Introduction

Two questions about anticanonical bundles motivate this paper. First, when a torus acts on a compact complex manifold, can the invariant Euler characteristic at the trivial power force invariant cohomology at large anticanonical powers? Second, on a smooth projective variety, can a fixed pseudoeffective error be removed from an unbounded sequence of effective anticanonical twists? We answer the first question without a positivity assumption and the second under smooth metric semipositivity. They meet in an application to differential forms: invariant cohomology supplies forms that descend through monodromy, and conversion is applied only after that descent.

The invariant index and its value at zero

Let TT be a compact real torus acting smoothly by holomorphic automorphisms on a compact complex manifold FF. Its differential acts on the anticanonical line LF=−KF=det⁡TFL_F=-K_F=\det T_F. We call this the natural linearization. The corresponding action on a section is (t⋅s)(x)=tLFs(t−1x)(t\cdot s)(x)=t_{L_F}s(t^{-1}x); tensor powers carry the induced action. For each integer m≥0m\ge0, define

IT(m)=∑q≥0(−1)qdim⁡Hq(F,LFm)T.I_T(m)=\sum_{q\ge0}(-1)^q\dim H^q(F,L_F^m)^T.

Thus IT(m)I_T(m) is the multiplicity of the trivial representation in the Dolbeault index of LFmL_F^m.

Theorem 1.1 (Invariant anticanonical index). Let a compact real torus TT act holomorphically on a compact complex manifold FF, and give −KF-K_F its natural linearization. There are an integer a>0a>0 and a polynomial P∈Q[t]P\in\mathbb{Q}[t] such that

IT(m)=P(m)for every positive multiple m of a,P(0)=IT(0).I_T(m)=P(m)\quad\text{for every positive multiple }m\text{ of }a,\qquad P(0)=I_T(0).

The theorem has no projectivity, Kählerness, or positivity premise. Its endpoint is essential: when IT(0)≠0I_T(0) \ne0, the polynomial cannot vanish at all large divisible exponents. Some fixed cohomological degree therefore contains invariant classes at unbounded exponents. Eventual polynomiality alone would give no information about whether that polynomial is zero.

The natural linearization is equally essential. On a point, twisting the trivial line by a nonzero torus character gives invariant dimension zero at every positive power and dimension one at power zero. For the natural anticanonical action, by contrast, the fiber character at a fixed component is the sum of the normal tangent characters. This identity controls the endpoint.

Our calculation uses the holomorphic Lefschetz framework of Atiyah–Bott [1] and its compact-group, fixed-component form due to Atiyah–Segal and Atiyah–Singer [2, 3]. Polarizing its denominators expresses the invariant multiplicity as polynomially weighted lattice counts on rational polytopes with specified coordinate faces removed. Weighted Ehrhart theory supplies polynomiality on divisible exponents [4], preprint §2.4 and §3.1. To determine the value at zero, we prove the count directly, retaining all small divisible exponents, and then show that the anticanonical character gives a deformation retraction onto the removed faces. The cancellation is a difference of Euler characteristics of compact polyhedra. Stanley’s treatment of deleted boundary already identifies this constant term and singles out boundary visible from an exterior point [21], Proposition 8.2 and the discussion and proof of Proposition 8.3. Here the anticanonical character produces such an exterior point in the affine counting space. We give a direct weighted argument and an explicit retraction, including degenerate polytopes.

When FF is Kähler and LFL_F has a smooth semipositive metric, hard Lefschetz with semipositive coefficients [10], Theorem 0.1 gives

H0(F,ΩFn−q⊗LFm+1)⟶Hq(F,LFm),n=dim⁡F.H^0(F,\Omega_F^{n-q}\otimes L_F^{m+1}) \longrightarrow H^q(F,L_F^m), \qquad n=\dim F.

surjectively. An invariant Kähler form makes this map equivariant; compact averaging then preserves surjectivity on invariant subspaces. The coefficient is LFm+1L_F^{m+1} because the cohomological target is KF⊗LFm+1=LFmK_F\otimes L_F^{m+1}=L_F^m. Thus Theorem 1.1 supplies invariant twisted differential forms when IT(0)≠0I_T(0)\ne0. The use of hard Lefschetz and a nonzero Euler characteristic to obtain infinitely many twisted forms already appears for canonical powers in [10], Theorem 2.7.3; here the invariant anticanonical index requires a separate argument to retain its value at exponent zero.

Removing a fixed error

We use additive notation for line bundles and Cartier divisors. A divisor is pseudoeffective if its numerical class lies in the closure of the effective cone. Smooth semipositivity means the existence of a smooth Hermitian metric with nonnegative Chern curvature; it implies nefness. The next theorem is an ordinary section theorem, with no group action.

Theorem 1.2 (Pseudoeffective-error conversion). Let SS be a smooth connected projective complex variety, and suppose that L=−KSL=-K_S has a smooth Hermitian metric with semipositive Chern curvature. Let DD be a pseudoeffective Cartier divisor. If

H0(S,OS(mjL−D))≠0H^0(S,\mathcal{O}_S(m_jL-D))\ne0

for a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers mjm_j, then H0(S,OS(kL))≠0H^0(S,\mathcal{O}_S(kL))\ne0 for some integer k>0k>0.

The fixed error need not be effective. No rational-connectedness or Euler-characteristic assumption on SS is used. The argument begins with a rational map whose base has maximal dimension among maps S⇢YS \dashrightarrow Y for which a multiple of LL dominates an ample base divisor in pseudoeffective order. Maximality forces ratios of the relevant sections to be base functions. Their horizontal zero orders consequently vary affinely with the exponent.

After birational modifications, a normalization along base divisors produces a line bundle BB on a smooth base YY and a nonzero map

σ:f∗B⟶ℓπ∗L,ℓ>0,\sigma: f^{*}B \longrightarrow\ell\pi^{*}L,\qquad\ell> 0,

where VV is smooth, π:V→S\pi: V \to S is birational, and f:V→Yf : V \to Y is a morphism. This map will be used to transfer the sections constructed on the base to positive multiples of LL on SS. The same maximality gives rank-one adjoint direct images, whose integral metrics yield a semipositive metric on BB by Berndtsson’s positivity theorem [5]. The normalization of σ\sigma makes the resulting weights locally bounded, including near singular fibers.

These bounds allow Fujino’s Kollár–Nadel theorem [12] to give vanishing at every nonnegative base twist. A single Euler polynomial therefore equals the corresponding section dimension even at zero, where the exceptional canonical section makes it positive. Some positive exponent gives a section, which σ\sigma transfers back to SS. As in the invariant-index argument, control at zero is what rules out the zero polynomial; the two constructions of that control are independent.

This criterion applies to differential forms through a determinant construction. The generic-span method of Lazić–Peternell [15] (Lemma 4.1), adapted in Lazić–Matsumura–Peternell–Tsakanikas–Xie [14] (Lemma 5.1), extracts one fixed determinant line from infinitely many twisted forms. We give the argument for an unbounded positive sequence, including the numerically trivial case excluded by the hypotheses of those two cited lemmas. The cotangent subsheaf theorem [14] (Theorem 4.1), with Ou’s generic nefness result [19] (Theorem 1.4) as an antecedent, makes the negative of that line pseudoeffective. Theorem 1.2 then removes the error.

Application through monodromy

For a smooth connected projective XX, anticanonical nonvanishing asks for a section of −mKX-mK_X for some m>0m > 0. The positive-multiple question under smooth semipositivity is associated with Yau’s anticanonical-section problem [24] (Problem 75). The prescribed-Ricci theorem [23] and the structure theorems of Demailly–Peternell–Schneider and Campana–Demailly–Peternell [9, 6] identify a compact rationally connected factor of the universal cover. Residual monodromy can still act on it through a compact torus, so a section on that factor alone need not descend. Müller’s equivariant theorem produces invariant plurisections under semiampleness [17] (Theorem C). His Theorem A proves nonvanishing for projective klt pairs with nef anti-log-canonical divisor when its restriction to the general fiber of the maximal rationally connected fibration is semiample; Corollary B proves nonvanishing for projective klt threefold pairs with nef anti-log-canonical divisor. Our smooth application assumes metric semipositivity and imposes no fiber-semiampleness condition.

