Cambridge Math

MODULI SPACES OF FILTERED (STOKES) G-LOCAL SYSTEMS ON CURVES
PENGFEI HUANG AND HAO SUN

arXiv:2304.09999v1 [math.AG] 19 Apr 2023
Abstract. In this paper, we construct the moduli spaces of filtered (Stokes) G-local systems on
curves for an arbitrary reductive group G over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. This
provides an algebraic construction for the Betti moduli spaces in the tame/wild nonabelian Hodge
correspondence for vector bundles/principal bundles on noncompact curves. As a direct application,
the tame nonabelian Hodge correspondence on noncompact curves holds not only for the relevant
categories, but also for the moduli spaces.
1. Introduction
1.1. Background. The celebrated nonabelian Hodge correspondence (NAHC) on a smooth projective
variety over C establishes a connection among three types of objects on the variety: Higgs bundles,
DX -modules, and local systems [Sim92, Sim94a, Sim94b]. This correspondence holds not only for the
relevant categories, but also for the moduli spaces. For the noncompact (quasi-projective) case, by
introducing extra structures that capture the asymptotic behaviour of local sections near the divisors,
these three types of objects were generalized by Simpson into: filtered regular Higgs bundles, filtered
regular DX -modules and filtered local systems respectively, and thus the tame NAHC for vector
bundles on noncompact curves was established with the help of tame harmonic bundles [Sim90]. This
correspondence is only given as an equivalence of the corresponding categories due to the lack of
constructions of the corresponding moduli spaces. By now, the moduli spaces of filtered Higgs bundles
(Dolbeault moduli spaces) and filtered DX -modules (de Rham moduli spaces) have been constructed
in numerous references (see [Alf17, BY96, Ina13, Kon93, Sun20, Yok93], for instance). However, a
construction of the moduli space of filtered local systems (Betti moduli spaces) is still missing (see
[Sim97, §1]). Moreover, since the stability of filtered local systems is not equivalent to the irreducibility
of the corresponding representations of the fundamental group of the noncompact curve, the results in
[Ric88] cannot be applied directly to this situation. Therefore, we need a new approach to construct
the Betti moduli spaces in the noncompact case. On the other hand, when dealing with principal
bundles, Simpson’s filtered structures (also called parabolic structures) are not enough to produce a
satisfactory complete correspondence. This obstacle was overcame recently by the authors of [HKSZ22]
via parahoric torsors under the language of parahoric Bruhat–Tits group schemes, where a complete
tame NAHC for principal bundles on noncompact curves was established for both categories and
moduli spaces. For the part on the Riemann–Hilbert correspondence, they proved that the moduli
problems of logarithmic parahoric connections (de Rham side) and filtered G-local systems (Betti side)
are equivalent, but did not construct the Betti moduli space (moduli space of filtered G-local systems)
directly.
In comparison to the tame case, there is a more general situation, called the wild case, by allowing
the singularities of the Higgs fields and connections to be of higher order. This wild case for vector
bundles was studied by Biquard–Boalch and a wild NAHC for vector bundles on noncompact curves was
established [BB04]. Going further to the case of principal bundles, recently the authors established
the (unramified) wild NAHC at the level of categories for principal bundles on noncompact curves
(under some good conditions) [HS22], which contains Biquard–Boalch’s result as a special case. On
∗
Key words: filtered local system, quiver representation, Betti moduli space, nonabelian Hodge correspondence
†
MSC2020: 14D22, 14D25, 16G10
1
2 PENGFEI HUANG AND HAO SUN
the Betti side, the stability condition on filtered Stokes G-local systems is similar to the one for
filtered G-local systems considered in [HKSZ22], which is given inspired by Ramanathan’s stability
condition [Ram75, Ram96a]. As in the tame case, the stability of filtered Stokes G-local systems is
not equivalent to the irreducibility of the corresponding Stokes G-representations of the fundamental
groupoid of the irregular curve. Therefore, the wild character varieties considered in [DDP18, HMW19]
are only a special case (by taking trivial weights) of the moduli spaces of filtered Stokes G-local systems
on the Betti side of the wild NAHC for principal bundles, of which points correspond to irreducible
representations (see [Boa14, Theorem 9.3]).
The goal of this paper is to construct the Betti moduli spaces involved in the tame/wild NAHC
for vector/principal bundles on noncompact curves. As a direct application, the tame NAHC on
noncompact curves holds for moduli spaces [Sim90, HKSZ22].
1.2. Main Results. In this paper, we always assume that k is an algebraically closed field of char-
acteristic zero, and X is a smooth projective algebraic curve with genus g over k. Let D be a set of
distinct points in X. Denote by XD := X\D the noncompact curve.
In §3, we construct the moduli space of degree zero filtered local systems. It is well-known that
representations of the fundamental group π1 (X) can be regarded as representations of some special
quiver. Therefore, local systems on X are related to quiver representations (see §2.4). For the noncom-
pact case, we are considering filtered local systems on XD , which are local systems on XD equipped
with parabolic structures for each x ∈ D (Definition 3.6). Roughly speaking, a parabolic structure is
a weighted filtration, and the type of filtrations is a parabolic subgroup regarded as the automorphism
group of the filtration and the weights are rational numbers. Denote by P (resp. θ) a set of parabolic
subgroups (resp. weights) indexed by D. Although there are many methods to construct a quiver
such that the quiver representations correspond to fundamental group representations, the key point
is that the correspondence should also preserve the stability conditions of Definition 2.1 and Defini-
tion 3.10. Note, however, that the equivalence between these stability conditions is not guaranteed
for any construction of a quiver (see for instance the counterexample provided in Remark 3.23). In
Construction 3.13, we construct a quiver Q D such that the orbits in the (quiver) representation space
R(Q D , I D , P ) are in one-to-one correspondence with the isomorphism classes of filtered local systems
of type P (Proposition 3.15). Inspired by King’s work [Kin94], with a good choice of the character χθ
(Construction 3.20), we prove that the stability of filtered local systems of type P is equivalent to the
χθ -stability of the corresponding point in R(Q D , I D , P ) (Proposition 3.21). Finally, applying the
geometric invariant theory, we construct the moduli space of degree zero filtered local systems.
Theorem 1.1 (Theorem 3.27). There exists a quasi-projective variety MB (XD , P , θ) as the coarse
moduli space of degree zero semistable filtered local systems of type P with weights θ. There exists an
open subset MsB (XD , P , θ), of which points correspond to isomorphism classes of degree zero stable
filtered local systems of type P with weights θ.
We refer the reader to Theorem 3.27 for a precise statement. Since the stability condition of filtered
local systems we consider (Definition 3.10) is the one given by Simpson [Sim90], the moduli space
MB (XD , P , θ) is the Betti moduli space in the tame NAHC for vector bundles on noncompact curves,
where the subscript “B” is for “Betti”.
In §4, we use a similar approach as we did in §3 to construct the moduli space of degree zero filtered
G-local systems. The main result is given as follows:
Theorem 1.2 (Theorem 4.11). There exists a quasi-projective variety MB (XD , G, θ) as the coarse
moduli space of degree zero R-semistable θ-filtered G-local systems. There exists an open subset
MsB (XD , G, θ), of which points correspond to isomorphism classes of degree zero R-stable θ-filtered
G-local systems.
The stability condition for filtered G-local systems (Definition 4.4) follows from that of principal
bundles given by Ramanathan [Ram75, Ram96a, Ram96b], which is called the R-stability condition in
this paper. When G = GLn (k), the R-stability condition of filtered local systems is equivalent to the
MODULI SPACES OF FILTERED (STOKES) G-LOCAL SYSTEMS ON CURVES 3
usual slope stability (Definition 3.10). Moreover, the R-stability condition is the one the authors used
to establish the tame NAHC for principal bundles on noncompact curves [HKSZ22].
In §5, we move to filtered Stokes G-local systems. It is well-known that Stokes G-local systems
can be regarded as representations of fundamental groupoids of irregular curves [Boa14]. Keeping this
result in mind, we fix a collection of irregular types Q indexed by D, and construct a new quiver
Q Q (Construction 5.2) such that the representations of this quiver correspond to filtered Stokes G-
local systems on XQ (Proposition 5.3), where XQ is an irregular curve given by Q [Boa14, §8]. The
idea of the construction of the quiver Q Q comes from the structure of the fundamental groupoid of
the irregular curve XQ (see §5.1). Then, we define the stability condition for filtered Stokes G-local
systems, which is similar to that of filtered G-local systems (Definition 5.4) and is also called the
R-stability condition. With the same approach as in §4, we construct the moduli space of degree zero
filtered Stokes G-local systems.
Theorem 1.3 (Theorem 5.8). There exists a quasi-projective variety MB (XQ , G, θ) as the coarse
moduli space of degree zero R-semistable θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems on XQ . Furthermore, there
exists an open subset MsB (XQ , G, θ), of which points correspond to isomorphism classes of degree zero
R-stable θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems on XQ .
In order to obtain a general wild NAHC ([HS22]), one has to treat the Betti side (and hence
Dolbeault and de Rham sides) by considering general weights, rather than just trivial weights. As
shown by the above theorem, in this case the associated Betti moduli spaces are not affine in general
(see also [Boa21, Remark 13.2]). However, when the weights are trivial, these moduli spaces become
affine (see Example 5.9), which is exactly the case of the wild character varieties mentioned above.
1.3. Applications and Remarks. Generally speaking, Theorem 1.1 gives the existence of the moduli
space of degree zero filtered local systems. By a similar technique as Simpson’s in [Sim94a, Sim94b],
one can see that the tame NAHC on noncompact curves given in [Sim90, Theorem, p. 718] also holds
at the level of moduli spaces. The same argument holds for the Betti moduli space in the tame NAHC
for principal bundles on noncompact curves [HKSZ22] with respect to Theorem 4.11. Since the result
for principal bundles contains Simpson’s result as a special case, we only give the construction of the
Betti moduli spaces for principal bundles appearing in the statement of the tame NAHC for principal
bundles in §6 (see Theorem 6.1 or [HKSZ22, Theorem 1.1]). When we consider the Betti moduli spaces
in the tame/wild NAHC on noncompact curves, we have to fix the data of monodromies/residues at
punctures in order to get a one-to-one correspondence. Let γ be a collection of weights. Fixing a
collection of the data of monodromies Mγ , we construct the Betti moduli spaces MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ),
whose points correspond to degree zero R-semistable γ-filtered G-local systems with monodromies Mγ
(Theorem 6.2), which gives a direct construction of the Betti moduli space in the tame NAHC for
principal bundles on noncompact curves. For the wild case, the Betti moduli space can be constructed
in the same way as in §6.1 with respect to Theorem 5.8. However, since we could not find a reference
for an algebraic construction of the de Rham and Dolbeault moduli spaces for principal bundles in the
wild case, the moduli version of the wild NAHC for principal bundles is still missing.
In §6.2, we construct a scheme Mon(D, Lγ ) for monodromies, where Lγx is the Levi subgroup of
the parabolic subgroup Pγx . This scheme Mon(D, Lγ ) is called the monodromy scheme (Definition
6.5). There is a natural morphism
πγ : MB (XD , G, γ) → Mon(D, Lγ )
such that the fiber πγ−1 ([Mγ ]) is isomorphic to the Betti moduli space MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ), where
Mγ is a collection of monodromies and [Mγ ] is the correponding point in Mon(D, Lγ ). Thus, the
fiber πγ−1 ([Mγ ]) is homeomorphic to the corresponding de Rham and Dolbeault moduli spaces (see
Proposition 6.6).
In this paper, the weights of filtered local systems are always assumed to be rational because we
follow King’s approach to give the construction of moduli spaces. If we take real weights, we cannot
associate it with a well-defined character (see Construction 3.20 and §4.2). However, given a collection
of real weights θ, we can always find a collection of “nearby” rational weights θ′ such that the parabolic
subgroups are the same Pθx = Pθx′ and the stability conditions for θ′ -filtered and θ-filtered (Stokes)
G-local systems are equivalent. Thus, the moduli space of θ′ -filtered (Stokes) G-local systems can be
regarded as that of θ-filtered (Stokes) G-local systems. This approach of dealing with real weights is
also considered in [BBP17].
Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank Andres Fernandez Herrero, Georgios Kydon-
akis, Carlos Simpson, Tao Su, Szilárd Szabó and Lutian Zhao for helpful discussions and their interest
in this work, especially Georgios Kydonakis for his very helpful comments and suggestions on a very
early version of this paper. Pengfei Huang would like to express the deep gratitude to Institut des
Hautes Études Scientifiques for kind hospitality during the preparation of this paper, and acknowledges
funding by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) – Project-ID
281071066 – TRR 191. Hao Sun is partially supported by National Key R&D Program of China (No.
2022YFA1006600).
2. Preliminaries
We briefly review the numerical criterion for quiver representations given in [Kin94], which will be
applied to construct the moduli spaces considered in this paper, and then the definition and some
properties of quiver representations, of which good references are [ASS06, Rei08]. Finally, in §2.4, we
construct a quiver such that fundamental group representations can be regarded as representations of
this quiver. Thus, local systems are related to quiver representations.
2.1. Numerical Criterion. In this subsection, we review the numerical criterion given in [Kin94,
§2], which is an application of the famous Mumford’s numerical criterion in geometric invariant theory
(GIT) [MFK94, Chapter 2]. Let R be a smooth affine variety over k. Let G be a connected reductive
group over k, and there is a G-action on R. Denote by ∆ the kernel of this action. Let L be the trivial
line bundle on R. A G-linearization of L is given by a character χ of G in this case. Moreover, as a
trivial line bundle on R, a function in k[R] is regarded as a section of L. Given a character χ of G, a
function f (x) ∈ k[R] is a relative invariant of weight χn , if
f (g · x) = χn (g)f (x),
i
where n is a non-negative integer. Denote by k[R]G,χ the subset of relative invariants of weight χi .
i j i+j L i
If f ∈ k[R]G,χ and g ∈ k[R]G,χ , then f · g ∈ k[R]G,χ . Thus, k[R]G,χ has a natural graded
i≥0
structure. Denote by
M i

