Pull-back of divisors under different behaviour of maps

533 Views Asked by At

I would like to have a clear picture of the notion of pull-back (and push-forward) of a divisor (or a line bundle), under 3 different scenarios: morphism, birational morphism and birational map.

I will always work with normal projective varieties over the field of complex numbers.

The first case is the simplest: let $f:X\to Y$ be a morphism, and consider a line bundle $L$ on $Y$: then we can define a line bundle $f^\star L$, also called the pull-back bundle, on $X$, obtained as a fiber product.

The other two cases are those which I don't fully understand:

Suppose now $f:X\to Y$ is a birational morphism, that is $f$ is an isomorphism on an open subset $U$ of $X$. Take moreover $L$ line bundle on $Y$. Since $f$ is a morphism, I guess can still pull-back the line bundle $L$ via the fiber product, obtaining a line bundle $f^\star L$ on $X$.

If $f:X\dashrightarrow Y$ is a birational map, I think the pullback map $f^\star$ is actually $f^{-1}_{\star}$. I define the push-foward as follows: I choose a divisor $D$ on $X$, and I locally map it either to $0$ (if the image has codimension at least 2), either to a divisor on $Y$. Therefore by using $f^{-1}_{\star}$ I still can obtain a map at the level of divisors from $Y$ to $X$, that is a pull-back.

Is the above reasoning correct? Is there a reference for these topics which describes these differences?

1

There are 1 best solutions below

1
On BEST ANSWER

I'll stick to the pullbacks and line bundle sides of things, since this is what you seem to be concentrating on.

Your first two bits are correct. If $f:X\to Y$ is a map of schemes, there is always a homomorphism $\renewcommand{\Pic}{\operatorname{Pic}}\renewcommand{\ClGrp}{\operatorname{Cl}} f^*:\Pic Y \to \Pic X$ given by sending $L\in\Pic Y$ to $f^*L$, a line bundle on $X$. (Though I don't see why you appeal to the fiber product to define $f^*$: the definition is just $f^*(-)=\mathcal{O}_X\otimes_{f^{-1}\mathcal{O}_Y} f^{-1}(-)$.)

When $f$ is only a rational map, things may break in interesting ways. If you want a map on Picard groups, then what you might think of doing is pulling back a line bundle $L$ on $Y$ to $U\subset X$ which is a domain of definition for the rational map $f$ and extending this to a line bundle on $X$. But there are obstacles: this line bundle may not extend uniquely (take $X=\Bbb P^1$, $Y=\Bbb A^1$, and $f$ the identity on $U_0$: then $f^*\mathcal{O}_Y$ extends to any line bundle on $X$), or the unique extension of $f^*L$ may not be a line bundle.

If you want to salvage a map of Picard groups here, you need to guarantee that any line bundle on the maximal domain of definition of $f$ has a unique extension. The best general result in this area is that a vector bundle on an open subscheme $U\subset X$ extends uniquely to a vector bundle on $X$ when $X$ is $S_2$ and $\operatorname{codim}(X\setminus U)\geq 2$ (ref). In particular, since you always deal with projective normal varieties over $\Bbb C$, your varieties are $S_2$ by Serre's criterion for normality and the indeterminacy locus of your morphism is at least codimenstion two by Hartshorne lemma V.5.1, for instance. So everything's okay.