VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES

P. E. NEWSTEAD
LUKE 
CIN, POLAND, 9-14 SEPTEMBER, 2002

The obje t of these notes is to des ribe the lassi

ation of ve tor bundles on algebrai urves and the stru ture of the orresponding moduli spa es. For onvenien e
we work throughout over the omplex numbers and let C denote an irredu ible nonsingular proje tive algebrai urve. We also work almost entirely in terms of varieties
rather than s hemes, although a s heme-theoreti approa h has te hni al advantages.
Most of the basi theory that we shall need is overed in Chapter I of Hartshorne's
book; the main te hnique required from the later hapters of the book is sheaf ohomology. Chapter IV ontains a lot of material on urves; we shall need only a few basi
fa ts.
We restri t attention to the moduli spa es of ve tor bundles, ignoring the many interesting and important extensions to paraboli bundles, pairs of various types, oherent
systems and above all G-bundles.
The notes have been slightly adapted from those issued with the original le tures,
but are still not in their

Le ture 1 { Quotients 1. Moduli and quotients. Comments (by email to newsteadliv.a .1.uk) are wel ome. In parti ular I have in luded only a very small number of referen es. 1. Moduli problems in algebrai geometry are on erned with the lassi.nal form.

algebrai urves. ation of ertain obje ts (e. ve tor bundles on a .g.

isomorphism of urves. proje tive equivalen e).g.xed algebrai variety. isomorphism of bundles. The general pro edure for ta kling su h a problem is  . sets of points in Pn ) under an equivalen e relation (e.

number of points). Hilbert polynomial.  . genus.x some dis rete invariants (e.g.

In fa t this rarely happens even if one allows more general stru tures 1 .2. It may happen that the set of orbits X=G has a natural stru ture of variety. We would like to onstru t a quotient for this a tion. whi h in ludes all the desired obje ts as members. parametrised by a variety S .  onstru t a quotient of S by G. together with an a tion of an algebrai group G on S su h that orbits orrespond to equivalen e lasses of obje ts. 1. through a morphism G  X ! X ). The purpose of this le ture is to onsider the third part of this programme. what ould this mean? (i) Orbit spa e. Types of quotient. Let G be an algebrai group a ting rationally on a variety X (that is.nd a family of obje ts.

If Y is a ategori al quotient. and. the homomorphism A(Y ) ! A(X )G is an isomorphism. POLAND. a C -algebra has the form A(Z ) for some aÆne variety Z if and only if it is . We shall be looking for a ategori al quotient with good geometri al properties. We say that  : X ! Y (or just Y ) is a ategori al quotient of X by G if every morphism X ! Z whi h is onstant on orbits fa tors uniquely through . This has good fun torial properties.3. Now suppose that X is an aÆne variety. we let A(X ) denote the algebra of morphisms X ! C . but we do not have a very good geometri al grasp of U=G. by Hilbert's Nullstellensatz. For any variety X . but not ne essarily good geometri ones. 1. (ii) Categori al quotient. AÆne quotients. Moreover. The a tion of G on X determines an a tion of G on A(X ). we an re over X from A(X ). If X ! Z is onstant on orbits. E. 2002 su h as s hemes or \algebrai spa es". In this ase A(X ) is just the aÆne oordinate ring of X . A tually there is always a dense Zariskiopen G-invariant subset U of X for whi h U=G exists [Rosenli ht 1963℄. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. we have a homomorphism A(Z ) ! A(X )G. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN.2 P.

The se ond property is ne essarily true of A(X )G . so the question to be answered is Question. Is A(X )G .nitely generated and has no nilpotent elements.

e.3.4. Corollary 1. (iii) if U is a Zariski-open subset of Y . Note that Corollary 1. then (W ) is losed in Y . If (x1 ) = (x2 ). for example GL(n). SL(n) and P GL(n). W are Zariski- losed G-invariant subsets of X and W \ W = .nitely generated? This is a version of Hilbert's 14th problem and the answer in general is NO [Nagata 1958℄. If G a ts on  1 (U ) with losed orbits. 1 2 1 1 2 2 Corollary 1. then O(x1 ) \ O(x2 ) 6= . U is an orbit spa e). then (W ) \ (W ) = . this in ludes many important ases. U is a ategori al quotient of  1 (U ) by G. then U =  1 (U )=G (i... Theorem 1. This is perhaps more signi.3 states that  separates orbits to the greatest extent possible. (v) if W . (ii)  is surje tive.1. Let G be a redu tive group a ting on an aÆne variety X . (iv) if W is a Zariski- losed G-invariant subset of X .. the indu ed homomorphism  : A(U ) ! A( 1 (U ))G is an isomorphism. However the answer is always YES if G is redu tive. For any Zariski-open subset U of Y . Corollary 1. onsistent with Y being a variety. Then there exists an aÆne variety Y and a morphism  : X ! Y su h that (i)  is onstant on orbits.2.

ant than the simple fa t that A(X )G is .

.nitely generated.

VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 3 1. The ase in whi h we are most interested is when X is proje tive. Proje tive quotients.4. this is be ause we would like our quotients to be omplete ( ompa t) or at least to have natural ompa ti.

De. Then G a ts on the polynomial ring C [X . we need to onsider aÆne open subsets of X whi h are invariant under G. ations. : : : . then Xf = fx 2 X : f (x) 6= 0g is a G-invariant aÆne open subset of X . Xn ℄. We suppose X  Pn and that G a ts linearly. If f is any G-invariant homogeneous polynomial for this a tion. that is through a representation of G in GL(n + 1). To apply the previous se tion.

this is alled \properly stable". stable) points of X are G-invariant Zariski-open subsets on X . De. (In GIT. The subsets X ss.nition.) 0 Lemma 1. Prove Lemma 1.5. X s of X of semistable (resp.  stable for the a tion of G if dim O(x) = dim G and there exists f as above su h that G a ts on Xf with losed orbits. A point x 2 X is  semistable for the a tion of G if there exists f su h that x 2 Xf .5.

1 hold. the idea originates in GIT. the inverse image of every aÆne Zariski-open set in Y is aÆne) and (i){(v) of Theorem 1.nition.  a geometri quotient if it is a good quotient and also an orbit spa e. The on ept of \good quotient" given here is due to Seshadri. It is onventional to write Y = X==G when Y is a good quotient and Y = X=G when Y is a geometri quotient.  : X ! Y is  a good quotient of X by G if  is an aÆne morphism (that is. but the de.

Theorem 1.6.nition given there is not identi al with ours. (ii) there exists a Zariski-open subset Y s of Y su h that  (Y s) = X s and Y s = 1 (iii) (iv) X s=G X s. This means both that it signi. Let G be a redu tive group a ting linearly on a proje tive variety X . Remark 1. Our \geometri quotient" di ers from that in GIT by the insisten e that  be an aÆne morphism.7. Exer ise. In some ways the most proje tive. is a geometri quotient of for x1 . for x 2 X ss . x2 2 X ss. O(x1 ) \ O(x2 ) \ X ss 6= .. (x1 ) = (x2 ) . Then (i) there exists a good quotient  : X ss ! Y and Y = X ss==G is proje tive. x is stable if and only if dim O(x) = dim G and O(x) is losed in X ss.

For G not ne essarily redu tive. Referen es. Remark 1.5. .8. 1. Rosenli ht's result gives a dense Zariskiopen subset U of X su h that U=G exists with all the properties of a geometri quotient ex ept that the morphism  need not be aÆne. ant point of this theorem is that Y is is omplete and that it an be embedded in proje tive spa e. The main referen es for this le ture are GIT and my Tata notes.

