alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Algebraic ellipticity of double covers of (P1)3(\mathbf P^1)^3

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

We show that every smooth complex double cover of (P1)3(\mathbf P^1)^3 branched along a smooth divisor of tridegree (2,2,2)(2,2,2) is algebraically Gromov elliptic. These irrational Fano threefolds form Mori–Mukai family 3-1 and have anticanonical genus seven and Picard rank three. Their three coordinate projections define degree-four del Pezzo fibrations. Each threefold also admits a dominant rational map of degree two from P3\mathbf P^3.

Introduction

All varieties considered in this paper are defined over C\mathbb{C}. Recall that an algebraic spray on a smooth variety VV is a vector bundle p:E→Vp:E\to V with a morphism s:E→Vs:E\to V satisfying s(0v)=vs(0_{v})=v. It is dominating at vv if the differential of s∣Evs|_{E_{v}} at 0v0_{v} surjects onto TvVT_{v}V. The variety VV is said to be algebraically Gromov elliptic, or simply algebraically elliptic, if it admits a spray dominating at every point. According to Banecki [1], every smooth complete rational variety is algebraically elliptic. The first examples of irrational smooth projective algebraically elliptic varieties are smooth cubic threefolds and very general smooth cubic fourfolds, see [9 Theorem 1.1] and the introduction in [4]. Very general smooth quartic double spaces of dimension 3 and 4 are also algebraically elliptic and are not stably rational, see [4]. In this paper we extend this list of examples by the following irrational Fano threefolds.

For a smooth effective divisor RR on Y=(P1)3Y=(\mathbb{P}^{1})^{3} of tridegree (2,2,2)(2,2,2), let π:X→Y\pi:X\to Y be the double cover branched along RR. Its three coordinate fibrations are fi=pr⁡i∘π:X→P1f_i=\operatorname{pr}_i\circ\pi:X\to\mathbb{P}^{1}, i=1,2,3i=1,2,3.

Theorem 1.1. For every smooth R∈∣OY(2,2,2)∣R\in|\mathcal{O}_{Y}(2,2,2)|, the threefold XX is algebraically Gromov elliptic.

These threefolds form family 3-1 in the Mori–Mukai classification [11] and have Picard number three. Let L=OY(1,1,1)L=\mathcal{O}_{Y}(1,1,1). Since KY=−2LK_{Y}=-2L and L3=6L^{3}=6, the double-cover formula KX=π∗(KY+L)K_{X}=\pi^{*}(K_{Y}+L) gives

−KX=π∗(L),(−KX)3=2⋅6=12.(1)-K_{X}=\pi^{*}(L),\qquad(-K_{X})^{3}=2\cdot6=12. \tag*{(1)}

Thus XX is Fano of anticanonical genus 1+12(−KX)3=71+\frac{1}{2}(-K_{X})^{3}=7. According to Prokhorov [12 Theorem 6.1, case (6.1.g)], every smooth threefold XX as above is irrational, whereas it is unirational. Moreover, we provide in Proposition 4.2 a dominant rational map P3⇢X\mathbb{P}^{3}\dashrightarrow X of degree two.

The proof uses local rank-one sprays. For a smooth variety VV, such a spray is a morphism

s:U×A1⟶V,s(u,0)=u,s:U\times\mathbb{A}^{1}\longrightarrow V,\qquad s(u,0)=u,

where U⊂VU \subset V is Zariski open; its values need not remain in UU. Its velocity at a∈Ua \in U is ∂ts(a,0)∈TaV\partial_t s(a, 0) \in T_aV. To establish the algebraic ellipticity of VV, it suffices to construct, near every point of VV, finitely many local rank-one sprays whose velocities span its tangent space. By Gromov’s localization lemma, these local sprays extend to global rank-one sprays whose velocity directions at the chosen point are unchanged, see [8 Lemma 1.3 and the proof of Lemma 1.5]. Openness of domination and quasicompactness give finitely many global sprays whose velocities span the tangent space at every point of VV. Thus VV is algebraically subelliptic, and the equivalence of subellipticity and ellipticity [8 Theorem 0.1] gives algebraic ellipticity.

We obtain these local sprays on our threefold XX from the three natural del Pezzo fibrations fi:X→P1f_i: X \to\mathbb{P}^1. Their fibers are degree-four del Pezzo surfaces with at worst Du Val singularities, and their general fibers are smooth (Lemma 4.1). At a smooth point aa of a fiber SS, which may be singular elsewhere, Lemma 2.1 provides an auxiliary point q≠aq \ne a, lying on no line of SS, such that the anticanonical section through aa and singular at qq is integral with a single ordinary node. Blowing up qq gives a cubic del Pezzo surface. If HH denotes the pullback of −KS-K_S to this blow-up and eqe_q its exceptional curve, the anticanonical class is H−eqH-e_q, whereas the strict transforms of the sections singular at qq form a conic pencil of class H−2eqH-2e_q. The chosen nodal member becomes a smooth conic.

To carry out this construction in nearby surface fibers, we extend qq to a section of fif_i and blow up that section. This extension uses weak approximation, including when SS is singular. We pull the smooth conic family back by the map that assigns to each nearby point uu the member of the pencil through uu. The point uu itself gives a section of the pullback, which is therefore a P1\mathbb{P}^1-bundle, trivial on a suitable Zariski neighborhood UU of aa. An affine chart with the marked section at zero, followed by the blow-down to XX, gives a local rank-one spray on UU with values in XX.

We choose the auxiliary point twice so that the corresponding curves have different tangent directions at aa. The two spray velocities then span TaST_aS. Finally, at every point of XX, at least two of the three fibrations fif_i are smooth there and have distinct fiber tangent planes. The corresponding local sprays span TaXT_aX. This proves Theorem 1.1.

AI disclosure. Motivated by their work on algebraic ellipticity of quartic double spaces [4], the authors directed GPT-6 Astra to search for further examples of nonrational algebraically elliptic varieties. This search led to the class considered in this paper. The resulting arguments were revised, expanded where necessary, and streamlined by the authors with assistance from GPT-6 Astra. The authors take responsibility for the mathematical content.

Anticanonical curves through a prescribed point

A weak del Pezzo surface is a smooth projective surface whose anticanonical divisor is nef and big. In degrees three and four, its anticanonical system is base point free and defines a birational morphism contracting precisely the (−2)(-2)-curves. The image is a Du Val cubic surface in P3\mathbb{P}^3, respectively a degree-four Du Val del Pezzo surface in P4\mathbb{P}^4; see [2 §2.3, Proposition 2.6]. The degree-four model is cut out by two quadrics; see [3 Theorem 8.6.2 and Corollary 8.3.7]. Throughout this section, degrees and lines on these images refer to their anticanonical embeddings. We denote the embedded tangent plane at q∈Ssmq \in S^{\mathrm{sm}} by TqST_qS. The space P(TaS)\mathbb{P}(T_aS) parametrizes one-dimensional subspaces of TaST_aS, that is, tangent directions at aa.

These surfaces have only finitely many lines. Indeed, on the minimal resolution, the strict transform λ~\widetilde{\lambda} of a line has anticanonical degree one. The Hodge index theorem gives λ~2≤0\widetilde{\lambda}^{2} \le0, and adjunction then gives λ~2=−1\widetilde{\lambda}^{2} = -1 and pa(λ~)=0p_a(\widetilde{\lambda}) = 0. There are only finitely many such lattice classes, since the orthogonal complement of the canonical class in the intersection lattice is negative definite, and a class of negative square contains at most one irreducible curve.