R//(G, χ) := Proj k[R]G,χ .
i≥0
0
The quotient R//(G, χ) is known as the GIT quotient, and it is a scheme projective over k[R]G,χ =
k[R]G . If k[R]G ∼
= k, then R//(G, χ) is a projective variety (over k). Now we consider the stability
condition by Mumford:
n
Definition 2.1. A point x ∈ R is χ-semistable, if there is a relative invariant f ∈ k[R]G,χ for n ≥ 1
such that f (x) 6= 0. It is χ-stable, if it is χ-semistable, dim(G · x) = dim G/∆, and the G-action on
the set {x ∈ R | f (x) 6= 0} is closed.
There is a natural pairing
h·, ·i : Hom(Gm , G) × Hom(G, Gm ) → Z
of cocharacters and characters, such that hµ, χi = n if χ(µ(t)) = tn . Note that this pairing can be
defined over rational coefficients. As an application of Mumford’s numerical criterion, we have the
following result to determine the stability:
Proposition 2.2 (Proposition 2.5 in [Kin94]). A point x ∈ R is χ-semistable if and only if χ(∆) = {1}
and given any cocharacter µ of G, if lim µ(t) · x exists, then hµ, χi ≥ 0. A point x ∈ R is χ-stable if
t→0
and only if the cocharacters µ, for which lim µ(t) · x exists and hµ, χi = 0, are with values in ∆.
t→0
(s)s
Denote by Rχ ⊆ R the open subset of χ-(semi)stable points. The points in R//(G, χ) are in
one-to-one correspondence with equivalence classes of points in Rχss , where the equivalence of points
in Rχss is given as follows: x ∼ y if G · x ∩ G · y ∩ Rχss 6= ∅. This equivalence is called the GIT
equivalence.
Proposition 2.3 (Proposition 2.6 in [Kin94]). Let x, y ∈ Rχss be two points. An orbit G · x is closed
in Rχss if and only if when the limit lim µ(t) · x exists for any cocharacter µ of G satisfying hµ, χi = 0,
t→0
the limit lim µ(t) · x is in the orbit G · x. Furthermore, x ∼ y if and only if there are cocharacters µ1
t→0
and µ2 such that hµ1 , χi = hµ2 , χi = 0 and the limits lim µ1 (t) · x and lim µ2 (t) · y are in the same
t→0 t→0
closed G-orbit.
Proposition 2.2 and 2.3 will be used later to construct the moduli spaces of filtered (Stokes) G-local
systems.
2.2. Representations of Quivers. A quiver Q is a directed graph (Q0 , Q1 , s, t), where Q0 is the set
of vertices, Q1 is the set of arrows and s, t : Q1 → Q0 are the source map and target map respectively.
We use the notation Q = (Q0 , Q1 ) for simplicity. A quiver Q is finite if Q0 and Q1 are both finite
sets, and Q is connected if it is connected as a graph. In this paper, quivers we consider are always
supposed to be finite and connected. A path of length ℓ is a sequence of arrows w = (a1 , . . . , aℓ ) such
that s(ai+1 ) = t(ai ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ ℓ − 1. We also use the notation w = a1 . . . aℓ for convenience, which is
regarded as a composition of arrows. The source (resp. target) of w is defined to be the source (resp.
target) of a1 (resp. aℓ ). Moreover, a path w = a1 . . . aℓ is a loop if s(a1 ) = t(aℓ ). We associate each
point v ∈ Q0 with a path of length zero, with a slight abuse of notation, denote by Q0 the set of all
paths of length zero. Then, let Qℓ be the set of all paths of length ℓ. Denote by kQ the path algebra
of Q, of which the basis of the underlying k-vector space is the set of all paths of length ℓ ≥ 0 in Q
and the product is given by the composition of paths. Since
M
kQ = kQℓ , kQi · kQj ⊆ kQi+j ,
ℓ≥0
the path algebra has a natural graded structure.

Let Q be a (finite connected) quiver. A representation of Q is denoted by M = (Mv , φa )v∈Q0 ,a∈Q1 ,
where Mv is a k-vector space for v ∈ Q0 and φa is a k-linear map φa : Ms(a) → Mt(a) for a ∈ Q1 . Let
w = a1 . . . aℓ be a path, and then φw = φa1 . . . φaℓ . A representation M of Q is of finite dimension if
Mv is of finite dimension for each v ∈ Q0 , and the dimension vector of M is given by n = {nv }v∈Q0 ,
where nv = dim Mv . If the vector spaces Mv are of the same dimension n, then the representation M
is said to be of dimension n. Denote by rep(Q) the category of finite dimensional representations of
Q. Note that this category is an abelian category and it is equivalent to the category of kQ-modules
of finite dimension [ASS06]. Denote by K0 (rep(Q)) the Grothendieck group of the abelian category
rep(Q), and let Θ : K0 (rep(Q)) → Z be an additive function on this group.
Definition 2.4. A finite dimensional representation M of Q is Θ-semistable (resp. Θ-stable) if
Θ(M ) = 0 and for any nontrivial proper submodule M ′ ⊆ M , we have Θ(M ′ ) ≥ 0 (resp. Θ(M ′ ) > 0).
Two Θ-semistable representations are S-equivalent if they have the same composition factors in the
category of Θ-semistable representations.
Now we fix a dimension vector n. The isomorphism classes of representations of Q with dimension
vector n are in one-to-one correspondence with orbits in
M
R(Q, n) = Hom(k ns(a) , k nt(a) )
a∈Q1
under the action of

Y
GL(n) = GLnv (k),
v∈Q0
where the action is defined as

−1
(gv )v∈Q0 · (φa )a∈Q1 := (gs(a) · φa · gt(a) )a∈Q1 ,
for (gv )v∈Q0 ∈ GL(n) and (φa )a∈Q1 ∈ R(Q, n). Then, R(Q, n) is called the space of quiver represen-
tations. Similarly, we define
M
R(Q, n) := Hom(k n , k n ),
a∈Q1
and the isomorphism classes of representations

Q of Q with dimension n are in one-to-one correspondence
with orbits in R(Q, n) under the action of v∈Q0 GLn (k).
Given an additive function Θ : K0 (rep(Q)) → Z, we define a character of GL(n) as follows
Y
χΘ (g) := det(gv )Θv ,
v∈Q0
P
where g := (gv )v∈Q0 and the integers Θv are given from the formula Θ(M ) = v∈Q0 Θv dim Mv for
any representation M of Q.
Theorem 2.5 (Proposition 3.1 in [Kin94]). A point in R(Q, n) is χΘ -semistable (resp. χΘ -stable) if
and only if the corresponding representation of Q is Θ-semistable (resp. Θ-stable).
2.3. Relations in Quivers. Let Q be a (finite connected) quiver, and let kQ be the path algebra.
A relation (or a k-relation) in Q is a k-linear combination of paths in Q such that the sources and
targets of all paths are the same. Let I be a set of relations in Q, and if there is only one relation in I,
we directly use I for the single relation. A representation M of Q satisfies the relations in I if φw = 0
for any relation w ∈ I. We define
R(Q, I, n) = {(φa )a∈Q1 | φw = 0 for w ∈ I}.
If the subset R(Q, I, n) ⊆ R(Q, n) is invariant under GL(n), then the orbits in R(Q, I, n) ⊆ R(Q, n)
are in one-to-one correspondence with the isomorphism classes of representations of Q with dimension
vector n satisfying the relations in I. As a special case, given a single loop w with source and target
v, let I = w − v. We define
R(Q, I, n) := {(φa )a∈Q1 | φI = 0}.
Note that the relation φI = 0 is equivalent to the condition that φw is the identity matrix (at the point
v).
We give an example to end this subsection. This example is helpful to understand the equivalence
between filtered local systems and quiver representations in Proposition 3.15.
Example 2.6. We define Q = (Q0 , Q1 ) to be the quiver as follows
a
v
which consists of a single vertex and a single loop. Given a positive integer n, the subset
R(Q, det, n) := {φa ∈ GLn (k)} ⊆ R(Q, n)
consists of all homomorphisms φa with nonzero determinant. Clearly, R(Q, det, n) is invariant under
the action of GLn (k).
Now let Q′ = (Q′0 , Q′1 ) be the quiver
a′2
v1′ v2′
a′1
which consists of two vertices and two arrows. Let I ′ = a′1 a′2 − v1′ be a relation. Consider
R(Q′ , I ′ , n) = {(φa′1 , φa′2 ) | φa′1 φa′2 = id, φa′i ∈ End(k n )}.
Note that the condition φa′1 φa′2 = id implies that φa′i ∈ GLn (k). Moreover, the subset R(Q′ , I ′ , n) ⊆
Q
R(Q′ , n) is invariant under the action of v∈Q′ GLn (k).
0 Q
It is clear that GLn (k)-orbits in R(Q, det, n) are in one-to-one correspondence with v∈Q′ GLn (k)-
0
orbits in R(Q′ , I ′ , n).
2.4. Fundamental Group Representations and Local Systems. Let X be a smooth projective
algebraic curve over k with genus g. The fundamental group of X at a base point x0 is
g
Y
π1 (X, x0 ) = h ai , bj , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g | [ai , bi ] = id i.
i=1
If there is no ambiguity, we omit the base point x0 and use the notation π1 (X) for the fundamental
group. Fixing a positive integer n, we consider the space of fundamental group representations
Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)).
Fundamental group representations can be regarded as representations of a specific quiver. Now we

give the construction of such a quiver Q = (Q0 , Q1 ). The set of vertices Q0 = {v0 } contains only one
element, which is regarded as the base point x0 ∈ X. The set of arrows Q1 contains 2g elements and
denote them by ai , bj : v0 → v0 . Since Q0 has a single vertex, a positive integer n is therefore regarded
as a dimension vector for representations of Q. Thus,
Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)) ⊆ R(Q, n).
Q
g Q
g
Since the element [ai , bi ] is a loop in Q, the element I = [ai , bi ] − v0 is a relation. Then, we
i=1 i=1
define a subset R(Q, I , n) of R(Q, n) as
R(Q, I , n) = {(φa )a∈Q1 | φI = 0}.
Clearly, the condition φI = 0 implies that φa ∈ GLn (k) for each arrow a ∈ Q1 , and thus, we have
R(Q, I , n) ∼
= Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)).
In this way, fundamental group representations are equivalent to quiver representations. We also want
to remind the reader that the construction of such a quiver is not unique.
Fundamental group representations are also related to local systems. A local system (of rank
n) on X is regarded as a pair (Lx0 , ρ), where Lx0 is a k-vector space of dimension n and ρ :
π1 (X, x0 ) → GL(Lx0 ) ∼ = GLn (k) is a representation. Denote by [ρ] the corresponding point in
Hom(π1 (X, x0 ), GLn (k)). We refer the reader to [Sim94a, Sim94b] for a more detailed discussion about
local systems, and moreover, the definition of local systems does not depend on the base point x0 .
Two local systems (Lx0 , ρ) and (Lx′ 0 , ρ′ ) are isomorphic if there exists an isomorphism φ : Lx0 → Lx′ 0
of vector spaces such that φ ◦ ρ = ρ′ ◦ φ. The isomorphism classes of local systems of rank n are in
one-to-one correspondence with GLn (k)-orbits in Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)). Thus, a representation ρ (or
the corresponding point [ρ]) is regarded as a local system. In conclusion, we have the (one-to-one)
correspondence among fundamental group representations, quiver representations and local systems.
local systems
representations of fundamental groups
quiver representations
3. Moduli Space of Filtered Local Systems