Let C be an irredu ible non-singular proje tive algebrai urve of genus g. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. The on ept of a moduli spa e. E. hen e the Chern lass (E ) an be regarded as an integer { this is by de. 2002 2.4 P. We onsider algebrai ve tor bundles E over C of rank n and degree d. (Note here that H (C. Le ture 2 { Constru tion of moduli spa es 2. Z)  = Z and this group has a anoni al positive generator. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. POLAND.1.

where N and P are the numbers of zeroes and poles of s. ounted with multipli ities { this number is indepedent of the hoi e of s. then deg E = N P . Alternatively one an onsider a rational se tion s of the line bundle det E .) 2 1 De.nition the degree of E .

we have an indu ed family (idC  f )V parametrised by S 0. (ii) For any family V parametrised by S and any morphism f : S 0 ! S . (i) A family of ve tor bundles over C parametrised by a variety S is a ve tor bundle V over C  S . We an now de.nition. V parametrised by S are equivalent (V  V ) if V  = V pS L for some line bundle L over S . we write Vs = V jC  fsg and refer to this as the member of the family orresponding to s. (iii) Two families V . for any s 2 S .

there exists a unique morphism  : S ! M su h that V  (idC  ) U: If this were to happen we would all M a . for there to exist a variety M and a universal ve tor bundle U over C  M su h that.ne a ontravariant fun tor F : fvarietiesg ! fsetsg F (S ) = fequivalen e lasses of families parametrised by S g: We would like F to be representable. i.e. for any family V parametrised by S .

it makes no di eren e. in this problem. this is a fundamental fa t . however. Similarly using holomorphi bundles and looking for an analyti moduli spa e makes no di eren e.ne moduli spa e for ve tor bundles of rank n and degree d over C . In prin iple we should allow s hemes as parametrising spa es.

1 2 1 2 1 2 2. this is the reason for the de. All ve tor bundles admit s alar multiples of the identity as automorphisms. Some problems. 1. Automorphisms reate problems for the existen e of moduli spa es.2.rst noted in a formal way by Serre.

?) remain. 2. However some bundles have dimAutE  2 and this prevents the existen e of moduli spa es.e. It was to over ome these problems that Mumford introdu ed the on ept of a stable bundle.nition of equivalen e of families given above. To avoid this we restri t attention to simple bundles. Using simple bundles over omes all lo al problems. those for whi h AutE = C  . i. an it be embedded in a proje tive spa e et . . but global problems (does M exist as a variety (or s heme) or only in some weaker sense.

r lie in the same orbit:  Embed R in PN so that G a ts linearly.  Take quotients Rss==G and Rs=G as in Le ture 1. To onstru t a moduli spa e M (n. r . deg F < deg E : rkF rkE 3. for every proper subbundle F of E . we pro eed as follows  Find a family V ! C  R in luding all stable bundles of the given rank and degree. together with an a tion of a redu tive group G (a tually P GL(p)) on R su h that Vr  Vr . we ould then de.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 5 A ve tor bundle E over C is stable if. d) for stable bundles of rank n and degree d over C . If we ould show that Rs orresponds pre isely to the stable bundles in the family V .

ne M (n. d) := Rs =G. But where is the universal bundle U ? We would like to de.

but does not a t freely on Rs .ne U := V=G. However. if we settle for F being o-representable. everything is OK and M (n. d) is de. GL(p) (or SL(p)) does a t on V . but it turns out that G = P GL(p) does not a t on V . so onstru tion of U by des ent doesn't work.

d) does have a weaker universal property whi h is suÆ ient for many purposes. If we want a proje tive quotient.ned as a oarse moduli spa e. There is no universal bundle but M (n. we must onsider Rss ==G. 4. What does this orrespond to? The obvious guess is semistable bundles (where we repla e the < in the de.

One an show that.5 and indeed was . in any family of bundles.nition of stable bundle by ). This is mu h harder than Lemma 1.1. This does indeed work but of ourse the points of the quotient no longer orrespond pre isely to orbits (see below). the subsets of stable and semistable members of the family orrespond to Zariski-open subsets of the parametrising variety. Remark 2.

The orresponden e between ve tor bundles and sheaves is fundamental to the study of ve tor bundles. 2. By onsidering lo al se tions of a ve tor bundle E (that is.3. se tions de. Let O denote the sheaf of lo al rings over C . Sheaves and ohomology.rst proved by onstru ting moduli spa es as des ribed below and using an a posteriori argument.

For our ase. thus every oherent sheaf is the dire t sum of a lo ally free sheaf and a torsion sheaf . a oherent sheaf is lo ally free if and only if it is torsion-free. This sheaf is a module over O and as su h is lo ally free. It is onventional to identify the on epts of ve tor bundle and lo ally free sheaf.and the latter is ne essarily supported on a . unlike lo ally free sheaves. these form an abelian ategory.ned over Zariski-open subsets of C ). we obtain the sheaf of se tions of E . Conversely any lo ally free sheaf determines a ve tor bundle. It is sometimes ne essary to use the bigger ategory of oherent sheaves over C . where C is a non-singular urve. and we shall do this. unique up to isomorphism.

in parti ular a sheaf of rank 0 is pre isely a torsion sheaf.nite set of points of C . Note that the on epts of rank and degree an be extended to oherent sheaves. De.

1 2 1 2 .nition.

In our ase we have just H and H . E. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. H and H are . POLAND. where H is just the spa e of global se tions. Sin e C is proje tive.6 P. 2002 The introdu tion of sheaves allows us to use sheaf ohomology.

h (K ) = g: 0 2. whi h as usual is an irredu ible non-singular proje tive urve of genus g. De. O). There is a natural duality of ve tor spa es between H (E ) and H (E  K ). (iii) If E is stable. Exer ise. then E L is stable (semistable). Stable bundles as quotient sheaves. Lemma 2.2. Prove Lemma 2. (ii) If E is stable (semistable) and L is a line bundle. 0 0 Using these theorems. 1 1 Exer ise.2. We denote by K the anoni al line bundle on C (that is. then E is simple. valid for oherent sheaves over C . We have the following fundamental results. and we write hi = dim H i. In parti ular h (E ) = h (E  K ): Serre Duality Theorem. (i) Every line bundle is stable. the dual of the tangent bundle).nite-dimensional as ve tor spa es. show that deg K = 2g 2. Riemann-Ro h Theorem. h (E ) h (E ) = d + n(1 g ): 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 Let E  denote the dual sheaf Hom(E.4. For any oherent sheaf E of rank n and degree d over C .

Prove Lemma 2. A bundle E is generated by its se tions if the evaluation map H (E ) ! Ex is surje tive for all x 2 C . or equivalently if there is an exa t sequen e 0 ! F ! O W ! E ! 0.  h ( E ) = 0.nition. Lemma 2.3. 0 Then  E is generated by its se tions. Now . Exer ise. Let E be a semistable bundle of rank n and degree d with d > n(2g 1).3. where W is a ve tor spa e.

x a line bundle O(1) of degree 1 and .

where the indu ed linear map Wr ! H (E (r)) is an isomorphism and h (E (r)) = 0. d.x n. Assuming E is semistable and writing E (r) = E O(1)r . 1 0 0 1 . we have by Lemma 2. Choose r so that d + nr > n(2g 1). So by Riemann-Ro h p := dim Wr = h (E (r)) = d + n(r + 1 g ): Note that E is a quotient of Fr = O( r) Wr .3 an exa t sequen e 0 ! G ! O W r ! E ( r ) ! 0.