We apply the invariant index on the compact factor FF and ordinary conversion on a finite cover SS of XX; descending forms is the step that connects those two spaces.

The companion Anticanonical nonvanishing from smooth semipositivity [18] proves a finite-cover description with the residual torus and invariant canonical frames retained, as well as the finite étale norm of a section. We use only these geometric inputs. We prove locally that invariant twisted forms on the compact factor descend injectively to the finite cover. Theorem 1.1 and hard Lefschetz provide those forms, and Theorem 1.2 is applied after descent. Taking the norm then proves that −mKX-mK_X has a nonzero section for some m>0m > 0.

Passing to a positive multiple is necessary. On an Enriques surface EE, KEK_E has order two and H0(E,−KE)=0H^0(E,-K_E)=0 [11]. Consequently E×P1E \times\mathbb{P}^1 has a smoothly semipositive, non-torsion anticanonical bundle without a first-power section. In dimension two, the classification of Chen–Filip–Sun–Tosatti–Zhang [7] gives complementary geometric context.1

Section 2 proves the index theorem and derives invariant twisted forms. Section 3 proves conversion by constructing the normalized relative section and bounded base metric. Section 4 gives the determinant argument. Section 5 proves form descent and the global application. The two principal theorems are independent of one another; their combination takes place only in that last application.

The invariant index, including exponent zero

The proof of Theorem 1.1 rests on two facts about weighted lattice counts, which we establish before applying localization. Here is the counting problem that explains their role. For a fixed component, polarization of the fixed-point formula produces integral vectors α1,…,αs,w∈Zr\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_s,w \in\mathbb{Z}^r, where r=dim⁡Tr=\dim T, and a subset I⊂{1,…,s}I \subset\{1,\ldots,s\}. Its counting equation is

∑i=1sαibi=−mw,bi>0 (i∈I),bi≥0 (i∉I).\sum_{i=1}^{s}\alpha_i b_i=-mw,\qquad b_i>0\ (i\in I),\qquad b_i\ge0\ (i\notin I).

The vectors αi\alpha_i are positive under one linear functional; ww is the natural anticanonical character; and II records the denominators whose expansions start at a positive exponent. Section 2.2 derives these data from the normal tangent action. For now this equation explains the two counting tasks.

First, the closed count, in which every inequality is weak, is polynomial at every divisible exponent; its polynomial value at zero is the weight at zero. Second, imposing the strict inequalities removes coordinate faces. The anticanonical character gives a retraction onto their union, so its Euler characteristic cancels the constant of the closed count. Only the constant terms from contributions with no deleted faces survive. At actual exponent m=0m=0, positivity of the αi\alpha_i forces b=0b=0, allowed exactly in that same case. Matching these two endpoint calculations completes the index proof.

Polynomially weighted Ehrhart sums and fundamental parallelepipeds are classical; see [4], preprint §2.4 and §3.1. We give the count directly to retain the low divisible powers and the value at zero, before proving the special deleted-face assertion.

Lemma 2.1 (A weighted lattice count at zero). Let D⊂RsD \subset\mathbb{R}^s be a nonempty closed rational polytope, and let W(x,m)W(x,m) be a polynomial in xx and $m. For sufficiently divisible positive integers mm,

∑x∈mD∩ZsW(x,m)\sum_{x\in mD\cap\mathbb{Z}^s} W(x,m)

is polynomial in mm, and its polynomial value at zero is W(0,0)W(0,0). The same assertion holds with coefficients in any finite-dimensional vector space.

Proof. Choose a positive integer aa clearing all vertex denominators. Writing m=anm=an, replace DD by the lattice polytope aDaD and the weight by W(x,an)W(x,an). Its value at (0,0)(0,0) is unchanged. We may therefore prove the assertion for a lattice polytope and again call the dilation variable mm. Triangulate into closed lattice simplices, using lattice vertices. It suffices first to treat a dd-dimensional simplex with vertices v0,…,vdv_0,\ldots,v_d.

The vectors (vi,1)(v_i,1) are linearly independent. Use the lattice Zs+1∩span⁡R{(vi,1):0≤i≤d}\mathbb{Z}^{s+1}\cap\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb{R}}\{(v_i,1):0\le i\le d\} in their real linear span. Every lattice point in their nonnegative cone has a unique expression

p+∑i=0dli(vi,1),li∈Z≥0,p+\sum_{i=0}^{d}l_i(v_i,1),\qquad l_i\in\mathbb{Z}_{\ge0},

where pp is a lattice point of the half-open fundamental parallelepiped for these generators. This permits a lower-dimensional simplex, a nonunimodular simplex, and a simplex not containing the origin. The height hh of pp is an integer with 0≤h≤d0\le h\le d, and height mm imposes ∑li=m−h\sum l_i=m-h. For fixed pp, substitute this expression into WW and expand the resulting polynomial in the basis ∏i(liui)\prod_i\binom{l_i}{u_i}, with coefficients polynomial in mm. The identity

∑li≥0∑li=m−h∏i=0d(liui)=(m−h+dd+∑iui)(1)\sum_{\substack{l_i\ge0\\ \sum l_i=m-h}}\prod_{i=0}^{d}\binom{l_i}{u_i} = \binom{m-h+d}{d+\sum_i u_i} \tag*{(1)}

follows by multiplying the generating functions zui/(1−z)ui+1z^{u_i}/(1-z)^{u_i+1}. For m≥hm\ge h it is the desired counting identity. For 0≤m<h0\le m<h, the upper entry on the right is an integer between zero and d−1d-1, so the binomial polynomial also vanishes. Thus the polynomial formula is valid for every m≥0m\ge0.

At m=0m=0, every term with h>0h>0 vanishes. The only parallelepiped point of height zero is the origin. For it, only ui=0u_i=0 for all ii contributes in (1), giving W(0,0)W(0,0). This proves the assertion for a simplex of any dimension.

Apply inclusion–exclusion to the closed simplices in the triangulation. Each nonempty intersection is a lattice face and has the same constant term W(0,0)W(0,0). The alternating sum of these constant terms is χ(D)W(0,0)=W(0,0)\chi(D)W(0,0)=W(0,0), because a nonempty convex polytope is contractible. The vector-valued assertion follows coefficientwise.

The deleted boundary

Polarizing a fixed-point denominator may exclude some coordinate faces. The next lemma proves the cancellation needed for those exclusions. Its geometry is simple: a point outside the nonnegative orthant lies in the affine space containing the polytope, and rays from that point first enter the polytope through the faces being removed.

Lemma 2.2 (Deleted faces). Let α1,…,αs\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_s be vectors admitting a linear functional positive on each, and let I⊂{1,…,s}I\subset\{1,\ldots,s\}. Put ui=−1u_i=-1 for i∈Ii\in I, ui=1u_i=1 otherwise, and set

D={xi≥0:∑iαixi=∑iαiui}.D=\left\{x_i\ge0:\sum_i\alpha_i x_i=\sum_i\alpha_i u_i\right\}.

If D≠∅D\ne\varnothing and I≠∅I\ne\varnothing, the union

A=⋃i∈I(D∩{xi=0})A=\bigcup_{i\in I}\left(D\cap\{x_i=0\}\right)

is a deformation retract of DD. In particular χ(A)=1\chi(A)=1.

Proof. The positivity of the functional makes DD compact. For x∈Dx \in D, put

t(x)=max⁡i∈I1xi+1,r(x)=u+t(x)(x−u).t(x)=\max_{i\in I}\frac{1}{x_i+1},\qquad r(x)=u+t(x)(x-u).