Let X be a smooth projective algebraic curve over k with genus g, and let D be a reduced effective
divisor on X. The divisor D is actually a sum of finitely many distinct points, and therefore, it is also
regarded as a set. Denote by XD := X\D the punctured curve. The fundamental group of XD is
g
Y Y
π1 (XD ) = h ai , bj , cx , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g, x ∈ D | [ai , bi ] cx = id i,
i=1 x∈D
where cx is a loop around the puncture x ∈ D. As in §2.4, a point [ρ] ∈ Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k)) can
be considered as a local system L = (Lx0 , ρ) of rank n on XD .
The goal of this section is to construct the moduli space of filtered local systems on XD . “Filtered”
in this context refers to weighted filtrations, which are also called parabolic structures. When equipped
with these additional structures, filtered local systems are the appropriate entities in the topological
facet of tame nonabelian Hodge correspondence. With the idea in §2.4, we construct a quiver Q D and
prove that there is a one-to-one correspondence between isomorphism classes of filtered local systems
and orbits in the space of quiver representations (Proposition 3.15). Furthermore, this correspondence
also preserves the stability conditions (Proposition 3.21). With the same argument as in [Sim94b, §6],
we give the construction of the moduli space of filtered local systems (Theorem 3.27).
3.1. Quasi-parabolic Local Systems. Let V be a vector space of dimension n. A quasi-parabolic

structure on V is a filtration of subspaces
V = V1 ) V2 ) · · · ) Vn′ +1 = {0},
where n′ ≤ n is a positive integer. Let P ⊆ GL(V) be the automorphism group of the filtration, which
is a parabolic subgroup, and then the quasi-parabolic structure on V is called of type P . Moreover, let
λ = (λ1 , . . . , λn′ ) be a partition of n such that
dim(Vi /Vi+1 ) = λi ,
which is called the partition associated to the quasi-parabolic structure of V .
Now we consider local systems on XD . Since local systems do not depend on the choice of base
point, let (L , ρ) be a local system of rank n on XD , where L is a vector space of dimension n and
ρ : π1 (XD ) → GL(L ) is a representation.
Definition 3.1. A quasi-parabolic local system L• of rank n on XD is a local system (L , ρ) of rank n
on XD equipped with a quasi-parabolic structure for each puncture x ∈ D compatible with ρ. More
precisely, denote by
L = Lx,1 ) · · · ) Lx,nx +1 = {0}
the quasi-parabolic structure on L at the puncture x ∈ D, where nx is a positive integer, and we have
(ρ(cx ))(Lx,i ) ⊆ Lx,i . Note that since ρ(cx ) ∈ GL(L ), we indeed have (ρ(cx ))(Lx,i ) = Lx,i .
Given a collection P := {Px , x ∈ D} of parabolic subgroups in GL(L ), a quasi-parabolic local
system L• is of type P if the quasi-parabolic structure at x is of type Px . Moreover, denote by λx the
associated partition, and λ = {λx , x ∈ D} the collection of partitions.
Two quasi-parabolic local systems L• and L•′ are isomorphic if there exists an isomorphism φ :
(L , ρ) → (L ′ , ρ′ ) of local systems such that it is compatible with representations and preserves the
quasi-parabolic structures. More precisely, we have
φ ◦ ρ = ρ′ ◦ φ, ′
φ(Lx,i ) = Lx,i .
Remark 3.2. Let λ be a collection of partitions of n. A quasi-parabolic local system L• is of type λ,
if for each parabolic structure
L = Lx,1 ) · · · ) Lx,nx +1 = {0},
we have
dim(Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ) = λx,i .
This definition is weaker than Definition 3.1. More precisely, a parabolic subgroup can uniquely
determine a partition, while a partition could only give an isomorphism class of parabolic subgroups.
(If we fix a basis of the vector space, then a partition can determine a unique parabolic subgroup.)
In conclusion, if a quasi-parabolic local system L• is of type P , it is also of type λ, where λ is the
associated collection of partitions. However, if a quasi-parabolic local system is of type λ, we cannot
determine its type in parabolic subgroups. Consider the following example. Let L = k 2 and we fix
the standard basis of the vector space. Suppose that D = {x1 , x2 } contains two points. Consider two
collections of parabolic subgroups
P = {U, U }, P ′ = {U, L},
where U is the Borel subgroup for upper triangular matrices and L is for lower triangular matrices.
Clearly, quasi-parabolic local systems of type P and P ′ are of the same type λ. However, a quasi-
parabolic local system of type P is not isomorphic to a quasi-parabolic local system of type P ′ since
there is no g ∈ GLn (k) such that
gU g −1 = U and gU g −1 = L.
In the viewpoint of [MS80], although using partitions to give the definition of types is more natural,
we still use parabolic subgroups to define types of quasi-parabolic structures because we have to fix a
parabolic subgroup for each puncture in the tame NAHC, especially in the case of principal bundles
[HKSZ22].
Lemma 3.3. Let L• (resp. L•′ ) be a quasi-parabolic local system of type P (resp. P ′ ), and let
φ : L• → L•′ be an isomorphism. We have φ(Px ) = Px′ .
Proof. This is a direct result of the definition of isomorphisms of quasi-parabolic local systems.
This lemma tells us that when studying isomorphism classes of quasi-parabolic local systems, we
can fix a vector space L , and it can be regarded as k n by fixing a basis. In the rest of this section,
a local system (L , ρ) is always considered as a vector space L = k n together with a representation
ρ : π1 (XD ) → GLn (k).
Lemma 3.4. Let P = {Px , x ∈ D} be a collection of parabolic subgroups. Let g ∈ GL(L ) and define
P ′ = {Px′ , x ∈ D}, where Px′ = gPx g −1 . Then, a quasi-parabolic local system of type P is isomorphic
to one of type P ′ , of which the underlying vector spaces are L .
Proof. This is clear from the definition of isomorphisms of quasi-parabolic local systems.
Lemma 3.5. Given a collection P of parabolic subgroups in GL(L ), there is a one-to-one correspon-
dence between isomorphism classes of quasi-parabolic local systems of type P on XD and GL(L )-orbits
of fundamental group representations in Hom(π1 (XD ), GL(L )) such that each orbit includes a point
[ρ] satisfying the condition that ρ(cx ) ∈ Px for x ∈ D.
Proof. By Definition 3.1, it is easy to find that isomorphism classes of quasi-parabolic local systems
(with underlying vector space L ) correspond to orbits of representations in Hom(π1 (XD ), GL(L )).
The condition ρ(cx )(Lx,i ) = Lx,i implies that the element ρ(cx ) is in Px . On the other hand, given
a representation ρ ∈ Hom(π1 (XD ), GL(L )) such that ρ(cx ) ∈ Px , denote by L the corresponding
local system. Note that the parabolic subgroup Px determines a unique quasi-parabolic structure of
L for the puncture x, and Px is regarded as the automorphism group of the filtration. Clearly, as an
element in Px , ρ(cx ) preserves the quasi-parabolic structure. Thus, the representation ρ determines a
natural quasi-parabolic structure of L for each puncture x ∈ D. It is easy to check that this gives a
one-to-one correspondence as expected.
With the same idea as in §2.4, we can construct a quiver such that representations of the fundamen-
tal group π1 (XD ) is equivalent to representations of this quiver, and then we obtain a correspondence
between quasi-parabolic local systems on XD and quiver representations. This quiver will be con-
structed after we introduce stability conditions because it is important for our purposes that this
one-to-one correspondence also preserves the stability conditions.
quasi-parabolic local systems
Lemma 3.5
representations of fundamental groups

Proposition 3.15
quiver representations
3.2. Filtered (Parabolic) Local Systems. Now we move to parabolic structures and stability con-
ditions. A parabolic structure on V is a quasi-parabolic structure
V = V1 ) V2 ) · · · ) Vn′ +1 = {0},
such that each Vi is associated to a rational number θi for 1 ≤ i ≤ n′ . The collection {θi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n′ }
is called the weights. In sum, a parabolic structure on V can be regarded as a weighted filtration.
Definition 3.6. A filtered (parabolic) local system L• is a local system (L , ρ) equipped with a para-
bolic structure for each puncture x ∈ D. More precisely, for each puncture x ∈ D, denote by
L = Lx,1 ) · · · ) Lx,nx +1 = {0}
the quasi-parabolic structure, where nx is a positive integer, and denote by θx,i the rational number
associated to Lx,i . Denote by P the collection of parabolic subgroups, where Px is the automorphism
group of the quasi-parabolic structure at x. Such a filtered local system is called a filtered local system
of type P with weights θ, where θ = {θx,i , x ∈ D, 1 ≤ i ≤ nx }.
Two filtered local systems L• and L•′ are isomorphic if there exists an isomorphism φ : L• → L•′
′
of quasi-parabolic local systems such that the corresponding weights are the same θx,i = θx,i .
Remark 3.7. The definition of filtered (parabolic) local systems is similar to that of parabolic bundles
introduced in [MS80]. However, in this paper, we use the terminology filtered local system rather than
parabolic local system because Simpson first defined and studied this type of local systems in [Sim90]
and used the notion “filtered local system”. Moreover, in [MS80], the weights for parabolic bundles
are assumed to be non-negative rational numbers in [0, 1) in increasing order, i.e.
0 ≤ θx,1 < · · · < θx,nx < 1.
However, when we consider filtered local systems, it is not necessary to make these assumptions. The
reason for this setup comes from the result of tame nonabelian Hodge correspondence on noncompact
curves, where the weights of filtered local systems are given by the real part of the eigenvalues of the
residue of the corresponding Higgs fields (see [Sim90, §5]).
Definition 3.8. Given a filtered local system L• of type P with weights θ, denote by λ the associated
collection of partitions. The degree of L• is defined as
XX nx nx
XX
degloc (L• ) := θx,i · dim(Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ) = θx,i λx,i .
x∈D i=1 x∈D i=1
Similar to the definition of parabolic sub-bundles [MS80, Definition 1.7], we give the definition of
filtered sub-local systems.
Definition 3.9. A filtered local system L•′ is a filtered sub-local system of a filtered local system L•
(of type P with weights θ), if
• the underlying local system (L ′ , ρ′ ) is a sub-local system of (L , ρ). More precisely, L ′ is a
subspace of L which is preserved by ρ and ρ′ is the restriction ρ|L ′ ;
• for each puncture x ∈ D, given 1 ≤ j ≤ n′ (x), let i be the largest integer such that Lx,j
′
⊆ Lx,i ,
′
and then θx,j = θx,i .
Definition 3.10. A filtered local system L• is semistable (resp. stable), if for any nontrivial proper
filtered sub-local system L•′ ⊆ L• , we have
degloc (L•′ ) degloc (L• )
′
≤ (resp. <).
rk(L• ) rk(L• )
Example 3.11. In this example, we calculate the degree of nontrivial filtered sub-local systems. Let
L•′ ⊆ L• be a filtered sub-local system. Note that 0 ( L ′ ( L is a filtration of vector spaces. Denote
by PL ′ ⊆ GL(L ) the parabolic subgroup given by the filtration. Then, the degree of L•′ is
XXnx
degloc (L•′ ) = θx,i · dim(L ′ ∩ Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ).
x∈D i=1
Lemma 3.12. Let L• be a filtered local system of type P with weights θ. Suppose that degloc (L• ) =
0. Then, L• is semistable (stable) if and only if for any nontrivial proper filtered sub-local system
L•′ ⊆ L• , we have
degloc (L•′ ) ≤ 0 (resp. <).
Proof. If degloc (L• ) = 0, then L• is semistable if and only if we have

degloc (L•′ ) degloc (L• )
≤ =0
rk(L•′ ) rk(L• )
for any nontrivial filtered sub-local system of L•′ . Therefore,
degloc (L•′ ) ≤ 0.
The proof for the stable case is exactly the same.
3.3. The Quiver Q D . In this subsection, we construct a new quiver Q D and prove that there is a one-
to-one correspondence between parabolic local systems and representations of this quiver. Furthermore,
this correspondence also preserves the stability condition, which will be proved in §3.4. The underlying
vector space of a quasi-parabolic local system in this subsection is always considered as k n under an
isomorphism.
Construction 3.13. We first define a new quiver Q D = (Q0D , Q1D ) as follows:
Q0D = {v0 , vx , x ∈ D},
Q1D = {ai , bj : v0 → v0 , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g,
cx,1 : v0 → vx , cx,2 : vx → v0 , x ∈ D}.
More precisely, for each point x ∈ D, we have
cx,2
v0 vx
cx,1
and denote by cx := cx,1 cx,2 the loop with source and target v0 . Define a relation
g
Y Y
I D := ( [ai , bi ]) · ( cx ) − v0 .
i=1 x∈D
Q
Then, the orbits in R(Q D , I D , n) under the action of GLn (k) correspond to rank n quiver
v∈QD
0
representations of Q D satisfying the relation I D .

Fixing a collection of parabolic subgroups P = {Px , x ∈ D} in GLn (k). Denote by Lx the Levi
subgroup. Define
Y Y
GP = Gv := GLn (k) × Lx ,
v∈QD
0
x∈D
Q
where Gv0 = GLn (k) and Gvx = Lx . As a subgroup of GLn (k), we have a natural action of GP
v∈QD
0
on R(Q D , I D , n).
We define a subset
R(Q D , I D , P ) ⊆ R(Q D , I D , n)
as follows. It consists of all points (φa )a∈QD

1
∈ R(Q D , I D , n), of which the GP -orbit includes a point
′
(φa )a∈QD1
such that
φ′cx,1 ∈ Lx , φ′cx,2 ∈ Px
for any x ∈ D. Clearly, the induced action of GP on R(Q D , I D , P ) is well-defined.

Now we give an equivalent construction of R(Q D , I D , P ). Define a closed subset
Z ⊆ R(Q D , I D , n),
of which the points φ = (φa )a∈QD
1
satisfy the condition
φcx,1 ∈ Lx , φcx,2 ∈ Px
for x ∈ D. Denote by Z ′ ⊆ GP × R(Q D , I D , n) the preimage of Z under the GP -action.

Z′ Z
GP × R(Q D , I D , n) R(Q D , I D , n)
Clearly, Z ′ is a closed subvariety of GP × R(Q D , I D , n) and we have
R(Q D , I D , P ) = Z ′ |R(QD ,I D ,n) .
It is easy to see that R(Q D , I D , P ) is a locally closed subset.

Remark 3.14. In [AD20], the authors studied quiver representations with parabolic structures by
constructing a new quiver, called the ladder quiver. Their approach is interesting, but it is hard to
apply it directly to our case. The main problem is that the quiver we consider includes loops, which
comes from the fundamental group representations.
Proposition 3.15. There is a one-to-one correspondence between GP -orbits in R(Q D , I D , P ) and
the isomorphism classes of quasi-parabolic local systems of type P on XD .
Proof. Lemma 3.5 shows that there is a one-to-one correspondence between the isomorphism classes
of quasi-parabolic local systems of type P and special GLn (k)-orbits in Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k)). Thus,
it is equivalent to prove that such orbits in Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k)) are in one-to-one correspondence
with GP -orbits in R(Q D , I D , P ).
Given a point (φa )a∈QD1
∈ R(Q D , I D , P ), we suppose that
φcx,1 ∈ Lx , φcx,2 ∈ Px
for every x ∈ D. (Sometimes we directly assume that φcx ∈ Px .) We associate this point with a
representation ρ : π1 (XD ) → GLn (k) as follows
ρ(ai ) = φai , ρ(bj ) = φbj , ρ(cx ) = φcx = φcx,1 φcx,2 .
By assumption, we have ρ(cx ) ∈ Px . Therefore, the representation ρ corresponds to a quasi-parabolic
local system of type P .
Let (gv )v∈QD
0
∈ GP . Consider the point
(φ′a )a∈QD
1
= (gv )v∈QD
0
· (φa )a∈QD
1
.
We first suppose that gvx is the identity element for every x ∈ D. In this case, (φ′a )a∈QD 1
also gives a
representation gv0 · ρ, which is in the orbit GLn (k) · [ρ], and any point in the orbit GLn (k) · [ρ] can be
obtained in this way. Now we suppose that gv0 is the identity element. Then, we have
φ′ai = φai , φ′bj = φbj ,
and
φ′cx,1 = φcx,1 gv−1
x
, φ′cx,2 = gvx φcx,2 .
As gvx ∈ Lx , then
φ′cx,1 ∈ Lx , φ′cx,2 ∈ Px , φ′cx,1 φ′cx,2 = φcx,1 φcx,2 ∈ Px .
With respect to the above construction, both (φa )a∈QD1

and (φ′a )a∈QD
1
correspond to the same repre-
sentation ρ.
In conclusion, the orbit GP · (φa )a∈QD
1
corresponds to the orbit GLn (k) · [ρ], and this correspon-
dence gives a one-to-one correspondence between GP -orbits in R(Q D , I D , P ) and GLn (k)-orbits in
Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k)) satisfying the condition in Lemma 3.5.
Example 3.16. Let L• be a quasi-parabolic local system of type P , and denote by φ = (φa )a∈QD 1
∈
R(Q D , I D , P ) a point corresponding to L• by Proposition 3.15 such that φcx ∈ Px for every x ∈ D.
Let L•′ be a quasi-parabolic sub-local system of L• . As a quasi-parabolic local system, L•′ corre-
sponds to a point in the representation space of Q D and denote it by φ′ . By the proof of Proposition
3.15, it is clear that φ′ = φ|L ′ . This property implies that φa ∈ PL ′ for each arrow a, where PL ′ is
defined by the subspace L ′ ⊆ L as in Example 3.11.
Now let P ∈ GLn (k) be a parabolic subgroup and denote by λ = (λ1 , . . . , λn′ ) the associated
partition of P . We suppose that φa ∈ P for all arrows a. As studied in §3.1, let
L = L1 ) · · · ) Ln′ +1 = {0}
be the filtration of L given by P . Since φa ∈ P for all arrows a, the restriction of the representation
ρ|Lj is well-defined. Therefore, the filtration of L induces a filtration of quasi-parabolic sub-local
systems
L• = L1,• ) · · · ) Ln′ +1,• = {0},
and (Lj , ρ|Lj ) is the underlying local system of Lj,• .
3.4. Equivalence of Stability Conditions. We follow the same notation as in previous sections. Let
P = {Px , x ∈ D} be a collection of parabolic subgroups. Let Px = Lx Ux be the Levi decomposition of
the parabolic subgroup Px , where Lx is the Levi subgroup and Ux is the unipotent group, and we write
Qx
n
Lx = Lx,i as a product of general linear groups. For convenience, we suppose that the standard
i=1
maximal torus T ∈ GLn (k), the diagonals, is included in Px for every x ∈ D. Recall that
Y
GP = GLn (k) × Lx .
x∈D
Let µ be a cocharacter of GP , i.e. µ = (µv )v∈QD0

, where µv0 is a cocharacter of GLn (k) and µvx is a
cocharacter of Lx . Since T is included in Px , all cocharacters µv can be regarded as cocharacters of
the maximal torus T .
Lemma 3.17. Let µ1 , µ2 be two cocharacters of T ⊆ GLn (k). Define
S12 := {g ∈ End(k n ) | lim µ1 (t) · g · µ−1
2 (t) exists.}
t→0
S21 := {g ∈ End(k n ) | lim µ2 (t) · g · µ−1
1 (t) exists.}
t→0
Then, S12 ∩ GLn (k) 6= ∅ and S21 ∩ GLn (k) 6= ∅ if and only if µ1 = µ2 .
Proof. Applying the argument in [MFK94, Chapter 2, §2], this lemma follows directly.
Lemma 3.18. Let φ = (φa )a∈QD 1
∈ R(Q D , I D , P ) be a point such that φcx ∈ Px for every x ∈ D,
and let µ = (µv )v∈QD
0
be a cocharacter of GP . If the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists, then µs(a) = µt(a) for all
t→0
arrows a ∈ Q1D . In other words, all cocharacters µv are the same.
Proof. The limit lim µ(t) · φ exists if and only if the limit
t→0
lim µs(a) (t) · φa · µ−1

t(a) (t)
t→0
exists and is an element in GLn (k) for each arrow a ∈ Q1D . Therefore, for each x ∈ D, we have
lim µv0 (t) · φcx,1 · µ−1 −1
vx (t), lim µvx (t) · φcx,2 · µv0 (t) ∈ GLn (k).
t→0 t→0
By Lemma 3.17, this holds if and only if µv0 = µvx for every x ∈ D. Therefore, all cocharacters µv
are the same.
By the lemma above, if the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists, we use the same notation µ : Gm → T for the
t→0
corresponding cocharater defined on each vertex. On the other hand, given a cocharacter µ : Gm → T ,
it can be regarded as a cocharacter of GP , of which µv = µ for every vertex v, and we also use the
same notation µ : Gm → GP for convenience. Moreover, a cocharacter µ : Gm → T determines a
parabolic subgroup of GLn (k), which is defined as
Pµ = {g ∈ GLn (k) | lim µ(t) · g · µ(t)−1 exists}.
t→0
Lemma 3.19. Let µ : Gm → GLn (k) be a cocharacter. The limit lim µ(t) · φ exists if and only if
t→0
φa ∈ Pµ for every a ∈ Q1D .
Proof. By definition, the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists if and only if the limit
t→0
lim µ(t) · φa · µ−1 (t)

t→0
exists for each arrow a ∈ Q1D . Therefore, if the limit lim µ(t)·φ exists, then φa ∈ Pµ for every a ∈ Q1D .
t→0
On the other hand, if φa ∈ Pµ , then clearly, the limit lim µ(t) · φa · µ−1 (t) exists, and therefore, the
t→0
limit lim µ(t) · φ exists.
t→0

Now we move to characters. A character of Lx can be regarded as a character of Px , i.e.

Hom(Px , Gm ) ∼
= Hom(Lx , Gm ) ∼
= Znx .
In the next construction, we define a character χθ of GP based on the given data of weights θ.
Construction 3.20. A character χ : GP → Gm is a product of characters of groups associated to
vertices. More precisely,
Y
χ = χv0 · χvx
x∈D
such that
Y
χ((gv )v∈QD
0
) = χv0 (gv0 ) · χvx (gvx ),
x∈D
where
χv0 : GLn (k) → Gm , χvx : Px → Gm .
Now let θ = {θx,i , x ∈ D, 1 ≤ i ≤ nx } be a collection of rational numbers, which are regarded as
d
weights. Since θx,i are (finitely many) rational numbers, we can write θx,i = x,i
d as fractions with a
common denominator d. With respect to the above data, we define a character
χθ : GP → Gm
Q
as follows. We write the character as χθ = χv0 · χvx . Since χvx is a character of Px , it is a product
x∈D
of characters of Lx,i . Therefore, we define
nx
Y
χvx (px ) := det(lx,i )−dx,i ,
i=1
where px ∈ Px , px = lx ux is the Levi decomposition, and lx,i is the component of lx in Lx,i . For
χ0 : GLn (k) → Gm , we take the trivial character. This finishes the definition of the character χθ :
GP → Gm .
Now we are ready to prove the equivalence of stability conditions.
Proposition 3.21. Let φ = (φa )a∈QD 1
∈ R(Q D , I D , P ) be a point. Denote by L• the corresponding
quasi-parabolic local system, which is isomorphic to one of type P . Equipped with weights θ, we obtain
a filtered local system L• . Suppose that degloc (L• ) = 0. Then, L• is semistable (resp. stable) if and
only if the point φ = (φa )a∈QD1
∈ R(Q D , I D , P ) is χθ -semistable (resp. χθ -stable).
Proof. For convenience, we suppose that φcx ∈ Px for every x ∈ D. Then, the corresponding quasi-
parabolic local system L• is of type P . Let µ be a cocharacter of T such that the limit lim µ(t) · φ
t→0
exists. Then, φa ∈ Pµ by Lemma 3.19. For convenience, let P := Pµ and denote by λ = (λ1 , . . . , λn′ )
n′
Q
the corresponding partition. Let P = LU be the Levi decomposition of P and L = Lj be a product
j=1
′
of general linear groups. Then, we can assume that µ|Lj : Gm → T ∩ Lj is given by t 7→ tdj · id, where
d′j is an integer. By Example 3.16, the parabolic subgroup P determines a filtration of filtered local
systems
L• = L1,• ) · · · ) Ln′ +1,• = {0},
and (Lj , ρ|Lj ) is the underlying local system of Lj,• . By Example 3.11, the degree of Lj,• is
nx
XX
degloc (Lj,• ) = θx,i · dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ).
x∈D i=1
We calculate the pairing hµ, χθ i first.

′
X nx X
XX n
hµ, χθ i = hµ, χvx i = (−d′j · dx,i ) · dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /(Lj+1 ∩ Lx,i + Lj ∩ Lx,i+1 ))
x∈D x∈D i=1 j=1
n′
nx
!
X XX
=− d′j dx,i · dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /(Lj+1 ∩ Lx,i + Lj ∩ Lx,i+1 ))
j=1 x∈D i=1
n′
nx
!
X XX
=− d′j dx,i · (dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ) − dim(Lj+1 ∩ Lx,i /Lx,i+1 ))
j=1 x∈D i=1
n′
nx
!
X XX
=− (d′j − d′j−1 ) dx,i · dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /Lx,i+1 )
j=1 x∈D i=1
′
n
X
= −d (d′j − d′j−1 ) · degloc (Lj,• ),
j=1
where d′0 = 0. In conclusion,

′
n
X
(3.22) hµ, χθ i = −d (d′j − d′j−1 ) · degloc (Lj,• ).
j=1
Since
nx
XX
degloc (L• ) = θx,i λx,i = 0,
x∈D i=1
we have
nx
XX
hµ, χθ i = hµ, χθ i + N d θx,i λx,i
x∈D i=1
X nx
XX
= −d (d′j − d′j−1 ) · degloc (Lj,• ) + N d θx,i λx,i
j x∈D i=1
X
= −d (d′j − d′j−1 − N ) · degloc (Lj,• ),
j
where N is an arbitrary integer. Therefore, d′j − d′j−1 can be supposed to be a positive integer for each
j.
We suppose that L• is semistable, which gives rise to degloc (Lj,• ) ≤ 0 by Lemma 3.12. Then, we
have
X
hµ, χθ i = −d (d′j − d′j−1 ) · degloc (Lj,• ) ≥ 0.
j
By Proposition 2.2, we know that the corresponding point φ ∈ R(Q D , I D , P ) is χθ -semistable.