Lemma 2.1. Let S⊂P4S \subset\mathbf{P}^{4} be a degree-four Du Val del Pezzo surface in its anticanonical embedding. Fix a∈Ssma \in S^{\mathrm{sm}} and a finite set Z⊂S∖{a}Z \subset S \setminus\{a\}. For qq in a nonempty Zariski open subset of SsmS^{\mathrm{sm}}, the point qq differs from aa, lies on no line of SS, and satisfies a∉TqSa \notin\mathrm{T}_{q}S. The hyperplane ⟨a,TqS⟩\langle a,\mathrm{T}_{q}S\rangle cuts an integral curve C(q,a)C(q,a) with an ordinary node at qq, smooth elsewhere, and disjoint from Z∪Sing⁡SZ \cup\operatorname{Sing} S. Given a direction δ∈P(TaS)\delta\in\mathbf{P}(\mathrm{T}_{a}S), the open subset can also be chosen so that TaC(q,a)\mathrm{T}_{a}C(q,a) has direction different from δ\delta.

Proof. Let r ⁣:S~→Sr\colon\widetilde{S} \to S be the minimal resolution, let βa ⁣:W→S~\beta_a\colon W \to\widetilde{S} blow up the point above aa, and set μ=r∘βa\mu= r \circ\beta_a. Write eae_a for the exceptional curve of βa\beta_a and H=μ∗(−KS)H = \mu^{*}(-K_S). Crepancy of rr and the blow-up formula give

−KW=H−ea,(−KW)2=3.-K_W = H - e_a,\qquad(-K_W)^2 = 3.

For an integral curve C⊂SC \subset S with strict transform C^⊂W\widehat{C} \subset W,

(−KW)⋅C^=deg⁡C−mult⁡aC≥0.(-K_W)\cdot\widehat{C} = \deg C - \operatorname{mult}_{a} C \ge0.

The inequality follows by intersecting CC with a general hyperplane through aa. The strict transforms of the exceptional curves of rr have anticanonical degree zero: HH has degree zero on them and they are disjoint from eae_a. Also H⋅ea=0H \cdot e_a = 0 and ea2=−1e_a^2 = -1, so (−KW)⋅ea=1(-K_W)\cdot e_a = 1. Hence WW is a weak del Pezzo surface of degree three. Its anticanonical morphism

S←μW→νS′⊂P3S \xleftarrow{\mu} W \xrightarrow{\nu} S' \subset\mathbf{P}^{3}

resolves projection from aa and has a Du Val cubic as image. It maps ea≃P(TaS)e_a \simeq\mathbf{P}(\mathrm{T}_{a}S) isomorphically to a line ℓ\ell. The exceptional curves of rr, and the strict transforms of any lines of SS through aa, are contracted by ν\nu to singular points of S′S'.

We use the following two properties of tangent planes to S′S'. First, a general tangent-plane section is an integral cubic with a single ordinary node at its point of tangency. Indeed, the Gauss map is generically finite: otherwise its general fibers, whose closures are linear spaces in characteristic zero [10 §1], would contradict finiteness of the lines on S′S'. Thus its differential has rank two at a general smooth point q′q'. To interpret this condition, choose local analytic coordinates centered at q′q', with tangent plane z=0z = 0, and write the surface as

z=g2(ξ1,ξ2)+terms of order at least three,z = g_2(\xi_1,\xi_2) + \text{terms of order at least three},

where g2g_2 is homogeneous of degree two. Writing g=g2+O(3)g = g_2 + O(3), the two slope coordinates of the Gauss map are −gξ1,−gξ2-g_{\xi_1}, -g_{\xi_2}, and the differential of its remaining affine coordinate vanishes at q′q'. Its rank is therefore the rank of the Hessian of g2g_2. Rank two makes g2g_2 nondegenerate. Setting z=0z = 0 gives a plane curve with an ordinary node at q′q'. Choose q′q' off the finitely many lines on S′S'. A nonintegral plane cubic has a line component, and any singular point away from its line components would have to be a singular point of an irreducible conic. The tangent-plane section is therefore integral. Since its arithmetic genus is one, its ordinary node at q′q' is its only singularity. Second, a general tangent plane avoids any prescribed finite set of points of P3\mathbb{P}^3.

If all tangent planes contained a fixed point pp, the polar derivative in direction pp of the cubic equation would vanish on S′S'. Being quadratic, it would vanish identically. The cubic would then be a cone with vertex pp, of multiplicity three there, contrary to its Du Val singularities. Avoiding pp is consequently a nonempty open condition.

The set ν(μ−1(Z∪Sing⁡S))\nu(\mu^{-1}(Z \cup\operatorname{Sing} S)) is finite, since ZZ avoids aa and ν\nu contracts every exceptional curve of rr. Choose a smooth point q′q' of S′S', lying on none of its lines, such that its tangent plane Π=Tq′S′\Pi= T_{q'}S' cuts an integral cubic whose only singularity is an ordinary node at q′q'. We also require Π\Pi to avoid Sing⁡S′\operatorname{Sing} S' and this finite set. If a direction δ\delta has been prescribed, Π\Pi must also avoid the corresponding point of ℓ\ell. Finally, the point qq corresponding to q′q' under projection must belong to Ssm∖{a}S^{\mathrm{sm}} \setminus\{a\} and lie on no line of SS. Each requirement holds on a nonempty open subset of S′smS'^{\mathrm{sm}}. Since S′S' is irreducible, these requirements can be satisfied simultaneously.

The cubic Γ=S′∩Π\Gamma= S' \cap\Pi avoids the singularities of S′S', so its inverse image Γ~⊂W\widetilde{\Gamma} \subset W avoids the exceptional locus of ν\nu. Since Γ\Gamma is integral, Π\Pi does not contain ℓ\ell. Hence Π∩ℓ\Pi\cap\ell is a single reduced point, and Γ⋅ℓ=1\Gamma\cdot\ell= 1. Since q′∉ℓq' \notin\ell and Π\Pi avoids Sing⁡S′\operatorname{Sing} S', this intersection is transverse at a smooth point of Γ\Gamma and S′S'. Thus Γ~\widetilde{\Gamma} meets eae_a once transversely. Since Γ~∼H−ea\widetilde{\Gamma} \sim H - e_a, its image under μ\mu is an anticanonical curve on SS, smooth at aa, with its only singularity an ordinary node at qq. It avoids Z∪Sing⁡SZ \cup\operatorname{Sing} S, and its tangent direction at aa is the point Π∩ℓ\Pi\cap\ell, different from δ\delta when prescribed.

Finally, a∉TqSa \notin T_qS. Otherwise the line aqaq would meet each defining quadric of SS to order at least two at qq and also at aa, so it would lie on both quadrics, contrary to the choice of qq. Hence ⟨a,TqS⟩\langle a, T_qS\rangle is a hyperplane. The hyperplane defining the curve just constructed contains aa and is tangent to SS at qq, so it equals this span. The open subset of admissible q′q' corresponds to a nonempty open subset of SsmS^{\mathrm{sm}}, as required. □

Sprays relative to a del Pezzo fibration

Let f:V→Bf : V \to B be a flat projective morphism from a smooth projective threefold to a smooth projective curve. Assume that every fiber is a degree-four del Pezzo surface with Du Val singularities and that the general fiber is smooth. Write Vc=f−1(c)V_c = f^{-1}(c) for its scheme-theoretic fiber and VB0=f−1(B0)V_{B_0} = f^{-1}(B_0) for its restriction over an open subset B0⊂BB_0 \subset B. The relative smooth locus Vsm/BV^{\mathrm{sm}/B} meets each fiber VcV_c in VcsmV_c^{\mathrm{sm}}. A local spray ss is ff-relative if f(s(u,t))=f(u)f(s(u,t)) = f(u).

