In the litterature on D-modules, there are many definitions of regularity of holonomic D-modules.

(1) Bernstein first defines regularity on a curve then says a holonomic D-module is regular if its restriction to any curve is regular

(2) Mebkhout defines the irregularity complexes of a complex of D-modules along an hypersurface. The complex is then regular if its irregularity complexes are 0 along any hypersurface.

(3) Kashiwara defines a D-module as regular if it admits a good filtration $F_*M$ such that $Ann(Gr^F M)$ is a radical ideal of $Gr^F D_X = \pi_*O_{T^*X}$.

I think there are other definitions (in Deligne for example)

Where can I find proofs that all these definitions are equivalent? Thanks.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Another definition, I believe from Björk (though I can't check it, because the author came by my office and "borrowed" the book "to check a few things" four months ago, and hasn't given it back), is that a complex of analytic holonomic $D_X$-modules $M^\bullet$ is regular if $RHom_{D_{X,x}}(M^\bullet_x,\widehat{O}_{X,x}/O_{X,x})=0$ for every $x\in X$; for the algebraic case one takes the direct image into a good compactification and checks the analytic localisation. $\endgroup$ – Ketil Tveiten Jun 28 '12 at 8:54

There are some comparison results in Chapter 5 of Bjork's `Analytic D-modules and Applications'. Also see Chapter 8. In particular, I think Thm. 8.7.3 combined with Thm. 5.6.5 (almost) gives (1) iff (3). Further, I think Prop. 5.6.22 gives the equivalence with (2). There are also results in there comparing Deligne's description.

I must admit though that I find Bjork quite notationally dense and am not particularly familiar with it, so I may be quite off with the references above. I am interested in this question also, so please comment/post if you find better references.


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.