How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
SNC projective compactifications of smooth quasiprojective varieties
Statement
Assume AC. Every smooth quasiprojective complex variety admits a smooth projective compactification with reduced boundary a simple normal crossings divisor . Given finitely many such compactifications, there is another dominating all of them and restricting to the identity on . A morphism of smooth quasiprojective varieties extends to a morphism of such compactifications after modifying the source compactification outside its open variety.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice; a smooth quasiprojective complex variety , meaning a separated finite-type -scheme (Separated morphism of schemes, Locally finite type and finite type morphisms) whose structure morphism to is H-quasi-projective (Quasi-projective morphisms before Proj); need not be connected or irreducible, and its finitely many connected components are treated separately. A compactification of is an open immersion into a proper -scheme with dense image (Open immersions of schemes); it is smooth projective when is smooth over (Smooth morphism of schemes) and is H-projective (Projective morphisms before Proj), and its boundary is the complement of the image with its reduced structure. An SNC compactification is one whose boundary is a reduced effective Cartier divisor with simple normal crossings support (Simple normal crossings divisors and simultaneous normal crossings position), interpreted on each pure-dimensional component when dimensions differ.
Quasi-projectivity unpacked: the structure morphism factors, for some , through a quasi-compact immersion followed by the projection; an immersion factors as a closed immersion into an open subscheme (Quasi-projective morphisms before Proj, Immersion of schemes, Quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms, Closed immersions of schemes).
Scheme-theoretic image: for a quasi-compact morphism , the kernel is a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf and is the smallest closed subscheme of through which factors; its restriction to every open is the scheme-theoretic image of (Scheme-theoretic image, Scheme-theoretic image of a quasi-compact morphism).
Weak embedded desingularization: for a field of characteristic zero, a smooth finite-type -scheme and a reduced closed subscheme , there is a sequence of blowups of regular centers such that every center avoids the copy of the original smooth locus in the successive strict transform , the strict transform is smooth and has simple normal crossings with the exceptional divisor, and the induced morphism is proper, birational on each irreducible component and an isomorphism over ; the construction is canonical and commutes with smooth morphisms and ambient embeddings (Weak embedded desingularization in characteristic zero). Centers may meet points of that become smooth during the sequence.
Principalization: for a field of characteristic zero, a smooth finite-type -scheme and a coherent ideal sheaf that is not identically zero on any irreducible component of , there is a sequence of blowups of regular centers with the ideal of an effective Cartier divisor whose support has simple normal crossings; the centers of the underlying canonical resolution of the marked ideal lie in its successive supports, and the controlled transform satisfies , so that (Canonical principalization of ideals in characteristic zero, Canonical resolution of marked ideals, Multiple test blow-ups, controlled transforms and resolutions of marked ideals, Simple normal crossings divisors and simultaneous normal crossings position).
Projectivity devices: on a scheme projective over a Noetherian ring, twisting a coherent sheaf by a large power of an ample invertible sheaf makes it globally generated (Eventual generation of coherent projective twists, Absolute ampleness by affine section opens); for an integral finite-type -scheme , an invertible sheaf and meromorphic sections of not all zero, the blowup of the fractional ideal is the schematic closure of the graph of the ratio map and is a closed immersion, with (Blowing up the base ideal resolves a rational map to projective space, Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf); is a closed immersion (Segre embedding and its line bundle); the pullback of along a closed immersion is H-very ample, hence ample over an affine base (Relative very ampleness implies relative ampleness); closed immersions are stable under base change, and a composite of closed immersions is a closed immersion, since a homeomorphism onto a closed subset and a surjection of structure sheaves compose to such (Base change of immersions, Closed immersions of schemes).
Regularity and smoothness: a smooth morphism at a point has geometrically regular scheme-theoretic fibre there, so a smooth finite-type -scheme is regular and reduced, regular local rings being domains (Smooth morphism of schemes, regular local rings are domains and cohen macaulay, Regular points of locally Noetherian schemes); in characteristic zero a finite-type scheme over a field is smooth if and only if all its local rings are regular (Conventions for the resolution development, Field tests for geometric regularity); a regular point of a reduced Noetherian scheme lies on exactly one irreducible component (A regular point lies on one irreducible component, Irreducible components as schemes); smoothness is stable under base change and composition (Smoothness survives base change and composition), and étale is smooth of relative dimension zero (Étale morphism of schemes); étale morphisms are stable under base change and composition (Étale stability).