Then 0<t(x)≤10<t(x)\le1, and r(x)r(x) lies in the same affine equation space as xx and uu. For i∈Ii\in I, its ii-th coordinate is −1+t(x)(xi+1)≥0-1+t(x)(x_i+1)\ge0, with equality for at least one index. For i∉Ii\notin I, it is 1−t(x)+t(x)xi≥01-t(x)+t(x)x_i\ge0. Hence r(x)∈Ar(x)\in A. If x∈Ax\in A, then t(x)=1t(x)=1, so r(x)=xr(x)=x. The continuous straight homotopy from xx to r(x)r(x) stays in the convex set DD and fixes AA. This proves the assertion.

Figure 1 illustrates this retraction when all three vectors αi\alpha_i are 1 and I={1}I=\{1\}. The proof above also applies when DD has smaller dimension or consists of one point.

The affine plane and triangular domain D with retraction point

Figure 1. The affine plane x1+x2+x3=1x_1+x_2+x_3=1, drawn using (x2,x3)(x_2,x_3) as coordinates. The triangle is DD, and its thick edge is the deleted union AA. The point r(x)r(x) is the first point of DD on the ray from uu through xx; the homotopy moves xx along the indicated segment to that edge.

Remark 2.3 (The visible-face alternative). Stanley discusses the visible-boundary case in [21], discussion preceding and proof of Proposition 8.3. Here it also gives a short geometric proof covering degenerate polytopes. With D≠∅D\ne\varnothing and I≠∅I\ne\varnothing, the preceding coordinate calculation identifies AA as exactly the first entry points of rays from uu into DD. Indeed, for a∈Aa\in A, a coordinate with ai=0a_i=0, i∈Ii\in I, stays negative on the segment from uu preceding aa. By strict separation, choose a linear functional ff and c>0c>0 with f(x−u)>cf(x-u)>c on DD, and project centrally onto H={z:f(z−u)=c}H=\{z:f(z-u)=c\}:

π(x)=u+c(x−u)f(x−u).\pi(x)=u+\frac{c(x-u)}{f(x-u)}.

There is one first entry point on each ray meeting DD, so π∣A\pi|_A is a continuous bijection onto π(D)\pi(D), hence a homeomorphism by compactness. The image is convex: it is the section by HH of the convex cone with vertex uu generated by DD. Thus AA is homeomorphic to a nonempty compact convex set and χ(A)=1\chi(A)=1, also for lower-dimensional and singleton polytopes. Both proofs concern χ(D)−χ(A)\chi(D)-\chi(A); one must not replace that difference by the ordinary Euler characteristic of the nonclosed set D∖AD\setminus A.

Localization and the anticanonical character

We now identify the lattice domains in the fixed-point formula. The two lemmas above will determine their constant terms component by component.

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Write Λ=Hom⁡(T,S1)\Lambda= \operatorname{Hom}(T,S^1) for the character lattice and tλt^\lambda for the value at t∈Tt \in T of a character λ∈Λ\lambda\in\Lambda. The invariant index is the coefficient of t0t^0 in the alternating character.

The Dolbeault complex is an equivariant elliptic complex on any compact complex manifold; a Kähler metric is not needed for its index. For elements generating dense cyclic subgroups of TT, the fixed locus is FTF^T. If FTF^T is empty, the fixed-point theorem makes the entire alternating character zero on these elements. Such elements are dense in TT, and the character of a finite-dimensional virtual representation is continuous, hence identically zero. In this case IT(m)=0I_T(m)=0 for all mm, including zero, and we take P=0P=0. Otherwise apply the equivariant Dolbeault fixed-point formula on the dense set of these elements. Clearing its finitely many denominators gives an identity of rational characters. Its compact-group form, including fixed components, follows from [2] and [3]. For a component ZZ of FTF^T, write νi≠0\nu_i \ne0 for the normal tangent characters, repeated with their ranks, and xix_i for the corresponding formal Chern roots. The natural anticanonical fiber weight is

w=∑iνi.w = \sum_i \nu_i.

Writing L=KF−1L=K^{-1}_{F}, the contribution to the alternating character is

∫Ztd⁡(Z)emc1(L∣Z)tmw∏i11−t−νie−xi.(2)\int_Z \operatorname{td}(Z)e^{m c_1(L|_Z)}t^{mw}\prod_i \frac{1}{1-t^{-\nu_i}e^{-x_i}}. \tag*{(2)}

The action on sections uses the inverse action on arguments, accounting for the conormal characters in the denominator. Choose an integral one-parameter direction pairing nontrivially with every normal character at every fixed component. For a component ZZ, let II be the indices with positive pairing. Put αi=νi\alpha_i=\nu_i on II, and αi=−νi\alpha_i=-\nu_i otherwise. All αi\alpha_i pair positively with the chosen direction. The pairings are positive integers, hence at least one. Expand the denominators toward exponents with positive pairing:

11−t−νie−xi={−∑bi>0tbiαiebixi,i∈I,∑bi≥0tbiαie−bixi,i∉I.\frac{1}{1-t^{-\nu_i}e^{-x_i}} = \begin{cases} -\sum_{b_i>0}t^{b_i\alpha_i}e^{b_i x_i}, & i\in I,\\ \sum_{b_i\ge0}t^{b_i\alpha_i}e^{-b_i x_i}, & i\notin I. \end{cases}

These expansions respect the identity of rational characters in a completion in which there are only finitely many terms below each pairing bound. In particular, each trivial-character coefficient is a finite sum.

The coefficient of the trivial character in (2) is therefore a polynomially weighted lattice count satisfying

∑iαibi=−mw,bi>0 (i∈I),bi≥0 (i∉I).\sum_i \alpha_i b_i=-mw,\qquad b_i>0\ (i\in I),\qquad b_i\ge0\ (i\notin I).

Before integration, the polynomial weight in the truncated root space is

W(b,m)=(−1)∣I∣[td⁡(Z)exp⁡(mc1(L∣Z)+∑i∈Ibixi−∑i∉Ibixi)]≤dim⁡Z.(3)W(b,m)=(-1)^{|I|}\left[\operatorname{td}(Z)\exp\left(mc_1(L|_Z)+\sum_{i\in I}b_i x_i-\sum_{i\notin I}b_i x_i\right)\right]_{\le\dim Z}. \tag*{(3)}

The bracket retains complex cohomological degrees at most dim⁡Z\dim Z, so only finitely many terms contribute and WW is polynomial in b,mb,m. The sign is part of this weight. All root expressions are interpreted by the splitting principle in truncated cohomological degrees. Operations are first performed coefficientwise with formal roots. Individual root monomials or individual face terms need not define cohomology classes. Permuting roots within an equal-character normal bundle, together with the corresponding lattice coordinates, preserves the entire lattice domain and its total weighted sum. Thus the complete sum is symmetric at every positive divisible exponent. Its polynomial continuation is symmetric coefficient by coefficient, by uniqueness of a polynomial on an infinite progression. Only after taking this complete sum do we interpret the symmetric polynomials as characteristic classes and integrate on ZZ.

For positive mm, the domain is the dilation by mm of the rational compact polytope

D={bi≥0:∑iαibi=−w},(4)D = \left\{ b_i \ge0 : \sum_i \alpha_i b_i = -w \right\}, \tag*{(4)}

with the union AA of its faces bi=0b_i = 0, i∈Ii \in I, removed.

If I=∅I = \varnothing, then −w=∑iαi-w = \sum_i \alpha_i, so D≠∅D \ne\varnothing. Lemma 2.1 gives the polynomial continuation, whose constant term is the weight at (b,m)=(0,0)(b,m) = (0,0). If I≠∅I \ne\varnothing and DD is empty, the contribution is zero. Otherwise the vector with coordinates −1-1 on II and 11 elsewhere belongs to the affine equation space in (4), since the linearization is anticanonical. Lemma 2.2 gives χ(A)=χ(D)=1\chi(A) = \chi(D) = 1. By inclusion–exclusion and Lemma 2.1, the polynomial constant term of the count on D∖AD \setminus A is

(χ(D)−χ(A))W(0,0)=0.(\chi(D) - \chi(A))W(0,0) = 0.

