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

What is the exact geometric meaning of the Simpson's correspondence between Higgs bundles and local systems ? I know that it should have a rich geometric content but don't know an explicit geometric interpretation which reveals the significance f this correspondence.

share|cite|improve this question

The nonabelian Hodge theorem, i.e. Simpson's correspondence, for smooth projective varieties refines a number of earlier results by several authors (Narasimhan-Seshadri, Donaldson...) where things can be understood more explicitly. For example, a unitary local system $L$ gives rise to polystable vector bundle $E= L\otimes \mathcal{O}_X$ with zero Higgs field. In general, the correspondence is highly transcendental, and I think it would be fair say that the geometric meaning is a very deep mystery. We can see this even in rank one. On the local system side, the moduli space is the character variety $$M_{Betti}=Hom(\pi_1(X), \mathbb{C}^*);$$ on the Higgs bundle side the moduli space is the cotangent bundle $$M_{Dol}=T^*Pic(X) = Pic(X)\times H^0(X,\Omega_X^1).$$ As algebraic varieties or even as complex manifolds these are very different, $M_{Betti}$ is Stein and the other is not. Yet they correspond as sets or topological spaces because they can both be identified using polar coordinates/Hodge theory with $$Hom(\pi_1(X),U(1))\times Hom(\pi_1(X),\mathbb{R})$$ I could go on, but perhaps I've made my point that the algebro-geometric meaning of the correspondence is by no means clear.

But I should add the significance should not be underestimated. For example, Simpson's work shows that among all representations of the fundamental group of a variety, the ones having Hodge theoretic (e.g. geometric) origin hold special status in this framework. In particular, he showed that any representation can be deformed to such a representation, which I think was totally unexpected.

share|cite|improve this answer
However, a nice analytical consequence is that $M_{Dol}$ is hyperKaehler (by using both Betti and Dolbeault complex structures). – Pavel Safronov Nov 1 '11 at 21:08
Yes, sure. I agree there is much more to the story. – Donu Arapura Nov 1 '11 at 21:14

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.