Regular immersions and blowup charts: for a closed immersion of smooth finite-type schemes over a field with pure dimensions and constant codimension, locally in the étale topology the embedding is the inverse image of a coordinate inclusion (Smooth immersions, their conormal sequence, deformation charts and smooth sections); blowups commute with flat base change along for the inverse image ideal, (Flat base change for blowups, and failure without flatness); the blowup is an isomorphism off the zero scheme of the ideal (The blowup is an isomorphism off the center); blowups restrict to open subschemes of the base (Blowups restrict to open subschemes of the base); a blowup of a nonzero finite-type ideal on an integral scheme is integral (Integrality and reducedness of blowups from the Rees charts), and is finite type and proper (Blowups of finite type ideals are locally H-projective, and proper); affine blowup charts are with and (Affine blowup standard charts and overlaps, Affine blowup algebras: normal form, nonzerodivisors, reducedness, domains).
Finite type versus coherent: on a locally Noetherian scheme a quasi-coherent module of finite type is coherent (Coherent sheaves on a locally Noetherian scheme, Coherent module sheaves, Quasi-coherent ideal sheaves).
AC is assumed in the statement and consumed through the suppliers above (scheme-theoretic images, canonical resolution and principalization centers, Serre generation, the graph-closure corollary, Segre and ample-pullback items); the divisor, component and diagonal/graph bookkeeping below is choice-free. (The Axiom of Choice)
Proof
Closure of a quasi-compact immersion. Let be a quasi-compact immersion from a reduced finite-type -scheme into a Noetherian scheme, factored as a closed immersion followed by an open immersion . By [F2] its scheme-theoretic image , , restricts on to , so is open in with the same local rings. On an affine open , the kernel is radical: if restricts to zero on , then restricts to zero because is reduced. Thus is reduced, proving that is reduced. If were not dense in , its proper reduced closed closure in would receive : its defining sections restrict to functions zero at every point of the reduced scheme , hence zero on every affine open of . This contradicts minimality of the scheme-theoretic image, so is dense. Every irreducible component meets : the complement of the finitely many other components is a nonempty open subset of contained in that component, since an irreducible component cannot be contained in their finite union; density forces this open to meet .
Blowups of integral projective schemes are projective. Let be an integral finite-type -scheme whose structure morphism is H-projective, and let be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type. If then , which is projective as the empty closed subscheme of ; assume . Fix a closed immersion and let be the pullback of , which is H-very ample by construction and ample over the affine base ; is Noetherian and is coherent, so for some the twist is globally generated. Its evaluation map is surjective and is quasi-compact with of finite type, so finitely many global sections already generate : on a finite affine cover, a finitely generated module generated by the image of the global sections is generated by finitely many of them. Put , view the as meromorphic sections of the invertible sheaf , and set and , so the ratio map of the is . The graph-closure corollary gives with a closed immersion . Composing with the closed immersion obtained by base change of and then with the Segre embedding, itself a closed immersion, exhibits as a closed subscheme of ; hence the structure morphism of is H-projective.
Disjoint unions of projective schemes are projective. Let be closed subschemes with pairwise disjoint underlying sets and ideals . The product ideal equals the intersection : on an affine chart the ideals of the satisfy for , so and the product of pairwise comaximal ideals is their intersection. At a point one has for , so ; therefore as subschemes of , and the natural morphism is a closed immersion. Now let be projective -schemes, say closed. The coordinate-block maps , , identify the projective spaces with pairwise disjoint linear subspaces (vanishing of all coordinates outside one block), and are closed immersions; the images of the are closed subschemes with pairwise disjoint underlying sets, so the preceding paragraph realizes as a closed subscheme of . Hence a finite disjoint union of projective -schemes is projective over .