These constants are exactly the actual trivial-character contributions at m=0m = 0. Indeed, positivity of the pairing forces every bi=0b_i = 0 when ∑αibi=0\sum\alpha_i b_i = 0; this is permitted precisely when I=∅I = \varnothing. Summing over fixed components and taking a common divisibility integer proves both polynomiality and P(0)=IT(0)P(0) = IT(0). An empty normal list gives the one-point lattice domain in R0\mathbb{R}^0, with no deleted faces; its contribution is the ordinary index integral on that fixed component. This also handles a trivial torus. The empty fixed set was handled before localization. Finally, the polynomial has rational coefficients because its values at all positive points of an integral progression are integers.

Invariant twisted forms

The index theorem is independent of positivity. For its geometric application we now assume Kählerness and introduce the analytic map that turns cohomology into holomorphic forms.

Theorem 2.4 (Hard Lefschetz with semipositive coefficients). Let FF be compact Kähler of dimension nn, with Kähler form ω\omega, and let AA have a smooth semipositive Hermitian metric. For every 0≤q≤n0 \le q \le n, wedge multiplication by ωq\omega^q induces a surjection

H0(F,ΩFn−q⊗A)⟶Hq(F,KF⊗A).H^0(F,\Omega_F^{n-q} \otimes A) \longrightarrow H^q(F,K_F \otimes A).

This is the smooth-metric case of [10, Theorem 0.1]; its multiplier ideal is trivial. The smooth-coefficient Lefschetz theorem of Mourougane [16, Theorem 2.6] and the earlier nef-coefficient cohomology work of Takegoshi [22, Theorem 1] are antecedents of this statement. We use the formulation in [10]. If a compact group preserves the data, the map is equivariant. Averaging over the group then preserves surjectivity on invariant subspaces.

Corollary 2.5. Let FF be compact Kähler with smoothly semipositive LF=−KFL_F = -K_F, and let a compact torus TT act holomorphically, with the natural linearization on LFL_F. If

∑q(−1)qdim⁡Hq(F,OF)T≠0,\sum_q (-1)^q \dim H^q(F,\mathcal{O}_F)^T \ne0,

then for some fixed p≥0p \ge0 and arbitrarily large positive integers mm,

H0(F,ΩFp⊗LFm+1)T≠0.H^0(F,\Omega_F^p \otimes L_F^{m+1})^T \ne0.

Proof. By Theorem 1.1, IT(m)≠0I_T(m) \ne0 for all but finitely many positive integers in a divisible progression. Some fixed qq therefore has Hq(F,LFm)T≠0H^q(F,L_F^m)^T \ne0 for unbounded mm. Average a Kähler form over TT, and apply Theorem 2.4 with A=LFm+1A=L_F^{m+1}. Its target is

Hq(F,KF⊗LFm+1)=Hq(F,LFm).H^q(F,K_F \otimes L_F^{m+1}) = H^q(F,L_F^m).

The wedge map is equivariant, and compact averaging gives an invariant preimage of each invariant target class. Take p=dim⁡F−qp=\dim F-q. Indeed the map is u↦[ωq∧u]u \mapsto[\omega^q \wedge u]; it depends on the averaged Kähler form and the natural linearization, not on the coefficient metric used to establish surjectivity. Averaging a chosen preimage over Haar probability measure therefore leaves its invariant target unchanged.

Removing a pseudoeffective error

We prove Theorem 1.2. Throughout this section L=−KSL=-K_S carries a fixed smooth semipositive metric, and we choose effective integral divisors

Nj∼mjL−D,m1<m2<⋯ .N_j \sim m_jL-D,\qquad m_1<m_2<\cdots.

We use additive notation for line bundles. A divisor is pseudoeffective when its numerical class lies in the closed effective cone; on a smooth projective variety it is equivalent to admitting a singular Hermitian metric with semipositive curvature current [10]. Such classes pull back under dominant maps between smooth projective varieties and push forward under birational morphisms.

The proof builds a resolution π:V→S\pi:V \to S, a morphism f:V→Yf:V \to Y, and a line bundle BB on the base, together with a nonzero map f∗B→ℓπ∗Lf^*B \to\ell\pi^*L. The map will be used to transfer the sections constructed on the base to positive multiples of LL on SS. Its normalization will also supply the bounds needed to construct those base sections.

The base and the relative section

A maximal base. Call a dominant rational map S⇢YS \dashrightarrow Y dominated by LL if, after resolving it to a morphism f:V→Yf:V \to Y,

cπ∗L−f∗H is pseudoeffectivec\pi^*L-f^*H \text{ is pseudoeffective}

for some positive integer cc and ample Cartier divisor HH on the integral projective variety YY. The constant map is allowed: the trivial line on a point is ample, and LL is pseudoeffective. There is therefore a dominated map of largest possible base dimension.

We may choose its base smooth and its function field relatively algebraically closed in C(S)\mathbb{C}(S). Indeed, normalize the original base in its relative algebraic closure in C(S)\mathbb{C}(S), a finite extension, and then resolve the base and the rational map. The pullback of the original ample divisor to the new smooth base is big. A large multiple of this pullback dominates an ample divisor in pseudoeffective order, which preserves (3.2). The same argument permits further birational modifications of the base and higher smooth source models.

This choice has a useful maximality property. If AA is a line bundle on SS and c′L−Ac'L-A is pseudoeffective for some c′>0c'>0, then the ratio of any two nonzero sections of AA lies in C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y). To prove this, suppose their ratio is nonconstant and resolve the corresponding pencil. Its moving line is the pullback of OP1(1)\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1), and its fixed divisor is effective, so the pencil is dominated by LL. The joint map of this pencil and S⇢YS \dashrightarrow Y is dominated as well: add their two inequalities on a common resolution and restrict the ample product line to the joint image. Normalizing and resolving that image preserves domination. By maximality its dimension is dim⁡Y\dim Y, so the pencil’s function is algebraic over C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y). Relative algebraic closedness places it in C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y), as asserted. A constant ratio already has this property. When necessary, increasing c′c' to an integer preserves pseudoeffectivity because LL is pseudoeffective.

Apply this property to the effective divisors in

(mj−m2)N1+(m2−m1)Nj∼(mj−m1)N2,j>2.(m_j-m_2)N_1+(m_2-m_1)N_j \sim(m_j-m_1)N_2,\qquad j>2.

Their common class is (mj−m1)(m2L−D)(m_j-m_1)(m_2L-D), which is bounded above by (mj−m1)m2L(m_j-m_1)m_2L in pseudoeffective order. The equivalence function in (3.3) thus belongs to C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y). On any normal model resolving the map to YY, a prime is called horizontal if it dominates YY, and vertical otherwise. A base function has order zero at a horizontal prime. If aja_j is the coefficient of the pullback of NjN_j at such a prime, then (3.3) gives

aj=a1+mj−m1m2−m1(a2−a1).a_j=a_1+\frac{m_j-m_1}{m_2-m_1}(a_2-a_1).

Since aj≥0a_j\ge0 along an unbounded sequence, a2≥a1a_2\ge a_1. Consequently the pullback of N2−N1N_2-N_1 has effective horizontal part.

If YY is a point, apply this calculation on SS itself: every prime is horizontal, and N2−N1N_2-N_1 is effective. Its class is (m2−m1)L(m_2-m_1)L, proving the theorem in this case. Henceforth dim⁡Y>0\dim Y>0. The remaining task is to remove the negative vertical coefficients by subtracting a divisor from the base.

