8
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a nice DM stack (Noetherian, separated), and $X_0$ its coarse moduli space which exist by the Keel-Mori theorem. (I like the exposition in D. Rydh. “Existence and properties of geometric quotients”, the map $X \to X_0$ is a separated universal homeomorphism).

$\newcommand{\Spec}{\mathop{Spec}}\newcommand{\red}{\mathop{red}}\newcommand{\Isom}{\mathop{Isom}}$ Let $x: \Spec k \to X$ be a point on $X$, it induces a point $\Spec k_0 \to X_0$ on $X_0$. I will call $k_0$ (the residue field of the point defined by $x_0$) the field of moduli of $x$.

Let $Z=X \times_{X_0} x_0$ denote the pullback. We can also look at the residual gerbe $G_{x} \to \Spec k_1$ associated to $x$.

Questions:

  1. What is the relationship between $Z$ and $G_{x}$, $k_0$ and $k_1$?
  2. The obstruction to $k_0$ being a field of definition should be given by some element in $H^2(k_0, \Isom(x,x))$, hence a gerbe. Is this gerbe related to the residual gerbe? In particular does $x$ descends to $k_0$ if and only if $G_x$ is neutral?
  3. Some authors define the field of moduli $k'$ as the intersection of the fields of definition. Clearly $k_0 \subset k'$, and we need not have equality in general (cf Residual gerbe and field of moduli). On the other hand it seems folklore that $k_0=k'$ for moduli stacks of curves or abelian varieties. Is there a criterion for when $k_0=k'$?
  4. (Meta): what are some good references on these topics?

Some partial answers (hoping I am not making any mistakes, this is far from my area of expertise):

Let $Z_0$ be the coarse moduli space of $Z$. The formation of coarse moduli only commute with flat base change in general, so we only have a morphism $g: Z_0 \to \Spec k_0$. Still by general properties (see for instance J. Alper. “Adequate moduli spaces and geometrically reductive group schemes”), $g$ is a universal homeomorphism so $Z_0$ is a point.

So $|Z|$ is a point, and $Z_{\red}$ is the residual gerbe at $x$ by the Stack Project: $G_{x}=Z_{\red}$. The residual point $\Spec k_1$ at the residual gerbe is the sheaf associated to $G_x$, this is a Noetherian reduced algebraic space with one point so indeed correspond to a field $k_1$. The sheaf associated to a gerbe is also its coarse moduli space, so by unicity we have that $Z_0=\Spec k_1$.

Hence we have a map $\Spec k_1 \to \Spec k_0$, which is a universal homeomorphism so $k_1/k_0$ is purely inseparable. Furthermore if $x$ is a tame point, ie $\Isom(x,x)$ has degree prime to the characteristic of $k$, then $X \to X_0$ is a tame/good moduli space étale locally around $x_0$, and good moduli spaces commute with pullback so in this case $k_0=k_1$. (References for this: D. Abramovich, M. Olsson, and A. Vistoli. “Tame stacks in positive characteristic”; J. Alper. “Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks”.)

Bonus questions:

  1. Is there any example where $Z$ is not reduced, or $k_0 \ne k_1$?
  2. By M. C. Olsson. “Hom-stacks and restriction of scalars”, Theorem 2.12, $X$ is étale locally around $x$ a quotient $[U/I_x]$ where $U$ is affine and $I_x=\Isom(x,x)$. By Luna's fundamental lemma (shrinking $U$ if necessary), we have an étale morphism of the coarse space $U//I_x$ to $X_0$, and $[U/I_x] \to X$ is strongly étale, ie is the pullback of the morphism $U//I_x \to X_0$. How much can we recover of the field of moduli $k_0$ and the residual gerbe $G_x \to \Spec k_1$ from the presentation $[U/I_x]$? The map $U//I_x \to X_0$ is étale but may not be Nisnevich so I guess we need the map $[U/I_x] \to X$ too to get the descent data?
  3. In D. Abramovich, M. Olsson, and A. Vistoli. “Tame stacks in positive characteristic”, Appendix A, the authors show how to construct a rigidification $X/G$ of $X$ by a generic automorphism group $G$, and $X \to X/G$ is a gerbe (bound by $G$). (Think of some fine moduli stack of elliptic curves and take $G=\pm 1$.) They have the same coarse moduli (I hope!), so a point $x$ has the same field of moduli when seen in $X$ or $X/G$. Do they have the same fields of definitions? In other words, does a point $y: \Spec k \to X/G$ lift to $X$ over $k$? (It clearly lifts over an étale extension of $k$.)
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Giulio Bresciani has a series of papers where he consider topics like this (some joint with Angelo Vistoli). I'd recommend taking a look. For example this paper arxiv.org/pdf/2210.04789.pdf $\endgroup$ May 9, 2023 at 10:53

