Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)verified 2026-11-05 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Low-dimensional nonvanishing from exact subadjoint resolution data

Statement

Let W be a normal integral projective complex surface, A an ample Cartier divisor, and ν:V→W a projective resolution which is an isomorphism off finitely many points. Assume V is smooth, and the union of its exceptional curves and Supp Δ is simple normal crossing. Suppose Δ is a rational divisor with every coefficient strictly less than one, D=ν∗Δ is effective, M is a curve-nef rational Cartier divisor on V, and a is positive rational, with

$K_{V}+Δ+M ∼_{Q}$ −a $ν^*A$.

The divisor Δ is allowed negative exceptional coefficients. No effectivity of Δ on V, Q-Cartierness of KW alone, rational singularity theorem, or global klt boundary on W is assumed. The conclusion is

$H^{i}(W,O_{W}(nA))=0  (i>0,n≥0),
h⁰(W,A)=χ(W,A)≥1+(1+a)A^{2}/2>0$.

For the target fourfold index-two codimension-two centre, the actual supplied relation has a=2−γ≥1 when G≡γA and γ≤1. This is the only surface case used here.

For a normal integral projective curve W with ample Cartier A, assume KW+D+M≡−aA, with D effective, M curve-nef and rational a satisfying a⋅deg⁡A>−2. Then h0(W,A)>0, including a=0. A reduced point satisfies h0(A∣W)=1.

Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited through the coherent-cohomology suppliers. The conclusion is nonvanishing on W; ambient restriction-surjectivity is a separate obligation.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

All subadjoint resolution data are explicit hypotheses. This lemma constructs no lc centre, subadjunction formula or ambient restriction-surjectivity. It assumes the Axiom of Choice through the supplied coherent-cohomology interfaces.

[F1]

Serre global-generation criterion for ampleness supplies eventual global generation of coherent ample twists, including the nonzero ideal IN(kA) in step 3.1. The other precise suppliers are Log adjoint and nef big vanishing on smooth projective varieties, Curve-nef ample perturbations by a projective Nakai construction, The Hodge index theorem for smooth projective surfaces, Riemann-Roch for smooth projective surfaces, Riemann-Roch for curves: the Euler-characteristic form, Serre vanishing for coherent sheaves and ample twists, Leray spectral sequence for sheaf cohomology, Projection formula for invertible twists, Coherent higher direct images under proper morphisms, A normal Noetherian domain is the intersection of its height-one localizations, The Axiom of Choice. Vanishing is applied only on smooth V to an effective SNC boundary with coefficients below one and ample adjoint difference. Hodge index and the exact public numerical criterion proved by Curve-nef ample perturbations by a projective Nakai construction construct the exceptional ample perturbation; no separate root draft Nakai item is imported. Smooth RR and the actual coherent Leray/projection interfaces give the Cartier Euler-difference calculation, without invoking a singular RR or rational-singularity theorem.

[F2]

Serre duality for locally free sheaves on a smooth projective variety gives, for smooth projective W/C of dimension one and E=OW, perfect pairings Hq(W,OW)×H1−q(W,ωW)→C, q=0,1, with ωW=ΩW/C1. We use this only for the curve case, together with the Euler-characteristic curve Riemann–Roch supplier.

Proof

Given: Exactly the explicit resolution data or curve data of the Statement.

1.1givenA1F1algebra

Let E1,...,Er be the exceptional curves. Their intersection matrix Q is negative definite. Here is the needed construction from Hodge index, rather than an unmentioned contraction theorem. The pullback B=ν∗A has B2=A2>0 and BEi=0. Hodge index (equivalently its signature on numerical divisor classes) makes the quadratic form nonpositive on combinations of the Ei. Off-diagonal entries of Q are nonnegative, since distinct curves on the smooth surface have nonnegative local intersection multiplicities. If a nonzero coefficient vector z had zTQz=0, replacing z by |z| could only increase this quadratic form. It would remain zero by nonpositivity. Hodge index would then make the effective nonzero divisor ∑∣zi∣Ei numerically zero, impossible since it has positive intersection with an ample divisor on V. Thus Q is negative definite even as a matrix on the exceptional coefficient vectors.

2.1givenA1F1step 1.1algebra

Put B0=−Q. Its off-diagonal entries are nonpositive and it is positive definite. The unique minimizer of 1/2 xTB0x−∑xi has no negative coordinate: replacing x by |x| cannot increase the quadratic term and strictly reduces the linear term if a coordinate is negative. Its equation is B0x=1; no coordinate can be zero, since that row would have nonpositive left side. Hence xi>0 for every i, and x is rational since Q is an integral invertible matrix. Clearing denominators gives a positive integral exceptional divisor E with EEi<0 for every i.

3.1givenA1F1step 2.1algebra

Here is a direct absolute ampleness construction, avoiding a relative numerical criterion. Choose an integer N larger than all coefficients of E, and let I be the ideal of the finite image of the exceptional locus. For k sufficiently large, the ample global-generation criterion gives a nonzero section of IN(kA), defining an effective F∈|kA|. Every exceptional valuation of the pullback of I is a positive integer, so ν∗F−E is effective. For every nonexceptional curve C not a component of ν∗F−E this implies EC≤kν∗AC. For the finitely many nonexceptional curve components of that divisor, the denominators ν∗AC are strictly positive; enlarge k to a real bound k0 for all their ratios EC/(ν∗AC) as well. Thus ν∗A−δE has positive intersection with every nonexceptional curve when δk0<1, and with each exceptional curve because EEi<0. Its square is A2+δ2E2>0 for sufficiently small δ. The actual projective Nakai--Moishezon criterion on the smooth surface V makes ν∗A−δE ample. Scaling gives aν∗A−δE ample for sufficiently small δ. If there are no exceptional curves, take E=0 and use that ν is an isomorphism.