Normalization along base divisors. For that subtraction to see every vertical coefficient, we need each vertical prime to dominate a base divisor. We construct a normal intermediate model with this property:

V→ρU→bSf↓h↓Yπ=bρ,f=hρ.\begin{CD} V @>{\rho}>> U @>{b}>> S \\ @V{f}VV @V{h}VV \\ Y \end{CD} \qquad\pi=b\rho,\quad f=h\rho.

Here bb and ρ\rho are birational, VV and YY are smooth projective, and every prime divisor of UU that fails to dominate YY dominates a prime divisor of YY.

For this construction, begin with a smooth resolution V0→Y0V_0\to Y_0 of the maximal map. On a dense open of Y0Y_0, its fibers form a flat family of subschemes of V0V_0 with a fixed Hilbert polynomial. Resolve the induced rational map from Y0Y_0 to the projective Hilbert scheme, obtaining a smooth projective birational base YY [13]. Pull back the universal family. Every fiber of this family has dimension r=dim⁡S−dim⁡Yr=\dim S-\dim Y. The reduced closure WW of the original flat family is integral and maps birationally to V0V_0. Its fibers are closed subschemes of the pulled-back Hilbert fibers, so have dimension at most rr. The normalization U→WU\to W is finite, and hence has the same fiber-dimension bound over YY. A prime divisor Q⊂UQ\subset U mapping into a subset of codimension at least two would satisfy

dim⁡Q≤dim⁡Y−2+r=dim⁡S−2,\dim Q\le\dim Y-2+r=\dim S-2,

which is impossible. Resolve UU to obtain VV. The dimension bound is needed on UU; the smooth space VV will be used for metrics and vanishing. The preceding maximality argument preserves (3.2) throughout these modifications.

On this model, let s0s_0 be the rational section of (m2−m1)b∗L(m_2-m_1)b^*L whose divisor is b∗(N2−N1)b^*(N_2-N_1). Its horizontal part is effective by the preceding calculation. The base divisor to be subtracted is now determined one prime at a time.

For each prime divisor P⊂YP\subset Y, subtract the smallest normalized vertical order:

bP=min⁡Q→Pord⁡Q(s0)ord⁡Q(h∗P).(5)b_P=\min_{Q\to P}\frac{\operatorname{ord}_Q(s_0)}{\operatorname{ord}_Q(h^*P)}. \tag*{(5)}

The minimum runs over the finitely many components of h∗Ph^*P dominating PP. This set is nonempty and its denominators are positive. Only finitely many bPb_P are nonzero, because div⁡(s0)\operatorname{div}(s_0) has finite support. Every vertical prime of UU occurs in one of these minima. Together with horizontal effectivity, this proves

div⁡(s0)−h∗(∑PbPP)≥0.\operatorname{div}(s_0)-h^*\left(\sum_P b_P P\right)\ge0.

Choose a positive integer aa clearing all denominators and set

ℓ=a(m2−m1),B=a∑PbPP.\ell=a(m_2-m_1),\qquad B=a\sum_P b_P P.

Smoothness of YY makes BB Cartier. On the normal variety UU, the resulting rational section of ℓb∗L−h∗B\ell b^*L-h^*B has nonnegative order at every prime, so is regular. Pulling it back to VV gives

σ:OV(f∗B)⟶OV(ℓπ∗L).(6)\sigma:\mathcal{O}_V(f^*B)\longrightarrow\mathcal{O}_V(\ell\pi^*L). \tag*{(6)}

For every base prime PP, some component of f∗Pf^*P dominating PP has order zero in σ\sigma: take the strict transform of a prime attaining (5). Its strict transform defines the same divisorial valuation, since UU is normal and hence regular at its generic point. The new exceptional divisors on VV acquire no poles because the pulled-back section is regular. This is the normalization we will use near singular fibers; equidimensionality of VV is unnecessary.

Rank one of the adjoint direct images. We now have the map that will transfer sections from the base. To construct a semipositive metric on its source line BB, we will use adjoint integral metrics. Their direct images must first be shown to have rank one. The anticanonical identity enters at this point. Put

E=KV−π∗KS=KV+π∗L.E=K_V-\pi^*K_S=K_V+\pi^*L.

The divisor EE is effective and π\pi-exceptional; denote its canonical section by ee. For every integer k≥0k\ge0, we claim that

Gk=f∗OV(E+kℓπ∗L)(7)G_k=f_*\mathcal{O}_V(E+k\ell\pi^*L) \tag*{(7)}

has generic rank one. The section eσke\sigma^k, after trivializing BB over the generic point, shows that the rank is at least one, also when k=0k=0. If it were larger, Serre’s global generation theorem would give, for some positive tt, two sections of E+kℓπ∗L+tf∗HE+k\ell\pi^*L+tf^*H independent over C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y). Their ratio would lie outside that field.

Push their zero divisors forward to SS. They become two effective divisors in one Cartier class

A∼kℓL+tπ∗f∗H,A\sim k\ell L+t\pi_*f^*H,

with the same rational-function ratio. Indeed, choose a Cartier divisor representing the upstairs line and express both sections as rational functions; birational pushforward preserves their principal divisors, and π∗E=0\pi_*E=0. Smoothness makes the common downstairs divisor Cartier. Pushing forward (3.2) gives

(kℓ+tc)L−A pseudoeffective.(k\ell+tc)L-A\ \text{pseudoeffective}.

The maximality property then places the ratio in C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y), a contradiction. The coefficient kℓ+tck\ell+tc is positive even at k=0k=0, proving (7) in its full stated range.

The bounded base metric

We have constructed BB and σ\sigma; the next task is a semipositive metric on BB with locally bounded weights. For a local frame β\beta, our weight convention is −log⁡∣β∣2-\log|\beta|^2, so semipositive curvature means that the weights are plurisubharmonic. We obtain them as limits of adjoint integral metrics. We use Berndtsson’s direct-image theorem in the following form [5]: for a proper holomorphic submersion with Kähler total space and a smoothly semipositive line bundle AA, the natural L2L^2 metric on f∗(KV/Y+A)f_*(K_{V/Y}+A) has semipositive curvature wherever the adjoint sections form a vector bundle. The coefficient metric may be semipositive; strict positivity along the fibers is not required.

Let hLh_L denote the pulled-back smooth metric on π∗L\pi^*L. Choose a dense Zariski open Y∘Y^\circ on which ff is smooth and ee and σ\sigma are not identically zero on any fiber. The fibers there are connected: relative algebraic closedness of C(Y)\mathbb{C}(Y) in C(S)\mathbb{C}(S) makes the finite part of the Stein factorization trivial. For a local frame β\beta of BB, set σβ=σ(f∗β)\sigma_\beta=\sigma(f^*\beta) and

φβ(y)=−log⁡max⁡Vy∣σβ∣hL2,y∈Y∘.(8)\varphi_\beta(y)=-\log\max_{V_y}|\sigma_\beta|_{h_L}^2,\qquad y\in Y^\circ. \tag*{(8)}

The fiberwise maximum is positive and continuous on this open set. To see that φβ\varphi_\beta is plurisubharmonic, take a local frame τ\tau of KYK_Y. Equation (3.6) gives

KV/Y+(1+kℓ)π∗L=E+kℓπ∗L−f∗KY.K_{V/Y}+(1+k\ell)\pi^*L=E+k\ell\pi^*L-f^*K_Y.

Thus eσβk/f∗τe\sigma_\beta^k/f^*\tau is an adjoint section. By (7) and generic base change, it spans the adjoint direct image on a dense open subset of Y∘Y^\circ. For every integer k≥1k\geq1, Berndtsson’s theorem makes

φβ,k(y)=−1klog⁡∫Vy∣σβ2k∣hL2k∣e/f∗τ∣hL2(9)\varphi_{\beta,k}(y)=-\frac{1}{k}\log\int_{V_y}|\sigma_\beta^{2k}|_{h_L^{2k}}|e/f^*\tau|_{h_L}^2 \tag*{(9)}

plurisubharmonic on that dense open. The integral is smooth and strictly positive throughout Y∘Y^\circ; its curvature inequality therefore holds on all of Y∘Y^\circ by continuity.