Proposition 3.1. Under the hypotheses on f:V→Bf : V \to B, at every a∈Vsm/Ba \in V^{\mathrm{sm}/B} there are two local ff-relative rank-one sprays with values in VV whose velocities at aa span ker⁡(df)a\ker(df)_a.

To form the blow-up, we need a section of ff through the auxiliary point q0q_0. Smoothness guarantees an étale-local section, whereas we need a section over a Zariski neighborhood in BB.

Lemma 3.2. For every b∈Bb \in B and q0∈Vbsmq_0 \in V_b^{\mathrm{sm}} there is a section γ:B→Vsm/B\gamma: B \to V^{\mathrm{sm}/B} with γ(b)=q0\gamma(b) = q_0.

Proof. The general fiber is a smooth del Pezzo surface, hence rationally connected. The theorem of Graber–Harris–Starr [6 Theorem 1.1] gives a section γ∗:B→V\gamma_* : B \to V. It lies in Vsm/BV^{\mathrm{sm}/B}: differentiating f∘γ∗=id⁡Bf \circ\gamma_*=\operatorname{id}_B gives a surjective differential of ff along it, and both VV and BB are smooth.

Recall that a smooth variety YY is strongly rationally connected if every point lies on a very free rational curve in YY. Here very free means that the curve is given by a morphism α:P1→Y\alpha:\mathbb{P}^1 \to Y for which α∗TY\alpha^*T_Y is ample.

Over a smooth projective curve, Theorem 15 of Hassett–Tschinkel [7] shows that a smooth morphism with strongly rationally connected fibers and a section has a section through any prescribed point of a fiber. The morphism need not be proper.

The morphism Vsm/B→BV^{\mathrm{sm}/B}\to B is smooth and has the section γ∗\gamma_*. Its fiber over cc is VcsmV_c^{\mathrm{sm}}. The surface VcV_c is a log del Pezzo surface: its anticanonical divisor is ample and its Du Val singularities are Kawamata log terminal. Xu’s theorem [16 Theorem 1.4] therefore makes VcsmV_c^{\mathrm{sm}} strongly rationally connected. The approximation theorem now gives a section γ:B→Vsm/B\gamma:B\to V^{\mathrm{sm}/B} with γ(b)=q0\gamma(b)=q_0. □

Blowing up the auxiliary section replaces the degree-four fibers by cubic surfaces with an exceptional line. Planes through that line cut out the conics used for the sprays.

For the next lemma, let g:M→B′g:M\to B' be a flat projective morphism from a smooth threefold to a smooth curve whose fibers are Du Val del Pezzo surfaces of fixed degree d∈{3,4}d\in\{3,4\}. Set

A=ωM/B′−1=ωM−1⊗g∗ωB′,F=g∗A.\mathcal{A}=\omega_{M/B'}^{-1}=\omega_M^{-1}\otimes g^*\omega_{B'},\qquad\mathcal{F}=g_*\mathcal{A}.

Relative projective bundles parametrize one-dimensional quotients; our convention is

PB′(F)=Proj⁡B′(Sym⁡F).\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{F})=\operatorname{Proj}_{B'}(\operatorname{Sym}\mathcal{F}).

Lemma 3.3 (Relative anticanonical embeddings). The sheaf F\mathcal{F} is locally free of rank d+1d+1, and its formation commutes with base change. Evaluation defines a closed immersion

ι:M↪PB′(F),ι∗OPB′(F)(1)≃A.\iota:M\hookrightarrow\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{F}),\qquad\iota^*\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{F})}(1)\simeq\mathcal{A}.

For d=3d=3, its image is locally over B′B' defined by one homogeneous cubic equation with regular coefficients.

Proof. Write P=PB′(F)P=\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{F}). Adjunction identifies A∣Mc\mathcal{A}|_{M_c} with ωMc−1\omega_{M_c}^{-1} for every fiber, since McM_c is a Cartier divisor in MM. This restriction is very ample by the anticanonical description recalled in § 2. To compute its cohomology, fix a fiber SS and let r:S~→Sr:\widetilde{S}\to S be its minimal resolution. Crepancy gives

KS~=r∗KS,KS~2=d,K_{\widetilde{S}}=r^*K_S,\qquad K_{\widetilde{S}}^2=d,

so −KS~-K_{\widetilde{S}} is nef and big, being the pullback of the ample divisor −KS-K_S.

We use the following form of Kawamata–Viehweg vanishing: if YY is smooth and projective over C\mathbb{C} and DD is a nef and big Cartier divisor, then Hi(Y,OY(KY+D))=0H^i(Y,\mathcal{O}_Y(K_Y+D))=0 for i>0i>0; see [5 Theorem 0.1]. Applying it on S~\widetilde{S} with D=−KS~D=-K_{\widetilde{S}} and D=−2KS~D=-2K_{\widetilde{S}} gives, respectively,

Hi(S~,OS~)=0,Hi(S~,OS~(−KS~))=0(i>0).H^i(\widetilde{S},\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}})=0,\qquad H^i(\widetilde{S},\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}}(-K_{\widetilde{S}}))=0\qquad(i>0).

The first vanishing gives χ(OS~)=1\chi(\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}})=1. Riemann–Roch therefore yields

h0(S~,OS~(−KS~))=1+12(−KS~)⋅(−2KS~)=d+1.h^0(\widetilde{S},\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}}(-K_{\widetilde{S}}))=1+\tfrac{1}{2}(-K_{\widetilde{S}})\cdot(-2K_{\widetilde{S}})=d+1.

Du Val singularities are rational, so r∗OS~=OSr_{*}\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}}=\mathcal{O}_{S} and Rjr∗OS~=0R^{j}r_{*}\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}}=0 for j>0j>0. The projection formula and Leray [14 Lemmas 20.13.4 and 20.13.6(1)] give

Hi(S,OS(−KS))≃Hi(S~,OS~(−KS~))(i≥0).H^{i}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(-K_{S}))\simeq H^{i}(\widetilde{S},\mathcal{O}_{\widetilde{S}}(-K_{\widetilde{S}})) \qquad(i\geq0).

Thus h0(S,OS(−KS))=d+1h^{0}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}(-K_{S}))=d+1 and its higher cohomology vanishes.

Since gg is projective and A\mathcal{A} is flat over B′B', cohomology and base change [15 Lemma 30.22.1] give the assertions about F\mathcal{F}. Evaluation g∗F→Ag^{*}\mathcal{F}\to\mathcal{A} is surjective on each fiber, hence surjective by Nakayama’s lemma. It defines ι\iota, whose fiber maps are the complete anticanonical embeddings. The morphism ι\iota is proper and quasi-finite, hence finite. Direct image under a finite morphism commutes with base change, so the cokernel of OP→ι∗OM\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}\to\iota_{*}\mathcal{O}_{M} restricts to zero on every fiber. Nakayama’s lemma makes it zero, proving that ι\iota is a closed immersion.