We all a point q 2 Qr good if the indu ed map Wr ! H (E (r)) is an isomorphism. whi h is a proje tive s heme. 0 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 Exer ise. Prove Lemma 2. at over Qr . su h that Vq := V jC  fqg is pre isely the quotient sheaf orresponding to the point q 2 Qr . so the a tion goes down to an a tion of P GL(p) on Qr . Lemma 2.4.4. q be good points of Qr . q lie in the same orbit for the a tion of P GL(p) on Qr . Then Vq  = Vq if and only if q .) Note that. moreover s alar matri es a t trivially. (Flatness here is a te hni al ondition whi h ensures that pull-ba ks behave well.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 7 The set of all sheaf quotients of Fr of rank n and degree d gives Grothendie k's Quot s heme Qr . then GL(p) a ts on Qr . Now de. Moreover the stabiliser of Vq is AutVq =f(id)g. if we identify GL(p) with the automorphism group of Wr . Moreover there exists a universal quotient and in parti ular a sheaf V over C  Qr . Let q .

ne R := fq 2 Qr : Vq is lo ally free and q is goodg: It is easy to see that R is a Zariski-open P GL(p)-invariant subset of Qr . This ompletes the .

The next step is to embed R in PN and ompute the stability ondition. The . d).rst part of the onstru tion of M (n. 2. Computation of stability.5.

rst onstru tion for this was due to Mumford. then Vq is stable (semistable). It remains to show that the stability ondition for the a tion of SL(p) orresponds to bundle stability when restri ted to R. In fa t.5. A tually this is true only if we take r suÆ iently large. for all r  r . (ii) if q is semistable. while this a tion is not linear. the most natural one is due to Simpson using Grothendie k's onstru tion for a proje tive embedding of Qr . Simpson's method extends to torsion-free sheaves on singular urves and to sheaves of pure dimension on higher-dimensional varieties. However. There exists an integer r su h that. 0 0 . the indu ed a tion of SL(p) is. We shall not give full details here but note that one advantage of this method is that Qr is embedded as a proje tive s heme whereas R is only quasi-proje tive. then q 2 R. then q is stable (semistable). Later on Gieseker gave a somewhat di erent onstru tion whi h works also in higher dimensions. Proposition 2. The a tion of P GL(p) extends to an a tion on PN and. We an thus apply the results of Le ture 1 to onstru t a quotient for the a tion. (iii) if q 2 R is stable (semistable). (i) if Vq is stable (semistable).

5.6. the points of Qssr==SL(p) orrespond to equivalen e lasses of semistable bundles. Then Qsr =SL(p) is a oarse moduli spa e for stable bundles of rank n and degree d over C .8 P. 2002 2. Fix r  r0 . Con lusions. Any semistable sheaf E possesses a . POLAND.6. Theorem 2. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. It is quasi-proje tive and is an open subset of the proje tive variety Qss r ==SL(p). A ording to the general theory and Proposition 2. This equivalen e an be des ribed as follows. E.

ltration (the Jordan-Holder .

This .ltration) 0 = E  E  E  : : :  Em = E by subbundles Ei. where Ei =Ei is a stable bundle of rank ni and degree di with di =ni = d=n for 1  i  m.

ltration is not unique. De. but the asso iated graded obje t m M gr(E ) = Ei =Ei 0 1 2 1 1 i=1 is determined by E .

we now de.nition. Two semistable bundles E . Given this. E are S-equivalent if gr(E ) = gr(E ).

d) := Qsr =SL(Wr ). M r f(n.ne f(n. d) := Qss ==SL(Wr ): M (n. d) then orrespond to S-equivalen e lasses of semistable bundles. The points of M This ompletes the onstru tion. From the in.

we an ask whether M (n. then M (n. d) = M proje tive variety. M (n. None of this proves the most basi property of all. Finally. we dedu e  M (n. d) is a normal proje tive variety. M (n.  if M (n. M (n. d). d) is non-empty if and only if (n.  if g = 0. M f(n. d) is non-singular.  if g = 1. d) = 1 [Atiyah 1957℄. Moreover f(n. d) is non-empty if and only if n = 1. in fa t in this ase every ve tor bundle is a dire t sum of line bundles [Grothendie k 1957 in this form℄. In fa t. d) is a non-singular  if n and d are oprime.  if g  2. d. namely non-emptiness. hen e M (n. then dim M (n. d) is non-empty for all n. d) is a . d) is non-empty.nitesimal theory of Quot s hemes. d) = n (g 1) + 1.

that is whether there exists a universal bundle. M (n. d) is a .7.ne moduli spa e. Proposition 2.

1 2 1 2 2 .ne moduli spa e if and only if (n. d) = 1.

d) = 1. Le Potier. Referen es. d). and Ramanan [1973℄ showed that in this ase the universal bundle does not exist. whi h as a family is equivalent to V and on whi h P GL(p) a ts. My Tata notes. However the a tion of GL(p) does lift in su h a way that the s alar matrix I a ts by multipli ation by .7. This argument fails if (n. It turns out that. when (n. A des ent argument now gives a universal bundle on C  M (n.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 9 The problem with onstru ting a universal bundle and hen e proving this proposition is that the a tion of P GL(p) on R does not lift to the universal quotient V . We an now repla e V by V pR L. one an use V to onstru t a line bundle L on R on whi h the a tion of GL(p) lifts in su h a way that I a ts by  . d) 6= 1. 2. 1 .

M (1. We obtain a new subspa e Rd  U (n) g given by 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 Rd := f(A1 . d) using representations. 3. Ag . : : : .3. A2 . whi h is a prin ipal P U (n)-bundle. 0). not the Zariski topology. Question. Note that R does not possess a holomorphi stru ture. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. Des ription of M (n. (ii) A holomorphi ve tor bundle over C has the form E with  unitary if and only if it is a dire t sum of stable bundles of degree 0. we an identify the unitary representations of  with the points of a losed subspa e R  U (n) g . However it is diÆ ult to determine when E = E . In fa t this stru ture is an algebrai stru ture and is the same as the one des ribed in Le ture 2. POLAND. Using the generators for  .  :  ! U (n). whi h is surje tive and is an orbit spa e for the a tion of P U (n). bg : ai bi ai bi = 1i: 1 1 1 1 1 1 i=1 A representation  :  ! GL(n.1. Here we use \topology" in the sense of the usual omplex topology. but Narasimhan and Seshadri f(n. Re all that g Y  :=  (C ) = ha . [Weil℄ A holomorphi ve tor bundle over C has the form E if and only if every inde omposable summand of E has degree 0. of genus g.1.  are equivalent under the onjugation a tion of P U (n). Re all that C is an irredu ible non-singular proje tive algebrai urve over C . we have R = U (1) g = (S ) g . In the ase n = 1. : : : . In fa t. (i) If  . or equivalently a ompa t Riemann surfa e. 2002 3. in parti ular E is always 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 semistable. the onstru tion also works for families. M (1. What happens if d 6= 0? Narasimhan and Seshadri show that we an take suitable representations of an extended group. Le ture 3 { Topology of Moduli Spa es In this le ture we onsider the topology of M (n.2. Theorem 3. Weil remarked that this should be easier for unitary representations and Narasimhan and Seshadri proved Theorem 3. Theorem 3. C ) determines a ve tor bundle E with a holomorphi stru ture. 0) is just the Ja obian of C and this result is lassi al. d). E.10 P. R ! M Moreover we have a restri tion Rs ! M (n. 0). 9-14 SEPTEMBER. ag . 0) has a natural stru ture of analyti spa e and has a ertain universal proved that M property for holomorphi families of semistable bundles.2 then gives us a map f(n. Bg ) 2 U (n) g 2 : g Y i=1 Ai Bi Ai 1 Bi 1 = e 2id n I g: . then E  = E if and only if  . This goes ba k to Weil [1938℄ and was fully developed by Narasimhan and Seshadri [1965℄. hen e Corollary 3. 0)  = (S ) g . b .