4.1givenA1F1step 3.1algebra

Put P=ceil⁡(−Δ), with coefficientwise rounding. Because ν∗Δ≥0 and all coefficients of Δ are <1, P is an effective integral exceptional divisor. The coefficients of Δ+P lie in [0,1). Choose δ>0 sufficiently small that aν∗A−δE is ample and Γ=Δ+P+δE has every coefficient <1. It is effective and simple normal crossing by the resolution hypothesis.

5.1givenA1F1step 4.1algebra

For every integer n≥0, the Cartier divisor Tn=P+nν∗A satisfies Tn−KV−Γ∼Q(n+a)ν∗A+M−δE.

6.1givenA1F1step 5.1algebra

The right side is ample: aν∗A−δE is ample, and nν∗A+M is curve-nef. Apply the actual SNC log-adjoint vanishing supplier on the SMOOTH V to obtain Hi(V,OV(Tn))=0 for every i>0. Notice both the sign +δE in Γ and the rounding P; applying smooth vanishing directly to a possibly negative Δ would be invalid. No global klt replacement of M on W is used.

7.1givenA1F1step 6.1algebra

Normality gives ν∗OV(P)=OW. Indeed a local rational function with divisor at least −P on V has no pole along any codimension-one point of W, because P is exceptional; the codimension-one characterization of regular functions on a normal variety makes it regular on W. Conversely regular functions pull back regularly and P is effective.

8.1givenA1F1step 7.1algebra

The coherent sheaf R1ν∗OV(P) is supported at finitely many points. For sufficiently large n, Serre vanishing gives H1(W,OW(nA))=H2(W,OW(nA))=0. Projection formula and the low-degree Leray sequence then identify H0(W,R1ν∗OV(P)⊗OW(nA)) with H1(V,OV(P+nν∗A))=0. A nonzero coherent sheaf of finite support has a nonzero global section after every line-bundle twist. Therefore R1ν∗OV(P)=0.

9.1givenA1F1step 8.1algebra

For every n≥0, the same Leray sequence injects H1(W,OW(nA)) into H1(V,OV(Tn)), and, since R¹ has vanished, injects H2(W,OW(nA)) into H2(V,OV(Tn)). Both targets vanish by Section 2. This proves all the claimed cohomology vanishings. Since W is integral proper over C, H0(W,OW)=C, and therefore χ(OW)=1. This deduction proves exactly what is needed and does not label W rational or assert an unproved local rational-singularity theorem.

10.1givenA1F1step 9.1algebra

Use the ordinary smooth-surface Riemann–Roch formula on V for ν∗A. The higher direct images Rjν∗OV are supported at finitely many points for every j>0. By projection formula, twisting by A does not change their lengths. The Leray Euler formula therefore cancels these finite-support corrections in the difference and gives χ(W,A)−χ(W,OW)=χ(V,ν∗A)−χ(V,OV)=1/2ν∗A(ν∗A−KV).

11.1givenA1F1step 10.1algebra

This difference formula requires only that A be Cartier; it does not assume KW Q-Cartier or use a singular Riemann–Roch theorem. From the exact subadjoint relation, KVν∗A=−aA2−Δν∗A−Mν∗A≤−aA2.

12.1givenA1F1step 11.1algebra

Indeed Δν∗A=D A≥0 because D is effective, while Mν∗A≥0 because both are nef (or approximate ν∗A by ample divisors). Thus χ(W,A)≥1+(1+a)A²/2. Section 3 gives h0(W,A)=χ(W,A), proving the positive section count and the desired nonvanishing.

13.1givenA1F1F2step 12.1algebra∎

Let W instead be a normal integral projective curve and A an ample Cartier divisor on W. A normal curve over C is smooth: its one-dimensional normal local rings are discrete valuation rings, hence regular, and C has characteristic zero. Put g=h1(W,OW) and choose a canonical divisor KW with OW(KW)=ωW. Since W is integral projective, h0(OW)=1. F2 gives h0(ωW)=g and h1(ωW)=1. Applying curve Euler-characteristic Riemann–Roch to KW yields g−1=χ(ωW)=deg⁡KW+1−g, so deg⁡KW=2g−2. Suppose the actual subadjoint relation is KW+D+M≡−aA with D effective, M nef, and rational a satisfying a⋅deg⁡A>−2. Taking degrees gives 2g(W)−2≤−a⋅deg⁡A<2, hence g(W)≤1 because 2g(W)−2 is an even integer. Curve Riemann–Roch gives h⁰(W,A)≥deg A+1−g(W)>0 because deg A is a positive integer. This includes the index-one threefold endpoint γ=1, for which a=1−γ=0; strict log-Fano positivity must not be falsely claimed there. It also covers curve centres in the fourfold case and the slight negative-a perturbation allowed by (γ1−1)deg⁡A<2. A reduced point has h0(A∣W)=1 directly.

Remarks

Actual source reading is the retained extracted Kawamata Theorems 1 and 6 and proof of Theorem 1, and Mella Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.2; no full-document reading or extraction-completeness claim is made. Kawamata's klt replacement in Theorem 1 is affine; no projective global klt replacement is asserted here. The resolution-level rounding and vanishing argument is constructed in this proof. Actual centre existence/normality, the exact resolution data, lc tie-breaking and ambient restriction-surjectivity remain separately owned inputs.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources