Let $X$ be a smooth variety over an algebraically closed field $k$. If it makes things easier, $X$ may be assumed to be quasi-projective. By Nagata (or quasi-projectivity) there exists a proper variety $\bar{X}$ which contains $X$ as a dense open subvariety, and by the smoothness of $X$ we may assume $\bar{X}$ to be normal. Are there any criteria/theorems which give information about the codimensio of the $\overline{X}\setminus X$?

The same question can be asked if we assume resolution of singularities, such that we may assume $\overline{X}$ to be smooth. Under which conditions can a smooth compactification $\overline{X}$ be found such that $X$ has complement of codimension $>1$ in $\overline{X}$?

Finally, to rephrase, how can one detect whether a given smooth variety $X$ arises by removing a codimemsion $>1$ closed subvariety from some proper variety?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Just a small remark to get things going, perhaps you knew this already, but the complement of an affine variety is always a divisor. So if you want larger codimension $X$ must not be affine. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Loughran Oct 10 '10 at 11:57
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I should have mentioned this, there are stronger restrictions. For example, at least if $\overline{X}$ is smooth, then we must have $\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X)=k$, and the category of vector bundles on is equivalent to the category of vector bundles on $X$. $\endgroup$ – Lars Oct 10 '10 at 12:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Vector bundles extend to vector bundles in codimension $2$ but not necessarily beyond that so your equivalence of categories is OK for surfaces but not for higher dimension. $\endgroup$ – Torsten Ekedahl Oct 10 '10 at 12:52
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, yes, of course! $\endgroup$ – Lars Oct 11 '10 at 6:49
  • $\begingroup$ If the codimension is $c$, then $H^i(\overline X) \to H^i(X)$ is an isomorphism for $i<2c-1$ and injective for $i=2c-1$ (use the long exact sequence of a pair). This gives cohomological obstructions to the existence of such a compactification; for example, the Hodge structure on $H^i(X)$ must be pure of weight $i$ in low degrees. $\endgroup$ – Dan Petersen Sep 17 '18 at 0:24

I don't think you can hope for any kind of useful conditions, here are just some comments.

Even if $X$ is smooth, whether or not we demand the compactification matters. Let for instance $X'$ be a smooth projective surface containing a $(-2)$-curve $C$, i.e., $C$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb P^1$ with self-intersection $-2$. Put $X:=X'u C$. Then there is no smooth compactification of $X$ with complement of codimension $³2$ but there is a normal one. In fact $C$ can be contracted to a point on a normal surface but that point is singular with a non-trivial local fundamental group. This fundamental group is an invariant of $X$ at infinity and would be trivial if we could add a smooth point instead.

I think (haven't checked) that there is also for surfaces a distinction between proper and projective (non-smooth) compactifications. If one does the usual thing of blowing up $10$ general points on a smooth cubic, then the complement of the strict transform of the cubic has a proper compactification by adding just one point but I don't think it has a projective such compactification.

If $X$ has a projective normal compactification $\overline X$ then there are some necessary conditions such as the space of global functions being finite dimensional. In fact for a line bundle on $\overline X$, its space of section are the same on $X$ as on $\overline X$ and hence using an ample line bundle on $\overline X$ we see that $\overline X$ is the $\mathrm Proj$ of the algebra of sections of powers of some line bundle on $X$. If we furthermore assume that $\overline X$ is smooth, then any line bundle on $X$ extends to $\overline X$ and will in particular have a finite dimensional space of sections.

Hence a reasonable question is if the condition that all line bundle have finite dimensional spaces of sections is enough to get a (smooth?) compactification with complement of codimension $>1$. I think that for surfaces the answer may be positive but feel dubious about higher dimensions.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer! I like your example. Do you know if the argument with the local fundamental group also works in positive characteristic? $\endgroup$ – Lars Oct 11 '10 at 13:45
  • $\begingroup$ In odd characteristics it does. $\endgroup$ – Torsten Ekedahl Oct 12 '10 at 4:25

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.