Local reduction to pure dimensions and constant codimension. Let be a smooth finite-type -scheme and a regular closed subscheme with ideal sheaf , a coherent ideal. Fix ; if there is nothing to prove. Since smooth finite-type -schemes and regular finite-type -schemes are smooth over in characteristic zero, is smooth over and, being regular Noetherian and reduced, each of its points lies on exactly one irreducible component; the components of are therefore pairwise disjoint, finitely many, and each is a smooth finite-type -scheme of pure dimension , with local rings equal to those of at its points. Let be the component through and let be the connected component of containing ; it is a single irreducible component, hence pure of dimension , and open in . Choose an affine open containing and disjoint from (a finite union of closed sets missing ). Then is smooth of pure dimension , is closed in , smooth, irreducible of dimension , and the closed immersion has constant codimension .
Regularity and components. A point is a regular point of : the local rings of and at coincide by step 1.1, and a smooth finite-type -scheme has regular local rings. Every irreducible component of meets : for a component of the reduced Noetherian , the complement of the union of the finitely many other components is a nonempty open subset of contained in , nonemptiness holding because otherwise irreducibility of would place it inside one of the other components, contradicting maximality; and the dense open meets every nonempty open subset. If is smooth over , as the schemes , and below are, then its irreducible components are pairwise disjoint: a common point of two components would give the local ring there two distinct minimal primes and hence a non-domain, whereas a smooth finite-type -scheme has regular local rings, which are domains. Consequently, for smooth , the components are finitely many pairwise disjoint integral closed subschemes, open and closed in .
Blowups preserve finite disjoint unions of integral projective schemes. Let with each integral, finite type and H-projective over , and let be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type on ; write . Since the pieces are open and closed, the blowup restricts: . If then that piece is empty; if then is integral, finite type and H-projective by step 1.2. So the blowup is again a finite disjoint union of integral projective -schemes, and it is projective over by step 1.3; the relevant ideals are quasi-coherent of finite type, as ideals of closed subschemes of finite-type -schemes (affine-locally the kernel of a surjection of Noetherian rings, hence finitely generated).
Smoothness of the blowup along a regular center. Keep the notation of step 1.4 and first blow up the coordinate subspace: for and , the chart of indexed by () is , and is generated over by the fractions (, ); substituting exhibits it as the polynomial ring , the two presentations agreeing inside because the are algebraically independent over (clearing denominators uses only that is a nonzerodivisor). Hence is covered by affine spaces and is smooth over . Now by [F7] the closed immersion of step 1.4 is, at each of its points, locally in the étale topology the inverse image of the coordinate inclusion : there are a Zariski open and an étale morphism with as closed subschemes. Since is flat and blowups commute with flat base change along the inverse image ideal, . The projection of this fibre product to is the base change of the étale morphism , hence étale, and étale morphisms are smooth; a composite of smooth morphisms is smooth, so the model base change, and therefore , is smooth over .
Conclusion for one blowup and for sequences. With and as in step 1.4, choose the open of step 2.3 around ; the open subscheme of the blowup is smooth over . Points of mapping outside lie in the open subscheme , which is isomorphic to the smooth scheme ; as ranges over , these opens cover , and smoothness is local on the source, so is smooth over . The blowup is finite type over , so the same statement applies to it in place of : if is a regular closed subscheme of a smooth finite-type -scheme , then is smooth over . By induction, every scheme obtained from a smooth finite-type -scheme by a finite sequence of blowups along regular closed subschemes is smooth over .
The model construction: desingularizing the closure. Let be a smooth projective -scheme, a reduced closed subscheme and an open dense subscheme that is smooth over . Apply [F3] to : there is a sequence of blowups of regular centers with strict transforms , and is smooth over with the composite an isomorphism over the smooth locus of , hence over . Each is a finite disjoint union of integral projective -schemes: is smooth projective, so it is such a union by step 2.1, and each step is a blowup along the ideal sheaf of a regular closed subscheme, a coherent ideal, so step 2.2 applies inductively. Let be the preimage of in ; it is open in and isomorphic to . Every irreducible component of meets : the composite is proper and birational on every component, so a component of maps onto a component of ; a component of disjoint from would have image contained in , a closed set, but every component of meets the dense open by step 2.1, a contradiction. Consequently the ideal of the reduced closed subscheme is coherent and is not identically zero on any irreducible component of .