if (n. In prin iple this gives a omplete topologi al des ription and one may note in parti ular f(n.4. d) Remark 3. The topologi al stru ture of M (n. d). M d and not on the holomorphi stru ture of C . d) = 1. then From this we obtain Rd ! M d s Rd = Rd . fL (n. If L is a line bundle of degree d over C . d) and Rs ! M (n.5. Of ourse.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 11 Theorem 3.2 applies with (ii) repla ed by : (ii)0 A holomorphi bundle has the form E with  2 Rd if and only if it is a dire t sum of stable bundles Ei with deg Ei = d : rkEi n f(n. we an de. d). n and Theorem 3. d) depends only on g .

M by admitting only bundles of determinant L. Note also that the determinant de. We an give topologi al des riptions of these spa es exa tly as above by repla ing U (n) by SU (n).ne ML (n. d).

d) whose .nes a morphism det : M (n. d) ! M (1.

d). with respe t to the usual topology. this is a lo ally trivial .bre over L is pre isely ML(n.

3. [Here a Bott-Morse fun tion is a di erentiable fun tion whose riti al set is a . at least in the ase (n. A natural question to ask is whether there exists a natural perfe t Bott-Morse fun tion on M (n.bration. If so. d) = 1. d). d).2. we ould give a pre ise topologi al des ription of M (n. Digression: Morse theory.

and is onstant on orbits for the onjugation a tion of P U (2). 1). sin e Ag 2 SU (2). this fun tion takes real values between 2 and 2. hen e de.nite disjoint union of submanifolds whose normal bundles have non-degenerate Hessians. Su h a fun tion is perfe t if all the di erentials in the asso iated spe tral sequen e are zero { this implies that all the homology oming from the riti al submanifolds survives in the homology of the omplete manifold without any an ellation. this question has been answered.℄ For ML(2. We an onsider the fun tion TrAg (see previous se tion).

it is simple to determine whether it is perfe t. 1). so. d). Theorem 3. However.6. [Thaddeus 2000℄ TrAg de.nes a bounded real-valued fun tion on ML (n. on e we know the homology of ML (2. it is only very re ently that an a priori proof has been given. The riti al submanifolds are easy to al ulate and it is not hard to show the fun tion is Bott-Morse. This indeed turns out to be the ase (as observed a few years ago by Je rey and Weitsman).

Homology and ohomology.3. 3.nes a perfe t Bott-Morse fun tion on ML (2. 1). Note .

0) ! M (n.rst that we have a map ML (n. L0 ) 7! E L0 : . d)  M (1. d) (E.

2002 This is an unrami. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. POLAND. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. E.12 P.

It is therefore reasonable to restri t attention to the . 0)  = (S ) g . and this group a ts trivially on the rational ohomology. d). d). Q ). Q )  = H (ML (n. so its ohomology is known. M (1. by Corollary 3. Now. this isomorphism being an isomorphism of graded algebras.ed overing with group (Z=n) g. 0). Q ) H (M (1.3. It follows that H  (M (n.

The .xed determinant ase.

Theorem 3. 1)) = (1 t )(1 t ) 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 Prove that the RHS of this formula is a polynomial of degree 6g 6 in t. (1 + t ) g t g (1 + t) g : Pt (ML (2. . 1)) := bi ti and we give this version here. Theorem 3.8.7. Harder observed that this formula ould be expressed easily in terms of the Poin are polynomial X Pt (ML (2. Q ): A few years later.7. Q ) is generated by lasses 2H . one an obtain ohomology generators. g 2 H .rst result here was a formula for the Betti numbers bi = dim H i (ML (2. [Newstead 1967. . Harder 1970℄ For g  1. [Newstead 1972℄ H  (ML (2. Using Theorem 3. 1).:::. 1).

2 H : These lasses are naturally de.

This was made more expli it by Desale (Bhosle) and Ramanan [1975℄. In the meantime Mumford had proposed a method of obtaining relations among the ohomology generators. whi h has had an enormous in uen e on subsequent developments. Next ame the fundamental paper of Atiyah and Bott [1962℄. In luded in this paper. one an obtain an additive basis for ea h H j in terms of these generators. but a detailed des ription of the relations was not lear at this stage. was a proof that H  (ML (n. d) = 1 by number-theoreti methods. Z) is torsion-free. The next major result was due to Harder and Narasimhan [1975℄. they obtained an indu tive formula for Pt (ML(n. Moreover. d). They also gave generators for this ring.7). d)) for (n. For ML(2.ned using the Chern lasses of the universal bundle (this exists by Proposition 2. 1) these relations were shown to be suÆ ient .

Instead of using ordinary ohomology. d) = (2. Indeed a mu h simpler des ription of the relations has been obtained. d) = 1. d)). 0) be ause the moduli spa es are either non- ompa t (if one uses ML (n. d). For (n. d)) fL (n. d) 6= 1. for (n. it is now better or singular (if one uses M to use something whi h takes a ount of the singularities. things are more ompli ated even in the simplest ase (n. 2 1 2 3 4 . In general.rst by Kirwan [1992℄ and then by many other people. Zagier has produ ed a ( ompli ated) expli it formula for Pt (n. for example interse tion Exer ise.

Cohomology of ML(2. We have already noted in Theorem 3.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 13 ohomology or the ohomology of a partial desingularisation. There are partial answers due to Kirwan and others.:::. 1). but as yet no really satisfa tory des ription.4. 3. 1). .8 that Hg is generated by lasses 2H . g 2 H . . We write for onvenien e Hg = H (ML (2. Q ).

2 H : In fa t these lasses are de.

1). we an write (EndU ) in terms of its Kunneth omponents: 2 1 3 2 4 2 2 (EndU ) = 2f . 1) and this bundle is determined up to tensoring by a line bundle lifted from ML (2.7. In parti ular the endomorphism bundle EndU is determined.ned in a natural way. By Proposition 2. Using the formulae for the Betti numbers. there exists a universal bundle U on C  ML (2.

e g is a symple ti basis of H (C. e g . The lasses . : : : . where f is the positive generator of H (C. Z) su h that ei ei g = f for 1  i  g and all other ei ej with i < j are 0. 4 2g X i=1 ei i . : : : . . Z) and e . i . We write also ! g g X X := 2 ei i [X ℄: i i g= 2 1 1 2 + 2 2 i=1 + i=1 Note that is independent of the hoi e of basis e .

Z) and the i generate H (C.  denote the subalgebra of H  generated by . Z). It is true however that generates H (C. . are all integer lasses. but they do not generate the integral ohomology.

g g  naturally de. and . This is in fa t a Let HI.

 has been obtained independently Re ently a very ni e form for the relations in HI. King and Newstead. Siebert and Tian. .g is pre isely the invariant subalgebra.ned subalgebra. Herrera and Salamon. Z) on Hg and HI. Moreover . Let Ig denote the ideal of relations. Z) for this a tion and is the unique (up to s alar multiples) invariant 2-form. Baranovskii. g is a symple ti basis of H (C. there is a natural a tion of Sp(2g. so that  = Q [ . : : : .g by several authors or groups of authors: Zagier.

g+2i.g g 1 2 3 Theorem 3. where h 2 Q [ . 2 3 1 2 Ig = hg .9. ℄=I : HI.. g+1 . .