For d=3d=3, let p:P→B′p:\mathbb{P}\to B' be the projection and J\mathcal{J} the ideal sheaf of ι(M)\iota(M). In

0⟶J⟶OP⟶ι∗OM⟶0,0\longrightarrow\mathcal{J}\longrightarrow\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}\longrightarrow\iota_{*}\mathcal{O}_{M}\longrightarrow0,

both the middle and right-hand terms are flat over B′B'. Thus J\mathcal{J} is flat over B′B', and restriction to a fiber remains exact. Since ι(Mc)\iota(M_{c}) is a cubic hypersurface, J∣Pc≃OP3(−3)\mathcal{J}|_{\mathbb{P}_{c}}\simeq\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{3}}(-3). Cohomology and base change applied to J(3)\mathcal{J}(3) show that Lcub=p∗J(3)\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{cub}}=p_{*}\mathcal{J}(3) is a line bundle. Evaluation p∗Lcub→J(3)p^{*}\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{cub}}\to\mathcal{J}(3) is an isomorphism on every fiber. Its cokernel vanishes by Nakayama; its kernel also vanishes by Nakayama, since flatness of J(3)\mathcal{J}(3) preserves exactness on restriction to a fiber. Consequently,

J≃p∗Lcub⊗OP(−3).\mathcal{J}\simeq p^{*}\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{cub}}\otimes\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(-3).

After trivializing F\mathcal{F} and Lcub\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{cub}} over an open subset of B′B', the inclusion J↪OP\mathcal{J}\hookrightarrow\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}} is given by one homogeneous cubic polynomial with regular coefficients there. □

Let γ:B→Vsm/B\gamma:B\to V^{\mathrm{sm}/B} be a section, and let b∈Bb\in B be such that γ(b)\gamma(b) lies on no line of VbV_{b}. For each open neighborhood B0⊂BB_{0}\subset B of bb, denote the blow-up by

β:M=Bl⁡γ(B0)VB0⟶VB0,\beta:M=\operatorname{Bl}_{\gamma(B_{0})}V_{B_{0}}\longrightarrow V_{B_{0}},

set g=f∣VB0∘βg=f|_{V_{B_{0}}}\circ\beta, and let E⊂ME\subset M be its exceptional divisor.

Lemma 3.4 (Blow-up along the auxiliary section). There is a Zariski open neighborhood B0B_{0} of bb for which MM is smooth and gg is flat and projective. For every c∈B0c\in B_{0}, its scheme-theoretic fiber is

Mc≃Bl⁡γ(c)Vc,M_{c}\simeq\operatorname{Bl}_{\gamma(c)}V_{c},

a degree-three Du Val del Pezzo surface. The exceptional divisor E→B0E\to B_{0} is a P1\mathbb{P}^{1}-bundle. Each fiber EcE_{c} is a line in the smooth locus of the anticanonically embedded cubic surface McM_{c}. Moreover,

ωM−1⊗g∗ωB0≃β∗(ωV/B−1∣VB0)⊗OM(−E).\omega_{M}^{-1}\otimes g^{*}\omega_{B_{0}}\simeq\beta^{*}(\omega_{V/B}^{-1}|_{V_{B_{0}}})\otimes\mathcal{O}_{M}(-E).

Proof. By Lemma 3.3, VV is anticanonically embedded in a P4\mathbb{P}^{4}-bundle.

The locus of points lying on lines of their fibers is closed: it is the proper image of the universal family over the relative Hilbert scheme of lines. Since γ(b)\gamma(b) is outside this locus, γ(c)\gamma(c) lies on no line of VcV_{c} for cc in some open neighborhood B0B_{0} of bb.

The center Zγ=γ(B0)Z_{\gamma}=\gamma(B_{0}) is a smooth curve in the smooth threefold VB0V_{B_{0}}, so its blow-up MM is smooth. Along ZγZ_{\gamma}, the morphism ff is smooth of relative dimension two. Étale locally, two relative coordinates x,yx,y generate the ideal of ZγZ_{\gamma} and identify the blow-up with the étale pullback of the blow-up of AB02\mathbb{A}^{2}_{B_{0}} along its zero section. This model is flat over B0B_{0} and commutes with taking fibers. Away from ZγZ_{\gamma}, the blow-up agrees with VB0V_{B_{0}}. Thus gg is flat and Mc≃Bl⁡γ(c)VcM_{c} \simeq\operatorname{Bl}_{\gamma(c)} V_{c} scheme-theoretically. If IZγI_{Z_{\gamma}} is the ideal of ZγZ_{\gamma}, then E≃PZγ(IZγ/IZγ2)E \simeq\mathbb{P}_{Z_{\gamma}}(I_{Z_{\gamma}}/I_{Z_{\gamma}}^{2}); the conormal bundle has rank two, so E→B0E \to B_{0} is a P1\mathbb{P}^{1}-bundle.

Fix c∈B0c \in B_{0}, set qc=γ(c)q_{c}=\gamma(c), and write ec=E∣Mce_{c}=E|_{M_{c}}. Let HH be the pullback of −KVc-K_{V_{c}} to McM_{c}. Since qcq_{c} is a smooth point,

−KMc=H−ec,(H−ec)2=3,(H−ec)⋅ec=1.-K_{M_{c}}=H-e_{c}, \qquad(H-e_{c})^{2}=3, \qquad(H-e_{c})\cdot e_{c}=1.

On the strict transform of an integral curve D⊂VcD \subset V_{c}, the divisor H−ecH-e_{c} has degree deg⁡D−mult⁡qcD\deg D-\operatorname{mult}_{q_{c}}D. This is nonnegative, as is seen by intersecting DD with a general hyperplane through qcq_{c}. If it were zero, projection from qcq_{c} would contract DD. A fiber of that projection lies on a line through qcq_{c}, so DD itself would be such a line, contrary to the choice of the section. Together with the positive degree on ece_{c} and the positive self-intersection, the Nakai–Moishezon criterion shows that H−ecH-e_{c} is ample.

The singularities of McM_{c} are the Du Val singularities of VcV_{c} away from qcq_{c}; the blow-up is smooth near ece_{c}. Thus McM_{c} is a degree-three Du Val del Pezzo surface. The canonical-bundle formula for a blow-up with smooth center of codimension two gives the asserted formula on MM. Its restriction to McM_{c} is OMc(H−ec)\mathcal{O}_{M_{c}}(H-e_{c}). By Lemma 3.3, MM is embedded as a family of cubic surfaces. Since (H−ec)⋅ec=1(H-e_{c})\cdot e_{c}=1, each ece_{c} is embedded as a line in the smooth locus of its cubic. □

Lemma 3.5 (Conic pencils on cubic surfaces). Let g:M→B′g:M\to B' be a flat projective family of degree-three Du Val del Pezzo surfaces, where MM is a smooth threefold and B′B' is a smooth curve. Suppose that E⊂ME\subset M is a P1\mathbb{P}^{1}-bundle over B′B' whose fibers are lines in the anticanonical embeddings and lie in the smooth loci of the surface fibers. The planes containing these lines form a P1\mathbb{P}^{1}-bundle τ:T→B′\tau:T\to B'. Their residual conics define a proper flat morphism h:M→Th:M\to T, with τ∘h=g\tau\circ h=g, whose scheme-theoretic fibers are those conics.