The final factor in the integral is the smooth nonnegative measure obtained from a π∗L\pi^*L-valued relative canonical form. It has positive mass and full support on each fiber, because a nonzero holomorphic section on a connected smooth fiber cannot vanish on an open subset. Denote this measure by μy\mu_y, its mass by M(y)>0M(y)>0, and put

qβ=∣σβ∣hL2,Ak(y)=(1M(y)∫Vyqβk dμy)1/k.q_\beta=|\sigma_\beta|_{h_L}^2,\qquad A_k(y)=\left(\frac{1}{M(y)}\int_{V_y}q_\beta^k\,d\mu_y\right)^{1/k}.

Hölder’s inequality for the probability measure M(y)−1μyM(y)^{-1}\mu_y shows that Ak(y)A_k(y) increases with kk. Full support gives Ak(y)→max⁡VyqβA_k(y)\to\max_{V_y}q_\beta. The moments and their limit are continuous, so Dini’s theorem makes this convergence uniform on every compact subset of a coordinate open in Y∘Y^\circ. The limit is positive there. Since

φβ,k=−log⁡Ak−1klog⁡M,\varphi_{\beta,k}=-\log A_k-\frac{1}{k}\log M,

the weights in (9) converge locally uniformly to φβ\varphi_\beta. Their limit is plurisubharmonic.

It remains to establish local bounds near the omitted fibers. Properness of ff and smoothness of the upstairs metric bound qβq_\beta above over every relatively compact base neighborhood. Equation (8) therefore gives a local lower bound for φβ\varphi_\beta, even as one approaches the boundary.

For the upper bound, let PP be a divisorial component of Y∖Y∘Y\setminus Y^\circ. The normalization of σ\sigma supplies a component QQ above PP on which σ\sigma is generically nonzero. Choose a general point of QQ where P,QP,Q are smooth, Q→PQ\to P is submersive, no other component of f∗Pf^*P passes through the point, and σ≠0\sigma\ne0. In suitable local coordinates, a transverse coordinate to PP pulls back to a unit times z1rz_1^r, with r>0r>0, while the other base coordinates pull back to independent coordinates along QQ. Taking a local root absorbs the unit. This local form shows that a small source neighborhood maps onto a base neighborhood. On a still smaller source neighborhood, qβq_\beta has a positive lower bound. Every sufficiently nearby fiber meets this neighborhood, so its maximum has the same lower bound. This gives an upper bound for φβ\varphi_\beta near a general point of PP.

The removable-singularity theorem for plurisubharmonic functions now extends φβ\varphi_\beta across dense open subsets of all boundary divisors. These opens can be taken Zariski open: nonvanishing and the required differential ranks hold on algebraic opens of QQ, whose dominant constructible images contain dense Zariski opens of PP. The set still omitted is therefore contained in a closed analytic set A⊂YA\subset Y of codimension at least two.

We recall why no upper-bound obstruction remains at AA. Near a point of AA, choose a small affine complex disk centered there whose boundary misses AA, and a compact neighborhood of that boundary disjoint from AA. The plurisubharmonic function has a common upper bound on this neighborhood. For every nearby y∉Ay\notin A, choose a disk of the same radius centered at yy, with direction sufficiently close to the original one that its boundary stays in this fixed neighborhood. Its direction can also be chosen so that the whole disk misses AA: the radial image of AA, viewed from yy, in the space of complex line directions has real dimension at most 2dim⁡Y−42\dim Y-4, smaller than the direction space dimension 2dim⁡Y−22\dim Y-2. The submean inequality gives a common upper bound at all such yy. Removable singularities therefore extend the function across AA as well. The upper-limit extension preserves the lower bound already supplied by properness.

We have obtained locally bounded plurisubharmonic weights on all of YY. Under β′=gβ\beta'=g\beta, formula (8) gives

φβ′=φβ−log⁡∣g∣2.\varphi_{\beta'}=\varphi_\beta-\log|g|^2.

The same relation holds after extension, so the weights define a semipositive singular Hermitian metric hBh_B on BB, with locally bounded weights.

Vanishing at every nonnegative exponent

The bounded metric on BB is now available. To produce sections, we combine it with a metric on π∗L\pi^*L that is positive in base directions and has no multiplier-ideal loss. Recall that J(h)\mathcal{J}(h) consists locally of holomorphic functions gg for which ∣g∣2e−φh|g|^2e^{-\varphi_h} is integrable.

The domination (3.2) gives a singular metric on π∗L\pi^*L whose curvature is positive in base directions. More precisely, combine a semipositive singular metric on π∗L−f∗H\pi^*L-f^*H with a positive smooth metric on HH, and take the cc-th root. The resulting metric h1h_1 satisfies

Θh1(π∗L)≥c−1f∗ωH.\Theta_{h_1}(\pi^*L)\ge c^{-1}f^*\omega_H.

Mix its local weights with those of the smooth semipositive metric hLh_L: for some 0<δ<10 < \delta< 1, put h=hL1−δh1δh = h_L^{1-\delta}h_1^\delta. The local exponential-integrability consequence of Skoda’s theorem [20] supplies, near each point, a sufficiently small positive exponent for which the negative exponential of the singular weight is integrable. We use its arbitrary-plurisubharmonic-weight formulation in [8]: for a nontrivial psh weight φ\varphi, the local integrability threshold of e−2γφe^{-2\gamma\varphi} is positive. This formulation also includes complex dimension one. In our squared-norm convention, take γ=δ/2\gamma= \delta/2. A finite coordinate cover of the compact space VV gives one common δ>0\delta> 0. The smooth part changes integrability by bounded factors. Hence

Θh(π∗L)≥ϵf∗ωH,J(h)=OV,ϵ=δ/c>0.(10)\Theta_h(\pi^*L) \ge\epsilon f^*\omega_H,\qquad\mathcal{J}(h) = \mathcal{O}_V,\qquad\epsilon= \delta/c > 0. \tag*{(10)}

For each integer k≥0k \ge0, tensor this metric with f∗hBkf^*h_B^k. Its curvature is still at least ϵf∗ωH\epsilon f^*\omega_H, and its multiplier ideal is still trivial: for every fixed kk, the added weight is locally bounded. Thus the same choice of hh works at all the required exponents.

We use Fujino’s Kollár–Nadel vanishing theorem in the following form [12]. If f:V→Yf : V \to Y is a surjective morphism from a compact Kähler manifold to a projective variety and a line bundle AA has a singular metric hAh_A with ΘhA(A)≥ϵf∗ωH\Theta_{h_A}(A) \ge\epsilon f^*\omega_H, then

Hi(Y,Rqf∗(OV(KV+A)⊗J(hA)))=0(i>0, q≥0).H^i\left(Y,R^qf_*\left(\mathcal{O}_V(K_V+A)\otimes\mathcal{J}(h_A)\right)\right)=0 \qquad(i>0,\ q\ge0).

