Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $X$ be a (smooth, non-compact) complex space. By a compactification of $X$ we mean a compact complex space $\overline X$ which contains a dense open subset biholomorphic to $X$ (we shall identify this subset with $X$) and such that $\overline X\setminus X$ is a proper analytic subset (with no conditions on its codimension).

In particular, given two (different) compactifications of $X$, they always contain biholomorphic dense open subsets.

My question is: given two compactifications of $X$, are they necessarily bimeromorphic?

More precisely, does the biholomorphism between the two dense open subsets always extend to a global bimeromorphic map?

I guess the answer is no, but after a moment of reflection I cannot find any counterexample. Perhaps, it would suffice to look at compactifications of $\mathbb C^2$...

share|improve this question
This seems related: mathoverflow.net/questions/68421/… –  M P Jan 18 '12 at 16:36
I think that the tag ag.algebraic-geometry could be also appropriate here. I added it –  Francesco Polizzi Jan 18 '12 at 17:51
As you wish! The power of points... :) –  diverietti Jan 18 '12 at 18:13

2 Answers 2

up vote 6 down vote accepted

As you guessed, the answer is no.

A counterexample in dimension $2$ can be found in Vo Van Tan's paper On the compactification of strongly pseudoconvex surfaces III: the Stein surface $\mathbb{C}^* \times \mathbb{C}^*$ admits two algebraic compactifications $M_1$ and $M_2$ which are not bimeromorphic.

In fact, $M_1=\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ is a rational surface whereas $M_2$ is a $\mathbb{P}^1$-bundle over an elliptic curve.

share|improve this answer

Another example, different but diffeomorphic to Polizzi's, is given by
$E \times \mathbb C$, where $E$ is a fixed elliptic curve say $ \mathbb C^* / \lbrace z \mapsto 2z \rbrace$. It can be compactified as the projective surface $E \times \mathbb P^1$ or as the (non-Kähler) Hopf surface $\mathbb C^2-\{0\} / \lbrace (z,w) \mapsto (2z,2w) \rbrace$.

Notice that the two compactifications have fields of meromorphic functions of different transcendence degree over $\mathbb C$, i.e., they have different algebraic dimensions.

share|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.