Proof. By Lemma 3.3, MM is embedded in PB′(F)\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{F}), where F=g∗ωM/B′−1\mathcal{F}=g_{*}\omega^{-1}_{M/B'} has rank four. We write OM(1)\mathcal{O}_{M}(1) for the hyperplane bundle of this embedding; thus OM(1)≃ωM/B′−1\mathcal{O}_{M}(1)\simeq\omega^{-1}_{M/B'}. Restriction of linear forms to EcE_{c} is surjective. Since OM(1)∣Ec≃OP1(1)\mathcal{O}_{M}(1)|_{E_{c}}\simeq\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1), base change gives a surjection

F⟶(g∣E)∗OE(1)\mathcal{F}\longrightarrow(g|_{E})_{*}\mathcal{O}_{E}(1)

onto a rank-two bundle. Let K\mathcal{K} be its rank-two kernel. A plane containing EcE_{c} is specified by a nonzero linear form in Kc\mathcal{K}_{c}, up to scalar. With our quotient convention for projectivization, these pencils therefore form

T=PB′(K∨)⟶B′.T=\mathbb{P}_{B'}(\mathcal{K}^{\vee})\longrightarrow B'.

A plane through EcE_{c} cuts out that line and a residual conic. We check that the residual pencil defines a morphism even along EE. Locally on B′B', choose relative projective coordinates so that

M={xΨ1(x,y,z,w)+yΨ2(x,y,z,w)=0},E={x=y=0},M=\{x\Psi_{1}(x,y,z,w)+y\Psi_{2}(x,y,z,w)=0\}, \qquad E=\{x=y=0\},

where Ψ1,Ψ2\Psi_{1},\Psi_{2} are quadratic forms with coefficients on the base. The existence of a relative cubic equation follows from Lemma 3.3: coordinates adapted to EE come from locally splitting the preceding surjection. Off EE, the plane containing a point and EcE_{c} is recorded by [x:y][x:y]. The cubic equation gives

[x:y]=[−Ψ2:Ψ1][x:y]=[-\Psi_{2}:\Psi_{1}]

where both expressions are defined. On EcE_c, the partial derivatives of the cubic equation are (Ψ1,Ψ2,0,0)(\Psi_1,\Psi_2,0,0). Smoothness of McM_c along EcE_c says that Ψ1,Ψ2\Psi_1,\Psi_2 have no common zero there. The second expression extends the map across EE; the local extensions agree off EE and hence everywhere, giving h:M→Th:M\to T.

For [λ:μ]∈Tc[\lambda:\mu]\in T_c, the corresponding plane is μx−λy=0\mu x-\lambda y=0. Substituting x=λrx=\lambda r, y=μry=\mu r in the cubic equation gives

r(λΨ1(λr,μr,z,w)+μΨ2(λr,μr,z,w))=0.r\bigl(\lambda\Psi_1(\lambda r,\mu r,z,w)+\mu\Psi_2(\lambda r,\mu r,z,w)\bigr)=0.

The factor r=0r=0 defines EcE_c. The quadratic factor defines the residual conic and is not identically zero, since an integral cubic surface contains no plane. It cannot contain EcE_c: that would make λΨ1+μΨ2\lambda\Psi_1+\mu\Psi_2 vanish identically on EcE_c, forcing the two quadratic forms Ψ1∣Ec,Ψ2∣Ec\Psi_1|_{E_c},\Psi_2|_{E_c} to have a common zero on P1\mathbb{P}^1, contrary to smoothness along EcE_c. Off EcE_c it is the scheme-theoretic fiber of hch_c. Near a point of EcE_c where Ψ1≠0\Psi_1\ne0, normalize μ=1\mu=1. The fiber equation is Ψ2+λΨ1=0\Psi_2+\lambda\Psi_1=0; together with the cubic equation it implies x=λyx=\lambda y. Conversely, in that plane the residual equation is λΨ1+Ψ2=0\lambda\Psi_1+\Psi_2=0. This proves the same scheme-theoretic identification along EcE_c; where Ψ2≠0\Psi_2\ne0 the argument is symmetric. Thus every fiber of hh is a plane conic of pure dimension one, possibly reducible or nonreduced.

The morphism hh is proper because MM is projective over B′B' and TT is separated over B′B'.

The total spaces MM and TT are smooth, of dimensions three and two. The criterion called miracle flatness states that a local homomorphism Rbase→RtotR_{\mathrm{base}}\to R_{\mathrm{tot}} of Noetherian local rings is flat if RbaseR_{\mathrm{base}} is regular, RtotR_{\mathrm{tot}} is Cohen–Macaulay, and

dim⁡Rtot=dim⁡Rbase+dim⁡(Rtot/mRbaseRtot);\dim R_{\mathrm{tot}}=\dim R_{\mathrm{base}}+\dim\left(R_{\mathrm{tot}}/\mathfrak m_{R_{\mathrm{base}}}R_{\mathrm{tot}}\right);

see [13 Lemma 10.128.1, Tag 00R4]. Here Rtot/mRbaseRtotR_{\mathrm{tot}}/\mathfrak m_{R_{\mathrm{base}}}R_{\mathrm{tot}} is the local ring of the scheme-theoretic fiber.

At a closed point m∈Mm\in M, with θ=h(m)\theta=h(m), the relevant local rings are

Rbase=OT,θ,Rtot=OM,m.R_{\mathrm{base}}=\mathcal{O}_{T,\theta},\qquad R_{\mathrm{tot}}=\mathcal{O}_{M,m}.

The point θ\theta is closed, since we work with varieties over C\mathbb{C}. Smoothness of TT makes RbaseR_{\mathrm{base}} regular of dimension two; smoothness of MM makes RtotR_{\mathrm{tot}} regular, hence Cohen–Macaulay, of dimension three. The fiber MθM_\theta is a plane conic of pure dimension one, so its local ring at mm has dimension one. Thus the required equality is 3=2+13=2+1, and hh is flat at every closed point of MM. The flat locus is open for this morphism of finite presentation between Noetherian schemes. Its complement, if nonempty, would contain a closed point of the complex variety MM. Hence hh is flat everywhere. □

Proposition 3.6 (Relative conic pencil). Let γ:B→Vsm/B\gamma: B \to V^{\mathrm{sm}/B} be a section, and let b∈Bb \in B be such that γ(b)\gamma(b) lies on no line of VbV_b. There is a Zariski open neighborhood B0B_0 of bb such that the blow-up

β:M=Bl⁡γ(B0)VB0⟶VB0\beta: M = \operatorname{Bl}_{\gamma(B_0)} V_{B_0} \longrightarrow V_{B_0}

admits a flat morphism h:M→Th: M \to T whose fibers are plane conics, where τ:T→B0\tau: T \to B_0 is a P1\mathbb{P}^1-bundle. With g=f∣VB0∘βg = f|_{V_{B_0}} \circ\beta, the diagram

M→hTg↓↓τB0=B0\begin{CD} M @>{h}>> T \\ @V{g}VV @VV{\tau}V \\ B_0 @= B_0 \end{CD}

commutes. For each c∈B0c \in B_0, the restriction

hc:Mc⟶Tc≃P1h_c: M_c \longrightarrow T_c \simeq\mathbb{P}^1

is the conic pencil obtained from the anticanonical curves of VcV_c singular at γ(c)\gamma(c) by blowing up that point.