Now we suppose that φ is χθ -semistable. Let L•′ ⊆ L• be a filtered sub-local system. Denote by P
the parabolic subgroup determined by the filtration
L = L1 ) L ′ = L2 ) L3 = {0}
as in Example 3.11. In this case, n′ = 2. Then, the proof of Proposition 3.15 implies that φa ∈ P
for each arrow a. We choose a cocharacter µ such that Pµ = P and d′2 − d′1 is a positive integer. By
Lemma 3.19, the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists. Since φ is χθ -semistable, we have
t→0
hµ, χθ i = −d(d′2 − d′1 ) · degloc (L•′ ) ≥ 0

by Propsition 2.2, and then,

degloc (L•′ ) ≤ 0.
Therefore, L• is semistable. The proof of the stable case is the same.
Remark 3.23. We can construct a quiver Q ′ = (Q0′ , Q1′ ) as we did in §2.4, where Q0′ consists of a
single point v0 and the arrow set Q1′ is
Q1′ := {ai , bj , cx : v0 → v0 , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g, x ∈ D}.
Define the relation
g
Y Y
I′ = ( [ai , bi ])( cx ) − v0 .
i=1 x∈D
It is easy to prove that
R(Q ′ , I ′ , n) ∼
= Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k)).
Thus, the result of Proposition 3.15 also holds for special representations of the quiver Q ′ . However, if
we choose this quiver, it is impossible to prove the equivalence of stability conditions (Proposition 3.21).
The reason is that there is only one vertex v0 and the group G acting on the quiver representation
spaces R(Q ′ , I ′ , n) could only be a subgroup of GLn (k), and a character χ : G → Gm cannot include
all data (parabolic structures) on distinct punctures x ∈ D.
3.5. Moduli Space of Filtered Local Systems.
Definition 3.24. Let L• be a semistable filtered local system. A Jordan–Hölder filtration of L• is a
filtration of filtered local systems
L• = L1,• ) · · · ) Ln′ +1,• = {0}
such that the factors Lj,• /Lj+1,• are stable filtered local systems of degree zero. We define gr(L• ) :=
Ln′
Lj,• /Lj+1,• . Two filtered local systems L• and L•′ are called S-equivalent if gr(L• ) ∼= gr(L•′ ).
j=1
Following the approach in [HL97, §1.5], Jordan–Hölder filtrations for semistable filtered local systems
always exist. Similar to [Kin94, Proposition 4.2], we have the following result for S-equivalence classes.
and φ′ = (φ′a )a∈QD 1
be two χθ -semistable points in R(Q D , I D , P ).
Let L• and L•′ be the corresponding filtered local systems with weights θ respectively. The filtered local
systems L• and L•′ are S-equivalent if and only if φ ∼ φ′ , i.e. they are GIT equivalent.
Proof. We suppose that φcx , φ′cx ∈ Px for every x ∈ D. Let P (resp. P ′ ) be the automorphism group
of the filtration
L = L1 ) · · · ) Ln′ +1 = {0}
(resp. L ′ = L1′ ) · · · ) Ln′ ′ +1 = {0})
with Levi decomposition P = LU (resp. P ′ = L′ U ′ ). We write L (resp. L′ ) as a product of general
n′
Q n′
Q
linear groups Lj (resp. L′j ). With a similar calculation as in Example 3.11, we have
j=1 j=1
nx
XX
loc
deg (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ) = dx,i · dim(Lj ∩ Lx,i /(Lj+1 ∩ Lx,i + Lj ∩ Lx,i+1 )).
x∈D i=1
We first suppose that L• and L•′ are S-equivalent. The isomorphism gr(L• ) ∼ = gr(L•′ ) implies that
∼ ′ ∼
L = L , and then, P = P . Therefore, we suppose that P = P , L = L , U = U ′ and Lj = Lj′ for
′ ′ ′
1 ≤ j ≤ n′ . Moreover, the isomorphism together with Proposition 3.15 also imply that φ|L = φ′ |L .
Here is a brief explanation of the notation φ|L : We first restrict φ to the Levi subgroup L and then
embed it into GLn (k) via L → GLn (k). Now we take a cocharacter µ : Gm → T such that Pµ = P .
With a similar calculation as formula (3.22), we have
′
n
X
(3.26) hµ, χθ i = −d d′j · degloc (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ).
j=1
loc
Since deg (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ) = 0 by assumption, we have hµ, χθ i = 0. Furthermore,
lim µ(t) · φa · µ(t)−1 = φa |L
t→0
for each arrow a ∈ Q1D . Therefore,

lim µ(t) · φ = φ|L = φ′ |L = lim µ(t) · φ′ ,
t→0 t→0
′
which gives rise to φ ∼ φ from Proposition 2.3.
Now we suppose that φ ∼ φ′ . By Proposition 2.3, there exist cocharacters µ and µ′ such that
hµ, χθ i = hµ′ , χθ i = 0 and the limits lim µ(t) · φ and lim µ′ (t) · φ′ are in the same closed GP -orbit.
t→0 t→0
Without loss of generality, we suppose that
lim µ(t) · φ = lim µ′ (t) · φ′ .
t→0 t→0
Let P = Pµ and P ′ = Pµ′ be parabolic subgroups with Levi decompositions P = LU and P ′ = L′ U ′ .

The parabolic subgroups P and P ′ induce filtrations of filtered local systems. By the equality of limits,
we have φ|L = φ′ |L′ . Therefore, gr(L• ) ∼
= gr(L•′ ). We only have to show
degloc (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ) = degloc (Lj,•
′ ′
/Lj+1,• ) = 0.
By formula (3.26), we have
′
n
X
hµ, χθ i = −d d′j · degloc (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ) = 0.
j=1
With the same argument as in the proof of Proposition 3.21, we can suppose that d′j are positive
integers. Thus,
degloc (Lj,• /Lj+1,• ) = 0,
for each j. The same argument holds for degloc (Lj,•

′ ′
/Lj+1,• ).
We consider the moduli functor

fB (XD , P , θ) : (Sch/k)op → Set,
M
where Sch/k is the category of k-schemes, defined by sending each k-scheme S to the set of isomorphism
classes of S-flat families of semistable filtered local systems of type P with weights θ on XD .
Theorem 3.27. Let Rθss (Q D , I D , P ) ⊆ R(Q D , I D , P ) be the set of χθ -semistable points. Define
MB (XD , P , θ) := Rθss (Q D , I D , P )//GP
to be the good quotient. Then,
(1) MB (XD , P , θ) is a quasi-projective variety;
(2) MB (XD , P , θ) universally co-represents the moduli functor M fB (XD , P , θ);
(3) the k-points are in one-to-one correspondence with S-equivalence classes of degree zero semistable
filtered local systems of type P with weights θ;
(4) there exists an open subset MsB (XD , P , θ), of which the k-points correspond to isomorphism
classes of degree zero stable filtered local systems of type λ with weights θ.
Proof. Note that R(Q D , I D , P ) is locally closed. With the same argument as in [Sim94b, §6],
the theorem follows directly from the geometric invariant theory (see [MFK94, HL97, Sim94a] for
instance).
Example 3.28. In this example, we discuss the trivial case, where the parabolic structure is trivial
at each point x ∈ D. More precisely, Px = GLn (k) and θx = 0 for x ∈ D. The triviality of Px gives
Lx = GLn (k). Thus,
Y
GP = GLn (k) × GLn (k)
x∈D
and
R(Q D , I D , P ) = R(Q D , I D , n).
The triviality of each θx shows that the character
χθ : GP → Gm
is also trivial in this case. Thus, any point (φa )a∈QD
1
∈ R(Q D , I D , n) is χθ -semistable automatically,
and the moduli space
MB (XD , P , θ) = R(Q D , I D , n)//GP ∼
= Hom(π1 (XD ), GLn (k))//GLn (k)
is an affine variety, of which the points correspond to semisimple fundamental group representations.
4. Moduli Space of Filtered G-local Systems

In this section, we will generalize the result for filtered local systems in §3 to filtered G-local systems.
The stability condition for filtered G-local systems is given in Definition 4.4, which is an analogue of
Ramanathan’s stability condition on principal bundles and is called the R-stability condition. Following
Construction 3.13 we construct a new space of quiver representations R(Q D , I D , θ), and show that
the isomorphism classes of filtered G-local systems on XD are in one-to-one correspondence with orbits
in the quiver representation space (Proposition 4.3). Following the equivalence of stability conditions
(Proposition 4.7), we construct the moduli space of filtered G-local systems (Theorem 4.11).
4.1. Filtered G-local Systems. Let G be a connected reductive group over k with a fixed maximal
torus T . Denote by R the set of roots. There is a natural pairing of cocharacters and characters
h·, ·i : Hom(Gm , T ) × Hom(T, Gm ) → Z.
This pairing can be easily extended to be with coefficients in Q and R. A weight θ is a cocharacter of
T with rational number coefficients, i.e. θ ∈ Hom(Gm , T ) ⊗Z Q. The subset
Rθ = {r ∈ R | − hθ, ri ≥ 0}
of roots determines a parabolic subgroup Pθ ⊆ G. More precisely, Pθ is generated by T and Ur for
r ∈ Rθ , where Ur is the unipotent subgroup given by the root r. For convenience, we also use the
notation RPθ := Rθ . Let Pθ = Lθ Uθ be the Levi decomposition of Pθ .
Consider the space of fundamental group representations Hom(π1 (XD ), G), on which there is a
natural G-action. Let ρ : π1 (XD ) → G be a representation (a homomorphism of groups), and denote
by [ρ] the corresponding points in Hom(π1 (XD ), G). A G-local system on XD is regarded as a repre-
sentation ρ : π1 (XD ) → G. Two G-local systems are isomorphic if the representations are in the same
G-orbit.
Definition 4.1. Let θ = {θx , x ∈ D} be a collection of weights. A θ-filtered G-local system is a
representation ρ : π1 (XD ) → G such that ρ is isomorphic to a G-local system ρ′ , for which ρ′ (cx ) ∈ Pθx
for each x ∈ D.
Construction 4.2. Given a collection of weights θ, we construct a variety R(Q D , I D , θ) similar to

that in Construction 3.13. Following the same notation as in Construction 3.13, let R(Q D , I D , G)
be the set of elements (φa )a∈QD satisfying the relation I D , where φa ∈ G for each arrow a. Clearly,
D D
1 Q
R(Q , I , G) is an affine variety, and there is a natural action of G on R(Q D , I D , G). We
v∈QD
0
define
Y Y
Gθ = Gv := G × L θx ,
v∈QD
0
x∈D
Q
where Gv0 = G and Gvx = Lθx for x ∈ D. As a subgroup of G, we have a natural action of Gθ
v∈QD
0
on R(Q D , I D , G). We define a subset

R(Q D , I D , θ) ⊆ R(Q D , I D , G)
as follows. It consists of all points (φa )a∈QD
1
∈ R(Q D , I D , G), of which the Gθ -orbit includes a point
(φ′a )a∈QD
1
such that
φ′cx,1 ∈ Lθx , φ′cx,2 ∈ Pθx
for any x ∈ D. Clearly, the induced action of Gθ on R(Q D , I D , θ) is well-defined, and R(Q D , I D , θ)
is a locally closed subset of R(Q D , I D , G).
Proposition 4.3. There exists a one-to-one correspondence between Gθ -orbits in R(Q D , I D , θ) and
isomorphism classes of θ-filtered G-local systems on XD .
Proof. The proof is an analogue of that of Proposition 3.15, and we only construct a θ-filtered G-local
system from a given point in R(Q D , I D , θ). Let (φa )a∈QD 1
∈ R(Q D , I D , θ) be a point, and we
suppose that φcx ∈ Pθx , i.e.
φcx,1 ∈ Lθx , φcx,2 ∈ Pθx
for each x ∈ D. We define a G-local system ρ as follows
ρ(ai ) = φai , ρ(bj ) = φbj , ρ(cx ) = φcx = φcx,1 φcx,2 .
The assumption φcx ∈ Pθx implies that ρ(cx ) ∈ Pθx . Thus, ρ is a θ-filtered G-local system.
4.2. R-stability Condition. Let P be a parabolic subgroup. A character χ of P is called dominant
(resp. anti-dominant ) if it is a positive (resp. negative) linear combination of fundamental weights
given by roots in RP (see [Ram75, §2]). Given a G-local system ρ : π1 (XD ) → G, a parabolic subgroup
P is compatible with ρ, if there is a lifting
P
ρ
π1 (XD ) G
In other words, the representation ρ is well-defined when restricted to P . We follow Ramanathan’s
definition of the stability condition on principal bundles [Ram75, Ram96a] to define the stability
condition of filtered G-local systems, which is called the R-stability condition. When G = GLn (k) and
the degree is zero, it is equivalent to Definition 3.10.
Definition 4.4. A θ-filtered G-local system ρ is R-semistable (resp. R-stable), if for
• any proper parabolic subgroup P compatible with ρ;
• any nontrivial anti-dominant character χ of P which is trivial on the center of P ,
we have
X
degloc ρ(P, χ) := hθ, χi = hθx , χi ≥ 0 (resp. > 0).
x∈D
In the above definition, it is equivalent to consider nontrivial dominant characters χ of P , which is

trivial on the center of P , such that degloc ρ(P, χ) ≤ 0.
Definition 4.5. A θ-filtered G-local system ρ is of degree zero, if for any character χ of G, we have
hθ, χi = 0. Note that when G is semisimple, this condition is trivial.
When we discuss stability conditions, both Proposition 2.2 and Definition 4.4 require that characters
act trivially on the center of G. Therefore, everything in this subsection is given under the assumption
that G is semisimple apart from the statement of Proposition 4.7.
As free Z-modules, let {ei } (resp. {e∗i }) be a basis of Hom(Gm , T ) (resp. Hom(T, Gm )) such that
hei , e∗j i = δij . Note that a cocharacter µ determines a parabolic subgroup Pµ (see §3.4). Given a
parabolic subgroup P , a character χ : T → Gm is said to a character of P if χ is in the image of the
natural morphism Hom(P, Gm ) → Hom(T, Gm ). Given a cocharacter µ, a character χµ is uniquely
determined by the following conditions
hei , χµ i = hµ, e∗i i
for each i. Similarly, given a character χ, denote by µχ the cocharacter satisfying
hµχ , e∗i i = hei , χi
for each i. Clearly,
hµ, χi = hµχ , χµ i.
Lemma 4.6. Given a cocharacter µ, the character χµ is a dominant character of Pµ . On the other
hand, given a character χ, if it is a dominant character of some parabolic subgroup P , then Pµχ = P .
Proof. Let r be a root. By definition of Pµ , we have hµ, ri ≥ 0 for any root r ∈ Rµ . Suppose that
χµ is not dominant, then there exists a root r0 ∈ Rµ such that the coefficient of the corresponding
fundamental weight λr0 in χµ is negative. This implies that hµ, r0 i < 0, which is a contradiction. The
second statement is proved in a similar way.
Given a collection of weights θ, let d be the least common multiple of the denominators of weights
in θ. Thus, dθx is a cocharacter for x ∈ D. We define a character χθ : Gθ → Gm as a product
Y
χθ := χv0 · χvx ,
x∈D
where χv0 is the trivial character and χvx = χ−dθx for each x ∈ D, which is a character of Pθx (and
thus Lθx ) by Lemma 4.6 .
Proposition 4.7. Let φ = (φa )a∈QD 1
∈ R(Q D , I D , θ) be a point. Denote by ρ the corresponding
θ-filtered G-local system. Suppose that ρ is of degree zero. Then, ρ is R-semistable (resp. R-stable) if
and only if the point φ is χθ -semistable (resp. χθ -stable).
Proof. We suppose that φcx ∈ Pθx for any x ∈ D. With the same argument as in the proof of Lemma
3.19, given a cocharacter µ : Gm → Gθ , if the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists, then the cocharacter is exactly
t→0
given by a single cocharacter Gm → T . We also use the same notation µ : Gm → T for this cocharacter.
First, we assume that the point φ is χθ -semistable. We choose a parabolic subgroup P compatible
with ρ and pick an arbitrary anti-dominant character χ of P . We have
1 X 1 X 1 X 1
hθ, χi = hdθx , χi = h−dθx , −χi = hµ−χ , χ−dθx i = hµ−χ , χθ i.
d d d d
x∈D x∈D x∈D
By Lemma 4.6, we know that Pµ−χ = P . By the compatibility of ρ, the limit lim µ−χ (t) · φ exists.
t→0
Then, by Proposition 2.2, we know that hµ−χ , χθ i ≥ 0, and then, hθ, χi ≥ 0. Thus, ρ is R-semistable.
Now we suppose that ρ is R-semistable. We take a cocharacter µ : Gm → Gθ (i.e. µ : Gm → T ) such
that the limit lim µ(t) · φ exists. Then, we have φa ∈ Pµ for each arrow a ∈ Q1D . Then, Proposition
t→0
4.3 shows that ρ is compatible with Pµ . Moreover, χµ is a dominant character of Pµ by Lemma 4.6.
Then,
X X
hµ, χθ i = hµ, χ−dθx i = −d hθx , χµ i = −dhθ, χµ i.
x∈D x∈D
Since ρ is R-semistable and χµ is a dominant character of Pµ , we have hθ, χµ i ≤ 0. Thus, hµ, χθ i ≥ 0.

This finishes the proof for the semistable case. The argument for the stable case is similar.
4.3. Moduli Space of Filtered G-local Systems.
Definition 4.8. Let ρ be a θ-filtered G-local system. A parabolic subgroup P is said to be admissible
with ρ if P is compatible with ρ and for any character χ : P → Gm , we have degloc ρ(P, χ) = 0.
Let P be a parabolic subgroup with Levi decomposition P = LU . Given a G-local system ρ, if P
is compatible with ρ, the restriction of ρ to the Levi subgroup L is also well-defined and we obtain
an L-local system. Taking the natural inclusion L → G, the L-local system gives a G-local system
and denote it by ρL . We give the definition of S-equivalence of filtered G-local systems analogous to
[Ram96a, Definition 3.6].
Definition 4.9. Two θ-filtered G-local systems ρ and ρ′ are S-equivalent if there exist parabolic
subgroups P and P ′ admissible with ρ and ρ′ respectively such that the corresponding G-local systems
ρL and ρ′L′ are isomorphic.
and φ′ = (φ′a )a∈QD 1
be two χθ -semistable points in R(Q D , I D , θ).
Let ρ and ρ′ be the corresponding θ-filtered G-local systems respectively. The filtered local systems ρ
and ρ′ are S-equivalent if and only if φ ∼ φ′ , i.e. they are GIT equivalent.
Proof. We generalize the proof of Lemma 3.25 to reductive groups. Suppose that φcx , φ′cx ∈ Pθx for
every x ∈ D. We first assume that ρ and ρ′ are S-equivalent. The isomorphism ρL ∼ = ρ′L′ implies
∼ ′ ∼
that L = L , and then, P = P . Therefore, we suppose that P = P , L = L , U = U ′ . Under this
′ ′ ′
assumption, the isomorphism ρL ∼ = ρ′L′ is actually ρL = ρ′L′ . Now we choose a cocharacter µ : Gm → T

such that Pµ = P . Clearly,
lim µ(t) · φ = φ|L = φ|′L = lim µ(t) · φ′ .
t→0 t→0
Furthermore, hµ, χθ i = hµ , χθ i = 0 follows directly from the admissibility of ρ and ρ′ . Thus, φ ∼ φ′
′
by Proposition 2.3.
Now we move to the other direction and assume φ ∼ φ′ . With the same argument as in the
proof of Lemma 3.25, we suppose that φ|L = φ′ |L , and there exist cocharacters µ and µ′ such that
hµ, χθ i = hµ′ , χθ i = 0 and
φ|L = lim µ(t) · φ = lim µ′ (t) · φ′ = φ|L′ ,
t→0 t→0
′ ′ ′
where P = Pµ = LU and P = Pµ′ = L U are the Levi decompositions. This equality implies
that ρL = ρ′L′ by Proposition 4.3. The admissibility of P (resp. P ′ ) follows from the condition
hµ, χθ i = hµ′ , χθ i = 0 directly.
fB (XD , G, θ) : (Sch/k)op → Set
M
sending each k-scheme S to the set of isomorphism classes of S-flat families of degree zero R-semistable
θ-filtered G-local systems on XD . With a similar approach as Theorem 3.27, we have the following
results:
Theorem 4.11. Let Rθss (Q D , I D , θ) ⊆ R(Q D , I D , θ) be the set of χθ -semistable points. Define
MB (XD , G, θ) := Rθss (Q D , I D , θ)//Gθ
(1) MB (XD , G, θ) is a quasi-projective variety;

(2) MB (XD , G, θ) universally co-represents the moduli functor MfB (XD , G, θ);
(3) the k-points are in one-to-one correspondence with S-equivalence classes of degree zero R-
semistable θ-filtered G-local systems;
(4) there exists an open subset MsB (XD , G, θ), of which the k-points correspond to isomorphism
classes of degree zero R-stable θ-filtered G-local systems.
5. Moduli Space of Filtered Stokes G-local Systems

We construct the moduli space of filtered Stokes G-local systems in this section following the ap-
proach in §4. The main difference is the construction of the quiver Q Q , which depends on irregular
types Q (Construction 5.2). We refer the reader to [Boa14, Boa21, HS22] for more details about
irregular curves and Stokes G-local systems.
5.1. Filtered Stokes G-Local Systems. An irregular type Q is a t-valued meromorphic function
germ modulo holomorphic terms, i.e. an element in t(k((z)))/t(k[[z]]). Let m be the degree of Q(z −1 ).
Let Q = {Qx , x ∈ D} be a set of irregular types. Denote by Ax the set of anti-Stokes directions, which
is determined by the irregular type Qx . Let Hx ⊆ G be the stabilizer of Qx under the adjoint action,
and we define
Y
H := Hx .
x∈D
With a choice of half-period of directions, we determine two parabolic subgroups Px,+ = Hx Ux,+ and
Px,− = Hx Ux,− with Hx as the Levi subgroup. For each irregular type Qx , we define
A(Qx ) := G × Hx × (Ux,+ × Ux,− )mx ,
and an element in A(Qx ) is denoted by (Cx , hx , ux,+ , ux,− ), where hx is the formal monodromy.
Let Xb be the real oriented blow-up of X at each x ∈ D. We can define a punctured curve XQ ⊆ X, b
which is determined by the irregular types Q, and is called an irregular curve [Boa14, §8]. Let π1 (XQ )
be the fundamental groupoid of XQ , and let Hom(π1 (XQ ), G) be the space of G-representations of
π1 (XQ ). Denote by HomS (π1 (XQ ), G) ⊆ Hom(π1 (XQ ), G) the subset of Stokes G-representations.
Here is a more precise description of HomS (π1 (XQ ), G). Let
Y
RQ := (G × G)g × A(Qx ).
x∈D
Then, HomS (π1 (XQ ), G) is isomorphic to a subset of RQ , which includes all points
((Ai , Bi )1≤i≤g , (Cx , hx , ux,+, ux,− )x∈D ) ∈ RQ
such that
g
Y Y
[Ai , Bi ] Cx−1 hx ux,+ ux,− Cx = id
i=1 x∈D
Clearly, HomS (π1 (XQ ), G) is a closed subvariety of RQ . The (G × H)-action on HomS (π1 (XQ ), G) is
given as follows:
(g, (kx )x∈D )·((Ai , Bi )1≤i≤g , (Cx , hx , ux,+ , ux,− )x∈D ) :=
((gAi g −1 , gBi g −1 )1≤i≤g , (kx Cx g −1 , kx hx kx−1 , kx ux,+ kx−1 , kx ux,− kx−1 )x∈D ).
A Stokes G-representation on XQ is a representation ρ : π1 (XQ ) → G, which can be regarded as an
element ((Ai , Bi )1≤i≤g , (Cx , hx , ux,+ , ux,− )x∈D ) defined as above. Two Stokes G-representations are
isomorphic if the corresponding elements in RQ are in the same (G × H)-orbit. Moreover, a Stokes
G-local system is regarded as a Stokes G-representation.
Definition 5.1. A θ-filtered Stokes G-local system on XQ is a Stokes G-local system ρ on XQ such
that ρ is isomorphic to ρ′ , of which the formal monodromy h′x is in Pθx for each x ∈ D.
Construction 5.2. Given a collection of irregular types Q, we construct a quiver Q Q = {Q0Q , Q1Q }:
Q0Q = {v0 , vx , wx , x ∈ D},
Q1Q = {ai , bj : v0 → v0 , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g,
cx,1 : v0 → vx , cx,2 : vx → v0 ,
hx,1 : vx → wx , hx,2 : wx → vx ,
dx,+ : vx → vx , dx,− : vx → vx , x ∈ D}.
More precisely, for each x ∈ D, we have
dx,+
cx,2 hx,2
v0 vx wx
cx,1 hx,1
dx,−
Let cx := cx,1 hx,1 hx,2 dx,+ dx,− cx,2 be a loop. We define a relation
g
Y Y
Q
I := ( [ai , bi ]) · ( cx ) − v0 .
i=1 x∈D
Let R(Q Q , I Q , G) be the set of elements (φa )a∈QQ , where φa ∈ G, satisfying the relation I Q , and
Q 1
there is a natural action of G on R(Q Q , I Q , G).
v∈QQ
0
Given a collection of weights θ, we define
Y Y Y
GQθ := Gv := G × Hx × L θx ,
v∈QQ x∈D x∈D
0
Q Q
0 := G, Gvx := Hx and Gwx := Lθx . The action of Gθ on R(Q
where GvQ , I Q , G) is induced from
that of G.
v∈QQ
0
Now we consider a subset R(Q Q , I Q , θ) ⊆ R(Q Q , I Q , G). The subset R(Q Q , I Q , θ) consists of
all points φ = (φa )a∈QQ , of which the GQ ′ ′
θ -orbit of φ includes a point φ = (φa )a∈QQ such that
1 1
φ′cx,1 = (φ′cx,2 )−1 , φ′dx,+ ∈ Ux,+ , φ′dx,− ∈ Ux,− , φ′hx,1 ∈ L θx , φ′hx,2 ∈ Pθx
Clearly, R(Q Q , I Q , θ) is a locally closed subset and the action of GQ