℄ are determined for h  0 by 0 = 1 and h+1 = h + h2 ..

h 1 + 2h(h 1) h 2: Example.  2 = 2 + .  1 = .

 3 = 3 + 5 . .

+ 4 .  4 = 4 + 14 2.

+ 16 + 9.

2. Hen e .

E.  in HI. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. the relations redu e to .14 P. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. = Q . . POLAND. 2002  HI.

. As a step on the way to proving this. As a Q [ . = . So HI. = Q [ ℄=h i: Exer ise. = 0. . Cal ulate HI. we note that determines a primitive de omposition of the exterior algebra Hg { if we write  k := ker g k : k Hg !  g k Hg . = .10. one an prove another interesting result. For this. then g M   Hg = k Q [ ℄=h g k i: 1 2 2 3 4 4 2 3 3 +1 0 3 3 2 3 +1 0 k=0 +2 Theorem 3.

. g M k Q [ . ℄-module..

. . = = = = 0: Theorem 3. formulae in terms of asymptoti expansions of integrals have been obtained by Witten using physi al methods and proved mathemati ally by Je rey and Kirwan [1998℄. For ML (2. they are related.g (1 t g )(1 t g )(1 t g ) : (1 t )(1 t )(1 t ) This strongly suggests a result of the type of Theorem 3. for example. topology and physi s. Kiem. Interse tion numbers. Kirwan and Woolf.10 was onje tured by Mumford. an expli it formula for the interse tion numbers has been given by Thaddeus [1992℄. urrently in preparation. although the onverse is true at least in the oprime ase. Q ). Theorems 3. the relations (apart from the obvious ones) being given by = = 41 . for (n.5. Knowledge of the relations in rational ohomology is not enough to determine these numbers. The determination of interse tion numbers on moduli spa es has be ome of great importan e in questions of geometry. Of ourse.7. .  H1 = Q . ℄=I H = g 0 k=0 g k: Example. 3. A paper by Je rey.  Additively H  = Q + Q +( .  is one an dedu e that the Poin are polynomial of HI. 1). d) in interse tion ohomology and on the partial resolution of its singularities on M in the general ase. to the invariants onstru ted by Donaldson. From this theorem and Theorem 3. 1 2 1 3 2 4 3 2 1 2 3 2 1 2 +2 2 4 2 4 4 2 2 +4 6 3 3 3 4 .9.9 and 3. d) = 1. 1). )Q + Q + Q . 0) and give formulae for interse tion pairings f(n. Gromov and Seiberg and Witten. will rederive Witten's al ulations for M (2. Witten has also given formulae for M (2.10 together give the omplete stru ture of H (ML(2. More generally. 0).

VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 15 3. 184. Geometry and Physi s (Aarhus. Mar el Dekker. Referen es. Thaddeus. An introdu tion to the topology of the moduli spa e of stable bundles on a Riemann surfa e. The material in this le ture is s attered in many papers. 1995). Le ture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathemati s. .6. . 1997. but there is a very ni e a ount in  M. Vol.

every semistable bundle E of rank n and degree d is generated by its se tions. d) is irredu ible.1. by Lemma 2. where L = det E .16 P. By tensoring by a line bundle. d) is unirational. POLAND. (i) M fL (n. For simpli ity. A dimensional argument due to Serre now shows that we have an exa t sequen e 0 ! O  n ! E ! L ! 0. we restri t from now on to the ase g  2. Le ture 4 { Geometry of moduli spa es I 4. Irredu ibility and rationality.3. For . Then. 2002 4. f(n. E. whi h implies in parti ular that all the moduli spa es we onsider are non-empty. (ii) M Proof. we an suppose d > n(2g 1). 9-14 SEPTEMBER.1. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. Proposition 4.

the exa t sequen es of this type are lassi.xed L.

as L varies in M (1. d) as required for (ii). M For (i). and the universal property of the moduli spa e gives us a surje tive morphism WL ! fL (n. O n )  = H (L O n ): The semistable E orrespond to a Zariski-open subset WL of the ve tor spa e VL.ed by VL := Ext(L. we need to note that. d). the ve tor spa es VL have onstant dimension and therefore .

and we have a surje tive morphism W ! M proves (i). This semistable E is irredu ible. but no omplete answer even when (n. d).t together to form a ve tor bundle V over the irredu ible variety M (1. where L = det E . d).) The Zariski-open subset of V orresponding to f(n.3. Prove that. Proof. there have been many extensions to this result. [King/S ho. Theorem 4. where P is a universal bundle on C  M (1. d) is simply- onne ted. This is an immediate onsequen e of (ii) above. if E is a semistable bundle over C whi h is generated by its se tions. d). (As a sheaf V = R pM . The question of whether ML (n. d) = 1 until the following result was proved re ently. Sin e the 1970s. Exer ise.2.d  (P  O n ). d) = 1. The exa t sequen e used in the proof above gives the result for d  1 mod n [taking d = n(g 1) + (n 1)℄. ML (n. then there exists an exa t sequen e 0 ! O n ! E ! L ! 0. d) is a tually rational is more ompli ated. If (n. Corollary 4.

Idea of proof. d). d) ! M (h. 0) whose generi . d) is birational to M (h. 0)  P n h g . where h = (n. The theorem is proved by onstru ting a dominant rational map  : M (n.eld 1999℄ M (n.

4. d) = 1. ML (n. The onstru tion is arried out in steps. If (n. a key point being to show that ea h step preserves a ertain Brauer lass. ( 1) ( 1) 1 ( 1 (1 ( ) ( 1) 1) 1) ( 2 2 )( 1) . Corollary 4. d) is rational. this allows an indu tion giving the result.bre is rational.

VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 17 The dominant rational map onstru ted in the proof of the theorem restri ts to a dominant rational map of .

but it is diÆ ult to identify this line bundle. we pro eed di erently. d) and we shall do this. f(n. Proje tive embeddings. or equivalently a very ample line bundle. To onstru t expli it proje tive embeddings. 0) is a point. Now note that ML(1. It is somewhat fL (n. Proof.2. The . d) in Le ture 2 gives a pro4.xed determinant moduli spa es (though with di erent determinants). The onstru tion of M je tive embedding of the moduli spa e.

d)  Pi M = Z: 5 3 fL (n. 0)=i. Bhosle 1984℄. then  ML(2. given by the . It follows from the rationality of ML (n. [Ramanan 1973 for (n. d). For n  3 on hyperellipti urves. where i denotes the a tion of the hyperellipti involution embedding of M on the moduli spa e. dles) of M Theorem 4. d) = 1.6. but for M fL (2. we re all that the Pi ard group (the group of line bunfL (n. For hyperellipti urves of genus g  3. d) ! H (ML (n.5. Z). Narasimhan/Ramanan 1969℄ If g = 2. d) = 1. d) has been determined. Drezet/Narasimhan 1989 in general℄ fL (n. d) as a \determinant bundle". a similar onstru tion gives moduli for bundles with orthogonal or spin stru ture rather than the basi moduli spa es [Ramanan 1981. 1) was fL (2. 0)  M =P . d) and a standard exa t sequen e that the homomorphism : Pi ML (n. fL (2. a similar des ription for ML(2. There is a onstru tion for a generator of Pi M However. [Newstead 1968. 0) one obtains only a proje tive given by Desale and Ramanan [1976℄. the results in rank 2 are in some sense a fortuitous a ident. Before pro eeding further. when (n. 1) is an interse tion of 2 quadri s in P . we don't need this.rst result was simpler to use M Theorem 4.