Proof. Lemma 3.4 gives B0B_0, the blow-up β:M→VB0\beta: M \to V_{B_0}, and its exceptional divisor EE. The fibers of gg are cubic del Pezzo surfaces, and EcE_c is a line in the smooth locus of McM_c. Lemma 3.5 gives the bundle T→B0T \to B_0 and the proper flat conic morphism h:M→Th: M \to T.

To identify the pencil on the original surface, for c∈B0c \in B_0 set qc=γ(c)q_c = \gamma(c), ec=Ece_c = E_c, and H=βc∗(−KVc)H = \beta_c^*(-K_{V_c}). A plane through ece_c cuts out ece_c and a residual conic of class

(−KMc)−ec=(H−ec)−ec=H−2ec.(-K_{M_c}) - e_c = (H - e_c) - e_c = H - 2e_c.

The planes through ece_c give the complete system ∣−KMc−ec∣\lvert-K_{M_c} - e_c \rvert, since the cubic embedding is anticanonical. Under blow-up, sections of OMc(H−2ec)\mathcal{O}_{M_c}(H - 2e_c) correspond to anticanonical sections on VcV_c vanishing to order at least two at qcq_c. These are precisely the anticanonical curves singular there. No residual conic contains ece_c, as shown in Lemma 3.5, so its image has multiplicity two at qcq_c and the conic is its strict transform. For the member chosen in Lemma 2.1, the blow-up resolves its ordinary node. □\square

Proof of Proposition 3.1. Set b=f(a)b = f(a) and S=VbS = V_b. Lemma 2.1 supplies an auxiliary point q0q_0, with Z=∅Z = \varnothing, and Lemma 3.2 gives a section γ\gamma with γ(b)=q0\gamma(b) = q_0. Proposition 3.6 gives the relative conic pencil h:M→Th: M \to T. The strict transform C~\widetilde{C} of C(q0,a)C(q_0,a) in MbM_b is a smooth complete conic: blowing up resolves its ordinary node at q0q_0, and the curve has no other singularities and avoids Sing⁡S\operatorname{Sing} S.

Let θ0∈Tb\theta_0 \in T_b be its conic parameter. Since hh is proper and flat, the parameters of nonsmooth fibers form a closed subset of TT. There is therefore an open neighborhood T∘T^\circ of θ0\theta_0 over which

h∘:M∘=h−1(T∘)⟶T∘h^\circ: M^\circ= h^{-1}(T^\circ) \longrightarrow T^\circ

is a smooth proper conic family. Choose an open neighborhood UU of aa in VB0V_{B_0}, disjoint from γ(B0)\gamma(B_0), whose lift η:U→M\eta: U \to M lies in M∘M^\circ. Pullback along h∘ηh \circ\eta gives the Cartesian square

U^=M∘×T∘U→pr⁡MM∘pU↓↓h∘U→h∘ηT∘\begin{CD} \widehat{U}=M^\circ\times_{T^\circ}U @>{\operatorname{pr}_M}>> M^\circ\\ @V{p_U}VV @VV{h^\circ}V\\ U @>{h\circ\eta}>> T^\circ \end{CD}

The fiber of pUp_U over uu is the smooth conic through η(u)\eta(u). Thus the pullback has the section

σ:U⟶U^,σ(u)=(η(u),u).\sigma: U \longrightarrow\widehat{U},\qquad\sigma(u)=(\eta(u),u).

The image σ(U)\sigma(U) is an effective Cartier divisor on U^\widehat{U}, and OU^(σ(U))\mathcal{O}_{\widehat{U}}(\sigma(U)) has degree one on every fiber. Its direct image under pUp_U is locally free of rank two, has formation compatible with base change, and its evaluation map realizes U^\widehat{U} as the associated projective bundle. These assertions follow from h0(P1,O(1))=2h^0(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal{O}(1))=2, h1(P1,O(1))=0h^1(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal{O}(1))=0, and the fiberwise embedding by O(1)\mathcal{O}(1). After shrinking UU around aa, there is a trivialization

U^≃U×P1\widehat{U}\simeq U\times\mathbb{P}^1

carrying σ\sigma to the constant section 00. Such a trivialization exists by locally splitting the rank-one quotient associated with the section. Its affine chart gives an open immersion j:U×A1↪U^j:U\times\mathbb{A}^1\hookrightarrow\widehat{U} with j(u,0)=σ(u)j(u,0)=\sigma(u).

The resulting local spray is

sq0=β∘pr⁡M∘j:U×A1⟶V.(2)s_{q_0}=\beta\circ\operatorname{pr}_M\circ j:U\times\mathbb{A}^1\longrightarrow V. \tag*{(2)}

This morphism satisfies sq0(u,0)=β(η(u))=us_{q_0}(u,0)=\beta(\eta(u))=u. The projections from U^\widehat{U} commute with the maps to B0B_0, so f(sq0(u,t))=f(u)f(s_{q_0}(u,t))=f(u). On the fiber over aa, the map jj parametrizes an affine open subset of C^\widehat{C}. Since β\beta is an isomorphism near η(a)\eta(a), the velocity of sq0s_{q_0} at aa is nonzero and spans TaC(q0,a)T_aC(q_0,a).

Lemma 2.1, with δ\delta the direction of TaC(q0,a)T_aC(q_0,a), supplies a second auxiliary point. The same construction gives a second nonzero velocity in TaST_aS with a different direction. These two velocities span TaS=ker⁡(df)aT_aS=\ker(df)_a. Intersecting their base neighborhoods gives two local sprays at the same point, both with values in VV. □

Corollary 3.7. Let a smooth projective threefold VV admit finitely many fibrations fi:V→Bif_i:V\to B_i satisfying the hypotheses of Proposition 3.1. Suppose that at every a∈Va\in V there are indices i,ji,j such that (fi,fj):V→Bi×Bj(f_i,f_j):V\to B_i\times B_j has differential of rank two at aa. Then VV is algebraically elliptic.

Proof. Fix a∈Va\in V and choose i,ji,j as in the hypothesis. Since d(fi,fj)ad(f_i,f_j)_a has rank two, both (dfi)a(df_i)_a and (dfj)a(df_j)_a are surjective. Thus fif_i and fjf_j are smooth at aa, and the tangent planes to their fibers are

Ki:=ker⁡(dfi)a,Kj:=ker⁡(dfj)a.K_i:=\ker(df_i)_a,\qquad K_j:=\ker(df_j)_a.

The rank-two hypothesis also implies that these planes are distinct. Being two-dimensional subspaces of the three-dimensional space TaVT_aV, they satisfy Ki+Kj=TaVK_i+K_j=T_aV.

Proposition 3.1 supplies two local fif_i-relative rank-one sprays whose velocities at aa span KiK_i, and two local fjf_j-relative rank-one sprays whose velocities span KjK_j. Restricting their base domains to a common Zariski neighborhood of aa, we obtain four local sprays with values in VV whose velocities span TaVT_aV. Since this holds at every aa, the localization principle and the equivalence of algebraic subellipticity and ellipticity recalled in the introduction yield the conclusion.