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

As you say, things work smoothly for questions 1,2 if $x$ is tame. This is still true even if $X$ is not DM but it is tame in the sense of Abramovich-Olsson-Vistoli, see section $\S 3.2$ of my preprint with Vistoli https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.04789.pdf .

For question 3, in general if you fix a base field the intersection of the fields of definition does not work well, even in super-nice settings, e.g. if the base field is $\mathbb{R}$ you can construct smooth projective curves of genus $\ge 2$ over $\mathbb{C}$ not defined over $\mathbb{R}$ but whose corresponding point in the coarse moduli space has residue field $\mathbb{R}$. Still, this is more or less the only thing that can go wrong (at least under mild assumptions).

Using your notation, assume that $k$ is the algebraic closure of $k_{0}$, and that $k_{0}$ is perfect. Furthermore, if the characteristic is $0$ assume that $\sqrt{-1}\in k_{0}$. By the Artin-Schreier theorem $\operatorname{Gal}(k/k_{0})$ is torsion free, hence it is topologically generated by closed subgroups of the form $\mathbb{Z}_{p}$ for some prime $p$. If $H\simeq \mathbb{Z}_{p}$ is such a subgroup, then $x$ is defined over the fixed field $k^{H}$ since $\mathbb{Z}_{p}$ has cohomological dimension $1$, see Proposition 4.3 of my preprint with Vistoli. It follows that $k_{0}$ is the intersection of the fields of definition.

For a comparison between the two notions of field of moduli, see Theorem 1.6.9 of Huggins' thesis https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0610247.pdf .

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot for this reference! This confirms that (with my notations), $G_x = Z_{\mathrm{red}}$. But rereading my question, I don't understand anymore my claim that $Z_0$, the coarse space associated to $Z$, is the same as $k_1$, the coarse space/residue point of the gerbe $G_x$. (Because the reduced structure is universal for morphisms into $Z$ while the coarse space is universal for morphisms from $Z$). If I understand your last paragraph of section 3.2 of your article, you make the same claim (with your notations, $k'$ is my $Z_0$). $\endgroup$ May 12, 2023 at 16:08
  • $\begingroup$ So I guess my question is: if $Z$ has a reduced coarse moduli space $Z_0$, is it true that the coarse space associate to $Z_{\mathrm{red}}$ is also $Z_0$? $\endgroup$ May 12, 2023 at 16:09
2
$\begingroup$

The answer to the first bonus question is positive. To see this, let $k$ be any field of characteristic $p > 0$, and let $\mathbf{Z}/p$ act on $\mathbf{A}^2_k$ via $(x, y) \mapsto (x + y^p, y)$. I claim that the invariant ring $k[x,y]^{\mathbf{Z}/p}$ is generated by $s := xy^{p^2 - p} - x^p$ and $t := y$. To see this, note that $s$ and $t$ are clearly contained in the invariant ring, and $k[x,y]$ is free of rank $p$ over $k[s,t]$. Since $k[x,y]$ is of rank at least $p$ over $k[x,y]^{\mathbf{Z}/p}$ by Galois theory, the claim follows.

Note now that the induced map $k[s,t]/(t) \to k[x,y]/(y)$ is isomorphic to the inclusion $k[x^p] \subset k[x]$. In particular, the extension of fraction fields is purely inseparable, and the fiber over $0$ is $k[x]/(x^p)$. Consequently, the map $[\mathbf{A}^2_k/(\mathbf{Z}/p)] \to \mathbf{A}^2_k//(\mathbf{Z}/p)$ shows that $Z$ can fail to be reduced, and $k_0$ can fail to equal $k_1$.

The answer to the third bonus question is negative: just consider any nontrivial gerbe $\mathcal{X} \to \operatorname{Spec} k$ and note that $\operatorname{Spec} k$ is the space that Abramovich-Olsson-Vistoli attach to $\mathcal{X}$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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