2
$\begingroup$

It seems to be well-known that the pseudoeffective cone $\overline{\text{Eff}}(X)$ of a normal variety $X$ does not contain lines through the origin. How can it be proved? Is there a reference?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ What are you assuming about $X$: is it proper, resp. projective? Also, are you working with numerical equivalence classes of Cartier divisors (or perhaps the associated real vector space)? $\endgroup$ Jun 12, 2012 at 15:44
  • $\begingroup$ $X$ is projective; I consider the same setting and notation as in the book of Lazarsfeld. A divisor is pseudoeffective if its numerical class is a limit of effective classes in $N^1(X)_{\mathbb R}$. $\endgroup$
    – fds
    Jun 12, 2012 at 15:59

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

First, whether a class is pseudoeffective or not depends only on its numerical equivalence class. (The pseudoeffective cone is the closure of the cone of big classes, and $D$ is big if and only if $nD$ is numerically equivalent to $A + E$, where $A$ is an ample divisor on $X$, $E$ is an effective divisor on $X$ and $n > 0$ is an integer.)

Now suppose a class $\beta$ was such that both $\beta$ and $-\beta$ were pseudoeffective. Then $\beta \cdot a_1 \cdots a_k \geq 0$ and $\leq 0$ for any ample classes $a_1, \dots, a_k$. So $\beta \cdot a_1 \cdots a_k = 0$. But any divisor class can be written as a difference of ample classes, so $\beta \cdot \delta_1 \cdots \delta_k = 0$ for all divisor classes $\delta_1, \dots, \delta_k$. Thus, $\beta = 0$.

The standard reference for this material is Lazarsfeld's Positivity in Algebraic Geometry. I don't have a copy handy, but I'm $> 99\%$ certain that this fact is proved somewhere in Volume I.

Edit: I should add that this assumes that $X$ is projective. I don't know of any results without this assumption.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Properness is sufficient. By Chow's Lemma, there exists a projective, birational morphism from a projective variety to the original variety. Under pullback by a birational morphism, effectivity is preserved (hence so is pseudo-effectivity). So for a class $\beta$ as above, the pullback is numerically trivial. In other words, for every curve in the blowup, the image curve in the original variety has $0$ pairing with $\beta$. However, every integral curve in the original variety is the (finite-to-one) image of a curve in the blowup. So $\beta$ is numerically trivial. $\endgroup$ Jun 13, 2012 at 15:04
  • $\begingroup$ @JasonStarr Just to check, your comment is about effective divisor classes, right? Because everything else in the question and Michael's answer applies to effective classes in any dimension, but I believe that Nakajima's smooth proper nonprojective 3-fold has lines in the cone of effective curve classes. $\endgroup$ Oct 27, 2015 at 18:38
0
$\begingroup$

For a smooth projective variety, this follows from Lemma 2.3 in https://arxiv.org/abs/1206.6521.

$\endgroup$

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.