Fujino derives this form from the injectivity and multiplier-ideal Bertini theorems of Fujino–Matsumura [12]. The metric need not have analytic singularities. Apply the theorem to A=π∗L+kf∗BA = \pi^*L+kf^*B, with the metric just constructed, and take q=0q = 0. Since KV+π∗L=EK_V+\pi^*L = E, the projection formula gives

Hi(Y,G⊗OY(kB))=0(i>0, k≥0),G=f∗OV(E).(11)H^i\left(Y,\mathcal{G}\otimes\mathcal{O}_Y(kB)\right)=0 \qquad(i>0,\ k\ge0),\qquad\mathcal{G}=f_*\mathcal{O}_V(E). \tag*{(11)}

Riemann–Roch on the smooth projective base makes

Q(k)=χ(Y,G⊗OY(kB))=∫Ych⁡(G)ekc1(B)td⁡(Y)Q(k)=\chi\left(Y,\mathcal{G}\otimes\mathcal{O}_Y(kB)\right)=\int_Y\operatorname{ch}(\mathcal{G})e^{kc_1(B)}\operatorname{td}(Y)

a polynomial in kk, whether or not BB is ample. By (11), this polynomial equals h0(Y,G⊗OY(kB))h^0\left(Y,\mathcal{G}\otimes\mathcal{O}_Y(kB)\right) at every nonnegative integer. At zero the canonical section ee gives a nonzero section, so Q(0)>0Q(0)>0. This is why vanishing at k=0k=0 is indispensable: without it, the existence of ee would not determine the Euler characteristic. The polynomial is nonzero, and hence cannot vanish at every positive integer. For some k>0k>0 there is a nonzero section of E+kf∗BE+kf^*B on VV.

Multiply this section by σk\sigma^k from (6). The result is a nonzero section of E+kℓπ∗LE+k\ell\pi^*L. Finally, π∗OV(E)=OS\pi_*\mathcal{O}_V(E)=\mathcal{O}_S: a rational function with possible poles only on the effective exceptional divisor EE is regular away from its codimension-two image, and extends across that image by normality of SS. The projection formula therefore sends our section to a nonzero section of kℓLk\ell L, completing the proof of Theorem 1.2.

The two appearances of L=−KSL=-K_S explain the strength and the scope of the criterion. The identity KV+π∗L=EK_V+\pi^*L=E supplies the adjoint section used in the integral metric and turns adjoint vanishing into the fixed sheaf f∗OV(E)f_*\mathcal{O}_V(E) at exponent zero. These steps connect the positive base metric to an Euler polynomial with a known nonzero value.

From twisted differentials to effective divisors

Theorem 1.2 accepts any fixed pseudoeffective error. We now construct one from differential forms, so that the invariant forms obtained in Section 2 can be used after descent. The construction has two steps: take a fixed determinant line of a generic span, then control the sign of that line by generic nefness.

Theorem 4.1 (Cotangent subsheaves). Let SS be smooth projective with −KS-K_S nef. If a line bundle MM is a saturated subsheaf of (ΩS1)⊗b(\Omega_S^1)^{\otimes b}, where b>0b > 0, then −M-M is pseudoeffective.

This is the smooth, zero-boundary, rank-one case of [14], Theorem 4.1; Ou’s generic-nefness theorem [19], Theorem 1.4 is an antecedent of the cotangent result.

Lemma 4.2 (Determinants of twisted differentials). Let SS be smooth connected projective with −KS=L-K_S = L nef. Suppose that, for a fixed p>0p > 0,

H0(S,ΩSp⊗OS(mL))≠0H^0(S,\Omega_S^p \otimes\mathcal{O}_S(mL)) \ne0

for arbitrarily large positive integers mm. Then there is a pseudoeffective Cartier divisor DD and a strictly increasing sequence dj>0d_j > 0 with effective integral divisors

Nj∼djL−D.N_j \sim d_jL - D.

The generic-span construction below adapts [15], Lemma 4.1 and [14], Lemma 5.1. We give the proof for the present unbounded positive sequence, including the numerically trivial case excluded by the numerical-nontriviality premises of those two cited lemmas, and include the saturation argument needed for the negative first-Chern-class conclusion of [14], Theorem 4.1.

Proof. Choose one nonzero section at each of an unbounded set of exponents. Over C(S)\mathbb{C}(S), trivialize LL rationally and let WW be the span of the chosen vectors. Take a basis u1,…,uru_1,\ldots,u_r of WW from among them. For infinitely many unbounded exponents, the corresponding vector has nonzero coefficient along one fixed uau_a. Wedging that section with the other r−1r-1 basis sections gives a nonzero section of

⋀rΩSp⊗OS(djL),\bigwedge^r \Omega_S^p \otimes\mathcal{O}_S(d_jL),

where, if the fixed basis sections have exponents a1,…,ara_1,\ldots,a_r, the new exponent is dj=mj+∑i≠aaid_j = m_j + \sum_{i \ne a} a_i. The sum is fixed, so the djd_j are unbounded and may be taken strictly increasing. Every such wedge spans the same line ⋀rW\bigwedge^r W.

Let MM be its saturation in ⋀rΩSp\bigwedge^r \Omega_S^p. A saturated rank-one subsheaf of a vector bundle on a smooth variety is reflexive: its double dual maps into that vector bundle by extension across codimension two, and any enlargement would give torsion in the quotient. Hence MM is a line bundle. Each wedge factors through M(djL)M(d_jL), since its image in the torsion-free quotient is generically zero.

In characteristic zero, exterior powers are direct summands of tensor powers. Thus ⋀rΩSp\bigwedge^r \Omega_S^p is a direct summand of (ΩSp)⊗rp(\Omega_S^p)^{\otimes rp}, and MM remains saturated in that tensor power: the additional summand is a vector bundle, so the enlarged quotient is still torsion-free. Theorem 4.1 makes D=−MD = -M pseudoeffective. The zero divisors of the induced nonzero sections of M(djL)M(d_jL) are the required NjN_j. □

Corollary 4.3 (Conversion of twisted differentials). Let SS be smooth connected projective with smoothly semipositive L=−KSL = -K_S. If, for one fixed p≥0p \ge0,

H0(S,ΩSp⊗OS(mL))≠0H^0(S,\Omega_S^p \otimes\mathcal{O}_S(mL)) \ne0

for arbitrarily large positive integers mm, then some positive multiple of LL has a nonzero section.

Proof. For p=0p = 0 this is immediate. For p>0p > 0, apply Lemma 4.2 and Theorem 1.2. □

Descent before conversion

We now combine the two principal theorems. The geometric input describes a finite cover while retaining its residual torus action. Invariant forms on a compact factor then descend to that cover, where the ordinary conversion theorem applies.

We use the following finite-cover structure statement from [18], Theorem (Finite cover with compact torus monodromy). If XX is smooth connected projective and −KX-K_X is smoothly semipositive, there is a connected finite étale projective cover ν:S→X\nu:S\to X whose universal cover is

S~=Cb×C×F.\widetilde{S}=\mathbb{C}^{b}\times C\times F.

Here CC and FF are compact simply connected projective factors; CC is Ricci-flat, and FF has smoothly semipositive anticanonical bundle and no positive-degree holomorphic forms. The deck group acts by translations on Cb\mathbb{C}^{b}, trivially on CC, and through a compact real torus TT of holomorphic isometries on FF. The first two factors have nowhere-zero holomorphic canonical forms invariant under the deck group. Empty products are points and have unit canonical frame.

The proof of this statement in the companion starts from Yau’s prescribed-Ricci theorem and the Ricci-semipositive structure theory [23, 9, 6]. Its finite-cover construction preserves monodromy and the invariant frames. It also proves the vanishing of holomorphic forms by the Bochner argument on irreducible non-Ricci-flat factors, independently of the rational-connectedness conclusion of the refined structure theorem. Kähler Hodge symmetry therefore gives

Hq(F,OF)=0(q>0),H0(F,OF)=C,IT(0)=1.(12)H^q(F,\mathcal{O}_F)=0\quad(q>0),\qquad H^0(F,\mathcal{O}_F)=\mathbb{C},\qquad I_T(0)=1. \tag*{(12)}

This deduction includes a point factor.

Proposition 5.1 (Descent of invariant twisted forms). Let ν:S→X\nu:S\to X, FF, and TT be the finite-cover data just specified. After choosing invariant canonical frames on Cb\mathbb{C}^{b} and CC, there is, for every r≥0r\geq0 and 0≤p≤dim⁡F0\leq p\leq\dim F, an injective linear map

H0(F,ΩFp⊗(−KF)r)T⟶H0(S,ΩSp⊗(−KS)r).H^0(F,\Omega_F^p\otimes(-K_F)^r)^T\longrightarrow H^0(S,\Omega_S^p\otimes(-K_S)^r).