We have Now let L denote the unique positive generator of Pi M Theorem 4. (ii) [Beauville 1991. is an isomorphism. 0). 1 2 2 For n  3. Laszlo 1994. (i) [Beauville 1988. fL (n. In Izadi 2001℄ For M the ex eptional ase. Moreover H (ML(n. L determines a morphism to proje tive spa e of degree 2.7. 1). L is very ample ex ept for g  3. van Geemen/ fL (2. Z)  = Z and has a natural positive generator (see se tion 3. d). Brivio/Verra 1999℄ For ML(2. Brivio/Verra 1996.4 for the ase n = 2. very little is known. C hyperellipti . d). L is very ample in all ases. .rst Chern lass. but true in general).

indeed the . 9-14 SEPTEMBER. Verlinde formulae. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. 2002 4. E. It is of interest from various points of view to obtain formulae for h (Lk ).18 P. POLAND. The numbers also arise in physi s and.3. In our ontext these numbers are related to the proje tive embeddings of the previous se tion.

The . d) = 1 and write M = ML (n. d) for onvenien e. These were the original Verlinde formulae.rst viable formulae were obtained by physi al methods. As an illustration. let us onsider the ase (n.

by Hirzebru h-Riemann-Ro h. be ause (KM ) = 2 .rst observation is that. whi h an be omputed in terms of the Chern lasses of M . Hen e. it follows that hi (Lk ) = 0 for k  0. or alternatively in terms of the . h (Lk ) = (Lk ) = ( hLk )(tdM )[M ℄ = ek (tdM )[M ℄: Here h denotes total Chern hara ter and tdM denotes the Todd lass of M . i > 0.

it is known [Newstead 1972℄ that the total Pontrjagin lass p(M ) is given by p(M ) = (1 + . In the ase n = 2. d = 1.rst Chern lass and the Pontrjagin lasses.

) g (for the meaning of .

see se tion 3. . We an then express tdM formally as p.4).

=2  g  tdM = e sinh(p.

=2) : So p.

=2  g  k k p h (L ) = e [M ℄: sinh( .

this an be al ulated and we an obtain an expression k X ( 1)j k g : h (L ) = (k + 1) j  g sin j k 0 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 ( +1) 2 +1 0 +1 1 2 =1 Exer ise. Torelli theorems. It is however somewhat surprising that ML (n. J has additional stru ture . ) determines C . determined up to translation. For any C . d) = 1. (n.4.8. d) (perhaps with some added stru ture) should determine C . Then ML (n.=2) Sin e the interse tion numbers of M are known.there is a divisor  on J . Theorem 4. d) determines C . There is nothing remarkable in onje turing that M (n. d) ! J . However. sin e we have a surje tive morphism M (n. 4. [Mumford/Newstead 1968 for n = 2. (n. the Ja obian J = M (1. 2 2 +2 Prove that the RHS of this expression is an integer. 0) is an abelian variety. Now suppose n  2. 0 . d) determines C . d) = 1. The lassi al theorem of Torelli states that the pair (J. although in a sense this is true \generi ally". Tyurin 1970 in general℄ Suppose n  2. It is not true that J determines C . with h () = 1. Su h a divisor is alled a prin ipal polarisation.

d)).VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 19 We use the intermediate Ja obian J asso iated with H (ML (n. There are a tually two de.

Referen e. d). d). S ho. D. d) is unirational. but these oin ide be ause H . 4. The key referen e for rationality is  A. )  = (J. One shows that (J . = 0 sin e ML (n.nitions of this (due to Weil and GriÆths). ) by using the 13 omponent of the se ond Chern lass of the universal bundle on C  ML(n.5. J possesses a prin ipal polarisation  determined by ML (n. King and A.

Rationality of moduli of ve tor bundles on urves. S.eld. Math. 2 03 2 2 3 . N. 519-535.. Indag. Idea of proof. 10 (1999)..

20 P. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. we onsider two ways in whi h the moduli spa es an be strati. 2002 5. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. Le ture 5 { Geometry II Stratifi ations In this le ture. E. POLAND.

Theorem 5. Every ve tor bundle E of rank 2 over C possesses a line subbundle L su h that deg(E=L) deg L  g: De.ed. Any ve tor bundle E then determines a ruled surfa e P(E ) { these have been studied sin e the 19th entury. 5. First suppose n = 2. This theorem was forgotten and was reproved by Nagata [1970℄ in terms of bundles.1. One an show that the self-interse tion number of  is given by : = deg(E=L) deg L: Corrado Segre proved in the 1880s that every ruled surfa e has a dire trix urve  su h that :  g. Maximal subbundles. A line subbundle of E determines a se tion (or dire trix urve)  of P(E ).1.

d) in the Zariski topology and de. s(E ) := min (deg(E=L) deg L) LE U (s) := fE 2 M (2. The subsets U (s) are lo ally losed in M (2. d) : s(E ) = sg: The line bundles L  E su h that deg(E=L) deg L = s(E ) are alled maximal subbundles of E .nition.

ne a strati.

ation of M (2. d) { the Segre strati.

the non-trivial extensions of the above form an be parametrised by a variety of dimension g + g + h (L0 L) 1 = s + 3g 2: This proves that dim U (s)  s + 3g 2.2. h (L0 L) = s + g 1 when s > 0. By Riemann-Ro h. On e we have Theorem 5. it shows also that the general bundle in E 2 U (s) has . if we identify s alar multiples. Then U (s) is non-empty and irredu ible of dimension  s + 3g 2 if 0 < s < g  4g 3 if s = g.2. It follows that. [Lange/Narasimhan 1983℄ Let 0 < s  g and s  d mod 2. Remark 5. Note that E stable . ation. Note that points of U (s) ome from exa t sequen es 0 ! L ! E ! L0 ! 0 with deg L0 deg L = s. s(E ) > 0 s(E )  d mod 2: Theorem 5. In parti ular U (g 1) or U (g ) is the unique open stratum.3.

nitely many maximal subbundles. By more re.

ned arguments. 1 1 . one an show  for s < g 1. the general bundle E 2 U (s) has a unique maximal subbundle.

De. Now onsider general n.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 21  for s = g 1. the general E has 2g maximal subbundles { this an be proved using the Porteous formula and interse tion theory [Lange 1985℄.