The model construction: principalizing the boundary. Keep step 3.2 and decompose into its finitely many components, open and closed in by step 2.1. For each , apply [F4] to the smooth finite-type -scheme and the restricted ideal if , and take the identity sequence if ; the centers lie in the successive supports, which map into , so at every step the blowup is an isomorphism over the complement of the preimage of , and the composite is an isomorphism over . Set and . Each is a finite sequence of blowups of the integral projective scheme along regular centers: by step 2.2 each intermediate scheme is a finite disjoint union of integral projective -schemes, and by step 3.1 it is smooth; hence each is integral (or empty), smooth and projective, and is smooth and projective by step 1.3. On each with , the total transform is the ideal of an effective Cartier divisor with SNC support; on pieces with it is the unit ideal, defining the zero divisor with empty support. Let be the union of these supports with reduced structure: its ideal is, locally, generated by the products of the components' equations, so is a reduced effective Cartier divisor with simple normal crossings support. Finally is an isomorphism over , so , and the composite morphism restricts to the given open immersion . This proves: (C) for every smooth projective , reduced closed and open dense smooth , there are a smooth projective , a reduced SNC divisor , an isomorphism and a morphism inducing the inclusion of ; moreover is a finite disjoint union of integral projective pieces.
Existence of an SNC projective compactification. By [F1] there is a quasi-compact immersion ; let be its scheme-theoretic image, so that is open and dense in the reduced closed subscheme , with contained in the regular locus, by steps 1.1 and 2.1. Apply (C) of step 4.1 with and : the output is a finite disjoint union of integral projective smooth -schemes with a reduced SNC boundary divisor and . The exceptional boundary divisor misses the generic point of every component, so its intersection with each irreducible component is a proper closed subset and hence nowhere dense; therefore is dense in , and is a smooth projective compactification with reduced SNC boundary. If the same construction with returns and the empty divisor, and all claims are vacuous.
Common domination. Let be smooth projective compactifications, and put . Each is smooth over and H-projective, so is smooth over by stability of smoothness under base change and composition, and projective over : the product of closed immersions is a closed immersion by iterated base change, and the iterated Segre embeddings are closed immersions. The diagonal morphism is an immersion: it is the composite of the diagonal , a closed immersion because is separated over , with the product of the open immersions , which is an open immersion; it is quasi-compact because is Noetherian and is quasi-compact. Let be its scheme-theoretic image; by step 1.1, is reduced with open, dense and contained in its regular locus. Apply (C) of step 4.1 to and compose the resulting morphism with the projections: the composites restrict to the identity of under the identifications , and is a smooth projective compactification of with reduced SNC boundary dominating all . For the empty family, step 5.1 already supplies a compactification.
Extension of morphisms. Let be a morphism of smooth quasiprojective complex varieties and let , be smooth projective compactifications. Set ; as in step 6.1 it is smooth and projective. Consider the morphism , where is the open immersion ; it factors as the graph morphism , a closed immersion because is separated over , followed by the open immersion , so is an immersion, and it is quasi-compact because is Noetherian. Let be the scheme-theoretic image of ; by step 1.1, is reduced and is open, dense and smooth inside . Apply (C) of step 4.1 to , obtaining a smooth projective compactification of with reduced SNC boundary and a morphism inducing on . Then the composite of with the second projection is a morphism restricting to on , and the composite with the first projection is a morphism restricting to the identity on ; so extends after modifying the source compactification outside . Two extensions obtained from the same data coincide on , and the construction of step 6.1 applied to the two source modifications makes the resulting pullback maps agree on .