For some fixed pp, the target is nonzero at unbounded positive integers rr.

Proof. Let η\eta be the product of the chosen canonical frames on Cb\mathbb{C}^{b} and CC. For an invariant form uu in the displayed source, pull back its differential part along the projection to FF and use η−r\eta^{-r} for the other anticanonical factors. This gives

η−r⊗pr⁡F∗u∈H0(S~,ΩS~p⊗KS~−r).\eta^{-r}\otimes\operatorname{pr}_F^*u\in H^0(\widetilde{S},\Omega_{\widetilde{S}}^p\otimes K_{\widetilde{S}}^{-r}).

Translations preserve the Euclidean frame, the action on CC is trivial, and the action on FF lies in TT, with its natural induced action on both tensor factors of uu. The tensor is therefore deck-invariant and descends holomorphically to SS. Pullback along the projection is injective on differential forms, tensoring with η−r\eta^{-r} is invertible, and local covering charts preserve nonvanishing. Hence the descent map is injective. Its holomorphic sections are algebraic because SS is projective.

By (12) and Corollary 2.5, there are a fixed pp and invariant sections in H0(F,ΩFp⊗(−KF)m+1)H^0(F,\Omega_F^p\otimes(-K_F)^{m+1}) for unbounded positive mm. Apply the constructed map with r=m+1r=m+1. If FF is a point, its constant section gives the same assertion with p=0.□p=0. \square

Corollary 5.2 (Smooth anticanonical nonvanishing). Let XX be a smooth connected projective complex variety. If −KX-K_X has a smooth Hermitian metric with semipositive Chern curvature, then H0(X,−mKX)≠0H^0(X,-mK_X)\ne0 for some integer m>0m>0.

Proof. Choose the finite cover above. Proposition 5.1 gives nonzero anticanonically twisted differential forms on SS in one fixed degree and at unbounded positive exponents. The anticanonical metric on SS is the smooth semipositive pullback metric. Apply Corollary 4.3 on SS to obtain a nonzero section of −kKS-kK_S, k>0k>0.

The finite étale norm of a section [18] sends a nonzero section of ν∗A\nu^*A to a nonzero section of A⊗dA^{\otimes d}, where d=deg⁡νd=\deg\nu; a Galois hypothesis is unnecessary. With A=−kKXA=-kK_X, the identity KS=ν∗KXK_S=\nu^*K_X therefore gives a section of −dkKX-dkK_X. For zero-dimensional connected XX, the canonical line is trivial and the assertion is immediate. □\square

The ordering of the argument matters. The torus-invariant objects are the forms on FF; they descend before any section-conversion theorem is applied. Consequently no equivariant strengthening of Theorem 1.2 is required, and the finite cover is never treated as a global product.

References

  1. [1]Michael F. Atiyah and Raoul Bott. A Leschetz fixed point formula for elliptic differential operators. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 72(2):245–250, 1966.
  2. [2]Michael F. Atiyah and Graeme B. Segal. The index of elliptic operators. II. Annals of Mathematics. Second Series, 87(3):531–545, 1968.DOI
  3. [3]Michael F. Atiyah and Isadore M. Singer. The index of elliptic operators. III. Annals of Mathematics. Second Series, 87(3):546–604, 1968.DOI
  4. [4]Velleda Baldoni, Nicole Berline, Jesús A. De Loera, Matthias Köppe, and Michèle Vergne. Computation of the highest coefficients of weighted Ehrhart quasi-polynomials of rational polyhedra. Foundations of Computational Mathematics, 12(4):435–469, 2012. Preprint version arXiv:1011.1602v1, 7 November 2010.
  5. [5]Bo Berndtsson. Curvature of vector bundles associated to holomorphic fibrations. Annals of Mathematics. Second Series, 169(2):531–560, 2009.
  6. [6]Frédéric Campana, Jean-Pierre Demailly, and Thomas Peternell. Rationally connected manifolds and semipositivity of the Ricci curvature. In Christopher D. Hacon, Mircea Mustaţă, and Mihnea Popa, editors, Recent Advances in Algebraic Geometry: A Volume in Honor of Rob Lazarsfeld’s 60th Birthday, volume 417 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, pages 71–91. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015. Theorem 1.4; arXiv:1210.2923v, 5 February 2018.
  7. [7]Yifan Chen, Simion Filip, Song Sun, Valentino Tosatti, and Junsheng Zhang. Compact Kähler surfaces with semipositive anticanonical bundle, 2026. arXiv:2609.26716v1, 22 September 2026.
  8. [8]Jean-Pierre Demailly and János Kollár. Semi-continuity of complex singularity exponents and Kähler–Einstein metrics on Fano orbifolds. Annales scientifiques de l’École Normale Supérieure. Série 4, 34(4):525–556, 2001. Elementary properties 1.4(8); arXiv:math/9910118v3, 14 November 2013.
  9. [9]Jean-Pierre Demailly, Thomas Peternell, and Michael Schneider. Compact Kähler manifolds with hermitian semipositive anticanonical bundle. Compositio Mathematica, 101(2):217–224, 1996.
  10. [10]Jean-Pierre Demailly, Thomas Peternell, and Michael Schneider. Pseudo-effective line bundles on compact Kähler manifolds. International Journal of Mathematics, 12(6):689–741, 2001.
  11. [11]Igor V. Dolgachev. A brief introduction to Enriques surfaces. In Development of Moduli Theory—Kyoto 2013, volume 69 of Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics, pages 1–32. Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2016.
  12. [12]Osamu Fujino. Kollár–Nadel type vanishing theorem. Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, 42(5):643–646, 2018.
  13. [13]Alexander Grothendieck. Techniques de construction et théorèmes d’existence en géométrie algébrique IV: les schémas de Hilbert. In Séminaire Bourbaki: années 1960/61, exposés 205–222, number 6 in Séminaire Bourbaki, pages 249–276. Société Mathématique de France, Paris, 1961. Exposé 221.
  14. [14]Vladimir Lazić, Shin-ichi Matsumura, Thomas Peternell, Nikolaos Tsakanikas, and Zhixin Xie. The nonvanishing problem for varieties with nef anticanonical bundle. Documenta Mathematica, 28(6):1393–1440, 2023.
  15. [15]Vladimir Lazić and Thomas Peternell. Abundance for varieties with many differential forms. Épijournal de Géométrie Algébrique, 2:Article 1, 35 pp., 2018.DOI
  16. [17]Niklas Müller. Two non-vanishing results concerning the anti-canonical bundle. Nagoya Mathematical Journal, 258:201–218, 2025.
  17. [18]OpenAI. Anticanonical nonvanishing from smooth semipositivity. OpenAI Math Release preprint OAI:Anticanonical-nonvanishing-from-smooth-semipositivity-September-26-2026, 2026.
  18. [19]Wenhao Qu. On generic nefness of tangent sheaves. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 304:Paper No. 58, 2023.
  19. [20]Henri Skoda. Sous-ensembles analytiques d’ordre fini ou infini dans Cⁿ. Bulletin de la Société Mathématique de France, 100:353–408, 1972.DOI
  20. [21]Richard P. Stanley. Combinatorial reciprocity theorems. Advances in Mathematics, 14(2):194–253, 1974.
  21. [23]Shing-Tung Yau. On the Ricci curvature of a compact Kähler manifold and the complex Monge–Ampère equation. I. Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 31(3):339–411, 1978.DOI
  22. [24]Shing-Tung Yau. Open problems in geometry. In Lectures on Differential Geometry, volume 1 of Conference Proceedings and Lecture Notes in Geometry and Topology, pages 365–404. International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994. In the book by Richard Schoen and Shing-Tung Yau; Problem 75, p. 395.DOI

Paper details

Contents