We de. Let 0 < r < n.nition.

ne sr (E ) := min (r deg(E=E 0 ) (n r) deg E 0 ) E E. For . [Mukai/Sakai 1985℄ sr (E )  r(n r)g . E r 0 rk 0 = Ur (s) := fE 2 M (n. d) : sr (E ) = sg: Note that E is stable (semistable) if and only if sr (E ) > 0 (sr (E )  0) for all r. We have the following generalisation of the theorem of Segre and Nagata. 1  r  n 1.4. Theorem 5.

xed r. the sets Ur (s) de.

ne a strati.

 for s = r(n r)(g 1). Moreover sr (E )  rd mod n: Unless r = 1 or r = n 1. the general bundle E 2 Ur (s) has a unique maximal subbundle E 0 { moreover E 0 and E=E 0 are both stable. this is not suÆ ient to determine the maximal value of sr (E ). the general E has .5. Russo/Teixidor 1999℄ Let 0 < s  r(n r)(g 1) + n 1 and s  rd mod n. one an show that. d). ation of M (n. following Lange [1983℄.By a dimensional ount. d). Remark 5. for general E 2 M (n. As in rank 2.6. Then Ur (s) is non-empty and irredu ible of dimension  s + (n + r nr)(g 1) + 1 if s  r(n r)(g 1)  n (g 1) + 1 if s > r(n r)(g 1). sr (E )  r(n r)(g 1). proved that sr (E )  r(n r)(g 1) + " with 0  " < n: Theorem 5. one an show  for s < r(n r)(g 1). [Lange/Brambila-Paz 1998. However Hirs howitz [1986℄.

deg E 0) = 1 and Holla [2002℄ in general). in general.2. these numbers are a form of Gromov-Witten invariant. Lange/Newstead [2002℄ for (r. Okonek/Teleman [2001℄ for r = 1. Brill-Noether theory. For r = 1. the number is ng and. both E 0 and E=E 0 are stable { again this number an be omputed using the Porteous formula and interse tion theory (see Oxbury [2000℄. Another strati. 5.nitely many maximal subbundles and. if E 0 is any one of these.

ation of M (n. d) is given by de.

d. k) is usually denoted by k . (In the literature. d. 0) = M (n. k). but the notation used here is preferable. k) are Zariski- losed in M (n. d. d. d) : h (E )  kg: Obviously B (n. d) with B (n. d. d). k) := fE 2 M (n. for k  0. B (n. Moreover the B (n. B (n.ning. d. k + 1)  B (n.d 2 2 2 0 1 .) Wn.

GriÆths/Harris.22 P. Kleiman/Laksov. Modern versions had to wait until the 1970s and 1980s [Kempf. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. Gieseker. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. the study of these subvarieties was started by Brill and Noether in the 1870s. Eisenbud/Harris℄. E. Fulton/Lazarsfeld. POLAND. The main results an be expressed in terms of the Brill-Noether number . 2002 For n = 1.

d. d. (1. k) has dimension  . k) = g k(k d + g 1): Every irredu ible omponent of B (1.

(1. k) and we have (i) if . d.

then B (1. (ii) if . (1. d.. d. k) 6= . k)  0.

d. d. (1. (iii) for C generi . B (1. k) > 0. k) is onne ted. d. k) has dimension . then B (1.

d. k) is irredu ible whenever . (1. d). d. k) whenever it is nonempty and 6= M (1. (iv) for C generi . B (1.

k) 6= M (1. The in. d. d). k) > 0. (v) for C generi and B (1. d. SingB (1. d. (1. k + 1). d. k) = B (1.

d. d.7. k) is non-singular of dimension . d. Proposition 5.nitesimal study of B (1. the okernel of this map is isomorphi to the dual of the Zariski tangent spa e to B (1. k) at L. k) is governed by the multipli ation or Petri map H (L) H (L K ) ! H (K ): If deg L = d and h (L) = k. B (1.

Sundaram 1987. d. (1. For general n. k) at L if and only if 0 0 0 0 the Petri map is inje tive. work started in the mid 1980s [Hirs howitz 1986. Laumon 1991℄ followed by more extensive results in the 1990s and beyond. Prove Proposition 5.7. Here the Brill-Noether number is given by .

(n. d. d. k) = n (g 1) + 1 k(k d + n(g 1)) and the Petri map by H (E ) H (E  K ) ! H (E E  K ): It remains true that every omponent of B (n. k) has dimension  .

Mer at. the best general referen e (though not now ompletely up to date) is  V. For Brill-Noether theory. k) and the analogue of Proposition 5. Referen e. There is no generally a essible introdu tion to maximal subbundles. There are now many results but no lear overall pi ture.3. http://www.jussieu.bnt. 2 0 0 0 . d.html Exer ise. (n. Le probleme de Brill-Noether: presentation.7 holds.fr/presentation.math. 5. one needs to study the original papers. However the analogues of statements (i)-(v) an all be false.

In pra ti e. 6. In the 1960s it was developed by various authors. In this last le ture. we have been on erned almost entirely with the global theory with only brief referen es to lo al properties (for example. that is giving a ni e stru ture to he set of all possible deformations of X . s ). In previous le tures. M. with major ontributions from Grothendie k's theory of s hemes.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 6. 23 Le ture 6 { Deformations In a sense the terms deformations and moduli mean the same thing. smooth in the neighbourhood of s . the theory of moduli on erns the global theory. we mean a proper morphism f : X ! S . su h that f (s ) = X . Artin and S hlessinger.1. Isomorphism of deformations is de. the non-singularity of M (n. prin ipally Kuranishi. d)). By a deformation of X parametrised by (S. First let X be a non-singular proje tive variety. Basi ideas. while deformation theory on erns the lo al theory in the neighbourhood of X . Deformation theory began with a fundamental series of papers by Kodaira and Spen er in the 1950s in a omplex analyti ontext. where s is a point of the variety S . given some obje t X in algebrai geometry. we shall onsider the lo al theory.

ned in a lo al sense. meaning isomorphism in the neighbourhood of s . De.

nition. The in.

1. H (T X ) an be identi. If we allow the parametrising variety to be ome a s heme.nitesimal deformation spa e of X is the sheaf ohomology group H (T X ). where T X denotes the tangent bundle of X . this has a simple interpretation. Remark 6.

ed with the set of isomorphism lasses of deformations of X parametrised by the s heme Spe C [℄ where  = 0. Now suppose we have any deformation of X parametrised by (S. s ). It is then easy to see that we have a anoni al linear map T Ss ! H (T X ) from the Zariski tangent spa e of S at s to the in.

nitesimal deformation spa e of X . This map is alled the in.

If S is non-singular and f : X ! S is everywhere smooth.nitesimal deformation map. there is a global version of this map. where T Xf denotes the tangent bundle along the . namely a map of sheaves T S ! R f (T Xf ).

bres of f . This parametrises a deformation of X with a suitable lo al universal property. m ). for whi h in parti ular the in. A fundamental theorem of Kuranishi asserts that X possesses a lo al moduli spa e (M.

2.nitesimal deformation map is an isomorphism. (ii) The elements of H (T X ) are the in. providing possible obstru tions to the non-singularity of M at m . Remark 6. (i) The spa e H (T X ) is an \obstru tion spa e". then M is non-singular at m . if H (T X ) = 0. In parti ular.

nitesimal automorphisms of X . If H (T X ) = 0. the automorphism group of X is dis rete (and frequently .

but there an exist non-trivial automorphisms. It follows that the lo al moduli spa e need not be inje tively parametrised even when H (T X ) = 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .nite).

then H (T C ) = 0. if C is a non-singular proje tive urve. 2002 Of ourse. Moreover T C = K has degree 2 2g . a urve of genus g possesses 3g 3 moduli. In other words. a fa t .24 P. For g  2. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN. Hen e Theorem 6.3. it follows that H (T C ) = 0 and we an al ulate h (T C ) using Riemann-Ro h. E. the lo al moduli spa e of C is non-singular at C and has dimension h (T C ) = 3g 3. 9-14 SEPTEMBER. POLAND. For g  2.

if E is a oherent sheaf. we an de. Indeed.rst asserted by Riemann. Deformations of ve tor bundles. 6. There is a similar (in some ways simpler) theory for deformations of ve tor bundles.2.

ne its in.

