}(u) = q$
are bounded above by the following expression.
\begin{align*}
\min
\left(
\sage{main_theorem2.r_upper_bound1.subs(betamin_subs)}, \:\:
\sage{main_theorem2.r_upper_bound2.subs(betamin_subs)}
\right)
\end{align*}
Where $k_{v,q}$ is defined as in Definition/Lemma \ref{lemdfn:epsilon_q},
and $R = \chern_0(v)$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Following the same proof as Theorem \ref{thm:rmax_with_uniform_eps},
$\epsilon_{v,q} = \frac{k_{v,q}}{\lcm(m, 2n^2)}$ can be used instead of
$\epsilon_{v} = \frac{1}{\lcm(m, 2n^2)}$ as it satisfies the same required
property, as per Definition/Lemma \ref{lemdfn:epsilon_q}.
Although the general form of this bound is quite complicated, it does simplify a
lot when $m$ is small.
\begin{sagesilent}
from plots_and_expressions import main_theorem2_corollary
\end{sagesilent}
\begin{corollary}[Bound on $r$ \#3 on $\PP^2$ and Principally polarised abelian surfaces]
\label{cor:rmax_with_eps1}
Suppose we are working over $\PP^2$ or a principally polarised abelian surface
(or any other surfaces with $m=\ell^2=1$ or $2$).
Let $v$ be a fixed Chern character, with $\beta_{-}\coloneqq\beta_{-}(v)=\frac{a_v}{n}$
rational and expressed in lowest terms.
Then the ranks $r$ of the pseudo-semistabilisers $u$ for $v$ with,
which are solutions to Problem \ref{problem:problem-statement-2},
$\chern_1^{\beta_{-}}(u) = q = \frac{b_q}{n}$
are bounded above by the following expression:
\begin{align*}
\min
\left(
\sage{main_theorem2_corollary.r_upper_bound1.subs(betamin_subs)}, \:\:
\sage{main_theorem2_corollary.r_upper_bound2.subs(betamin_subs)}
\right)
\end{align*}
Where $R = \chern_0(v)$ and $k_{v,q}$ is the least
$k\in\ZZ_{>0}$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
k \equiv -\aa\bb
\pmod{n}
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
This is a specialisation of Theorem \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}, where we can
drastically simplify the $\lcm$ and $\gcd$ terms by noting that $m$ divides both
$2$ and $2n^2$, and that $a_v$ is coprime to $n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}[$v=(3, 2\ell, -2)$ on $\PP^2$]
\label{exmpl:recurring-third}
Just like in examples \ref{exmpl:recurring-first} and
\ref{exmpl:recurring-second},
take $\ell=c_1(\mathcal{O}(1))$ as the standard polarization on $\PP^2$, so that
$\beta=\sage{recurring.betaminus}$, giving $n=\sage{recurring.n}$
and $\chern_1^{\sage{recurring.betaminus}}(F) = \sage{recurring.twisted.ch[1]}$.
%% TODO transcode notebook code
The (non-exclusive) upper bounds for $r\coloneqq\chern_0(u)$ of a tilt semistabiliser $u$ of $v$
in terms of the possible values for $q\coloneqq\chern_1^{\beta_{-}}(u)$ are as follows:
\begin{sagesilent}
from examples import bound_comparisons
qs, theorem2_bounds, theorem3_bounds = bound_comparisons(recurring)
\end{sagesilent}
\vspace{1em}
\noindent
\directlua{ table_width = 3*4+1 }
\begin{tabular}{l\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do tex.sprint([[|c]]) end}}
$q=\chern_1^{\beta_{-}}(u)$
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{qs[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
\\ \hline
Thm \ref{thm:rmax_with_uniform_eps}
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{theorem2_bounds[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
\\
Thm \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{theorem3_bounds[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\noindent
It is worth noting that the bounds given by Theorem \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}
reach, but do not exceed the actual maximum rank 25 of the
pseudo-semistabilisers of $v$ in this case.
As a reminder, the original loose bound from Theorem \ref{thm:loose-bound-on-r}
was 144.
\end{example}
\begin{example}[extravagant example: $v=(29, 13\ell, -3/2)$ on $\PP^2$]
\label{exmpl:extravagant-third}
Just like in examples \ref{exmpl:extravagant-first} and
\ref{exmpl:extravagant-second},
take $\ell=c_1(\mathcal{O}(1))$ as the standard polarization on $\PP^2$, so that
$\beta=\sage{extravagant.betaminus}$, giving $n=\sage{n:=extravagant.n}$
and $\chern_1^{\sage{extravagant.betaminus}}(F) = \sage{extravagant.twisted.ch[1]}$.
This example was chosen because the $n$ value is moderatly large, giving more
possible values for $k_{v,q}$, in Definition/Lemma \ref{lemdfn:epsilon_q}. This allows
for a larger possible difference between the bounds given by Theorems
\ref{thm:rmax_with_uniform_eps} and \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}, with the bound
from the second being up to $\sage{n}$ times smaller, for any given $q$ value.
The (non-exclusive) upper bounds for $r\coloneqq\chern_0(u)$ of a tilt semistabiliser $u$ of $v$
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1241
1242
1243
1244
1245
1246
1247
1248
1249
1250
1251
1252
1253
in terms of the first few smallest possible values for $q\coloneqq\chern_1^{\beta}(u)$ are as follows:
\begin{sagesilent}
qs, theorem2_bounds, theorem3_bounds = bound_comparisons(extravagant)
\end{sagesilent}
\vspace{1em}
\noindent
\directlua{ table_width = 12 }
\begin{tabular}{l\directlua{for i=0,table_width do tex.sprint([[|c]]) end}}
$q=\chern_1^\beta(u)$
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{qs[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
&$\cdots$
\\ \hline
Thm \ref{thm:rmax_with_uniform_eps}
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{theorem2_bounds[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
&$\cdots$
\\
Thm \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}
\directlua{for i=0,table_width-1 do
local cell = [[&$\noexpand\sage{theorem3_bounds[]] .. i .. "]}$"
tex.sprint(cell)
end}
&$\cdots$
\end{tabular}
\vspace{1em}
\noindent
However the reduction in the overall bound on $r$ is not as drastic, since all
possible values for $k_{v,q}$ in $\{1,2,\ldots,\sage{n}\}$ are iterated through
cyclically as we consider successive possible values for $q$.
And for each $q$ where $k_{v,q}=1$, both theorems give the same bound.
Calculating the maximums over all values of $q$ yields
$\sage{max(theorem2_bounds)}$ for Theorem \ref{thm:rmax_with_uniform_eps}, and
$\sage{max(theorem3_bounds)}$ for Theorem \ref{thm:rmax_with_eps1}.