The double covers

With Y=(P1)3Y = (\mathbb{P}^{1})^{3} and L=OY(1,1,1)L = \mathcal{O}_{Y}(1,1,1), let ρ∈H0(Y,L⊗2)\rho\in H^{0}(Y,L^{\otimes2}) define the smooth branch divisor RR. Multiplication by ρ\rho gives a map L−2→OYL^{-2} \to\mathcal{O}_{Y} and hence an algebra structure on OY⊕L−1\mathcal{O}_{Y} \oplus L^{-1}. The relative affine spectrum provides the associated double cover

π:X=Spec⁡Y(OY⊕L−1)⟶Y.\pi: X = \operatorname{Spec}_{Y}(\mathcal{O}_{Y} \oplus L^{-1}) \longrightarrow Y.

On an affine open set UU trivializing LL, with ρ\rho represented by F∈O(U)F \in\mathcal{O}(U), the cover is

π−1(U)=Spec⁡(O(U)[w]/(w2−F)).\pi^{-1}(U) = \operatorname{Spec}(\mathcal{O}(U)[w]/(w^{2} - F)).

Thus π\pi is finite flat of degree two, with branch divisor RR. The variety XX is smooth because RR is smooth, and projective because π\pi is finite and YY is projective. It is integral: along any component of the nonempty reduced divisor RR, the defining rational square class has odd valuation.

Lemma 4.1. Every fiber of each fif_i is an integral normal del Pezzo surface of degree four with at worst Du Val singularities. The general fiber is smooth.

Proof. Fix a coordinate slice Q≃P1×P1Q \simeq\mathbb{P}^{1} \times\mathbb{P}^{1} in YY. The corresponding fiber SS is the double cover of QQ branched along the scheme-theoretic intersection D=R∩QD = R \cap Q. We denote this cover by πS:S→Q\pi_S : S \to Q. Smoothness of RR allows DD to be singular.

Choose a coordinate ζ\zeta on an affine chart of the omitted factor, with Q={ζ=0}Q = \{\zeta= 0\}, and trivialize the corresponding factor of OY(2,2,2)\mathcal{O}_{Y}(2,2,2). The branch equation has the form

F(ζ;u,v)=F0(u,v)+ζF1(u,v)+ζ2F2(u,v),Fj∈H0(Q,OQ(2,2)).F(\zeta;u,v) = F_{0}(u,v) + \zeta F_{1}(u,v) + \zeta^{2}F_{2}(u,v), \qquad F_j \in H^{0}(Q,\mathcal{O}_{Q}(2,2)).

Along QQ, the derivative in the transverse direction is F1F_{1}, whereas the two derivatives tangent to QQ are those of F0F_{0}.

Suppose first that F0F_{0} vanishes identically, so Q⊂RQ \subset R. Both tangent derivatives then vanish everywhere on QQ. The section F1F_{1} must have a zero: a nowhere-vanishing section would trivialize the nontrivial line bundle OQ(2,2)\mathcal{O}_{Q}(2,2). At such a zero the transverse derivative vanishes as well, making RR singular. This contradiction shows that F0≠0F_{0} \ne0. Its zero divisor DD is nonempty because its line bundle is nontrivial.

Suppose that DD has a multiple irreducible component CC. Both tangent derivatives of F0F_{0} vanish along CC. The pullback of F1∣CF_{1}|_{C} to the normalization of CC is a section of a line bundle of positive degree, since OQ(2,2)\mathcal{O}_{Q}(2,2) is ample. This section has a zero. At the image of that zero, FF and all three of its derivatives vanish. This again contradicts smoothness of RR. Thus DD is reduced, and its singular points are isolated.

Near a point of QQ, trivialize the double cover and write it as

w2=G(u,v),w^{2} = G(u,v),

where G=0G = 0 is a local equation of DD. The Jacobian criterion says that a singular point of the surface must satisfy

w=0,G=Gu=Gv=0.w = 0, \qquad G = G_{u} = G_{v} = 0.

The surface is therefore smooth over Q∖Sing⁡DQ \setminus\operatorname{Sing} D. At a singular point of DD, choose affine product coordinates uu, vv centered there. Before making further analytic coordinate changes, GG is a polynomial of degree at most two in each variable. Its multiplicity is consequently at most four.

If the multiplicity is two and the quadratic part has rank two, the analytic Morse lemma puts GG in the form uvuv. The surface equation becomes

w2=uv,w^2 = uv,

which is an A1A_1 singularity. If the quadratic part has rank one, the analytic splitting lemma gives G=u2+φ(v)G = u^2 + \varphi(v), where φ\varphi has order at least three. The series φ\varphi is nonzero, since otherwise DD would not be reduced. Write φ(v)=vma(v)\varphi(v) = v^m a(v), with m≥3m \ge3 and a(0)≠0a(0) \ne0. Absorbing an analytic mmth root of a(v)a(v) into vv gives G=u2+vmG = u^2 + v^m. Hence the surface equation is

(w−u)(w+u)=vm.(w-u)(w+u) = v^m.

The variables w−uw-u, w+uw+u, vv are analytic coordinates, so this is the normal form of an Am−1A_{m-1} singularity.

If the multiplicity is three, the bidegree restriction leaves only the monomials u2vu^2v, uv2uv^2, and u2v2u^2v^2. Thus

G=uv(au+bv+cuv).G = uv(au+bv+cuv).

Reducedness forces a≠0a \ne0 and b≠0b \ne0: if either vanished, uu or vv would be a repeated factor. The three branches have distinct tangent lines, so this is an ordinary triple point. Rescaling uu, vv, ww puts the surface equation in the form

w2=uv(u+v+κuv)w^2 = uv(u+v+\kappa uv)

for a constant κ\kappa. The analytic change of coordinates

v′=v(1+κu),w′=w1+κuv' = v(1+\kappa u), \qquad w' = w\sqrt{1+\kappa u}

is defined near the origin, since 1+κu1+\kappa u is a unit. It gives

(w′)2=uv′(u+v′),(w')^2 = uv'(u+v'),

the D4D_4 normal form. Finally, multiplicity four would force G=cu2v2G = cu^2v^2, contrary to reducedness. This exhausts the possibilities and proves that the surface has only Du Val singularities.

The surface SS is integral. Indeed, at each component of the nonempty reduced branch divisor its defining square class has odd valuation. It is therefore not a square in C(Q)\mathbb{C}(Q), so the generic double cover is a field extension of degree two. The locally free algebra defining SS injects into that field, proving integrality. Locally SS is a hypersurface, so it is Cohen–Macaulay and satisfies Serre’s condition S2S_2. Its singular set is finite by the calculation above, so it is regular in codimension one. Serre’s criterion gives normality.

The canonical bundle formula for the double cover gives

ωS≃πS∗(ωQ⊗OQ(1,1)),ωS−1≃πS∗OQ(1,1).\omega_S \simeq\pi_S^*(\omega_Q \otimes\mathcal{O}_Q(1,1)), \qquad\omega_S^{-1} \simeq\pi_S^*\mathcal{O}_Q(1,1).

Thus −KS-K_S is ample because πS\pi_S is finite. To compute its self-intersection, let D1D_1 and D2D_2 be the divisor classes of fibers of the two projections Q→P1Q \to\mathbb{P}^1.

D12=D22=0,D1⋅D2=1,c1(OQ(1,1))=D1+D2.D_1^2 = D_2^2 = 0, \qquad D_1 \cdot D_2 = 1, \qquad c_1(\mathcal{O}_Q(1,1)) = D_1 + D_2.

Writing HQ=D1+D2H_Q = D_1 + D_2, we obtain HQ2=2H_Q^2 = 2. Since πS\pi_S has degree two, the projection formula for intersection numbers gives

KS2=(−KS)2=(πS∗HQ)2=deg⁡(πS)HQ2=2(D1+D2)2=2⋅2=4.K_S^2 = (-K_S)^2 = (\pi_S^*H_Q)^2 = \deg(\pi_S) H_Q^2 = 2(D_1 + D_2)^2 = 2 \cdot2 = 4.

Thus SS is a degree-four del Pezzo surface. The morphism fif_i is flat, as the composition of a finite flat cover and a projection. Bertini’s theorem applied to its base point free pencil on the smooth threefold XX shows that the general fiber is smooth.

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Lemma 4.1 verifies the fiber hypotheses for all three fif_i. We check the rank condition in Corollary 3.7.

Off the ramification divisor of π\pi, the differential dπd\pi has rank three, so the three coordinate differentials are independent. At a ramification point x∈Xx \in X, use local coordinates u1,u2,u3u_1, u_2, u_3 on YY and a local trivialization of LL. The equation is w2=F(u1,u2,u3)w^2 = F(u_1, u_2, u_3), with w=0w = 0 at the point. Set y=π(x)y = \pi(x). In the chosen local trivialization, write an ambient tangent vector at xx as (a,v)∈C⊕TyY(a,v) \in\mathbb{C} \oplus T_yY, where aa is its component in the fiber coordinate ww. Differentiating the defining equation gives 2w(x)a−dFy(v)=02w(x)a - dF_y(v) = 0. Since w(x)=0w(x) = 0, this identifies

TxX={(a,v)∈C⊕TyY:dFy(v)=0},dπx(a,v)=v.T_xX = \{(a,v) \in\mathbb{C} \oplus T_yY : dF_y(v) = 0\}, \qquad d\pi_x(a,v) = v.

Smoothness of RR gives dFy≠0dF_y \ne0, so the image of dπxd\pi_x is the two-dimensional plane ker⁡(dFy)\ker(dF_y). The restrictions of du1,du2,du3du_1,du_2,du_3 span its dual, so some pair is independent. Their pullbacks to TxXT_xX are the differentials of the corresponding fif_i and remain independent. Corollary 3.7 therefore applies and proves the theorem.

Proposition 4.2. The threefold XX admits a dominant rational map P3⇢X\mathbb{P}^3 \dashrightarrow X of degree two.

Proof. Set Q=P1×P1Q = \mathbb{P}^1 \times\mathbb{P}^1 and ϖ=(f1,f2):X→Q\varpi= (f_1,f_2) : X \to Q. Its generic fiber is a smooth conic: it is the double cover of the third P1\mathbb{P}^1 branched at two points. Choose a general c∈P1c \in\mathbb{P}^1 and set S=f3−1(c)S = f_3^{-1}(c). This is a smooth degree-four del Pezzo surface, hence rational, and the restriction ϖ∣S:S→Q\varpi|_S : S \to Q is finite of degree two.

The base change of the conic fibration ϖ:X→Q\varpi: X \to Q along ϖ∣S:S→Q\varpi|_S : S \to Q is the projection X×QS→SX \times_Q S \to S. Since the generic conic of ϖ\varpi is geometrically integral, the base change has a unique component WW dominating SS. The inclusion S↪XS \hookrightarrow X gives a section s↦(s,s)s \mapsto(s,s) of W→SW \to S. Thus its generic conic has a C(S)\mathbb{C}(S)-rational point and is isomorphic to PC(S)1\mathbb{P}^1_{\mathbb{C}(S)}. Consequently, WW is birational to S×P1S \times\mathbb{P}^1 and is rational. Geometric integrality also implies that C(X)⊗C(Q)C(S)\mathbb{C}(X) \otimes_{\mathbb{C}(Q)} \mathbb{C}(S) is a field, of degree two over C(X)\mathbb{C}(X); hence the projection W→XW \to X has degree two. A birational parametrization by P3\mathbb{P}^3 gives the assertion.

References

Department of Mathematics, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA Email address: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA Email address: [email protected]

Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, IF, 38000 Grenoble, France Email address: [email protected]

References

  1. [1]J. Banecki, Retract rational varieties are uniformly retract rational, arXiv:2411.17892 (2024), revised 2026.arxiv.org/abs/2411.17892
  2. [2]R. Blache and E. Hallouin, Construction of good codes from weak Del Pezzo surfaces, arXiv:2301.11825 (2023), §2.3. https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.11825.
  3. [3]I. V. Dolgachev, Classical Algebraic Geometry: a modern view. II, draft, August 10, 2025, Theorem 8.6.2 and Corollary 8.3.7. https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/idolga/wp-content/uploads/sites/1467/2025/10/CAG-2.pdf.
  4. [4]A. Dvorsky, S. Kaliman, and M. Zaidenberg, Algebraic ellipticity of quartic double spaces, arXiv:2610.07260 (2026).arxiv.org/abs/2610.07260
  5. [5]O. Fujino, Kawamata–Viehweg vanishing theorem, notes, July 22, 2009, Theorem 0.1. https://www.math.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~fujino/kawamata--viehweg2.pdf.
  6. [6]T. Graber, J. Harris, and J. Starr, Families of rationally connected varieties, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (2003), no. 1, 57–67. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0109220.
  7. [7]B. Hassett and Y. Tschinkel, Approximation at places of bad reduction for rationally connected varieties, Pure Appl. Math. Q. 4 (2008), no. 3, 743–766. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0605274.
  8. [8]S. Kaliman and M. Zaidenberg, Gromov ellipticity and subellipticity, Forum Math. 36 (2024), no. 2, 373–376. https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.03058. The theorem and lemma numbers cited here refer to arXiv:2301.03058v1.
  9. [9]S. Kaliman and M. Zaidenberg, Algebraic Gromov’s ellipticity of cubic hypersurfaces, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 329 (2025), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1134/S008154382560067X.
  10. [10]E. Mezzetti and O. Tommasi, Some remarks on varieties with degenerate Gauss image, Pacific J. Math. 213 (2004), no. 1, 79–88. https://pmsp.org/pjm/2004/213-1/pjm-v213-n1-p05-s.pdf.
  11. [11]S. Mori and S. Mukai, Classification of Fano 3-folds with B₂ ≥ 2, Manuscripta Math. 36 (1981/82), no. 2, 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01170131.
  12. [12]Yu. Prokhorov, Rationality of Fano threefolds with terminal Gorenstein singularities, I, arXiv:1907.05678 (2019), Theorem 6.1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.05678.
  13. [13]The Stacks Project Authors, The Stacks Project, Lemma 10.128.1 (miracle flatness), Tag 00R4. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/00R4.
  14. [14]The Stacks Project Authors, The Stacks Project, Cohomology of Sheaves, Lemmas 20.13.4 and 20.13.6(1), Tags 01F2 and 01F4. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/01F2; https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/01F4.
  15. [15]The Stacks Project Authors, The Stacks Project, Cohomology of Schemes, Lemma 30.22.1 (cohomology and base change), Tag 07VK. https://stacks.math.columbia.edu/tag/07VK.
  16. [16]C. Xu, Strong rational connectedness of surfaces, J. Reine Angew. Math. 665 (2012), 189–205. https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.2597.

Paper details

vlnc:W_s4sarc87
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents