MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $X$ be a projective variety over $\mathbb C$ of dimension $n$. Let $\tilde{X} \to X$ be a resolution of singularities. Suppose that $H^n(\tilde{X}, \mathcal O_{\tilde{X}}) = 0$. What can we say about $H^n(X, \mathcal O_X)$? When is it $0$?

share|cite|improve this question

First, let me point out that $H^i(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}) \cong H^i(X, O_X)$ if $X$ has rational singularities for all $i > 0$.

Indeed, if $X$ has rational singularities if and only if

  1. $R^j \pi_* O_{\tilde X} = 0$ for $j > 0$ and
  2. $\pi_* O_{\tilde X} = O_X$.

It immediately follows from the Leray spectral sequence that $$H^i(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}) \cong H^i(X, O_X)$$ for all $i \geq 0$.

In fact, for any Cartier divisor $D$ on $X$, the same argument implies that $$ H^i(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}(\pi^* D) ) = H^i(X, O_X(D)) $$ for any $i \geq 0$ since the projection formula can be applied in the cases of 1. and 2. above.

Now, without rational singularities, you can run into trouble. For example, suppose that $X$ is a normal Cohen-Macaulay variety with an isolated singularity $x \in X$ that is not rational. Consider the exact triangle in the derived category: $$O_X \to R \pi_* O_{\tilde X} \to C \xrightarrow{+1}$$ Because $X$ is a normal Cohen-Macaulay, and has an isolated non-rational singularity, we know $C = M[-n+1]$ is a nonzero module supported at $x \in X$ (shifted over by $n-1$). See Lemma 3.3 in Rational, Log Canonical, Du Bois Singularities: On the Conjectures of Kollár and Steenbrink by Sándor Kovács.

Then we have the following exact sequence by taking (hyper)cohomology $$ 0 \to H^{n-1}(X, O_X) \to {{H}}^{n-1}(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}) \to {\mathbb{H}^{n-1}}(X, C) \to H^n(X, O_X) \to H^n(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}) \to 0 $$ where the two end points are zero since $C = M[-n+1]$ an Artinian module with a shift. On the other hand, $\mathbb{H}^{n-1}(X, C) = H^0(X, M) \neq 0$ for the same reason.

Now, if $\tilde{X}$ is for example Fano and we are in characteristic zero, then $$H^i(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}) = H^i(\tilde{X}, O_{\tilde{X}}(K_X-K_X)) = 0$$ by Kodaira vanishing for $i > 0$. But then $H^n(X, O_X) \neq 0$ from the exact sequence.

Beyond the Fano case, you might luck out of course, but I don't see any reason why it would hold in general.

share|cite|improve this answer

A very easy counterexample: let $X$ be a nodal cubic in $\mathbb{P}^3$. Then the resolution of singularities of $X$ is $\bar X = \mathbb{P}^1$, so $H^1(\bar X, \mathcal{O}_{\bar X}) = 0$. On the other hand, the exact sequence of sheaves on $\mathbb{P}^2$ $$ 0\to \mathcal{O}(-3)\to \mathcal{O} \to \mathcal{O}_X \to 0 $$ shows that $H^1(X, \mathcal{O}_X)$ is one-dimensional.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.