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 $L$ be a pseudo-effective divisor, we may define its numerical fixed part $N_{\sigma}(L)$. How to prove it is a divisor? I know there is a proof in Nakayama's book, but I can't find this book.

share|cite|improve this question
$N_{\sigma}(L)$ is a divisor by definition so it is not clear what you think needs to be proved. – ulrich Oct 4 '11 at 14:36
How to prove there are only a finite number of prime divisors $\Gamma$ such that $\sigma_{\Gamma}(L)>0$ – Zhengyu Hu Oct 4 '11 at 15:37
Just a note: the book of Nakayama to which I think you are referring seems to be freely available from Project Euclid. – Hoot May 30 at 19:01
up vote 3 down vote accepted

By definition, you first define $\sigma_\Gamma(L)$ for big divisors and then you take the limit.

In other words, if $L$ is big, then clearly $\sigma_\Gamma(L)$ is non zero for only finitely many divisors. Indeed, $L=A+B$ with $A$ ample $\mathbb Q$-divisor, and $B\ge 0$. Thus $\sigma_\Gamma(L)>0$ implies $\Gamma$ is contained in the support of $B$.

If $L$ is pseudo-effective, then you define $$\sigma_\Gamma(L)=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0^+} \sigma_\Gamma(L+\epsilon A)$$ where $A$ is ample (it is easy to check that the definition does not depend on the choice of $A$).

It follows that if $\sigma_\Gamma(D)=\alpha>0$ then $D-\alpha\Gamma$ is pseudo-effective. Finite generation of $N^1(X)$ implies that there can only be finitely many $\Gamma$ with such a property.

share|cite|improve this answer
How do you know that they remain a finite number when you pass to the limit? – Gianni Bello Oct 4 '11 at 18:56
I added two lines of explanations... let me know if it is clear. – mrw Oct 4 '11 at 19:00
I reckon that to show the last assetion of your answer you need to use that if the $\Gamma_i$ are prime divisors such that $\sigma_{\Gamma_i}(D)>0$, then the numerical classes of the $\Gamma_i$ are linearly independent in the vector space $N^1(X)$. Am I wrong? This is what Nakayama does in his book. – Gianni Bello Oct 4 '11 at 19:16
That is correct. – mrw Oct 4 '11 at 19:25
This is correct. The finite generation of Neron-Severi group gives it. – Zhengyu Hu Oct 5 '11 at 2:04

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.