For (n. if E is stable. d)E is anoni ally isomorphi to H (EndE ). d) 6= 1. this spa e is isomorphi to H (EndE ). There is again a global version of this. In parti ular. So in this ase the lo al moduli spa e is always non-singular. d) is the natural proje tion. d) = 1. where EndE denotes the bundle of endomorphisms of E . the global moduli spa e M (n.5. d) is anoni ally isomorphi to R pM  (EndU ). d) ! M (n. whi h is 0 when the base spa e is a urve. The tangent spa e T M (n. even though U does not exist when (n. and we have Corollary 6. where pM : C  M (n.4. The obstru tion spa e is H (EndE ). EndU does exist. d) is non-singular of dimension n (g 1) + 1. d) is a lo al moduli spa e at E and we have Theorem 6. d) and hen e a bundle EndU . E ). In fa t.nitesimal deformation spa e as Ext (E. M (n. The tangent bundle T M (n. when E is a ve tor bundle (lo ally free sheaf). we have a universal bundle U on C  M (n. Note here that R pM (EndU ) is de. In fa t.

d). For any x 2 C . We an now state the key theorem of Narasimhan and Ramanan in the following slightly modi. We suppose here that g  2 and let U denote the universal bundle on C  ML (n. Narasimhan and Ramanan [1975℄ showed that.ned as a sheaf. We an onsider U as a family of bundles on ML (n. d) parametrised by C . d) exa tly opy those of the urve C . but in this ase it is lo ally free and an therefore be regarded as a bundle. deformations of ML (n. we write Ux = U jfxg  ML(n. d). In a very interesting paper. d) = 1 and L is a line bundle of degree d. 6. when (n. Deformations of moduli spa es.3.

ed form (in parti ular we have globalised the statement (i)). Theorem 6.6. (i) The in.

(ii) For any x 2 C . .nitesimal deformation map T C ! R pC  (EndU ) 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 is an inje tive map of ve tor bundles.

(b) h (EndUx) = 1.7. n = 2. ex ept possibly when g = 2. Narasimhan and Ramanan dedu e Theorem 6. together with a vanishing theorem of Akizuki and Nakano and the Leray spe tral sequen e. ex ept possibly when g = 2. 3 or g = 3. From this. (i) The group of automorphisms of ML (n.VECTOR BUNDLES ON ALGEBRAIC CURVES 25 (a) h (EndUx) = 1. n = 2. ( ) h (EndUx) = 0. d) is . n = 2.

3.8. A tually there is an ex eptional ase g = 2. (iii) h (T ML(n. Remark 6. we see that the in. i (ii) h (T ML(n. but this was proved a little later by the same authors using a di erent method. d)) = 0 for i 6= 1. If we now ompare this result with Theorem 6. d)) = 3g 3. n = 3 in (iii).nite.

Let us suppose that (n.7 gives an isomorphism between these spa es and one an show that the lo al moduli spa es for these varieties are isomorphi . d). Then   (i) Hom(WL(E ). d). it follows that h (E F ) = 0 for all F 2 ML (n. 3. Pi ard bundles. Let E. n = 2. Theorem 6. Our obje t is to study the deformations of WL (E ). WL(E )) = 0C ifif EE 6== EE ex ept possibly when g = 3. Let (n. Brambila-Paz and Newstead. d). For line bundles. g = 4. whi h is still under investigation. (iii) h (EndWL(E )) = 0 ex ept possibly when g = 3. (ii) h (EndWL(E )) = n0 (g 1) + 1 ex ept possibly when g = 3. Note that (ii) tells us that the in. the ve tor bundle ase. d0 ).4. In fa t the proof of Theorem 6. d). Hen e the dire t image pM (U pC E ) is a lo ally free sheaf on ML (n. We write WL (E ) = pM  (U pC E ) and refer to WL(E ) as a Pi ard bundle. Let E 2 M (n0 . n = 2. In Theorem 6. is due to Biswas. 4. n = 2. E . we looked at deformations of the tangent bundle of ML(n. n = 2.9. n = 2 or g = 5.nitesimal deformation spa es of C and ML(n. g  3 and nd0 + n0 d > nn0 (2g 2). 3 or g = 4. d) = 1 and that U is a universal bundle on C  ML (n. This gives a lo al version of the Torelli theorem of Le ture 4. d) = 1. n = 2. d0) and suppose that nd0 + n0 d > nn0 (2g 2): Under these onditions. Here we shall dis uss deformations of ertain other bundles on the moduli spa e. d) both have dimension 3g 3.7. E 2 M (n0 . this is due independently to Kempf and Mukai in the late 1970s. 6.

at least if 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 .nitesimal deformation spa e of WL(E ) has the same dimension as the moduli spa e to whi h E belongs. This suggests that.

d0) should a t as a moduli spa e for the bundles WL(E ) on ML (n. 6. He ke transformations. This is enough to assert that M (n0 . d0) = 1. POLAND. mu h more is known (due to Kempf and Mukai). In the ase n = n0 = 1. d). and in general there are many possible extensions of Theorem 6.9 to onsider. We will . d0 ) is a lo al moduli spa e for every WL (E ). 9-14 SEPTEMBER. M (n0 . but in general we know only that WL(E ) is simple (by (i)). 2002 (n0.5. This an be proved if all WL (E ) are stable (whi h is true for example if n0 = 1).26 P. E. NEWSTEAD LUKE  CIN.

nish by hinting at one of the ingredients for the proofs of Theorems 6. d) = 1. The idea is as follows. x 2 C and onsider Ux as above. Let (n.9. but the method indi ated here (due to Narasimhan and Ramanan) has been used in other ontexts and seems to be of some interest.6 and 6. A point of P(Ux ) onsists of a stable bundle E and a line in the . d). It should be noted that other approa hes are possible and may give stronger results. We onsider the proje tive bundle P(Ux ) over ML(n.

or equivalently an exa t sequen e 0 ! E ! F ! C x ! 0.bre Ex . where F is a ve tor bundle and C x is the torsion sheaf supported at x with .

bre C . d + 1): This map is not everywhere de. The bundles F form a family of bundles. of determinant L(x). so we have a rational map : P(Ux ) ! ML x (n. parametrised by P(Ux ).

However. d + 1).ned sin e F need not be stable. then (Z ) is again an open subset of P(Ux ) and : (Z ) ! Z is a . if we restri t to a ertain open subset Z of ML x (n.

bration with .

bre a proje tive spa e. This .

bration and the proje tion of P(Ux ) onto ML(n. d) both have good ohomologi al properties. this only works if the omplement of (Z ) in P(Ux ) has suÆ iently high odimension. In parti ular. This odimension depends on g and n and is the reason for the ex eptional ases in the theorems. and this enables us to transport ohomology groups a ross this orresponden e and hen e sometimes to al ulate them. this method seems to be in apable of proving the following onje ture. However. with whi h we .

Seshadri. .9. Ramanan. of Symposia in Pure Mathemati s. S.6. Theory of moduli. Ann. With the notation of Theorem 6.263-304. XXIX. Vol. hi (EndWL (E )) = 0 for all i  2: 6. Referen es. of Math. AMS. Deformations of the moduli spa e of ve tor bundles over an algebrai urve. The key referen e for se tion 6. pp. A good referen e for deformations is  C. 391-417. S.3 is  M. 101 (1975).10.nish. Narasimhan and S. ( ) 1 ( ) 1 1 Conje ture 6. 1975. Pro .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful