This is probably a dumb question.

Let $G$ be a connected complex reductive group and $X$ a compact Riemann surface. Consider a stable principal $G$-bundle $P$ on $X$. I am interested in how one uses deformation theory to prove that the tangent space at $P$ to the moduli space of principal $G$-bundles equals $H^1(X,\mathfrak g_P)$, where $\mathfrak g_P$ means the vector bundle associated to the adjoint representation of $G$.

I understand that a differential-geometric proof can be found, for example, in Kobayashi's book titled 'Differential geometry of complex vector bundles'. I am pretty sure there is a deformation-theoretic proof, but I failed at my attempts to find it. Does anyone know what is the right place to look for the answer? Also, what is a good reference of deformation theory in general? Thank you very much!

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A natural route would be to start with nonabelian cohomology $H^1(X,G)$ classifying principal $G$-bundles: $G$-cocycles infinitesimally near to the one representing $P$ should be equivalent to $\mathfrak g_P$-cocycles. $\endgroup$ – მამუკა ჯიბლაძე Oct 25 '16 at 3:31

I don't know if this is what you're looking for, but here's a heuristic argument for this sort of thing being true in great generality. This should be a comment but it got long.

It's not hard to convince yourself that the tangent space to a map $f : X \to Y$, in the space of maps from $X$ to $Y$, whatever that means, is the space of sections of the pullback of the tangent bundle of $Y$ along $f$, or in other words $H^0(X, f^{\ast}(T_Y))$. (The generality in which you're willing to accept that something like this is true depends on the generality in which you're willing to talk about tangent spaces; here $X$ and $Y$ might be smooth manifolds or smooth varieties or something more general according to taste.)

In this situation $Y = BG$ is stacky and so its "tangent bundle" is also stacky; it's $\mathfrak{g}$, regarded as a representation of $G$ (and hence as a vector bundle on $BG$), but in degree $1$. The pullback of this tangent bundle along the classifying map of a $G$-bundle $f : X \to BG$ is the adjoint bundle of the $G$-bundle, but in degree $1$. And so its space of sections ends up being $H^1$ of the adjoint bundle.

  • $\begingroup$ I like this but I want to understand the third paragraph better. Here is a question: Should I be thinking about BG as a simplicial manifold? $\endgroup$ – Daniel Barter Oct 25 '16 at 15:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Daniel: $BG$ is a stack; its functor of points sends a thing (smooth manifold, variety, scheme, whatever) to the groupoid of $G$-bundles on the thing. It can be presented by a simplicial thing, if you like. $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Oct 25 '16 at 18:07
  • $\begingroup$ It is also totally fine to think of BG as simplicial object (manifold, scheme, etc). Very easy to convert from this to the stack (functor taking values in groupoids): consider it's functor of points (taking values in simplicial sets) and take the 1-truncation of this. $\endgroup$ – Artur Jackson Apr 12 '17 at 23:24

Let $k = \mathbb{C}$ be the field of complex numbers. Let $({\rm Art}_k)$ be the category of all Artin local $k$-algebra with residue field $A/\mathfrak{m} \cong k$. Let $E_H$ be a holomorphic (or equivalently, algebraic) principal $H$-bundle over $X$. For given any $A \in ({\rm Art}_k)$, the surjective ring homomorphism $A \longrightarrow A/\mathfrak{m} \cong k$ induces a closed embedding $i : X \hookrightarrow X_A := X\times {\rm Spec}(A)$. Consider the contravariant functor (called deformation functor)
$$\mathcal{D}_{E_H} : ({\rm Art}_k)^{\rm op} \longrightarrow ({\rm Set})$$ defined by setting $\mathcal{D}_{E_H}(A)$ to be the set of all equivalence classes $[F, \theta]$, where $F$ is a holomorphic principal $H$-bundle on $X_A = X\times_k{\rm Spec}(A)$ together with an isomorphism of principal $H$-bundles $\theta : i^*F \longrightarrow E_H$ over $X$. Two such pairs $(F,\theta)$ and $(F',\theta')$ are said to be equivalent if there is an isomorphism of principal $H$-bundles $\eta : F \longrightarrow F'$ over $X_A$ such that $\theta = \theta'\circ i^*(\eta)$.

Take $A = k[\epsilon]$, with $\epsilon^2 = 0$, i.e., $A = k[t]/(t^2)$. Let $(F,\theta) \in \mathcal{D}_{E_H}(k[\epsilon])$. Take any open subscheme $U$ of $X$. Then $U(\epsilon) := U\times_k {\rm Spec}(k[\epsilon])$ is an open subscheme of $X(\epsilon) := X\times_k{\rm Spec}(k[\epsilon])$. Then take an affine open cover $\{V_i := U_i(\epsilon)\}_{i \in I}$ of $X(\epsilon)$, and fix trivializations $F\vert_{V_i} \stackrel{f_i}{\longrightarrow} V_i\times H$. Then the transition functions for $F$ are of the form $g_{ij}+\epsilon\cdot h_{ij}$, where $g_{ij} : U_i\cap U_j \longrightarrow H$ are transition functions for $E_H = i^*F$, and $h_{ij} \in \Gamma(U_i\cap U_j, {\rm ad}(E_H))$ are sections of the adjoint vector bundle ${\rm ad}(E_H)$. Recall that, ${\rm Ad}(E_H) = E_H\times^H H$ is a group scheme of all principal $H$--bundle automorphisms of $E_H$ over $X$, with Lie algebra ${\rm ad}(E_H)$. The $H$--bundle automorphisms of $F$, which restricts to identity over the closed points $X \hookrightarrow X(\epsilon)$, is the adjoint vector bundle ${\rm ad}(E_H)$. Therefore, a section $s$ of ${\rm ad}(E_H)$ corresponds to the automorphism $1 + \epsilon s$ of $F$. Also if $s_1, s_2$ are two sections of ${\rm ad}(E_H)$, then $s_1 + s_2$ corresponds to the composite automorphism $(1+\epsilon s_1)(1+\epsilon s_2) = 1+\epsilon(s_1+s_2)$, since $\epsilon^2 = 0$. Now one can see that, these $h_{ij}$ defines a $1$--cocycle for ${\rm ad}(E_H)$, and hence defines an element of $H^1(X, {\rm ad}(E_H))$. The converse is also similar. Therefore, we have a canonical bijection $\mathcal{D}_{E_H}(k[\epsilon]) \cong H^1(X, {\rm ad}(E_H))$. Therefore, the space of all infinitesimal deformations of the principal $H$--bundle $E_H$ over $X$ is parametrized by $H^1(X, {\rm ad}(E_H))$.

Reference: I. Biswas and S. Ramanan, An Infinitesimal Study of the Moduli of Hitchin Pairs, doi: https://doi.org/10.1112/jlms/49.2.219.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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