θ on it is well-defined.
Proposition 5.3. The GQ Q Q

θ -orbits in R(Q , I , θ) are in one-to-one correspondence with isomor-
phism classes of θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems on XQ .
Proof. The proof of this proposition is similar to that of Proposition 3.15, and we only give the
correspondence as we did in the proof of Proposition 4.3. Let (φa )a∈QD
1
∈ R(Q Q , I Q , θ). Suppose
that
φdx,+ ∈ Ux,+ , φdx,− ∈ Ux,− , φhx,1 ∈ Lθx , φhx,2 ∈ Pθx .
We define
Ai := φai , Bi = φbi , Cx = φcx,2 , hx = φhx,1 φhx,2 , ux,+ = φdx,+ , ux,− = φdx,− .
Since φhx,1 φhx,2 ∈ Pθx , the resulting element ((Ai , Bi )1≤i≤g , (Cx , hx , ux,+, ux,− )x∈D ) gives a θ-filtered
Stokes G-local system.
5.2. Moduli Space of Filtered Stokes G-local Systems. Let ρ be a θ-filtered Stokes G-local
system, and let P be a parabolic subgroup. We say that P is compatible with ρ if ρ is well-defined
when restricting to P . Moreover, P is admissible with ρ if P is compatible with ρ and for any character
χ : P → Gm , we have degloc ρ(P, χ) = 0.
Definition 5.4. A θ-filtered Stokes G-local system is R-semistable (resp. R-stable), if for
• any compatible proper parabolic subgroup P ⊆ G,
• any nontrivial anti-dominant character χ : P → C∗ , which is trivial on the center of P ,
we have
degloc ρ(P, χ) = hθ, χi ≥ 0 (resp. > 0).
A θ-filtered Stokes G-local system ρ is of degree zero, if for any character χ of G, we have hθ, χi = 0.
Following the same notation as in §4.2, we define a character χQ Q
θ : Gθ → Gm as
Y
χQ
θ = χv0 · (χvx · χwx ),
x∈D
where χwx = χ−dθx and χv0 , χvx are trivial characters for x ∈ D.
The equivalence of stability conditions for filtered Stokes G-local systems follows directly by applying
the same argument as in Proposition 4.7.
Proposition 5.5. Given a point φ = (φa )a∈QQ ∈ R(Q Q , I Q , θ), let ρ be the corresponding θ-filtered
1
Stokes G-local system. Suppose that ρ is of degree zero. Then, ρ is R-semistable (resp. R-stable) if
and only if the point φ is χθ -semistable (resp. χθ -stable).
Definition 5.6. Two θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems ρ and ρ′ are S-equivalent if there exist parabolic
subgroups P and P ′ admissible with ρ and ρ′ respectively such that the corresponding Stokes G-local
systems ρL and ρ′L′ are isomorphic.
With the same argument as in Lemma 4.10, we have the following lemma for filtered Stokes G-local
systems:
Lemma 5.7. Two χQ ′ Q Q
θ -semistable points φ and φ in R(Q , I , θ) are GIT equivalent if and only if
′
the corresponding θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems ρ and ρ are S-equivalent.
fB (XQ , G, θ) : (Sch/k)op → Set
M
sending each k-scheme S to the set of isomorphism classes of S-flat families of degree zero R-semistable
θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems on XQ .
Theorem 5.8. Let Rθss (Q Q , I Q , θ) ⊆ R(Q Q , I Q , θ) be the set of χθ -semistable points. Define
MB (XQ , G, θ) := Rθss (Q Q , I Q , θ)//Gθ
(1) MB (XQ , G, θ) is a quasi-projective variety;
(2) MB (XQ , G, θ) universally co-represents the moduli functor M fB (XQ , G, θ);
(3) the k-points are in one-to-one correspondence with S-equivalence classes of degree zero R-
semistable θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems;
(4) there exists an open subset MsB (XD , G, θ), of which the k-points correspond to isomorphism
classes of degree zero R-stable θ-filtered Stokes G-local systems.
Example 5.9. (1) In the first example, we consider the case that all weights are trivial, i.e. θ = 0.
Similar to Example 3.28, we have
Y Y
GQ
0 = G × H x × G,
x∈D x∈D
and the character χQ

0 is trivial. Then, the moduli space MB (XQ , G, 0) is an affine variety
MB (XQ , G, 0) = R(Q Q , I Q , 0)//GQ ∼

0 = HomS (π1 (XQ ), G)//(G × H).
This is exactly the wild character variety introduced by Boalch [Boa14, §8], where he showed
that it is an algebraic Poisson variety with symplectic leaves obtained by fixing a collec-
tion of conjugacy classes C = {Cx ⊆ Hx ; x ∈ D} of the formal monodromies. Moreover,
the (semi)stable points in MB (XQ , G, 0) correspond to (semi)simple Stokes representations
[Boa14, Theorem 9.3]. Note that simple representations are defined as irreducible ones.
(2) In the second example, we consider the case that all irregular types are trivial, i.e. Qx = 0
for any x ∈ D. We claim that this case will completely reduce to the regular (or tame) case
considered in §4. We basically follow the same notation as in §4 and §5. In this case,
Y Y
GQ
θ = G× G× L θx ,
x∈D x∈D
the corresponding quiver Q Q reduces to

cx,2 hx,2
v0 vx wx
cx,1 hx,1
and
R(Q Q , I Q , G) = {φ = (φa )a∈QQ : φa ∈ G, φI Q = 0},
1
where
g
Y Y
Q
I := ( [ai , bi ]) · ( cx ) − v0
i=1 x∈D
with each cx = cx,1 hx,1 hx,2 cx,2 . We slightly change the notation of arrows and vertices in Q D
(see Construction 3.13) as follows
Q1D = {a′i , b′j : v0 → v0 , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ g,
c′x,1 : v0 → wx , c′x,2 : wx → v0 , x ∈ D},
and
c′x,2
v0 wx .
c′x,1
Given an element φ = (φa )a∈QQ ∈ R(Q Q , I Q , θ), we construct a point

1
φ = (φ′a )a∈QD
′
1
∈ R(Q D , I D , θ)
as follows
φ′a′i = φai , φ′b′i = φbi , φ′c′x,1 = φcx,1 φhx,1 , φ′c′x,2 = φhx,2 φcx,2 ,
Note that since φcx,1 = φ−1

cx,2 , this construction is well-defined. Similar to the proof of Propo-
sition 3.15, the orbits of R(Q Q , I Q , θ) under the action of GQ θ are in one-to-one correspon-
dence with orbits in R(Q D , I D , θ) under the action of Gθ . Furthermore, when irregular
types are trivial, the character χQθ can be regarded as a character of Gθ , and denote it by χθ .
Thus, a point φ ∈ R(Q , I , θ) is χQ
Q Q
θ -(semi)stable if and only if the corresponding point
φ′ ∈ R(Q D , I D , θ) is χθ -(semi)stable. Therefore, we obtain an isomorphism of moduli spaces
MB (XQ , G, θ) ∼
= MB (XD , G, θ).
Example 5.10 (“Weighted” Eguchi–Hanson space). In this example, we consider an explicit case,
where G = SL2 (C), and (X, D) = (P1 , 0). Suppose that the irregular type has a pole of order 3 at 0:
A3 A2 A1
Q= + 2 + ,
z3 z z
where the leading coefficient A3 is assumed to be regular. So the corresponding meromorphic connec-
tion with irregular type Q has a pole of order 4 at 0. Given the following weight
1
−2
θ= 1 ∈ t,
2
which determines a parabolic subgroup of SL2 (C) as

a b ∗
Pθ = | a ∈ C ,b ∈ C .
0 a−1
Since A3 is regular, Q determines 6 anti-Stokes directions, the irregular curve XQ is obtained by real-
blowing up X at 0 first and then puncturing the new curve at 6 distinct points near the boundary
circle. With respect to this irregular type Q, the centralizer group H = ZG (Q) and the Stokes groups
U+ , U− can be calculated in the following forms

a ∗ 1 b 1 0
H= | a ∈ C , U+ = | b ∈ C , U− = |c∈C .
a−1 0 1 c 1
Now we consider a special θ-filtered Stokes G-local system ρ = (C, h, u+ , u− ) ∈ HomS (π1 (XQ ), G)
such that C, h, u+ , u− ∈ Pθ and at least one of them is not contained in P−θ . Clearly, if we take
P = Pθ , the parabolic subgroup P is compatible with ρ. Furthermore, taking any nontrivial anti-
dominant character χ of P , it is easy to find
degloc ρ(P, χ) = hθ, χi > 0.
By the assumption, the parabolic subgroup P−θ is not compatible with ρ. Thus, the θ-filtered Stokes
G-local system ρ is R-stable. By Theorem 5.8, it corresponds to a point in MsB (XQ , G, θ).
On the other hand, this local system ρ is indecomposable but not semisimple, which is easy to
check by taking the standard representation SL2 (C) → GL2 (C). As we discussed in Example 3.28, the
classical wild character variety MB (XQ , G, 0) only parametrizes semisimple representations. Then,
the Stokes G-local system ρ does not correspond to a point in MB (XQ , G, 0). This example illustrates
the fact that
MB (XQ , G, 0) ≇ MB (XQ , G, θ)
in general. Moreover, the moduli space MB (XQ , G, 0) is exactly the Eguchi–Hanson space considered
by Boalch in [Boa18, §2], where he concluded that this is a smooth affine variety of dimension 2.
6. Betti Moduli Spaces in tame NAHC for Principal Bundles

In the tame/wild NAHC on noncompact curves, we have to fix the data of monodromies/residues
at punctures in order to get a one-to-one correspondence. Keeping this background in mind, in this
section, we give the construction of the Betti moduli spaces MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) in the tame NAHC
for principal bundles on noncompact curves (Theorem 6.2), where γ is a collection of weights and Mγ
is a given collection of monodromy data. When G = GLn (C), it gives the Betti moduli space (for
filtered local systems) considered by Simpson in [Sim90]. The construction for the Betti moduli spaces
in the wild case is similar. In §6.2, we construct the monodromy scheme Mon(D, Lγ ) and define a
morphism
πγ : MB (XD , G, γ) → Mon(D, Lγ ),
of which the fiber πγ−1 ([Mγ ])
is isomorphic to the Betti moduli space MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) and thus
homeomorphic to the Dolbeault moduli space (see Proposition 6.6).
6.1. Construction of the Betti Moduli Spaces. We first briefly review the statement of the tame
NAHC for principal bundles, and we refer the reader to [HKSZ22] for more details. Let α, β, γ (resp.
α, β, γ) be weights (resp. collections of weights). Let Gα and Gβ be parahoric group schemes (see
[KSZ23, HKSZ22] for instance). With respect to the relation in the following table,
Dolbeault de Rham Betti

weights α β = α − (sα + s̄α ) γ = −(sα + s̄α )
residues \ monodromies ϕα = sα + Yα ∇β Mγ
where ϕα = sα + Yα is the Jordan decomposition with semisimple part sα and nilpotent part Yα with
(Xα , Hα , Yα ) a Kostant–Rallis triple, and
∇β = α + (sα − s̄α ) − (Hα + Xα − Yα ),
Mγ = exp (−2πi(α + sα − s̄α )) exp (2πi(Hα + Xα − Yα )) ,
we define the following categories:
s
• CDol (X, Gα , ϕα ): the category of degree zero R-stable logahoric Gα -Higgs torsors on X, and
the Levi factors of the residues of the Higgs fields are ϕα at punctures;
s
• CdR (X, Gβ , ∇β ): the category of degree zero R-stable logahoric Gβ -connections on X and the
Levi factors of the residues of the connections are ∇β at punctures;
• CBs (XD , G, γ, Mγ ): the category of degree zero R-stable γ-filtered G-local systems, of which
the Levi factors of the monodromies around punctures are Mγ .
The tame NAHC for principal bundles on noncompact curves is given as follows:
Theorem 6.1 (Theorem 1.1 in [HKSZ22]). The following categories are equivalent
s
CDol ∼ C s (X, Gβ , ∇β ) ∼
(X, Gα , ϕα ) = = CBs (XD , G, γ, Mγ ).
dR
From the statement of the theorem, it is clear that we have to fix the data of residues and mon-
odromies in order to get a one-to-one correspondence among these three objects. This is also true
in the classical case [Sim90, §5], which is hidden behind the statement of the main theorem [Sim90,
Theorem, p. 718]. Now we will construct the Betti moduli spaces MsB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) with given data
Mγ of monodromies, which co-represents the moduli functor
fs (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) : (Sch/C)op → Sets,
M B
sending each C-scheme S to the set of isomorphism classes of S-flat families of degree zero R-stable
γ-filtered G-local systems on XD with Mγ being the Levi factors of monodromies.
We first review the construction of the locally closed subset
R(Q D , I D , γ) ⊆ R(Q D , I D , G)
which is similar to that in Construction 3.13. There is a natural Gγ -action
Gγ × R(Q D , I D , G) → R(Q D , I D , G)
Let Z ⊆ R(Q D , I D , G) be the closed subvariety, of which the points φ = (φa )a∈QD
1
satisfy the
condition
φcx,1 ∈ Lγx , φcx,2 ∈ Pγx
for x ∈ D. Denote by Z ′ ⊆ Gγ × R(Q D , I D , G) the pullback of the following diagram
Z′ Z
Gγ × R(Q D , I D , G) R(Q D , I D , G)
Then, we have
Z ′ |R(QD ,I D ,G) = R(Q D , I D , γ).
Now there is a natural map
Y
Z → Pγx , (φa )a∈QD
1
7→ (φcx,1 φcx,2 )x∈D .
x∈D
Then, we have
Y Y
Z′ →Z → Pγx → L γx ,
x∈D x∈D
Q
where Lγx is the Levi subgroup of Pγx . Fixing an element Mγ ∈ Lγx , denote by Z ′ (Mγ ) ⊆ Z ′
x∈D
the preimage, and then take the restriction
R(Q D , I D , γ, Mγ ) := Z ′ (Mγ )|R(QD ,I D ,G) .
Finally, we define the moduli space
MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) := Rγss (Q D , I D , γ, Mγ )//Gγ .
Following the approach in §4, this is the Betti moduli space expected.
Theorem 6.2. There exists a quasi-projective variety MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ) as the (coarse) moduli space
of degree zero R-semistable γ-filtered G-local systems such that the Levi factors of monodromies around
punctures are Mγ . There exists an open subset MsB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ), whose points correspond to iso-
morphism classes of R-stable objects in MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ).
As a direct result of the existence of the Betti moduli space, the categorical correspondence of tame
NAHC also holds for the corresponding moduli spaces:
Theorem 6.3 (Theorem 1.2 in [HKSZ22]). The following topological spaces are homeomorphic
(top) (top) (top)
MDol (X, Gα , ϕα ) ∼
= MdR (X, Gβ , ∇β ) ∼
= MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ).
Remark 6.4. Although the result of Theorem 6.3 is given in [HKSZ22], the authors do not give a direct
construction of the Betti moduli spaces in [HKSZ22] and only prove that the de Rham moduli functor
is equivalent to the Betti moduli functor.
6.2. Monodromy Scheme. We define a quiver Q • as follows
Q0• = {v0 , vx , x ∈ D},
Q1• = {cx,1 : v0 → vx , cx,2 : vx → v0 , x ∈ D}.
Compared to the quiver Q D , we forget the arrows ai , bj , and only keep the arrows for punctures. The
action of Gγ on R(Q • , G) is given in the same way as that on R(Q D , I D , G) in Construction 4.2
(resp. §6.1). Consider the closed subvariety
Y
WP = (Lγx × Pγx ) ⊆ R(Q • , G).
x∈D
′
Similar to the definition of Z , let WP′ ⊆ Gγ × R(Q • , Gγ ) be the preimage of WP under the action of
Gγ . Then, we define
R(Q • , Pγ ) := WP′ |R(Q• ,G) .
Q Q
2
Considering the Levi subgroups, we define WL′ as the preimage of WL := Lγx in the same way,
x∈D i=1
and
R(Q • , Lγ ) := WL′ |R(Q• ,G) .
Thus, we have a natural morphism
R(Q D , I D , γ) → R(Q • , Pγ ) → R(Q • , Lγ )
induced by
Z → WP → WL .
Note that the Gγ -action is well-defined on R(Q • , Lγ ).
Definition 6.5. The monodromy scheme Mon(D, Lγ ) is defined as
Mon(D, Lγ ) := Rγss (Q • , Lγ )//Gγ .
The monodromy scheme for Pγ can be defined similarly
Mon(D, Pγ ) := Rγss (Q • , Pγ )//Gγ .
Since the morphism R(Q D , I D , γ) → R(Q • , Lγ ) is compatible with the Gγ -action, we obtain an
induced morphism
πγ : MB (XD , G, γ) = Rγss (Q D , I D , γ)//Gγ → Rγss (Q • , Lγ )//Gγ = Mon(D, Lγ ).
Note that there is a natural map

Y
WL → L γx , (φa )a∈Q•1 → (φcx,1 φcx,2 )x∈D .
x∈D
Q
Taking an element Mγ ∈ Lγx , let [Mγ ] be the corresponding point in Mon(D, Lγ ) via
x∈D
Y
Lγx ← WL ← WL′ → R(Q • , Lγ ) → Mon(D, Lγ ).
x∈D
Proposition 6.6. We have
πγ−1 ([Mγ ]) ∼
= MB (XD , G, γ, Mγ ).
Moreover,
(top) (top)
πγ−1 ([Mγ ]) ∼
= MdR (X, Gβ , ∇β ) ∼
= MDol (X, Gα , ϕα )
as homeomorphisms.
Proof. The first statement is obvious from the construction. The second statement follows directly
from Theorem 6.3.
Remark 6.7. A morphism
MB (XD , G, γ) → Mon(D, Pγ )
Q
can be defined similarly, and the fiber of a given data of monodromies Mγ ∈ Pγx is the moduli
x∈D
space of degree zero γ-filtered local systems, of which the monodromies are Mγ around punctures.
This is a more precise
Q description of the Betti moduli spaces. Compared to the result of Proposition
6.6, an element in Pγx not only fixes the Levi part but also the unipotent part of the monodromy.
x∈D
When we consider the tame NAHC, it is enough to only fix the Levi factors to make the tame NAHC
a one-to-one correspondence (see [Boa11] or [HKSZ22]).
References
[AD20] S. Amrutiya and U. V. Dubey, Moduli of filtered quiver representations, Bull. Sci. Math. 164 (2020), 102899,
29.
[Alf17] D. Alfaya, Moduli space of parabolic λ-modules over a curve, arXiv:1710.02080 (2017).
[ASS06] I. Assem, D. Simson, and A. Skowroński, Elements of the representation theory of associative algebras.
Vol. 1, London Mathematical Society Student Texts, vol. 65, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006,
Techniques of representation theory.
[BB04] O. Biquard and P. P. Boalch, Wild non-abelian Hodge theory on curves, Compos. Math. 140 (2004), no. 1,
179–204.
[BBP17] V. Balaji, I. Biswas, and Y. Pandey, Connections on parahoric torsors over curves, Publ. Res. Inst. Math.
Sci. 53 (2017), no. 4, 551–585.
[Boa11] P. P. Boalch, Riemann-Hilbert for tame complex parahoric connections, Transform. Groups 16 (2011), no. 1,
27–50.
[Boa14] , Geometry and braiding of Stokes data; fission and wild character varieties, Ann. of Math. (2) 179
(2014), no. 1, 301–365.
[Boa18] , Wild character varieties, meromorphic Hitchin systems and Dynkin diagrams, Geometry and physics.
Vol. II, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2018, pp. 433–454.
[Boa21] , Topology of the Stokes phenomenon, Integrability, quantization, and geometry. I. Integrable systems,
Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., vol. 103, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, [2021] ©2021, pp. 55–100.
[BY96] H. U. Boden and K. Yokogawa, Moduli spaces of parabolic Higgs bundles and parabolic K(D) pairs over
smooth curves. I, Internat. J. Math. 7 (1996), no. 5, 573–598.
[DDP18] D.-E. Diaconescu, R. Donagi, and T. Pantev, BPS states, torus links and wild character varieties, Comm.
Math. Phys. 359 (2018), no. 3, 1027–1078.
[HKSZ22] P. Huang, G. Kydonakis, H. Sun, and L. Zhao, Tame parahoric nonabelian hodge correspondence on curves,
arXiv:2205.15475 (2022).
[HL97] D. Huybrechts and M. Lehn, The geometry of moduli spaces of sheaves, Aspects of Mathematics, E31, Friedr.
Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, 1997.
[HMW19] T. Hausel, M. Mereb, and M. L. Wong, Arithmetic and representation theory of wild character varieties, J.
Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 21 (2019), no. 10, 2995–3052.
[HS22] P. Huang and H. Sun, Meromorphic parahoric Higgs torsors and filtered Stokes G-local systems on curves,
arXiv:2212.04939 (2022).
[Ina13] M.-A. Inaba, Moduli of parabolic connections on curves and the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence, J. Algebraic
Geom. 22 (2013), no. 3, 407–480.
[Kin94] A. D. King, Moduli of representations of finite-dimensional algebras, Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2) 45
(1994), no. 180, 515–530.
[Kon93] H. Konno, Construction of the moduli space of stable parabolic Higgs bundles on a Riemann surface, J. Math.
Soc. Japan 45 (1993), no. 2, 253–276.
[KSZ23] G. Kydonakis, H. Sun, and L. Zhao, Logahoric Higgs torsors for a complex reductive group, Mathematische
Annalen (2023).
[MFK94] D. Mumford, J. Fogarty, and F. Kirwan, Geometric invariant theory, third ed., Ergebnisse der Mathematik
und ihrer Grenzgebiete (2) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (2)], vol. 34, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1994. MR 1304906
[MS80] V. B. Mehta and C. S. Seshadri, Moduli of vector bundles on curves with parabolic structures, Math. Ann.
248 (1980), no. 3, 205–239.
[Ram75] A. Ramanathan, Stable principal bundles on a compact Riemann surface, Math. Ann. 213 (1975), 129–152.
[Ram96a] , Moduli for principal bundles over algebraic curves. I, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Math. Sci. 106 (1996),
no. 3, 301–328.
[Ram96b] , Moduli for principal bundles over algebraic curves. II, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Math. Sci. 106 (1996),
no. 4, 421–449.
[Rei08] M. Reineke, Moduli of representations of quivers, Trends in representation theory of algebras and related
topics, EMS Ser. Congr. Rep., Eur. Math. Soc., Zürich, 2008, pp. 589–637.
[Ric88] R. W. Richardson, Conjugacy classes of n-tuples in Lie algebras and algebraic groups, Duke Math. J. 57
(1988), no. 1, 1–35.
[Sim90] C. T. Simpson, Harmonic bundles on noncompact curves, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), no. 3, 713–770.
[Sim92] , Higgs bundles and local systems, Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1992), no. 75, 5–95.
[Sim94a] , Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety. I, Inst. Hautes
Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1994), no. 79, 47–129.
[Sim94b] , Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety. II, Inst. Hautes
Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1994), no. 80, 5–79 (1995).
[Sim97] , The Hodge filtration on nonabelian cohomology, Algebraic geometry—Santa Cruz 1995, Proc. Sym-
pos. Pure Math., vol. 62, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 217–281.
[Sun20] H. Sun, Moduli spaces of λ-modules on projective deligne-mumford stacks, arXiv:2003.11674 (2020).
[Yok93] K. Yokogawa, Compactification of moduli of parabolic sheaves and moduli of parabolic Higgs sheaves, J. Math.
Kyoto Univ. 33 (1993), no. 2, 451–504.

Cambridge Math

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cambridge Math

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MODULI SPACES OF FILTERED (STOKES) G-LOCAL SYSTEMS ON CURVES

PENGFEI HUANG AND HAO SUN

the path algebra has a natural graded structure.

under the action of

where the action is defined as

and the isomorphism classes of representations

R(Q′ , I ′ , n) = {(φa′1 , φa′2 ) | φa′1 φa′2 = id, φa′i ∈ End(k n )}.

Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)).

Fundamental group representations can be regarded as representations of a specific quiver. Now we

Hom(π1 (X), GLn (k)) ⊆ R(Q, n).

R(Q, I , n) = {(φa )a∈Q1 | φI = 0}.

representations of fundamental groups

3. Moduli Space of Filtered Local Systems

3.1. Quasi-parabolic Local Systems. Let V be a vector space of dimension n. A quasi-parabolic

representations of fundamental groups

Proof. If degloc (L• ) = 0, then L• is semistable if and only if we have

representations of Q D satisfying the relation I D .

as follows. It consists of all points (φa )a∈QD

for any x ∈ D. Clearly, the induced action of GP on R(Q D , I D , P ) is well-defined.

for x ∈ D. Denote by Z ′ ⊆ GP × R(Q D , I D , n) the preimage of Z under the GP -action.

It is easy to see that R(Q D , I D , P ) is a locally closed subset.

With respect to the above construction, both (φa )a∈QD1

Let µ be a cocharacter of GP , i.e. µ = (µv )v∈QD0

lim µs(a) (t) · φa · µ−1

lim µ(t) · φa · µ−1 (t)

Now we move to characters. A character of Lx can be regarded as a character of Px , i.e.

We calculate the pairing hµ, χθ i first.

where d′0 = 0. In conclusion,

By Proposition 2.2, we know that the corresponding point φ ∈ R(Q D , I D , P ) is χθ -semistable.

hµ, χθ i = −d(d′2 − d′1 ) · degloc (L•′ ) ≥ 0

by Propsition 2.2, and then,

for each arrow a ∈ Q1D . Therefore,

Let P = Pµ and P ′ = Pµ′ be parabolic subgroups with Levi decompositions P = LU and P ′ = L′ U ′ .

for each j. The same argument holds for degloc (Lj,•

We consider the moduli functor

4. Moduli Space of Filtered G-local Systems

Construction 4.2. Given a collection of weights θ, we construct a variety R(Q D , I D , θ) similar to

on R(Q D , I D , G). We define a subset

In the above definition, it is equivalent to consider nontrivial dominant characters χ of P , which is

Since ρ is R-semistable and χµ is a dominant character of Pµ , we have hθ, χµ i ≤ 0. Thus, hµ, χθ i ≥ 0.

assumption, the isomorphism ρL ∼ = ρ′L′ is actually ρL = ρ′L′ . Now we choose a cocharacter µ : Gm → T

(1) MB (XD , G, θ) is a quasi-projective variety;

5. Moduli Space of Filtered Stokes G-local Systems

Clearly, R(Q Q , I Q , θ) is a locally closed subset and the action of GQ

Proposition 5.3. The GQ Q Q

and the character χQ

MB (XQ , G, 0) = R(Q Q , I Q , 0)//GQ ∼

the corresponding quiver Q Q reduces to

Given an element φ = (φa )a∈QQ ∈ R(Q Q , I Q , θ), we construct a point

Note that since φcx,1 = φ−1

6. Betti Moduli Spaces in tame NAHC for Principal Bundles

Dolbeault de Rham Betti

Thus, we have a natural morphism

R(Q D , I D , γ) → R(Q • , Pγ ) → R(Q • , Lγ )

Note that the Gγ -action is well-defined on R(Q • , Lγ ).

Definition 6.5. The monodromy scheme Mon(D, Lγ ) is defined as

Mon(D, Lγ ) := Rγss (Q • , Lγ )//Gγ .

The monodromy scheme for Pγ can be defined similarly

Mon(D, Pγ ) := Rγss (Q • , Pγ )//Gγ .

πγ : MB (XD , G, γ) = Rγss (Q D , I D , γ)//Gγ → Rγss (Q • , Lγ )//Gγ = Mon(D, Lγ ).

Note that there is a natural map

Proposition 6.6. We have

Remark 6.7. A morphism

You might also like