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

I want to see the following thing:

$\ \ $If $X$ is a smooth geometrically connected scheme over a field $k$ of characteristic 0, $U\subseteq X$ is a non-empty open, $(E,\nabla)$ is an integrable connection on $X/k$, then $H_{DM}^0(X/k,(E,\nabla))\hookrightarrow H_{DM}^0(U/k,(E,\nabla)|_{U})$ is an isomorphism. Here the De Rham cohomology with respect to an integral connection means I take the hypercohomology of the complex

$$E\xrightarrow{\nabla}E\otimes\Omega^1_{X/k}\to E\otimes\Omega^2_{X/k}\to\cdots$$

$\ \ $ I think it comes from the following "base change property of Guass-Manin sheaf", I don't know the precise formulation for that property, but I guess it is the following (0-th version):

If $S$ and $X$ are smooth geometrically connected schemes over a field $k$ of characteristic 0, $X\to S$ is proper smooth $k$-morphism, if we have a commutative diagramme
$\hspace{100pt}\ Y \xrightarrow{f} X$

$\hspace{100pt}\ |$$a$$\ \ \ \ |b$

$\hspace{100pt}\ T\xrightarrow{g}S$

with the property that $f^*\Omega_{X/S}\to \Omega_{Y/T}$ is an isomorphism, and if $(E,\nabla)$ is an integrable connection on $X/S$, then the canonical map

$g^*b_*E^{\nabla} \to$

$a_*{(f^*E)^{\nabla}}$is an isomorphism. Here $E^{\nabla}$ is the kernel of the $k$-linear map $\nabla: E\to E\otimes\Omega^1_{X/S}$. By definition $b_*E^{\nabla}$ with the canonical connection (the Gauss-Manin connection) on it is $H_{DM}^0(X,(E,\nabla))$. The similar notations for $(f^*E)^{\nabla}$.

Is that true? Is there a reference? If this was true, then we can take $Y/T$ to be $U/k$, this answers my first question. But I think maybe the complete formulation requires the diagramme to be Cartesian.

share|cite|improve this question
You have an arbitrary integrable connection so I don't see what the Gauss-Manin connection has to do with your question. – ulrich Oct 9 '11 at 12:47
You are right, I should just say the base change property for the "Gauss-Manin sheaf" – unknown Oct 9 '11 at 12:55
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Here is a proof of your claim:

We want to show that any flat section of $E|_U$ extends to a flat section of $E$. Since the extension is unique if it exists, the question is local on $X$ so we may assume that the bundle $E = \mathcal{O}_X^n$. The connection is then given an $n\times n$ matrix $A$ of $1$-forms on $X$ i.e. for $v$ a section of $E$, $$\nabla v = dv + Av $$ where $d$ is the exterior derivative applied componentwise.

Now any flat section $w$ of $E|_U$ can be viewed as a rational section $v$ of $E$. Since we are in characteristic zero, if any component $f$ of $w$ has a pole of order $r$ along some divisor $D$ in $X \backslash U$, then $df$ has a pole of order $n+1$ along $D$. Since none of the entries of $A$ have poles, it follows that $\nabla w$ cannot be $0$. Thus all components of $w$ are regular functions on $X$ so $w$ is extends to a regular section $v$ of $E$. Since $w$ was a flat section of $E|_U$, it follows that $v$ is a flat section of $E$, proving the desired surjectivity.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you very much! The answer looks very nice. But I have a stupid question here: Let us assume $X={\rm Spec}(A)$ with an etale map from $X$ to the affine $n$-space. Assume $U={\rm Spec}(A_f)$ with $f\in A$. How do you define the oder of a pole of a component of $w\in A_f$ along a divisor $D\subseteq V(f)$, and how do you define the components of $w$? – unknown Oct 9 '11 at 14:05
In your notation, $w$ is an $n$-tuple $(f_1,f_2,\dots,f_n) \in A_f^n$ and by component I just mean any one of the $f_i$. The local ring of a divisor $D$ in $X \backslash U$ is a discrete valuation ring and by order of pole of an element of $A_f$ is meant the negative of the valuation extended to the quotient field (which contains $A_f$). – ulrich Oct 9 '11 at 14:30
Thanks, ulrich. I think your answer is right and clean, but there is still a point which I am not quite clear yet. You take any divisor $D$ which is the closure of a codimension 1 point $p$ in $X\setminus U$. We assume the bundle is a line bundle, so there is only one component $w$. Let $\pi$ be the uniformizer of $A_p$, then $w_p=a\pi^{−n}$ with $a$ invertible in $A_p$. Assume $n>0$, then $d(w_p)=\pi^{−n}d(a)+na\pi^{-n-1}d(\pi)$, why it has a pole of oder $n+1$? – unknown Oct 9 '11 at 15:40
Let me first clarify what I mean by a pole of order $r$ of a rational $1$-form $w$ along a divisor $D$: In your notation this is defined to be the smallest integer $r$ so that $\pi^{r}w$ is a regular $1$-form at the generic point of the divisor. Since we are in characteristic zero, $na$ is a unit, and $d(a)$ and $d(\pi)$ are regular, so the order must be $n+1$. – ulrich Oct 9 '11 at 16:42
execellent proof, thank you. – unknown Oct 9 '11 at 20:02

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.