Choice accounting and boundaries. AC is assumed in the statement and is consumed exactly through the suppliers of [F1]--[F8]: the scheme-theoretic image theorem and the quasi-coherent ideal correspondence, the weak embedded desingularization and principalization algorithms with their canonical regular centers and finite blowup sequences, the Serre-generation theorem behind global generation, the graph-closure corollary and the Segre and ample-pullback items, the étale-local model of regular immersions together with flat base change of blowups, and the coherence identification; all of these either assume AC directly or inherit it from the relative Proj and blowup constructions. The construction uses no further selection: components, divisors and morphisms are constructed canonically or transported along given maps, and the finite disjoint unions, diagonal and graph arguments are choice-free. Boundary cases: if then and , the empty divisor being SNC with the empty parameter set, and all three clauses are vacuous; if is disconnected, is the finite disjoint union of the compactifications of its components and is projective by step 1.3; if a compactification already has empty boundary, the boundary ideal is the unit ideal and contributes the identity sequence and ; the statements are insensitive to replacing by another compactification, as shown in step 6.1.
Remarks
-
The domination and extension clauses hold for arbitrary smooth projective compactifications of , not only for those with SNC boundary produced by the first clause: steps 6.1 and 7.1 take for and for arbitrary smooth projective compactifications, the output of step 4.1 dominates each of them and restricts to the identity over while itself having reduced SNC boundary. This is the reading used by the consumers that must transfer a statement from an SNC compactification to an arbitrary smooth projective one.
-
The construction is stated for possibly reducible and disconnected ; the connected components of a smooth finite-type -scheme are its irreducible components and are pairwise disjoint, and each is compactified separately. The SNC compactification produced by step 4.1 is a finite disjoint union of integral projective pieces, which is projective by step 1.3.
-
The proof deliberately does not cite projectivity of a resolution: the projectivity of every blowup used is derived from global generation of a twist of the center ideal and the graph-closure corollary, and the smoothness of every blowup along a regular center is derived from the étale-local coordinate model of a regular immersion. The published resolution statements supply the sequences and the smoothness of the strict transform, not projectivity.
Depends on
- The Axiom of Choice
- Quasi-projective morphisms before Proj
- Projective morphisms before Proj
- Immersion of schemes
- Open immersions of schemes
- Closed immersions of schemes
- Scheme-theoretic image
- Scheme-theoretic image of a quasi-compact morphism
- Integral schemes
- Separated morphism of schemes
- Locally finite type and finite type morphisms
- Quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms
- Irreducible components as schemes
- A regular point lies on one irreducible component
- Regular points of locally Noetherian schemes
- regular local rings are domains and cohen macaulay
- Smooth morphism of schemes
- Étale morphism of schemes
- Conventions for the resolution development
- Field tests for geometric regularity
- Smooth immersions, their conormal sequence, deformation charts and smooth sections
- Smoothness survives base change and composition
- Étale stability
- Flat base change for blowups, and failure without flatness
- The blowup is an isomorphism off the center
- Blowups restrict to open subschemes of the base
- Integrality and reducedness of blowups from the Rees charts
- Affine blowup standard charts and overlaps
- Affine blowup algebras: normal form, nonzerodivisors, reducedness, domains
- Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf
- Quasi-coherent ideal sheaves
- Coherent module sheaves
- Coherent sheaves on a locally Noetherian scheme
- Blowups of finite type ideals are locally H-projective, and proper
- Absolute ampleness by affine section opens
- Relative very ampleness implies relative ampleness
- Eventual generation of coherent projective twists
- Blowing up the base ideal resolves a rational map to projective space
- Segre embedding and its line bundle
- Base change of immersions
- Weak embedded desingularization in characteristic zero
- Canonical principalization of ideals in characteristic zero
- Canonical resolution of marked ideals
- Multiple test blow-ups, controlled transforms and resolutions of marked ideals
- Simple normal crossings divisors and simultaneous normal crossings position
- Closed graphs over separated targets
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
230 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Pierre Deligne, Theorie de Hodge II, Publications mathematiques de l IHES 40 (1971), 5-57 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Jaroslaw Wlodarczyk, Simple Hironaka resolution in characteristic zero, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 18 (2005) 779-822; author's arXiv version math/0401401 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Herwig Hauser, The Hironaka theorem on resolution of singularities (or: A proof we always wanted to understand), Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 40 (2003) 323-403 (standard reference, not scraped)